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 .
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 5, 6, 20-24 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. The claims will be examined as best understood.
Claim 5 is dependent upon itself, not clear which parent claim 5 is dependent upon.
Claim 6 is rejected as based upon as rejected base claim.
Claim 7, 20 recites the limitation "the determination". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. What does “the determination” refer to in the claim?
Claim 20 recites the limitation "determining, by each decision circuit of the processing circuit ". A decision circuit has not been recited in prior claims to which claim 20 is dependent. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation of decision circuit in the claim.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "the one or more bias signal". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 22-24 are rejected as based upon a rejected base claim.
Claims 3 and 16 recite “the time window circuits are configured to control latches that selectively output pixel output signals.” Not clear from the claim or the specification what is considered a latch. The instant specification has “The second integrated circuit 32 may include ports and/or latches 34 or any interface that contacts the inter-chip conductors 33.” Are latches the same as a port? Are latches similar to a switch?
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 1-4, 7-9, 12-17, 20-22, 25-26 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Webster et al (US 20190302240) in view of Zhu et al (US 10983197).
In regards to claim 1, Webster discloses a device, comprising:
a transmitter that is configured to transmit, per each sensing iteration, a radiation pulse (device of Fig. 1, [0017]);
an array of pixels (Fig. 1 ref. 120), each pixel comprises multiple subpixels (Webster Fig. 4, ref. 420 and ref. 408, [0043] discloses ref. 120 representative of refs. 420), each subpixel comprises single photon avalanche diodes (SPADs) that are coupled to each other in parallel ([0043] “light sensing system 400 includes a pixel array 420 including a plurality of photomultiplier pixel cells 422 with corresponding photon detectors 408”, [0014] discloses SPADs, Fig. 4 refs. 408, 422 in parallel rows), and one or more quenching circuits (abstract discloses quenching circuit), wherein each subpixel is configured to output a subpixel output signal indicative of a reflected radiation pulse sensed by one or more SPADs of the subpixel ([0026] “FIG. 2, buffer circuit 244 is coupled to the photon detector 208 to generate a digital output signal D.sub.OUT1 258A having a pulse width interval 280…triggered in the photon detector 208”);
wherein the reflected radiation pulse is reflected from an area of an object that was illuminated by the radiation pulse (Webster as seen in Fig. 1, target ref. 130);
a processing circuit that is configured to: read, for each pixel, multiple subpixel output signals from the multiple subpixels of the pixel (Webster Fig. 1 ref. 126 [0017] “controller 126 may also be coupled to process the information that is readout from pixel array 120”);
receive, per each sensing iteration, transmission timing information indicative of a timing of transmission of the radiation pulse (Webster [0023] discloses “The timing signals are representative of when light source 102 emits light and when the photomultiplier pixel cells 122 detect the image light”); and
While Webster discloses: determine, per each sensing iteration, a timing of a first detection of the reflected pulse detected by any of the SPADs of the subpixel (Webster [0027] “The timing signals are representative of when light source 102 emits light and when the photon detector detects 208 the incident photon 210”, [0043]), Webster does not expressly disclose: determine per each subpixel a timing of a first detection of the reflected pulse detected by any of the SPADs of the subpixel.
Zhu teaches photo detectors are individually addressable and controllable (C12:30 “each photosensor may be individually addressable and controlled by a pixel-level circuit 601-2”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Webster with Zhu by providing per each sensing iteration and per each subpixel, a timing of a first detection of the reflected pulse detected by any of the SPADs of the subpixel in order to allow a more acute measurement.
In regards to claim 2, Webster discloses the device according to claim 1, but does not expressly disclose: wherein the processing circuit comprises time window circuits for ignoring pixel output signals generated outside programmable time windows.
Zhu teaches a TOF sensing system in which the return pulses are disabled/ignored for a period of time (C2:33 “a photosensor may comprise a set of photodetectors such as a photodetector array with the capability to dynamically enable/disable individual photodetector in the photodetector array”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Webster with Zhu by providing the means for the processing circuit comprises time window circuits for ignoring pixel output signals generated outside programmable time windows in order to prevent false readings from being read.
In regards to claim 3, Webster discloses the device according to claim 2, wherein the time window circuits are configured to control latches that selectively output pixel output signals (Zhu C2:38 “pixels outside of an expected detection location may be disabled and not combined so that signal-noise-ratio (SNR) may not be degraded by noise or ambient light from outside of the region of interest”).
In regards to claim 4, Webster discloses the device according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuit comprises a code generator that is configured to output a sequence of codes, starting from an initial code per each sensing iteration (Webster discloses pulses of light, ref. 106, emitted to target/object, the series of pulses occurring in a given order/code).
In regards to claim 7, Webster discloses the device according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuit comprises a decision circuit for each pixel (Webster Fig. 1 ref. 126); wherein the decision circuit is configured to determine whether the pixel sensed a reflected radiation pulse per each sensing iteration (Webster [0015]); and to generate a pixel output signal according to the determination (Webster [0015] if detector performance is determined good, output signals will be used).
