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 .
Status of the Claims
Amendment filed 9 February 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 2 and 5 have been canceled. Claims 1, 6-8, 10, and 20 have been amended. Claim 21 has been added. Claims 1, 3, 4, and 6-21 are pending.
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.
Claims 3, 4, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ikeda et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2020/0176493, hereinafter Ikeda ‘493) of record.
Applicant cannot rely upon the certified copy of the foreign priority application to overcome this rejection because a translation of said application has not been made of record in accordance with 37 CFR 1.55. When an English language translation of a non-English language foreign application is required, the translation must be that of the certified copy (of the foreign application as filed) submitted together with a statement that the translation of the certified copy is accurate. See MPEP §§ 215 and 216. Examiner notes that there exists publications of documents from the cited reference’s patent family dating to 29 November 2018.
With respect to claim 3, Ikeda ‘493 teaches (FIGs. 2 and 3) an imaging device as claimed, comprising:
a cell array where a plurality of cells (100 and 150) are arranged in a matrix ([0058]); and
a logic circuit (201) ([0057, 0076]),
wherein each of the plurality of cells includes a photoelectric conversion element (101) ([0060]),
wherein each of the plurality of cells (100 and 150) is configured to acquire imaging data using the photoelectric conversion element (101) ([0058-0060]),
wherein each of the plurality of cells (100 and 150) is configured to retain weight data ([0058-0060]), and
wherein the logic circuit (201) is configured to perform an arithmetic operation using first imaging data, second imaging data, first weight data, and second weight data in the case where, among the plurality of cells (100 and 150), a first cell (100) acquires the first imaging data, a second cell (100) acquires the second imaging data, a third cell (150) retains the first weight data, and a fourth cell (150) retains the second weight data ([0058-0060, 0076]).
With respect to claim 4, Ikeda ‘493 teaches wherein the logic circuit (201) is configured to calculate the sum of a product of the first imaging data and the first weight data and a product of the second imaging data and the second weight data ([0084]).
With respect to claim 19, Ikeda ‘493 teaches an electronic device as claimed, comprising: the imaging device according to claim 3 (see the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection of claim 3 above), and a display portion ([0240]).
With respect to claim 20, Ikeda ‘493 teaches (FIGs. 2 and 3) a semiconductor device as claimed, comprising:
an imaging device, the imaging device comprising:
a cell array where a plurality of cells (100 and 150) are arranged in a matrix ([0058]);
a logic circuit (201) ([0057, 0076]);
a read circuit (“a circuit for reading an image signal”) ([0162]); and
an A/D converter circuit (302) ([0143]),
wherein each of the plurality of cells (100 and 150) includes a photoelectric conversion element (101) ([0060]),
wherein each of the plurality of cells (100 and 150) is configured to acquire imaging data using the photoelectric conversion element (101) ([0058-0060]),
wherein each of the plurality of cells (100 and 150) is configured to retain weight data ([0058-0060]), and
wherein the logic circuit (201) is configured to perform an arithmetic operation using the imaging data acquired by a first cell (100) and the weight data retained by a second cell (150) ([0058-0060, 0076]).
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 3, 4, 19, and 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurokawa (US Patent Application Publication 2016/0172410, hereinafter Kurokawa ‘410) in view of Okada (US Patent Application Publication 2010/0054550, hereinafter Okada ‘550), both of record.
With respect to claim 3, Kurokawa ‘410 teaches (FIGs. 1 and 2) an imaging device substantially as claimed, comprising:
a cell array (21 and 23) where a plurality of cells (20 and 22) are arranged in a matrix ([0097]); and
a logic circuit (24) ([0097]),
wherein each of the plurality of cells (20 and 22) includes a photoelectric conversion element (60) ([0100]),
wherein each of the plurality of cells (20 and 22) is configured to acquire imaging data using the photoelectric conversion element (60) ([0100]),
wherein each of the plurality of cells (20 and 22) is configured to retain reference data ([0097, 0100]), and
wherein the logic circuit (24) is configured to perform an arithmetic operation using first imaging data, second imaging data, first reference data, and second reference data in the case where, among the plurality of cells (20 and 22), a first cell (20) acquires the first imaging data, a second cell (20) acquires the second imaging data, a third cell (22) retains the first reference data, and a fourth cell (22) retains the second reference data ([0108, 0121]).
