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.
Claims 14-15 are 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.
Regarding claim 14, the limitation “an output signal from the reference pixel” was already recited in the parent claim 13, and it is unclear if the output signal in claim 14 is the same or different from the output signal recited in claim 13. In view of applicant’s disclosure which appears to only refer to a single output signal from the reference pixel, it is assumed that they refer to the same output signal and that the article “an” should be replaced with --the-- in the limitation “an output signal”.
Regarding claim 15, the limitation “an output signal from the reference pixel” was already recited in the parent claim 13, and it is unclear if the output signal in claim 15 is the same or different from the output signal recited in claim 13. In view of applicant’s disclosure which appears to only refer to a single output signal from the reference pixel, it is assumed that they refer to the same output signal and that the article “an” should be replaced with --the-- in the limitation “an output signal”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 3-4, and 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Glover et al. US20200271765.
Regarding independent claim 1, Glover discloses, in Figures 1-5,
A distance measuring device (Glover; Fig. 1-5), comprising: a luminescence element (Glover; optical emitter OE) that irradiates an object (Glover; Fig. 1; external target TG) with light (Glover; [0069] the light that travels along measurement path P1); a light receiving element (Glover; Fig. 1-2; the assembly of main detector MD and reference detector RD; [0063] detectors MD and RD are SPAD arrays, and they have a corresponding measurement signal and a corresponding optical reference signal) that receives light from the luminescence element reflected from the object; and a substrate (see Glover’s labeled Figure 1) on which the luminescence element and the light receiving element are mounted, wherein the light receiving element includes a pixel array unit including an effective pixel array (Glover; Fig. 1-2; main detector MD; [0063] detectors MD and RD are SPAD arrays, and they have a corresponding measurement signal and a corresponding optical reference signal) including a plurality of effective pixels that receives reflection light from the object (Glover; measurement path P1) and a reference pixel array (Glover; Fig. 1-2; reference detector RD; [0063] detectors MD and RD are SPAD arrays, and they have a corresponding measurement signal and a corresponding optical reference signal) including a plurality of reference pixels that receives reference light (Glover; [0071] reference path P3; see Glover’s labeled Figure 1 for remarks relating to an apparent typographical error in Glover’s Figure 1 relating to the labeling of paths P2 and P3 relative to Glover’s specification [0070-0071]) from the luminescence element, and the reference pixel array is disposed between (Glover; Fig. 1; reference detector RD is positioned between main detector MD and optical emitter OE along a horizontal axis in Figure 1) the effective pixel array and the luminescence element (see Glover’s labeled Figure 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
804
762
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Glover’s labeled Figure 1.
Regarding claim 3, Glover discloses The distance measuring device according to claim 1, wherein the reference pixel array is disposed at an end portion of the pixel array unit on the side of the luminescence element (Glover; Fig. 1; reference detector RD is positioned relatively nearer to the optical emitter OE in comparison to the main detector MD).
Regarding claim 4, Glover discloses The distance measuring device according to claim 1, wherein a rib (Glover; Fig. 1; light barrier LB comprises a material that acts as a light barrier/shield) including a material having a light shielding property is disposed between the effective pixel array and the reference pixel array (Glover; Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 12, Glover discloses The distance measuring device according to claim 1, wherein the effective pixel array includes a single photon avalanche diode (SPAD) (Glover; [0063] detectors MD and RD are SPAD arrays).
Regarding claim 13, Glover discloses The distance measuring device according to claim 12, further comprising: a pixel control unit (Glover; the assembly of Fig. 2 that comprises processing circuit PRC and control unit CTRL) that controls the effective pixel, wherein the pixel control unit starts operation of the single photon avalanche diode included in the effective pixel array by using an output signal from the reference pixel (Glover; [0079] “the reference deterctor RD provides start signal to the measurement block MB for starting the measurement of the time period between emitting and receiving a pulse.”).
Regarding claim 14, Glover discloses The distance measuring device according to claim 13, wherein the pixel control unit (Glover; the assembly of Fig. 2 that comprises processing circuit PRC and control unit CTRL) enables detection of a photon by the single photon avalanche diode (Glover; [0063] detectors MD and RD are SPAD arrays) included in the effective pixel array by using an output signal from the reference pixel (Glover; [0079] “the reference deterctor RD provides start signal to the measurement block MB for starting the measurement of the time period between emitting and receiving a pulse.”).
