DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers for application KR 10-2022-0119349 filed in Republic of Korea on September 21, 2022 as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Republic of Korea on September 7, 2022. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the KR 10-2022-01113577 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed on March 4, 2025 and January 22, 2026 have been considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the subject of matter of claims 1-20 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). It appears that the wrong set of drawings was submitted with the application as the current drawing appear to relate an electron microscope with none of the claimed lens system of the instant application. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
[00020] “-50” and “0” should have units of mm
[00113] equation 1 should read “1 ≤ efl/f1 ≤ 2” to better correspond with the rest of the specification and claims.
[00114] “In [Equation 1], ‘f’ may…” should read “In [Equation 1], ‘efl’ may…” to better correspond with rest of the specification and claims.
[00126] “-50” and “0” should have units of mm
[00198] “-50” and “0” should have units of mm
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 5 and 14-15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 5 line 3 “the object-side surface of the first lens…” should read “an object-side surface of the first lens…”
Claim 14 line 1 “wherein object-side of the fifth lens…” should read “wherein an object-side surface of the fifth lens…”
Claim 15 line 3 “the object-side surface of the first lens…” should read “an object-side surface of the first lens…”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 3 and 13, the claims recite -50 ≤f23<0. This inequality should have a unit of length associated but does not. The lack of units makes it unclear whether the inequality is satisfied with units of millimeters, inches, unitless, etc. For the purposes of compact prosecution, Examiner will interpret the inequality as -50 mm ≤ f23 < 0 mm.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Jhang et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0176332 – hereinafter referred to as “Jhang”).
Regarding claim 1, Jhang teaches a lens assembly (Figure 16) comprising:
an image sensor (Figure 16 image plane 4, [0002] image sensor); and
seven lenses (Figure 16 seven lenses 10-70) sequentially provided along an optical axis in a direction from an object toward the image sensor (Figure 16 lenses 10-70 are arranged sequentially), the seven lenses comprising a first lens (Figure 16 lens element 10) having a positive refractive power (Figure 36 first lens has positive focal length), a second lens (Figure 16 lens element 20) having a negative refractive power (Figure 36 second lens has negative focal length), a third lens (Figure 16 lens element 30) having a positive refractive power (Figure 36 third lens has positive focal length), a fourth lens (Figure 16 lens element 40) having a negative refractive power (Figure 36 fourth lens has negative focal length), a fifth lens (Figure 16 lens element 50) having a positive refractive power (Figure 36 fifth lens has positive focal length), a sixth lens (Figure 16 lens element 60) having a positive refractive power (Figure 36 sixth lens has positive focal length), and a seventh lens (Figure 16 lens element 70) having a negative refractive power (Figure 36 seventh lens has negative focal length), wherein the lens assembly satisfies:
1 ≤ efl/f1 ≤ 2 (Figure 36 efl = 7.227 mm, f1 = 7.075 mm, efl/f1 = 1.02),
1.3 ≤Fno≤ 1.7 (Figure 36 Fno = 1.7), and
0.59 ≤ TTL/(ImgH*2) ≤ 0.68 (Figure 36 TTL = 8.983 mm, ImgH = 6.700 mm, TTL/(ImgH*2) = 0.67),
where, efl is an effective focal length of the lens assembly, f1 is a focal length of the first lens, Fno is an F number of the lens assembly, TTL is a distance from an object-side surface of the first lens to the image sensor, and ImgH is a maximum distance from the optical axis to an edge of an imaging plane of the image sensor.
Regarding claim 2, Jhang teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Jhang further teaches an aperture (Figure 16 aperture stop 2) between the first lens and the seventh lens (Figure 16 aperture stop 2 is between lens element 10 and lens element 70), wherein the lens assembly satisfies: 0.1 ≤ T1/TA ≤ 0.3 (Figure 36 T1 = 0.912 mm, TA calculated to be 7.866 mm, T1/TA = 0.12), where, T1 is a distance from the object-side surface of the first lens to the aperture, and TA is a distance from the object-side surface of the first lens to a sensor-side surface of the seventh lens.
Regarding claim 3, Jhang teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Jhang further teaches the lens assembly satisfies: -50 ≤f23<0 (Figure 36 f23 calculated to be -30.28 mm), where, f23 is a focal length of a combination of the second lens and the third lens.
