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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in France on 1/27/2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the French application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. The interim copy filed is not a certified copy.
Drawings
Figure 1 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Figure 2 is illegible due to line quality. Please provide a clearer copy.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6, 8, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bosset et al. (2012/0314112)
Regarding claim 1, Bosset discloses a readout method for reading a sensor comprising a matrix of pixels (P) sensitive to a physical phenomenon and delivering an electrical signal the level of which depends on the intensity of the physical phenomenon, the pixels being organized into rows and being connected, via conductors (Col), to readout circuits of the sensor, the readout circuits each comprising an analogue-to-digital converter receiving the electrical signal and delivering digital information depending on the electrical signal, (Bosset, Fig. 1) wherein the method comprises the following phases for the readout of each pixel: the matrix of pixels acquiring electric charges; reading the matrix by transferring the charges acquired during the acquisition phase to the readout circuits; wherein, during the readout phase, multiple successive analogue-to-digital conversions of the acquired charges are carried out in parallel with one and the same acquisition phase. (Bosset, [0051])
Regarding claim 2, Bosset further discloses the pixels are passive. (Bosset, Fig. 1, single charge transfer transistor shown per pixel, see Applicant’s Written Description at [0009] regarding the particular use of the term passive in this context)
Regarding claim 3, Bosset further discloses the electrical signal delivered by the pixels is an electric charge and wherein the readout circuits each comprise a charge-voltage stage configured to convert electric charges received from the pixels into a voltage, the voltage being delivered to the analogue-to-digital converter. (Bosset, Fig. 4, item E31)
Regarding claim 6, Bosset further discloses each readout circuit comprises a sample-and-hold unit that is driven in conduction mode throughout the readout phase. (Bosset, Fig. 7)
Regarding claim 8, Bosset further discloses the conversions are carried out at regular intervals during the same acquisition phase. (Bosset, Fig. 7)
Regarding claim 9, Bosset discloses a readout device for reading electrical signals from sensors comprising a matrix of pixels (P) sensitive to a physical phenomenon and configured to deliver an electrical signal the level of which depends on the intensity of the physical phenomenon, the readout device comprising the readout circuits of the sensor and being configured to implement the readout method according to claim 1, the pixels being organized into rows and being connected, via conductors, to the readout circuits of the readout device, the readout circuits each comprising an analogue-to-digital converter receiving the electrical signal and delivering digital information depending on the electrical signal. (Bosset, Fig. 1)
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bosset in view of Chan et al. (2021/0102844)
Regarding claim 7, Bosset lacks explicit teaching of the analogue-to-digital converter is a sigma-delta converter.
Chan teaches the analogue-to-digital converter is a sigma-delta converter. (Chan, [0450])
It would have been obvious to use a sigma-delta converter for its ordinary purpose of analog to digital conversion as the use of an art-recognized equivalent.
Claim 10 is rejected on the same grounds as claim 7.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 5 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record does not disclose, teach, or fairly suggest a circuit as described in claim 4 or equivalent.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDWIN C GUNBERG whose telephone number is (571)270-3107. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Dave Porta can be reached at 571-272-2444. 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.
/EDWIN C GUNBERG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884