Regarding claim 15, Glover discloses The distance measuring device according to claim 13, wherein the pixel control unit (Glover; the assembly of Fig. 2 that comprises processing circuit PRC and control unit CTRL) detects a luminescence timing (Glover; [0079] “start signal” and “stopping signal”) of the luminescence element by using an output signal from the reference pixel (Glover; [0079] “the reference deterctor RD provides start signal to the measurement block MB for starting the measurement of the time period between emitting and receiving a pulse.”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glover in view of Seitz et al. US20200233082.
Regarding claim 2, Glover teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The distance measuring device according to claim 1, wherein a edge of the reference pixel array is positioned on a side of the luminescence element (Glover; Fig. 1).
Glover is silent regarding wherein a long edge of the reference pixel array is positioned on a side of the luminescence element.
Seitz teaches wherein a long edge of the reference pixel array is positioned on a side of the luminescence element (Seitz; [0034] photosensor 30 comprises a one-dimensional array of photodiode pixels and that it is advantageous that the pixel shape is rectangular with the long side being parallel to the light source to minimize the influence of speckle pattern).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the edge of the reference pixel array is positioned on a side of the luminescence element as taught by Glover to be a long edge as taught by Seitz for the purpose of minimizing the influence of speckle pattern (Seitz; [0034] photosensor 30 comprises a one-dimensional array of photodiode pixels and that it is advantageous that the pixel shape is rectangular with the long side being parallel to the light source to minimize the influence of speckle pattern).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glover in view of Pan et al. US6075596.
Regarding claim 5, Glover teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The distance measuring device according to claim 4, wherein the rib (Glover; Fig. 1; light barrier LB comprises a material that acts as a light barrier/shield).
Glover is silent regarding wherein the rib includes a photosensitive adhesive.
Pan teaches a photosensitive adhesive (Pan; col. 12:61-67 to col. 13:1 photosensitive adhesive 60).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the mounting of the rib to include a photosensitive adhesive as taught by Pan for the purpose of providing rapid and accurate bonding with minimal pre-cure time constraints.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glover in view of Bamji US6323942.
Regarding claim 6, Glover teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The distance measuring device according to claim 4, wherein the reference pixel array (Glover; Fig. 1-2; reference detector RD) and the effective pixel array (Glover; Fig. 1-2; main detector MD) in the pixel array unit, and the ribs (Glover; Fig. 1; light barrier LB comprises a material that acts as a light barrier/shield) are arranged.
Glover does not teach wherein a plurality of dummy pixels is arranged between the reference pixel array and the effective pixel array in the pixel array unit, and the ribs are arranged on the plurality of dummy pixels.
Bamji teaches a plurality of dummy pixels (Bamji; col. 9:60-67 to col. 10:1-9 dummy pixel sensor/photodiode that has noise characteristics similar to actual detector 240 so that the dummy detector provides a pure noise signal having no light signal component, and using a differential comparator to cancel the common mode noise to enhance the output signal-to-noise ratio SNR).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the distance measuring device to comprise a plurality of dummy pixels and a a differential comparator as taught by Bamji for the purpose canceling the common mode noise and to enhance the output signal-to-noise ratio SNR (Bamji; col. 9:60-67 to col. 10:1-9 dummy pixel sensor/photodiode that has noise characteristics similar to actual detector 240 so that the dummy detector provides a pure noise signal having no light signal component, and using a differential comparator to cancel the common mode noise to enhance the output signal-to-noise ratio SNR).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glover in view of Bamji US6323942 as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Chou et al. US20220082670.
Regarding claim 7, Modified Glover teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The distance measuring device according to claim 6, wherein the rib (Glover; Fig. 1; light barrier LB comprises a material that acts as a light barrier/shield) is disposed to the effective pixel array (Glover; Fig. 1-2; main detector MD).
Modified Glover does not teach wherein the rib is disposed to surround the effective pixel array.
Chou teaches wherein the rib is disposed to surround the effective pixel array (Chou; [0048] “a peripheral light blocking layer (not shown) may be provided to surround the sensing micro-lens 49 (49B) and prevent stray light interference from the periphery of the micro-lens.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the rib configuration as taught by Modified Glover to surround the effective pixel array as taught by Chou for the purpose of preventing “stray light interference from the periphery” (Chou; [0048] “a peripheral light blocking layer (not shown) may be provided to surround the sensing micro-lens 49 (49B) and prevent stray light interference from the periphery of the micro-lens.”).
Claim(s) 8-9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glover in view of Iguchi et al. US20200183013.
Regarding claim 8, Glover teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The distance measuring device according to claim 4, further comprising: the luminescence element (Glover; optical emitter OE), wherein the rib (Glover; Fig. 1; light barrier LB comprises a material that acts as a light barrier/shield) above the plurality of effective pixels (Glover; Fig. 1-2; main detector MD).
Glover does not teach a band pass filter in which a transmission wavelength band is set to a peak wavelength of the luminescence element, wherein the band pass filter is supported by the rib above the plurality of effective pixels.
Iguchi teaches a band pass filter in which a transmission wavelength band is set to a peak wavelength of the luminescence element (Iguchi; [0052] “optical band-pass filter 152 has a transmission band in a band of a fixed width with a wavelength peak of the pulse light as a center”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the distance measuring device to include a band pass filter as taught by Iguchi for the purpose of improving signal-to-noise SNR ratio where stray light, ambient light, and/or sunlight would effect the SNR. Doing so would yield Iguchi’s optical band-pass filter 152 being disposed only above the effective pixels and not the reference pixels since the reference pixels would not require SNR compensation since the reference pixels are not exposed to stray light, ambient light, and/or sunlight.
Regarding claim 9, Modified Glover teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The distance measuring device according to claim 8, wherein the band pass filter is not disposed above the plurality of reference pixels (as described in the modification for parent claim 8, the modification would yield Iguchi’s optical band-pass filter 152 being disposed only above the effective pixels and not the reference pixels since the reference pixels would not require SNR compensation since the reference pixels are not exposed to stray light, ambient light, and/or sunlight.).
Regarding claim 11, Modified Glover teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The distance measuring device according to claim 8, further comprising: a second housing disposed on a front surface of the substrate to cover the light receiving element, wherein the second housing is disposed above the rib positioned between the effective pixel array and the reference pixel array to be in contact with the band pass filter (see Glover’s labeled Figure 1 below; Glover’s second housing covers the RD/reference pixel portion of the light receiving element).
PNG
media_image2.png
678
791
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Glover’s second housing.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glover in view of Iguchi as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Nishida et al. US20220136826.
Regarding claim 10, Modified Glover teaches the invention substantially the same as described above, and The distance measuring device according to claim 8, a side surface of the band pass filter (Iguchi; [0052] “optical band-pass filter 152 has a transmission band in a band of a fixed width with a wavelength peak of the pulse light as a center”).
Modified Glover does not teach wherein a light shielding film is disposed on a side surface of the band pass filter.
Nishida teaches a light shielding film (Nishida; Fig. 3; light-shielding film 24; [0042] “The light-shielding film 24 is a film that shields light to prevent light from entering the semiconductor substrate 21”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the band pass filter as taught by Modified Glover to comprise a light shielding film as taught by Nishida for the purpose of preventing stray light from entering the effective pixel array in which the stray light is not the object/target reflected light.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Nelson US20220196812 teaches a cover that reflects light.
Tsal US20220026545 teaches, a first/reference pixel 331 in Fig. 3-4, an isolation wall 395 of encapsulation 39, and a reference output signal in flowchart Fig. 11.
Vaello Panos US20200064453 teaches optical crosstalk calibration.
Ishizaki US20200056939 teaches cross-talk calibration.
Buettgen US20170090018 teaches reference pixels 128 with signals 172/174/176 in Figure 8D.
Masuda US20240186352 teaches an effective pixel region, “an optical black (OB) pixel region that outputs a pixel signal serving as a reference of dark output”, “a dummy pixel region that stabilizes a characteristic of the effective pixel region”.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN MALIKASIM whose telephone number is (313)446-6597. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 8 am - 5 pm (CST).
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.
/JONATHAN MALIKASIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645 2/26/26