Regarding claim 4, Jhang teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Jhang further teaches an object-side surface of the fifth lens is convex (Figure 36 radius of 51 is positive) and a sensor-side surface of the fifth lens is concave (Figure 36 radius of 52 is positive), and
PNG
media_image1.png
577
577
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein at least one of the object-side surface of the fifth lens and the sensor-side surface of the fifth lens comprises an inflection point (In Figure below solid line is the sag equation for the object-side surface of lens element 50 and dotted line is the second derivative of sag equation which shows an inflection point around ±0.5).
Regarding claim 5, Jhang teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Jhang further teaches the first lens, the second lens, and the third lens are meniscus lenses (Figures 16 and 36 lens elements 10, 20, and 30 are convex-concave meniscus lenses),
wherein the object-side surface of the first lens, an object-side surface of the second lens, and an object-side surface of the third lens are convex (Figure 36 radius of 11, 21, and 31 are positive),
wherein a sensor-side surface of the first lens, a sensor-side surface of the second lens, and a sensor-side surface of the third lens are concave (Figure 36 radius of 12, 22, and 32 are positive), and
wherein the lens assembly satisfies: 17 ≤ vd-min ≤25, where, vd-min is a minimum Abbe number of Abbe numbers of the seven lenses (Figure 36 vd-min = 19.243).
Regarding claim 7, Jhang teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Jhang further teaches the fourth lens is a meniscus lens (Figures 16 and 36 lens element 40 is a concave-convex meniscus lens), and wherein an object-side surface of the fourth lens is concave (Figure 36 radius of 41 is negative) and a sensor-side surface of the fourth lens is convex (Figure 36 radius of 42 is negative).
Regarding claim 8, Jhang teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Jhang further teaches each of at least one of an object-side surface of the fourth lens and a sensor-side surface of the fourth lens (In Figure below solid line is the sag equation for the sensor-side surface of lens element 40 and dotted line is the second derivative of sag equation which shows an inflection point around ±2),
PNG
media_image2.png
537
537
media_image2.png
Greyscale
at least one of an object-side surface of the fifth lens and a sensor-side surface of the fifth lens (In Figure below solid line is the sag equation for the object-side surface of lens element 50 and dotted line is the second derivative of sag equation which shows an inflection point around ±0.5),
PNG
media_image3.png
542
542
media_image3.png
Greyscale
at least one of an object-side surface of the sixth lens and a sensor-side surface of the sixth lens (See labeled Figure below, object-side surface of lens element 60 goes from convex to concave and thus has an inflection point), and at least one of an object- side surface of the seventh lens and a sensor-side surface of the seventh lens comprises an inflection point (See labeled Figure below, object-side surface of lens element 70 goes from concave to convex and thus has an inflection point).
PNG
media_image4.png
396
432
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Jhang teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Jhang further teaches an object-side surface of the sixth lens is convex (Figure 36 radius of 61 is positive).
Regarding claim 10, Jhang teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Jhang further teaches the object-side surface of the seventh lens is concave in a paraxial region (Figure 36 radius of 71 is negative) through which the optical axis passes of the seventh lens and convex in a peripheral region (See labeled Figure below, peripheral region of object-side surface of lens element 70 is convex) adjacent to the paraxial region of the seventh lens,
wherein the sensor-side surface of the seventh lens is concave in the paraxial region (Figure 36 radius of 72 is positive) of the seventh lens and convex in the peripheral region of the seventh lens (See labeled Figure below, peripheral region of sensor-side surface of lens element 70 is convex), and
wherein the peripheral region of the seventh lens is inclined toward the sixth lens (Figure 16 peripheral region of lens element 70 is inclined toward lens element 60).