Thus, Kurokawa ‘410 is shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of wherein the reference data is weight data.
However, Okada ‘550 teaches weight data as a type of reference data to determine attributes of an image ([0101]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the reference data of Kurokawa ‘410 as weight data as taught by Okada ‘550 to determine attributes of an image.
With respect to claim 4, Kurokawa ‘410 teaches wherein the logic circuit (24) is configured to calculate the sum of a product of the first imaging data and the first weight data and a product of the second imaging data and the second weight data ([0128]).
With respect to claim 19, Kurokawa ‘410 and Okada ‘550 teach an electronic device as claimed, comprising: the imaging device according to claim 3 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 3 above), and a display portion (Kurokawa ‘410; [0462]).
With respect to claim 20, Kurokawa ‘410 teaches (FIGs. 1 and 2) a semiconductor device substantially as claimed, comprising:
an imaging device, the imaging device comprising:
a cell array (21 and 23) where a plurality of cells (20 and 22) are arranged in a matrix ([0097]);
a logic circuit (24) ([0097]);
a read circuit ([0193]); and
an A/D converter circuit (26) ([0097]),
wherein each of the plurality of cells (20 and 22) includes a photoelectric conversion element (60) ([0100]),
wherein each of the plurality of cells (20 and 22) is configured to acquire imaging data using the photoelectric conversion element (60) ([0100]),
wherein each of the plurality of cells (20 and 22) is configured to retain reference data ([0097, 0100]), and
wherein the logic circuit (24) configured to perform an arithmetic operation using the imaging data acquired by a first cell (20) and the reference data retained by a second cell (22) ([0108, 0121]).
Thus, Kurokawa ‘410 is shown to teach all the features of the claim with the exception of wherein the reference data is weight data.
However, Okada ‘550 teaches weight data as a type of reference data to determine attributes of an image ([0101]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the reference data of Kurokawa ‘410 as weight data as taught by Okada ‘550 to determine attributes of an image.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments to claim 10 are sufficient to overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claims 10-13 made in the non-final rejection filed 12 November 2025. The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claims 10-13 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments to independent claim 1 incorporating the allowable subject matter of now-canceled dependent claim 5 are sufficient to overcome the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 1, 2, and 14 made in the non-final rejection filed 12 November 2025. See reasons for allowance below. Although dependent claim 5 has not been incorporated into independent claim 1 in its entirety, claim 1 has been amended to recite subject matter of claim 5 sufficient to overcome the outstanding rejections. The 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 1, 2, and 14 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 9 February 2026 with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of claims 3 and 20 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues (remarks, pp. 10-11) that Ikeda ‘493 fails to teach or suggest that each of the plurality of cells is configured to acquire imaging data using the photoelectric conversion element and each of the plurality of cells is configured to retain weight data. Applicant alleges that Ikeda ‘493 describes, at paragraph [0058], that of the plurality of pixels, pixels in any one column are reference pixels (150), and the others are pixels (100), in which the pixels (100) can obtain image data and the reference pixels (150) can output signals at the time of reset. Furthermore, Ikeda ‘493 describes, at paragraphs [0076], [0092], and [0093], that signals output from the reference pixels (150) are calculated separately from the signals output from the pixels (100). Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Ikeda ‘493 teaches (FIGs. 1-3) wherein each of the plurality of cells (100 and 150) is configured to acquire imaging data using the photoelectric conversion element (101) ([0058-0060]), [and] wherein each of the plurality of cells (100 and 150) is configured to retain weight data ([0058-0060]).
