Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/761,936

INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, CORRECTION METHOD, AND PROGRAM

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Mar 18, 2022
Examiner
CHILTON, CLARA GRACE
Art Unit
3645
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Sony Semiconductor Solutions Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
56%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 12m
To Grant
67%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 56% of resolved cases
56%
Career Allow Rate
31 granted / 55 resolved
+4.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 12m
Avg Prosecution
43 currently pending
Career history
98
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.4%
-38.6% vs TC avg
§103
58.1%
+18.1% vs TC avg
§102
23.4%
-16.6% vs TC avg
§112
15.6%
-24.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 55 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 09/24/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues Nishikawa does not teach correcting a pixel value of a saturation based on a pixel value of a non-saturation region. Instead, applicant argues Nishikawa only teaches performing gain control. Examiner respectfully disagrees. It is unclear from applicant's arguments how Nishikawa fails to teach the above limitations. In [0014] and [0093] taken together, Nishikawa teaches correcting a saturated pixel signal based on nearby unsaturated pixels. Applicant has not made a convincing argument of how this differs from the claim language, and instead has simply restated Nishikawa’s teaching. Thus, this argument is not persuasive. 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)(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 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Nishikawa (US 20180120423 A1). Claim 1: Nishikawa teaches an information processing apparatus comprising a control unit (Fig. 1, imaging signal processer) configured to: detect a saturation region of light reception image information wherein the light reception information is generated based on a plurality of pixel signals output from the light receiving sensor (Fig. 2, step S203 and [0070]), the plurality of pixel signals includes a saturated pixel signal and unsaturated pixel signal ([0014]), the light receiving sensor receives reflected light based on a set of exposure periods, by a measurement object, the projection light is light from a light source(Fig. 1, light L1 reflected off object and received by imaging element 105 as L2 and [0046]), the pixel signal being configured to be used to calculate a distance to the measurement object (Fig. 1, distance arithmetic operator 114 and [0051]), the saturation region is a region of the light reception image information([0054] - describing accumulated charge exceeding limit), and the saturation region of the light reception image information is based on the saturated pixel signal ([0054] - describing accumulated charge exceeding limit); and correct a pixel value of the saturation region of the light reception image information based on a pixel value of the non saturation region of the light reception image information (Fig. 2, steps S204 and S205 and [0074]), wherein the non-saturation region of the light reception image information is based on the unsaturated pixel signal ([0093]). Claim 2: Nishikawa teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the light reception image information is based on a component of the reflected light in the plurality of pixel signals ([0046]). Claim 3: Nishikawa teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the light reception image information is based on a component of the reflected light in the plurality of pixel signals and a component of ambient light, in the plurality of pixel signals ([0065]). Claim 4: Nishikawa teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the control unit is further configured to correct the pixel value of the saturation region based on a pixel value a non-saturation region that is adjacent to the saturation region ([0093]). Claim 5: Nishikawa teaches information processing apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the control unit is further configured to: calculate a correction value based on an average value of a plurality of pixel values of the non-saturation region located in surroundings of the saturation region; and correct the pixel value of the saturation region based on the correction value, wherein the plurality of pixel values of the non-saturation region includes the pixel value of the non-saturation region ([0093]). Claim 7: Nishikawa teaches information processing apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the control unit is further configured to: calculate a change rate of a reception light value based on the component of the reflected light in the plurality of pixel signals, and a component of ambient light in the plurality of pixel signals; and correct the pixel value of the saturation region based on the change rate of the reception light value ([0067] - comparing pixel values). Claim 8: As Claim 8 is a method claim corresponding to Claim 1, see rejection above. Claim 9: Nishikawa teaches non-transitory computer-readable medium having stored thereon, computer-executable instructions which, when executed a computer, cause the computer to execute operations, the operations comprising: detecting a saturation region of light reception image information, wherein the light reception image information is based on a plurality of pixel signals output from a light receiving sensor (Fig. 2, step S203 and [0070]), the plurality of pixel signals include a saturated pixel signal and an unsaturated pixel signal ([0014]), the light receiving sensor receives reflected light based on a set of exposure periods, the reflected light is reflection of projection light from a measurement object the projection light is projected from a light source, (Fig. 1, light L1 reflected off object and received by imaging element 105 as L2 and [0046]), a distance to the measurement object from the light receiving sensor is calculated based on the plurality of pixel signals (Fig. 1, distance arithmetic operator 114 and [0051]), the saturation region is a region of the light reception image information and the saturation region of the light reception image information is based on the saturated pixel signal ([0054] - describing accumulated charge exceeding limit); and correcting a pixel value of the saturation region of the light reception image information based on a pixel value of non- saturation region of the light reception image information, wherein the non-saturation region of the light reception image information is based on the unsaturated pixel signal (Fig. 2, steps S204 and S205 and [0074] and [0093]). 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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishikawa (US 20180120423 A1) in view of Watanabe (US 20030053689 A1). Claim 6: Nishikawa teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 5, but not wherein the correction value is larger than the average value. Watanabe teaches an image processing system which corrects color saturation (i.e.: lightness – described in [0014]) by using a weighted average of a pixel group ([0085] – note that it would be obvious to one skilled in the art that a weighting function could have the result of making the final correction value greater than a non-weighted average of pixels). It would have been obvious to use the weighted average, as taught by Watanabe, in place of the correction value taught by Nishikawa, because a weighted average is well known in the art and would yield predictable results, such as giving more control over the final correction value (by changing the weight of different pixels). Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLARA CHILTON whose telephone number is (703)756-1080. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6-2 MT. 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, Robert Hodge can be reached at (571) 272-2097. 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. /CLARA G CHILTON/Examiner, Art Unit 3645 /ROBERT W HODGE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 18, 2022
Application Filed
Jun 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Sep 24, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 24, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12566251
INTEGRATED AND COMPACT LIDAR MEASURMENT SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12523748
DETECTOR HAVING QUANTUM DOT PN JUNCTION PHOTODIODE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12481040
LOW POWER LiDAR SYSTEM WITH SMART LASER INTERROGRATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
Patent 12474454
SENSOR WITH CROSS TALK SUPPRESSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025
Patent 12461208
DIFFRACTIVE LIGHT DISTRIBUTION FOR PHOTOSENSOR ARRAY-BASED LIDAR RECEIVING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 04, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
56%
Grant Probability
67%
With Interview (+10.6%)
3y 12m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 55 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month