In regards to claim 8, Webster discloses the device according to claim 7, comprising a bias circuit for biasing each decision circuit with one or more bias signals (Webster Fig. 3 schematic of circuit), wherein the decision circuit is configured to make the determination whether the pixel sensed the radiation pulse based on the one or more bias signal (Webster [0039] “I.sub.BIAS represents the current value of each switched current source 376A, 376B, . . . 376N that have been switched on in response to digital output signals D.sub.OUT1 358A . . . D.sub.OUTN 358N, and R.sub.OUT represents the resistance value of R.sub.OUT 366. Thus, since I.sub.BIAS and
In regards to claim 9, Webster discloses the device according to claim 8, comprising a controller for determining the one or more bias signals (Webster controller ref. 126).
In regards to claim 12, Webster discloses the device according to claim 1, wherein each SPAD is coupled to a single quenching circuit that consists essentially of a resistor (Webster abstract discloses quenching, resister seen in schematic Fig. 3).
In regards to claim 13, Webster discloses the device according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuit is configured to determine, per each sensing iteration and per each pixel, an intensity parameter related to one or more reflected radiation pulses detected by the pixel (Webster [0003] discloses determines a distance, a parameter of intensity).
In regards to claim 14, Webster discloses a method comprising: transmitting, by a transmitter, per each sensing iteration, a radiation pulse(device of Fig. 1, [0017]); outputting, by each subpixel of an array of pixels (Webster ref. 120, Fig. 4 ref. 420 subpixel ref. 408), a subpixel output signal indicative of a reflected radiation pulse sensed by one or more single photon avalanche diodes (SPADs) of the subpixel (Webster [0026] detailed in claim 1 rejection); wherein each pixel of the array comprises multiple subpixels (Webster ref. 120, Fig. 4 ref. 420 subpixel ref. 408); wherein the SPADs of each subpixel are coupled to each other in parallel (Webster Fig. 4 refs. 408, 422 in parallel rows); wherein each subpixel comprises one or more quenching circuits (Webster abstract), wherein the reflected radiation pulse is reflected from an area of an object that was illuminated by the radiation pulse (Webster as seen in Fig. 1 ref. 130 target); reading, by a processing circuit for each pixel, multiple subpixel output signals from the multiple subpixels of the pixel (Webster [0023] discloses “The timing signals are representative of when light source 102 emits light and when the photomultiplier pixel cells 122 detect the image light”); receiving, per each sensing iteration, transmission timing information indicative of a timing of transmission of the radiation pulse; and
While webster discloses: determining, by the processing circuit and per each sensing iteration, a timing of a first detection of the reflected pulse detected by any of the SPADs of the subpixel (Webster [0027] “The timing signals are representative of when light source 102 emits light and when the photon detector detects 208 the incident photon 210”), Webster does not expressly disclose: determine per each subpixel a timing of a first detection of the reflected pulse detected by any of the SPADs of the subpixel.
Zhu teaches photo detectors are individually addressable and controllable (C12:30 “each photosensor may be individually addressable and controlled by a pixel-level circuit 601-2”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Webster with Zhu by providing per each sensing iteration and per each subpixel, a timing of a first detection of the reflected pulse detected by any of the SPADs of the subpixel in order to allow a more acute measurement.
In regards to claim 15, Webster discloses the method according to claim 14, comprising determining, by the processing circuit and per each sensing iteration and per each pixel, an intensity parameter related to one or more reflected radiation pulses detected by the pixel (Webster [0003] discloses determines a distance, a parameter of intensity).
In regards to claim 16, Webster discloses the method according to claim 15, comprising controlling by the time window circuits latches that selectively output pixel output signals (Webster, at least [0033] disclose switched/latch for output).
In regards to claim 17, Webster discloses the method according to claim 14, comprising outputting, by a code generator of the processing circuit, a sequence of codes, starting from an initial code per each sensing iteration (Webster discloses pulses of light, ref. 106, emitted to target/object, the series of pulses occurring in a given order/code).
In regards to claim 20, Webster discloses the method according to claim 14, comprising, determining, by each decision circuit of the processing circuit, whether a pixel associated with the decision circuit sensed a reflected radiation pulse per each sensing iteration (Webster abstract “A buffer circuit is coupled to the photon detector to generate a digital output signal having a pulse width interval in response to the avalanche current triggered in the photon detector”); and generating, by the decision circuit, a pixel output signal according to the determination (Webster abstract “to generate a digital output signal”).
In regards to claim 21, Webster discloses the method according to claim 20, comprising biasing each decision circuit by a bias circuit associated with the decision circuit (Webster as combined, Zhu C17:29 “the driver transistors (e.g., transistor 311-1, 311-2) may be individually activated (e.g., biased so as to be conducting)”) and wherein the determining is based on the one or more bias signal (Webster as combined, Zhu C17:30 “may be individually activated (e.g., biased so as to be conducting)”).