PNG
media_image5.png
391
314
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Jhang teaches an electronic device ([0001] portable electronic devices) comprising:
a lens assembly (Figure 16); and
a processor configured to obtain an image of an object based on the lens assembly ([0001] mobile phones, cameras, tablets, personal computers, and personal digital assistant all have processors), wherein the lens assembly comprises:
an image sensor (Figure 16 image plane 4, [0002] image sensor); and
seven lenses (Figure 16 seven lenses 10-70) sequentially provided along an optical axis in a direction from an object toward the image sensor (Figure 16 lenses 10-70 are arranged sequentially), the seven lenses comprising a first lens (Figure 16 lens element 10) having a positive refractive power (Figure 36 first lens has positive focal length), a second lens (Figure 16 lens element 20) having a negative refractive power (Figure 36 second lens has negative focal length), a third lens (Figure 16 lens element 30) having a positive refractive power (Figure 36 third lens has positive focal length), a fourth lens (Figure 16 lens element 40) having a negative refractive power (Figure 36 fourth lens has negative focal length), a fifth lens (Figure 16 lens element 50) having a positive refractive power (Figure 36 fifth lens has positive focal length), a sixth lens (Figure 16 lens element 60) having a positive refractive power (Figure 36 sixth lens has positive focal length), and a seventh lens (Figure 16 lens element 70) having a negative refractive power (Figure 36 seventh lens has negative focal length), wherein the lens assembly satisfies:
1 ≤ efl/f1 ≤ 2 (Figure 36 efl = 7.227 mm, f1 = 7.075 mm, efl/f1 = 1.02),
1.3 ≤Fno≤ 1.7 (Figure 36 Fno = 1.7), and
0.59 ≤ TTL/(ImgH*2) ≤ 0.68 (Figure 36 TTL = 8.983 mm, ImgH = 6.700 mm, TTL/(ImgH*2) = 0.67),
where, efl is an effective focal length of the lens assembly, f1 is a focal length of the first lens, Fno is an F number of the lens assembly, TTL is a distance from an object- side surface of the first lens to the image sensor, and ImgH is a maximum distance from the optical axis to an edge of an imaging plane of the image sensor.
Regarding claim 12, Jhang teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 11. Jhang further teaches an aperture (Figure 16 aperture stop 2) between the first lens and the seventh lens (Figure 16 aperture stop 2 is between lens element 10 and lens element 70), wherein the lens assembly satisfies: 0.1 ≤ T1/TA ≤ 0.3 (Figure 36 T1 = 0.912 mm, TA calculated to be 7.866 mm, T1/TA = 0.12), where, T1 is a distance from the object-side surface of the first lens to the aperture, and TA is a distance from the object-side surface of the first lens to a sensor-side surface of the seventh lens.
Regarding claim 13, Jhang teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 11. Jhang further teaches the lens assembly satisfies: -50 ≤f23<0 (Figure 36 f23 calculated to be -30.28 mm), where, f23 is a focal length of a combination of the second lens and the third lens.
Regarding claim 14, Jhang teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 11. Jhang further teaches an object-side surface of the fifth lens is convex (Figure 36 radius of 51 is positive) and a sensor-side surface of the fifth lens is concave (Figure 36 radius of 52 is positive), and
PNG
media_image1.png
577
577
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein at least one of the object-side surface of the fifth lens and the sensor-side surface of the fifth lens comprises an inflection point (In Figure below solid line is the sag equation for the object-side surface of lens element 50 and dotted line is the second derivative of sag equation which shows an inflection point around ±0.5).
Regarding claim 15, Jhang teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 11. Jhang further teaches the first lens, the second lens, and the third lens are meniscus lenses (Figures 16 and 36 lens elements 10, 20, and 30 are convex-concave meniscus lenses),
wherein the object-side surface of the first lens, an object-side surface of the second lens, and an object-side surface of the third lens are convex (Figure 36 radius of 11, 21, and 31 are positive),
wherein a sensor-side surface of the first lens, a sensor-side surface of the second lens, and a sensor-side surface of the third lens are concave (Figure 36 radius of 12, 22, and 32 are positive), and
wherein the lens assembly satisfies: 17 ≤ vd-min ≤25, where, vd-min is a minimum Abbe number of Abbe numbers of the seven lenses (Figure 36 vd-min = 19.243).
Regarding claim 17, Jhang teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 11. Jhang further teaches the fourth lens is a meniscus lens (Figures 16 and 36 lens element 40 is a concave-convex meniscus lens), and wherein an object-side surface of the fourth lens is concave (Figure 36 radius of 41 is negative) and a sensor-side surface of the fourth lens is convex (Figure 36 radius of 42 is negative).
Regarding claim 18, Jhang teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 11. Jhang further teaches each of at least one of an object-side surface of the fourth lens and a sensor-side surface of the fourth lens (In Figure below solid line is the sag equation for the sensor-side surface of lens element 40 and dotted line is the second derivative of sag equation which shows an inflection point around ±2),
PNG
media_image2.png
537
537
media_image2.png
Greyscale
at least one of an object-side surface of the fifth lens and a sensor-side surface of the fifth lens (In Figure below solid line is the sag equation for the object-side surface of lens element 50 and dotted line is the second derivative of sag equation which shows an inflection point around ±0.5),
PNG
media_image3.png
542
542
media_image3.png
Greyscale
at least one of an object-side surface of the sixth lens and a sensor-side surface of the sixth lens (See labeled Figure below, object-side surface of lens element 60 goes from convex to concave and thus has an inflection point), and at least one of an object- side surface of the seventh lens and a sensor-side surface of the seventh lens comprises an inflection point (See labeled Figure below, object-side surface of lens element 70 goes from concave to convex and thus has an inflection point).
