Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 8, 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2021033006 A (From IDS filed).
Regarding claim 1, JP 2021033006 A discloses an optical apparatus (Figs. 1-5) comprising:
a first optical member (11) and a second optical member (12) located on an inner side of the first optical member (11);
a first holding member (10) configured to hold the first optical member (11) and the second optical member (12);
a first sealing member (17) configured to seal a gap between the first optical member and the first holding member (see gap between 11 and 10); and
a second sealing member (18) configured to seal a gap between the first holding member and the second optical member (see gap between 10 and 12),
wherein the second optical member (12) has an abutting portion on an outer circumferential portion (see the edge of 12 in Fig. 2), at which the second sealing member (18) is in contact with the second optical member (18 is in contact with the edge of 12),
wherein the first holding member (10) has an abutting portion on an outer circumferential portion (see the edge of 10 in Fig. 2), at which the second sealing member (18) is in contact with the first holding member (18 is in contact with the edge of 10),
wherein the first optical member (11) and the first holding member (10) are sealed with the first sealing member (17), and
wherein a space between the first optical member (11) and the second optical member (12) is sealed (space between 11 and 12 are sealed as shown in Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 8, the optical apparatus according to claim 1, wherein either one of the first sealing member and the second sealing member limits an optical path (sealing members hold the optical members in its places, thus limit an optical path since any misalignment will be limited).
Regarding claim 12, the optical apparatus according to claim 1, wherein an optical effective range of each of the first optical member and the second optical member is shorter in a vertical direction than in a horizontal direction (the arrange of prior art Fig. 3 is similar to the arrange of present invention Fig. 2, thus meet the claimed language since the optical effective range is not clearly defined in the claim).
Regarding claim 14, the optical apparatus according to Claim 1,
wherein the abutting portion of the second optical member (12) is a planar face portion at which the second scaling member is in close contact with the second optical member (see it is a planer face portion as shown in Fig. 3), and
wherein the abutting portion of the first holding member (10) is a planar face portion at which the second sealing member is in close contact with the first holding member (see Fig. 3).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2, 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2021033006 A.
Regarding claim 2, the prior art discloses the claimed invention as set forth above except for wherein the first optical member is a flat plate.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention before the effective filing date to make the first optical member to be flat plate as a protective optical member for the purpose of protecting other optical members from any damages.
Regarding claim 4, the prior art discloses the claimed invention as set forth above except for the second optical member being made of plastic. The prior art second optical member is made possibly made of plastic (12 is made possibly of plastic from PE2E detail description “when the reflective IR cut coat is vapor-deposited on a plastic lens, the linear expansion coefficient of the plastic base material and the linear expansion coefficient of the vapor-deposited material that controls the reflectance are different, so that microcracks occur on the vapor-deposited surface. It will occur. Therefore, the lens on which the reflective IR cut coat is vapor-deposited needs to be limited to a glass lens, but when a glass lens is used, the cost increases as compared with the case where a plastic lens is used”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention before the effective filing date to make the second optical member with plastic material to reduce the manufacturing cost.
Regarding claim 5, the prior art discloses the claimed invention as set forth above except for wherein the second optical member is a convex shape lens convexed toward the first optical member.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention before the effective filing date to make the second optical member to have a convex shape lens convexed toward the first optical member for the purpose of gathering and focusing light efficiently and enabling adjustable focusing.
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2021033006 A in view of Balagurusamy et al (US 2016/0350937 A1).
The prior art discloses the claimed invention as set forth above except for wherein the first sealing member is a double-sided adhesive tape or is an adhesive agent.
Balagurusamy discloses the first sealing member is a double-sided adhesive tape or is an adhesive agent (Fig. 4 and para 92 “Double-sided tape or adhesive may act as spacers 408 and 411 for the sealed sample chamber 435”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention before the effective filing date to make the first sealing member is a double-sided adhesive tape or is an adhesive agent for the purpose of providing dual functionality, sealing and mechanical fastening and further the double sided adhesive tape is a space efficient option over o-ring of the prior art.
Claims 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2021033006 A in view of Slater (US 2019/0187099 A1).
Regarding claim 9, the prior art discloses the claimed invention as set forth above except for further comprising an electronic display apparatus, wherein the first optical member and the second optical member constitute a magnifying optical system through which the electronic display apparatus is magnified and observed.
Slater discloses an electronic display apparatus (Fig. 1), wherein the first optical member and the second optical member constitute a magnifying optical system through which the electronic display apparatus is magnified and observed (para 37 “microscope … lens 102 … objective lens 126”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention before the effective filing date to further comprise an electronic display apparatus, wherein the first optical member and the second optical member constitute a magnifying optical system through which the electronic display apparatus is magnified and observed, for the purpose of magnifying sample to be examined.
Regarding claim 10, in combination, the optical apparatus according to Claim 9, further comprising a diopter adjustment unit configured to adjust diopter of the electronic display apparatus, wherein the diopter can be adjusted by the diopter adjustment unit by moving a position of the electronic display apparatus in an optical axis direction (Slater, Fig. 1 and para 37 “a diopter adjustment 104”).
Regarding claim 11, in combination, the optical apparatus according to Claim 10, wherein a relative positional relationship between the first optical member and the second optical member does not change when the diopter is adjusted by the diopter adjustment unit (JP 2021033006 A, the relative positional relationship between 11 and 12 are not adjusted by the diopter).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 3, claim is allowable at least for the reason that the prior art does not teach or reasonably suggest wherein a distance between the first optical member and the second optical member on an optical axis is shorter than a thickness of the first optical member as set forth in the claimed combination; and
Regarding claim 13, claim is allowable at least for the reason that the prior art does not teach or reasonably suggest further comprising:
a third optical member arranged on an inner side of the second optical member;
a second holding member configured to hold the third optical member; and
an urging member configured to urge the first holding member against the second holding member,
wherein the second sealing member is in contact with the urging member to compress the urging member, thereby urging the first holding member against the second holding member and determining a position in the optical axis direction as set forth in the claimed combination.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EUNCHA P CHERRY whose telephone number is (571)272-2310. The examiner can normally be reached M to F 7am to 3:30pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Pinping Sun can be reached at (571) 270-1284. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
9/21/2026
/EUNCHA P CHERRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights