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. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements filed 7/24/2023; 7/10/2024 and 12/30/2024 have been considered by the examiner. Drawings The drawings filed 7/24/2023 are approved by the examiner. 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim s 1-4, 9, 12, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Nagai et al (WO 20710138032 A1) . With respect to claim 1, Nagai et al disclose: A range imaging device [ taught by the abstract ] , comprising: a light source configured to emit a light pulse to a measurement space of a measurement target [ taught by the light source (24) in figure 2 ] ; a light-receiving unit [ taught by pixel sensors (80) ] comprising a pixel drive circuit configured to distribute and accumulate charge in three or more charge accumulation units at a timing synchronized with emission of the light pulse, and a pixel including a photoelectric conversion element that generates the charge in accordance with incident light and the charge accumulation units that accumulates the charge [ figure 4 discloses charge accumulation units as capacitors (44) and (46) and a photoconversion element (42) wherein timing control is shown by figure 5 ] ; and a range image processing unit comprising circuitry configured to control an emission timing for emitting the light pulse and an accumulation timing for distributing and accumulating the charge in the charge accumulation units [ taught by the clock generator (22), emitter controller (28), receiver controller (30) and processing unit (38) in figure 2 ] , and calculate a distance to an object in the measurement space based on amounts of charge accumulated in the charge accumulation units [ taught by paragraphs [0029] and [0030] ] , wherein the circuitry of the range image processing unit is configured to perform a plurality of measurements different in relative timing relationship between the emission timing and the accumulation timing, extract a feature amount based on the amounts of charge accumulated at the plurality of measurements [ shown by the timing signals in figure 5 ] , determine, based on tendency of the extracted feature amount, whether reflection light of the light pulse is received by the pixel in a single path or the reflection light of the light pulse is received by the pixel via multipath propagation and calculate the distance to the object in the measurement space in accordance with a result of the determination [ taught by the operation of the error estimator (68) withing the processing unit (38); the abstract states, “…The present disclosure relates to a time-of-flight distance measuring device. The device includes a light source (24) that emits emitted light toward an object (12), a light receiver (26) that includes photodetectors (80). The light receiver (26) detects reflected light reflected by the object. A first controller (28) controls the light source to emit the emitted light such that the emitted light includes a fundamental component and at least one harmonic component. A second controller (30) generates control signals ( D.sub.N ) and outputs each of the control signals to a respective photodetectors. A calculator (62, 64) calculates amplitudes (A1, A2) and phase angles (θ1, θ2). An error estimator (68) estimates an error value (ΔL) of a multipath error. The second controller generates the plurality of control signals to simultaneously sense the fundamental component and the at least one harmonic component…” ] . Claim 1 differs from Nagai et al by using three or more charge accumulating capacitors rather than the two shown by figure 4. Figure 3 of Lei et al teaches that it was known before the effective filing date of the present application to have read out pixels including a photodiode using more than three charge accumulating capacitors. Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to have had a reasonable expectation of success in adapting the pixel readout circuit of figure 4 of Nagai to have used three or more capacitors because Lei et al taught this was known structure to perform the same function, thus producing no unexpected results. Claim 20 is rejected by the combination of Nagai et al and Lei et al, as applied to claim 1. Claim 2 is met by the combination of Negai et al and Lei et al, as applied to claim 1, because Nagai et al teaches the use of a look up table (72, paragraphs [0058] to [0062] to input phase and amplitude values for the function of determining multipath error. Claim 3 is met by the combination of Negai et al and Lei et al, as applied to claim 2, because the detection system of figure 2 of Nagai et al uses timing and charge accumulation. Claim 4 is met by the combination of Negai et al and Lei et al, as applied to claim 1 , because the detection system of figure 2 of Nagai et al uses timing and charge accumulation wherein the modification in view of Lei et al uses four charge accumulation capacitors, thus meeting using three or more to determine range feature amounts of a target. Figure 5 of Negai shows relative time delay between the transmitted pulse form and the gating detection signals; thus, rendering claim 9 met by the combination of Negai et al and Lei et al, as applied to claim 1 . Claim 12 is taught by the operation of the circuit in figure 4 using the control signals in figure 5, as shown by Nagai et al; thus, being met by the combination of Negai et al and Lei et al, as applied to claim 1. Claim 18 is met by the operation of the charge accumulation circuit of figure 4 of Nagai et al, as modified to use more than three capacitors, as taught by Lei et al; thus being produced by the combination of Negai et al and Lei et al, as applied to claim 2. 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 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagai et al (WO 20710138032 A1) in view of Ito et al (United States Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0231783). Claim 11 differs from Nagai et al by reciting: if the range image processing unit determines that the reflection light has been received by the pixel via multipath propagation [ the device of Nagai et al identifies multipath ] , the range image processing unit calculates the distance corresponding to each of light paths included in the multipath propagation by a least-squares method . Therefore, Nagai et al does not explicitly teach the range image processing unit calculates the distance corresponding to each of light paths included in the multipath propagation by a least-squares method . In Ito et al, paragraph [0063] teaches error correction using the least squares method and paragraph [0066] teaches using this method for multipath error correction. Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to have had a reasonable expectation of success in using the least squared method as error correction in the device of Nagai et al because Ito et al taught this was a known method for correcting for multipath error , thus meeting the need in Nagai et al for known signal processing techniques for operating on data to correct for multipath errors. Allowable Subject Matter Claim5-8, 10, 13-1 7 and 19 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to FILLIN "Insert the name of the examiner designated to be contacted first regarding inquiries about the Office action." \* MERGEFORMAT MARK HELLNER at telephone number FILLIN "Insert the individual area code and phone number of the examiner to be contacted." \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-6981 . Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. /MARK HELLNER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648