PNG
media_image4.png
396
432
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 19, Jhang teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 11. Jhang further teaches an object-side surface of the sixth lens is convex (Figure 36 radius of 61 is positive).
Regarding claim 20, Jhang teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 11. Jhang further teaches the object-side surface of the seventh lens is concave in a paraxial region (Figure 36 radius of 71 is negative) through which the optical axis passes of the seventh lens and convex in a peripheral region (See labeled Figure below, peripheral region of object-side surface of lens element 70 is convex) adjacent to the paraxial region of the seventh lens,
wherein the sensor-side surface of the seventh lens is concave in the paraxial region (Figure 36 radius of 72 is positive) of the seventh lens and convex in the peripheral region of the seventh lens (See labeled Figure below, peripheral region of sensor-side surface of lens element 70 is convex), and
wherein the peripheral region of the seventh lens is inclined toward the sixth lens (Figure 16 peripheral region of lens element 70 is inclined toward lens element 60).
PNG
media_image5.png
391
314
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claims 1, 6, 11, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Jhang et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0204923 – hereinafter referred to as “Jhang ‘923”).
Regarding claim 1, Jhang ‘923 teaches a lens assembly (Figure 42) comprising:
an image sensor (Figure 42 image plane IMA of image sensor); and
seven lenses (Figure 42 lens elements L1, L2, L3, L4, L6, L7, and L8), sequentially provided along an optical axis in a direction from an object toward the image sensor (Figure 42 lens elements L1, L2, L3, L4, L6, L7, and L8 are arranged sequentially), the seven lenses comprising a first lens having a positive refractive power (Figure 44 lens element L1 has positive focal length), a second lens having a negative refractive power (Figure 44 lens element L2 has negative focal length), a third lens having a positive refractive power (Figure 44 lens element L3 has positive focal length), a fourth lens having a negative refractive power (Figure 44 lens element L4 has negative focal length), a fifth lens having a positive refractive power (Figure 44 lens element L6 has positive focal length), a sixth lens having a positive refractive power (Figure 44 lens element L7 has positive focal length), and a seventh tens having a negative refractive power (Figure 44 lens element L8 has negative focal length), wherein the lens assembly satisfies:
1 ≤ efl/f1 ≤ 2 (Figure 44 efl = 7.536 mm, f1 = 7.342 mm, efl/f1 = 1.03),
1.3 ≤Fno≤ 1.7 (Figure 44 Fno = 1.7), and
0.59 ≤ TTL/(ImgH*2) ≤ 0.68 (Figure 44 TTL = 9.461 mm, ImgH = 7.3 mm, TTL/(ImgH*2) = 0.65),
where, efl is an effective focal length of the lens assembly, f1 is a focal length of the first lens, Fno is an F number of the lens assembly, TTL is a distance from an object-side surface of the first lens to the image sensor, and ImgH is a maximum distance from the optical axis to an edge of an imaging plane of the image sensor.
Regarding claim 6, Jhang ‘923 teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Jhang ‘923 further teaches a refractive index of the second lens (Figure 44 refractive index of L2 is 1.671), a refractive index of the fourth lens (Figure 44 refractive index of L4 is 1.671), and a refractive index of the fifth lens (Figure 44 refractive index of L6 is 1.661) are greater than or equal to 1 .6 and less than or equal to 1.7.