In regards to claim 22, Webster discloses the method according to claim 21, comprising determining, by a controller, the one or more bias signals (Webster as combined, Webster equation 3, Zhu C20:4 “SPADs are normally biased with a biased voltage above the breakdown voltage”).
In regards to claim 25, Webster discloses the method according to claim 14, wherein each SPAD is coupled to a single quenching circuit that consists essentially of a resistor (Webster abstract discloses quenching, resister seen in schematic Fig. 3).
In regards to claim 26, Webster discloses the method according to claim 14, comprising determining, by the processing circuit, per each sensing iteration and per each pixel, an intensity parameter related to one or more reflected radiation pulses detected by the pixel (Webster [0003] discloses determines a distance, a parameter of intensity).
Claim 10, 11, 23, 24 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Webster, Zhu as applied to claim 9, 22 above, and further in view of Nishihara et al (US 20140293107).
In regards to claim 10, Webster discloses the device according to claim 9, but does not expressly disclose: wherein the controller is configured to determine the one or more bias signals based on outcomes of previous sensing iterations.
Nishihara teaches comparing a signal from a pixel with that of a reference signal (abstract “Each sense circuit includes a comparator configured to compare an output signal from a pixel with a reference signal”). The previous signals being represented by a reference signal
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Webster with Zhu by providing the means for the controller to determine the one or more bias signals based on outcomes of previous sensing iterations/reference signals in order to provide a more accurate measurement.
In regards to claim 11, Webster discloses the device according to claim 10, wherein the controller is configured to determine the one or more bias signals based on signal to noise ratio (Webster [0016] “even though digital enable circuitry is featured in the disclosed photomultiplier pixel cells to individually enable and disable high DCR SPADs, analog circuitry is also combined in the disclosed examples photomultiplier pixel cells to provide high timing precision and edge detection, improve signal to noise ratio (SNR) performance, as well as reduce the overall transistor count compared to digital implementations”)
In regards to claim 23, Webster discloses the method according to claim 22, but does not expressly disclose: comprising determining by the controller the one or more bias signals based on outcomes of previous sensing iterations.
Nishihara teaches comparing a signal from a pixel with that of a reference signal (abstract “Each sense circuit includes a comparator configured to compare an output signal from a pixel with a reference signal”). The previous signals being represented by a reference signal
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Webster with Zhu by providing the means for determining by the controller the one or more bias signals based on outcomes of previous sensing iterations/reference signals in order to provide a more accurate measurement.
In regards to claim 24, Webster discloses the method according to claim 23, comprising determining by the controller the one or more bias signals based on signal to noise ratio (Webster [0015] discloses “to provide high timing precision and edge detection, improve signal to noise ratio (SNR) performance”, thus controller would optimize/base signals with regards to SNR performance).
Claim 5, 6, 18, 19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Webster, Zhu as applied to claim 1, 17 above, and further in view of Niclass et al (US 20180081041).
In regards to claim 5, Webster discloses the device according to claim 5, but does not expressly disclose: wherein the code generator is a pseudo random code generator.
Niclass teaches a pseudo random code generator for a light emission system ([0008] discloses “a pseudo-random pattern”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Webster with Niclass by providing the means the code generator is a pseudo random code generator in order to differentiate signals from different devices or at different times.
In regards to claim 6, Webster as combined discloses the device according to claim 5, wherein the processing circuit comprises code samplers (Niclass [0025] discloses a receiver receiving and reads the pseudo random code, thus comprising a code sampler); wherein each code sampler is associated with a pixel and is configured to sample, at each sensing iteration, the code generator at a timing that correspond to the timing of a first detection of radiation by the pixel (Niclass [0040] discloses interpretation of light pulses for each pixel and the time of the light pulse “For each SPAD 40, corresponding to a pixel in the depth map that is to be generated, the control and processing circuitry…”, [0041]).
In regards to claim 18, Webster discloses the method according to claim 17, but does not expressly disclose: wherein the code generator is a pseudo random code generator.
Niclass teaches a pseudo random code generator for a light emission system ([0008] discloses “a pseudo-random pattern”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify, with the reasonable expectation of success, Webster with Niclass by providing the means the code generator is a pseudo random code generator in order to differentiate signals from different devices or at different times.
In regards to claim 19, Webster discloses the method according to claim 17, comprising sampling, by each code sampler of the processing circuit, at each sensing iteration, the code generator at a timing that correspond to the timing of a first detection of radiation by a pixel associated with the code sampler. (Niclass [0025] discloses a receiver receiving and reads the pseudo random code, thus comprising a code sampler to interpret the pseudo code)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure cited on PTL 892. The cited references display devices comprising differing layouts of photo detectors and optical measurement systems using these detectors.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICENTE RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-4798. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 7-5.
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, JOSHUA HUSON can be reached at 571-270-5301. 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.
/V.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3642 /JOSHUA D HUSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642