First, in giving the claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, a cell is “configured to” acquire imaging data, and is “configured to” retain weight data if said cell is made capable of performing the claimed functions. Paragraph [0060] of Ikeda ‘493 describes, “the reference pixel (150) can also have an almost similar structure [as the pixel 100].” This is shown in FIG. 3 where both the pixel (100) and the reference pixel (150) have identical structures. Because the pixel (100) and the reference pixel (150) are identical or substantially identical, both the pixel (100) and the reference pixel (150) are made capable or acquiring imaging data and retaining weight data. And because both the pixel (100) and the reference pixel (150) are made capable or acquiring imaging data and retaining weight data, said pixel (100) and said reference pixel (150) are thus configured to acquire imaging data and to retain weight data.
Further, for the purposes of applying art, the term “a plurality of cells” may be interpreted as elements (100 and 150) of Ikeda ‘493 together representing a single cell of which a plurality of such cells are disclosed within a single pixel block (200) and among the plurality of pixel blocks (200), rather than each element taken individually. Thus, each plurality of cells (100 and 150 taken together) would be configured to acquire imaging data using the photoelectric conversion element at element (100) and would be configured to retain weight data at element (150).
Applicant argues (remarks, p. 11) that Kurokawa ‘410 fails to teach the same features as discussed above with respect to Ikeda ‘493. Applicant alleges that Kurokawa ‘410 describes, in FIGS. 1 and 22 and at paragraphs [0098] and [0225], that a reference pixel is shielded from light by a light-blocking layer, whereas other pixels are not shielded. Additionally, Kurokawa ‘410 describes, at paragraph [0128], that current flowing in the reference pixel is represented separately from the current flowing in the other pixels. Applicant maintains that Okada ‘550 fails to cure this deficiency. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Kurokawa ‘410 teaches (FIGs. 1 and 2) wherein each of the plurality of cells (20 and 22) is configured to acquire imaging data using the photoelectric conversion element (60) ([0100]), [and] wherein each of the plurality of cells (20 and 22) is configured to retain reference data ([0097, 0100]).
As discussed above with respect to Ikeda ‘493, a cell is “configured to” acquire imaging data, and is “configured to” retain weight data if said cell is made capable of performing the claimed functions. Paragraph [0098] of Kurokawa ‘410 describes, “circuits of the pixels (20) and the reference pixels (22) have the same structure.” This is shown in FIG. 2 where both the pixels (20) and the reference pixels (22) have identical structures. Although the reference pixels (22) may be shielded by a light-blocking layer, this does not prevent said reference pixels from being configured to acquire imaging data any more than placing a cover over a display prevents a display from being configured to emit light from its light-emitting elements. Because the pixels (20) and the reference pixels (22) are identical or substantially identical, both the pixels (20) and the reference pixels (22) are made capable or acquiring imaging data and retaining weight data. And because both the pixels (20) and the reference pixels (22) are made capable or acquiring imaging data and retaining weight data, said pixels (20) and said reference pixels (22) are thus configured to acquire imaging data and to retain weight data.
Similar to as discussed with Ikeda ‘493 above, for the purposes of applying art, the term “a plurality of cells” may be interpreted as elements (20 and 22) of Ikeda ‘493 together representing a single cell of which a plurality of such cells are disclosed within a single pixel block (21 and 23) and among the plurality of pixel blocks (21 and 23), rather than each element taken individually. Thus, each plurality of cells (20 and 22 taken together) would be configured to acquire imaging data using the photoelectric conversion element at element (20) and would be configured to retain weight data at element (22).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-18 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, for the reasons set forth on pp. 12-13 of the non-final rejection filed 12 November 2025.
Claims 1, 6-14, and 21 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Independent claim 1 has been amended to incorporate the allowable subject matter of now-canceled dependent claim 5, and is allowed for the same reasons as set forth on pp. 12-13 of the non-final rejection filed 12 November 2025. Although dependent claim 5 has not been incorporated into independent claim 1 in its entirety, claim 1 has been amended to recite subject matter of claim 5 sufficient to overcome the outstanding rejections.
Claims 6-14 and 21 are allowed based merely upon their dependencies from allowed claim 1.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 Christopher M. Roland whose telephone number is (571)270-1271. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10:00AM-7:00PM Eastern.
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, Yara Green can be reached at (571)270-3035. 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.
/C.M.R./Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/YARA B GREEN/Supervisor Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893