Regarding claim 11, Jhang ‘923 teaches an electronic device ([0005] mobile electronic device) comprising:
a lens assembly (Figure 42); and
a processor configured to obtain an image of an object based on the lens assembly ([0005] mobile phones, cameras, tablets, personal computers, and personal digital assistant all have processors), wherein the lens assembly comprises:
an image sensor (Figure 42 image plane IMA of image sensor); and
seven lenses (Figure 42 lens elements L1, L2, L3, L4, L6, L7, and L8), sequentially provided along an optical axis in a direction from an object toward the image sensor (Figure 42 lens elements L1, L2, L3, L4, L6, L7, and L8 are arranged sequentially), the seven lenses comprising a first lens having a positive refractive power (Figure 44 lens element L1 has positive focal length), a second lens having a negative refractive power (Figure 44 lens element L2 has negative focal length), a third lens having a positive refractive power (Figure 44 lens element L3 has positive focal length), a fourth lens having a negative refractive power (Figure 44 lens element L4 has negative focal length), a fifth lens having a positive refractive power (Figure 44 lens element L6 has positive focal length), a sixth lens having a positive refractive power (Figure 44 lens element L7 has positive focal length), and a seventh tens having a negative refractive power (Figure 44 lens element L8 has negative focal length), wherein the lens assembly satisfies:
1 ≤ efl/f1 ≤ 2 (Figure 44 efl = 7.536 mm, f1 = 7.342 mm, efl/f1 = 1.03),
1.3 ≤Fno≤ 1.7 (Figure 44 Fno = 1.7), and
0.59 ≤ TTL/(ImgH*2) ≤ 0.68 (Figure 44 TTL = 9.461 mm, ImgH = 7.3 mm, TTL/(ImgH*2) = 0.65),
where, efl is an effective focal length of the lens assembly, f1 is a focal length of the first lens, Fno is an F number of the lens assembly, TTL is a distance from an object- side surface of the first lens to the image sensor, and ImgH is a maximum distance from the optical axis to an edge of an imaging plane of the image sensor.
Regarding claim 16, Jhang ‘923 teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 11. Jhang ‘923 further teaches a refractive index of the second lens (Figure 44 refractive index of L2 is 1.671), a refractive index of the fourth lens (Figure 44 refractive index of L4 is 1.671), and a refractive index of the fifth lens (Figure 44 refractive index of L6 is 1.661) are greater than or equal to 1 .6 and less than or equal to 1.7.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 6 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jhang (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0176332).
Regarding claim 6, Jhang teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 1. Jhang further teaches a refractive index of the second lens (Figure 36 refractive index of lens element 20 is 1.671), a refractive index of the fourth lens (Figure 36 refractive index of lens element 40 is 1.671), are greater than or equal to 1 .6 and less than or equal to 1.7.
Jhang further teaches the refractive index of lens element 50 is 1.545 but fails to teach a refractive index of the fifth lens are greater than or equal to 1 .6 and less than or equal to 1.7. In this instance, 1.545 is close to the claimed range of greater than or equal to 1 .6 and less than or equal to 1.7. A prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Court held as proper a rejection of a claim directed to an alloy of "having 0.8% nickel, 0.3% molybdenum, up to 0.1% iron, balance titanium" as obvious over a reference disclosing alloys of 0.75% nickel, 0.25% molybdenum, balance titanium and 0.94% nickel, 0.31% molybdenum, balance titanium. "The proportions are so close that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties."). Furthermore, given the weak power of lens element 50 of Jhang (Figure 36 focal length of lens element 50 is 335.647 mm), adjusting the refractive index to 1.6 would have minimal effect on the overall optical system. As such, the disclosed lens system of Jhang would have made the claimed system obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective time of filing.
Regarding claim 16, Jhang teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention with respect to claim 11. Jhang further teaches a refractive index of the second lens (Figure 36 refractive index of lens element 20 is 1.671), a refractive index of the fourth lens (Figure 36 refractive index of lens element 40 is 1.671), are greater than or equal to 1 .6 and less than or equal to 1.7.
Jhang further teaches the refractive index of lens element 50 is 1.545 but fails to teach a refractive index of the fifth lens are greater than or equal to 1 .6 and less than or equal to 1.7. In this instance, 1.545 is close to the claimed range of greater than or equal to 1 .6 and less than or equal to 1.7. A prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Court held as proper a rejection of a claim directed to an alloy of "having 0.8% nickel, 0.3% molybdenum, up to 0.1% iron, balance titanium" as obvious over a reference disclosing alloys of 0.75% nickel, 0.25% molybdenum, balance titanium and 0.94% nickel, 0.31% molybdenum, balance titanium. "The proportions are so close that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties."). Furthermore, given the weak power of lens element 50 of Jhang (Figure 36 focal length of lens element 50 is 335.647 mm), adjusting the refractive index to 1.6 would have minimal effect on the overall optical system. As such, the disclosed lens system of Jhang would have made the claimed system obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective time of filing.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lai et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0163769) discloses a lens assembly (fifth embodiment) that is similar to the instant invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX PARK RICKEL whose telephone number is (703)756-4561. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 a.m. - 6 p.m. ET.
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, Bumsuk Won can be reached at (571)272-2713. 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.
Alex Rickel
Examiner
Art Unit 2872
/A.P.R./Examiner, Art Unit 2872
/BALRAM T PARBADIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872
Prosecution Insights