Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/252,276

LIGHT RECEPTION DEVICE AND DISTANCE MEASURING DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
May 09, 2023
Examiner
BAGHDASARYAN, HOVHANNES
Art Unit
3645
Tech Center
3600 — Transportation & Electronic Commerce
Assignee
Sony Semiconductor Solutions Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
759 granted / 971 resolved
+26.2% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
85 currently pending
Career history
1056
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.6%
-37.4% vs TC avg
§103
45.7%
+5.7% vs TC avg
§102
21.5%
-18.5% vs TC avg
§112
23.9%
-16.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 971 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 15 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. Limitations “wherein the second semiconductor chip in a second layer has a configuration in which a top-bottom relationship is inverted” Are unclear, it is unclear what is the second layer, and what is considered top-bottom relationship inverted. 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) 1 and claims bellow are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by D1 US 20190363130 A1. Regarding claims bellow D1 teaches [Claim 1] A light reception device comprising: a stacked chip structure(fig. 1) in which at least two semiconductor chips(100+200) including a first semiconductor chip(100) and a second semiconductor chip(210) are stacked,(fig. 2) wherein on the first semiconductor chip(100), pixels each including a light-receiving element are formed in an array, and[0003] on the second semiconductor chip(210 or 300), a readout circuit that reads a signal to be outputted by the pixel is formed with use of a three-dimensional transistor[0037],[0063],[0064], and a circuit using a two-dimensional transistor(20)[0041] is formed in a region other than a region where the readout circuit is formed.(fig. 7) [Claim 4] The light reception device according to claim 1, wherein the three-dimensional transistor comprises a Fin field-effect transistor. [0064] [Claim 5] The light reception device according to claim 1, wherein the two-dimensional transistor comprises a planar transistor.[0041] [Claim 6] The light reception device according to claim 1, wherein the circuit using the two-dimensional transistor comprises a high-voltage circuit that needs a voltage exceeding an allowable voltage of the three-dimensional transistor.[0065] [Claim 7] The light reception device according to claim 6, wherein the high-voltage circuit comprises a voltage generation circuit that generates a voltage for the light-receiving element.[0065] [Claim 10] The light reception device according to claim 1, wherein, in a three-layer stacked chip structure in which the first semiconductor chip, the second semiconductor chip, and a third semiconductor chip are stacked, a desired signal processor is formed on the third semiconductor chip. (fig. 7) [Claim 11] The light reception device according to claim 10, wherein the first semiconductor chip, the second semiconductor chip, and the third semiconductor chip are stacked in this order from top.(fig. 7) [Claim 13] The light reception device according to claim 10, wherein the third semiconductor chip is disposed between the first semiconductor chip and the second semiconductor chip.(depending on what you call first second and third fig. 7 reads on it) 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) 2, 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1. Regarding claims 2, 3 D1 teaches image sensor and is not concerned with type of the image sensor But does not explicitly teach [Claim 2] The light reception device according to claim 1, wherein the light-receiving element includes an avalanche photodiode that operates in a Geiger mode. [Claim 3] The light reception device according to claim 2, wherein the light-receiving element includes a single-photon avalanche diode. Although D1 does not teach claims 2 and 3 it is just the matter of obvious modification in order to detect the light of desired intensity , for example APD in Geiger or spad mode can produce fast electrical pulse even with single photon. Claim(s) 17, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D2 US 20210325244 A1 in view of D1. Regarding claims bellow D2 teaches [Claim 17] A distance measuring device comprising(title) a light source section(21) that emits light toward a distance measurement target(12); and a light reception device(41) that receives reflected light from the distance measurement target on a basis of the light emitted from the light source section, the light reception device including image sensor array[0002] but does not explicitly teach while D1 teaches a stacked chip structure in which at least two semiconductor chips including a first semiconductor chip and a second semiconductor chip are stacked, wherein on the first semiconductor chip, a pixel array section in which pixels each including a light-receiving element are disposed is formed, and on the second semiconductor chip, a readout circuit that reads a signal to be outputted by the pixel is formed with use of a three-dimensional transistor, and a circuit using a two-dimensional transistor is formed in a region around a region where the readout circuit is formed.(see rejection of claim 1 ) It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of filing to modify teachings by D2 with teaching by D1 in order to provide compact image sensor for lidar device as required in D1. [Claim 18] The distance measuring device according to claim 17, wherein distance measurement is performed by a ToF method of measuring a time until the light emitted from the light source section toward the distance measurement target returns by being reflected by the distance measurement target.(D1 [0002]) Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of D2. Regarding claim 8 D1 teaches high-voltage circuit but does not teach while D2 teaches a laser driver that drives a laser light source that emits laser light to be received by the light-receiving element.(fig. 1 implicit as laser source is driven) It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of filing to modify teachings by D1 with teaching by D2 in order to use single high voltage device for powering receivers and transmitters in LIDAR device. Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D1 in view of D3 WO/2020/170841(translation of CN 113287204 A as reference). Regarding claim 9 D1 teaches but wherein, in a two-layer stacked chip structure in which the first semiconductor chip and the second semiconductor chip are stacked,(fig. 2-7) [Claim 12, 14] The light reception device according to claim 11, wherein the first semiconductor chip in a first layer and the second semiconductor chip in a second layer are electrically coupled by a silicon through electrode, and(fig. 7 bonding between 100 and 300 layer 12 [0068]) does not teach while D3 teaches the first semiconductor chip and the second semiconductor chip are electrically coupled by a junction section including a Cu-Cu direct junction or a bump ball, or a silicon through electrode.(page 10, 11) the second semiconductor chip in the second layer and the third semiconductor chip in a third layer are electrically coupled by a junction section including a Cu-Cu direct junction.(page 10, 11) or a bump ball. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of filing to modify teachings by D1 with teaching by D3 in order to provide bonding between two stacked structures. Combination of D1 and D2 teaches different bonding mechanisms but does not explicitly say [Claim 16] The light reception device according to claim 15, wherein the first semiconductor chip in a first layer and the second semiconductor chip in the second layer are electrically coupled by a junction section including a Cu-Cu direct junction or a bump ball, and the second semiconductor chip in the second layer and the third semiconductor chip in a third layer are electrically coupled by a silicon through electrode. Claim 16 is Obvious modification of claims 12, 14 and can be considered simple design choice of using different bonding mechanisms between the layers. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of filing to modify teachings by D1 and D2 in order to provide desired bonding between layers. 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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at 5712726970. 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 09, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12591059
OPTICAL RANGING DEVICE AND OPTICAL RANGING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591047
OPTICAL SYSTEM FOR LIGHT DETECTION AND RANGING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12585000
RECEIVING DEVICE FOR AN OPTICAL MEASUREMENT APPARATUS FOR CAPTURING OBJECTS, LIGHT SIGNAL REDIRECTION DEVICE, MEASUREMENT APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR OPERATING A RECEIVING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569880
CMOS ULTRASONIC TRANSDUCERS AND RELATED APPARATUS AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12560721
SPAD LIDAR SYSTEM WITH BINNED PIXELS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+16.1%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 971 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