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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show “one or more electronic structures of the receiver are arranged between the adjacent active detector element configurations” as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 11-16, 2, 3, 6-9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Examiner was not able to find support to limitation “adjacent active detector element configurations corresponding to different stripes are spaced apart from each other in a direction perpendicular to longitudinal axes of the active detector element configurations such that one or more electronic structures of the receiver are arranged between the adjacent active detector element configurations”.
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 11-16, 2, 3, 6-9 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. It is unclear what Applicant means by “one or more electronic structures”. Can it be just simple wire or cable , or it should be something like chip or amplifier or filter.
Paragraphs cited in Argument section refer to fig. 2 which shows detector elements but do not show any other structure between then . Neither specification talks about “electronic structures”.
Claim 12 talks about “non-active row of the single photon avalanche detector elements” as electronic structure but it cannot be considered as “electronic structures of the receiver” as being non active they are not electronic structures (similar to dead space between the sensors). Moreover 112(a) is still applies as term “electronic structure” is much broader than limitation of claim 12.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 11 and claims bello2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by D0 US 20200057146 A1.
Regarding claim 11 D0 teaches
11. (New) A receiver for range imaging, the receiver comprising a plurality of single photon avalanche detector elements(fig. 3 with abstract) configured to operate in a Geiger mode and arranged two- dimensionally to form a plurality of active detector element configurations(fig. 3),
wherein each active detector element(row corresponding to pattern 24a) configuration comprises a single one-dimensional row of the single photon avalanche detector elements arranged side-by-side(fig. 3), and
adjacent active detector element configurations are arranged one above another and spaced apart from each other in a direction perpendicular to longitudinal axes of the active detector element configurations(another row corresponding to pattern 24a parallel to it) such that one or more electronic structures(row corresponding to pattern 24b) of the receiver are arranged between the adjacent active detector element configurations. (fig. 3)
12. (New) The receiver of claim 11, wherein the one or more electronic structures comprise at least one intervening non-active row of the single photon avalanche detector elements.(between black active elements of the row with pattern 24a we have while inactive element 24b)[0053]
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.
Claim(s) 13-16, 2, 3, 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 WO 2019197717 A1 in view of D0 US 20200057146 A1.
Regarding claims 1, 16 D1 fig. 6a-9 and page 6, 11 teach everything but while D0 teaches
adjacent active detector element configurations are arranged one above another and spaced apart from each other in a direction perpendicular to longitudinal axes of the active detector element configurations(another row corresponding to pattern 24a parallel to it) such that one or more electronic structures(row corresponding to pattern 24b) of the receiver are arranged between the adjacent active detector element configurations. (fig. 3)
It will be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art to modify teachings taught by D1 with teachings by D0 in order to scan specific patterns and therefore to decrease systematic errors[0052-0053][0062](other patterns also obvious)
14. (New) The range imaging apparatus of claim 13, further comprising a data processing unit configured, synchronously with the optical pulses repeatedly generated, to perform a selection of the single photon avalanche detector elements of the one or more of the active detector element configurations in response to generation of an optical pulse that illuminates the one or more active detector element configurations with the one or more stripes, and to determine values corresponding to time-of-flights of said optical pulse based on electrical signals from the selected single photon avalanche detector elements for performing range imaging. (page 6, page 14)
15. (New) The range imaging apparatus of claim 13, wherein the active detector element configurations forming the predetermined pairs with the respective stripes are selected from the two-dimensional arrangement of the single photon avalanche detector elements based on an illumination pattern formed by the stripes on the receiver.(page 11)
Subject matter of claims 2-9 is also known from D1 as presented office action on 09/24/2024
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 08/03/2026 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOVHANNES BAGHDASARYAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7845. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7am - 5 pm.
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, Yuqing Xiao can be reached at (571) 270-3603. 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.
/HOVHANNES BAGHDASARYAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights