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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/21/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Response to Remarks:
Applicant’s arguments filed 8/21/2025 regarding claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-13, 15-16 and 19-22 (amendment pages 3-5) state that the cited Mate reference fails to disclose “when the command signal is a signal for shooting according to a set exposure time, notifying the sensor to capture the image signal by the controller according to the exposure time through the logic circuit”. Specifically, the applicant’s arguments state that Mate discloses that the signal wirelessly transmitted to the image sensor by the illumination server (18) only includes recommended parameter for setting exposure time and there is no teaching in Mate that discloses the signal wirelessly transmitted to the image sensor by the illumination server (18) includes a shooting command according to a set exposure time to trigger the image sensor to shoot at the set exposure time. The examiner respectfully disagrees. The Mate reference specifically discloses that the illumination server (18) may determine parameters related to one recommended image capture setting for at least one image sensor wherein the parameters may include exposure time (paragraph 56). In addition, Mate further discloses that the image sensor (12) may receive the parameters including exposure time from the illumination server (18) and capture an image utilizing the exposure time received from the illumination server (18) (paragraph 59). Therefore, the examiner maintains that the combination of the Torikai reference, Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and the Mate reference discloses all of the limitations of claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-13, 15-16 and 19-22.
Official Notice Not Traversed, Now AAPA
Re claims 1-3, 5-[7, 9-13, 15-16 and 19-22, Official Notice was taken in the most recent Office Action stating that it is well known in the digital imaging art for logic circuits to be implemented into image sensors. The Examiner’s conclusion of common knowledge in the art is now taken to be admitted prior art because Applicant has failed to adequately traverse the Examiner’s assertion of Official Notice in reply to the Office Action in which the common knowledge statement was made. Please see MPEP § 2144.03.
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 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.
Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-13, 15-16 and 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Torikai et al. US 2014/0112326 in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and further in view of Mate et al. US 2012/0229699.
Re claims 1, 7 and 11, Torikai discloses a photodetector (digital camera 100) and a control method for wirelessly controlling a photodetector comprising: a processor (image capturing unit 102, control unit 101 and operation unit 105 perform processing on image data) (figure 1; paragraphs 27-32); a signal transceiver (connection unit 111) configured to wirelessly receive a command signal sent by an external device (200) (figures 1, 2, 13,14; paragraphs 35-36, 49-50, 183-204); and a controller connected to the processor and the signal transceiver (111) and configured to perform an operation corresponding to the command signal according to the command signal (connection is made between camera 100 and phone 200 via connection units 111, 211 and images and operation commands are transmitted between the devices) (figures 1, 2, 13,14; paragraphs 35-36, 49-50, 183-204). The Torikai reference further discloses that the photodetector further comprises: a sensor configured to receive an image signal, wherein the processor performs image processing on the image signal to generate a processed image signal (image capturing unit 102 converts light into an electronic signal and performs noise reduction processing to output digital image data and autofocus, autoexposure, white balance and pre-flash emission processing is also performed on image signals) (paragraphs 29-32). However, although the Torikai reference discloses all of the above limitations including a photodetector that comprises a processor, a signal transceiver, a controller and a sensor it fails to specifically disclose that the photodetector comprises a logic circuit connected between a controller and a sensor. The Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art discloses it is well known in the digital imaging art for logic circuits to be implemented into image sensors. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the image capturing device disclosed by the Torikai to include logic circuits in an image sensor in order to easily perform on-chip processing, amplification and data conversion.
Although the combination of the Torikai reference and Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art discloses all of the above limitations it fails to specifically disclose that when the command signal is a signal for shooting according to a set exposure time, notifying the sensor to capture the image signal by the controller according to the exposure time through the logic circuit.
Mate discloses an illumination server (18) that wirelessly sets exposure time parameters and sends the set exposure time parameters to image sensors (12) for image capture (paragraphs 53-56; figures 1-2). The Mate reference specifically discloses that the illumination server (18) may determine parameters related to one recommended image capture setting for at least one image sensor wherein the parameters may include exposure time (paragraph 56). In addition, Mate further discloses that the image sensor (12) may receive the parameters including exposure time from the illumination server (18) and capture an image utilizing the exposure time received from the illumination server (18) (paragraph 59). Therefore, the examiner maintains that the combination of the Torikai reference, Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and the Mate reference discloses all of the limitations of claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-13, 15-16 and 19-22.Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the image capturing device disclosed by the Torikai reference and Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art with the teachings disclosed by the Mate reference so that an exposure time of an image sensor may be easily adjusted remotely.
Re claims 2 and 12, Torikai further discloses that the wireless method comprises wireless communication or wifi (wireless communication between camera 100 and phone 200 may be via wireless local area network or other wireless technologies) (figures 1,2; paragraphs 35-36, 49-50).
Re claims 3 and 13, Torikai further discloses that the photodetector further comprises a power source, wherein the command signal is a signal for turning on or turning off the power source, the controller controls the power source to be on or off (camera 100 includes a power source that can be turned off by a signal sent from connected phone 200) (figures 13, 14; paragraphs 183-204).
Re claims 5 and 15 Torikai further discloses that the photodetector further comprises: a screen, wherein the controller displays information sent by the external device on the screen (camera 100 includes a display 106 that displays screens for selecting connection to wireless networks and remote devices) (figures 4A-5Ad; paragraphs 33, 61-65).
Re claims 6 and 16, Torikai further discloses that the controller receives information from the photodetector and sends the information to the external device (camera 100 sends images to the phone 200) (figures 14A,14B; paragraphs 192-204).
Re claims 9 and 19, Mate further discloses that the exposure time is set by an application (an illumination server 18 wirelessly sets exposure time parameters and sends the set exposure time parameters to image sensors 12 for image capture) (paragraphs 53-56; figures 1-2).
Re claims 10 and 20, Torikai further discloses that the processor provides the controller with the processed image signal, the controller sends the processed image signal to the external device through the signal transceiver, and the external device displays the processed image signal (mobile phone 200 displays received thumbnails from camera 100 on display unit 206) (paragraphs 97-98).
Re claims 21 and 22, the Torikai reference further discloses that when a remote power off request (1409) is instructed a change of the network settings of the camera is initiated and the camera is instructed to either exit from the network or to delete the network and subsequently at step S1413 power off processing is performed (paragraphs 202-204). Therefore, the examiner maintains that the Torikai reference discloses notifying the processor to switch network settings according to the command signal when the command signal is a signal for switching network settings, so that the external device switches the network settings of the photodetector wirelessly using the command signal.
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.
Contacts
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kelly L. Jerabek whose telephone number is (571) 272-7312. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday (8:00 AM - 5:00 PM).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, George Eng can be reached at (571) 272-7495. The fax phone number for submitting all Official communications is (571) 273-7300. The fax phone number for submitting informal communications such as drafts, proposed amendments, etc., may be faxed directly to the Examiner at (571) 273-7312.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/KELLY L JERABEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2699