DETAILED ACTION
This office action is responsive to communication filed on August 24, 2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed August 24, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, with respect to claims 1, 8 and 13, that as amended, the independent claims expressly encompass an arrangement in which each pixel circuit group includes multiple white pixel circuits. Thus, the amended independent claims are no longer limited to the embodiment illustrated in figure 5, which shows one white pixel circuit in each pixel circuit group. Rather, the amended claims are supported by, inter alia, the embodiment illustrated in Figure 10, which discloses pixel circuit groups including multiple white pixel circuits. Accordingly, the present claims, as amended, are adequately supported by the original disclosure.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Although figure 10 shows more than one white pixel (W) per pixel circuit group (702), figure 10 does not provide support for “at least one of the pixel circuit row comprises the pixel circuit of white pixel and the plurality of pixel circuits of color pixels, and at least one of the pixel circuit column comprises the pixel circuit of white pixel and the plurality of pixel circuits of color pixels” in combination with the other elements recited in claims 1, 8 and 13, respectively. The limitations “at least one of the pixel circuit row” and “at least one of the pixel circuit column” mean that there may be more than one pixel circuit row and pixel circuit column, but there may also be only one pixel circuit row and one pixel circuit column. Figure 10 does not show a single pixel circuit row comprising all of the pixel circuits of the white pixel and the surrounding color pixels of a pixel circuit group (702) or a single pixel circuit column comprising all of the pixel circuits of the white pixel and the surrounding color pixels of a pixel circuit group (702). Additionally, all of the pixels (706) of the pixel circuit groups (702) cannot be interpreted to be in the same row or same column, as all of the pixels (706) of a pixel circuit group (702) do not share one control signal line or one output signal line (see figure 10), as is required for each pixel circuit row and each pixel circuit column in claims 1, 8 and 13.
Therefore, the rejection is maintained by the Examiner.
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 the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites a combination of elements. The first element is a pixel array comprising a plurality of pixel circuit groups, wherein each pixel circuit group comprises “at least one pixel circuit of white pixel and a plurality of pixel circuits of color pixels”, and “the pixel circuit of white pixel is surrounded by the plurality of pixel circuits of color pixel”. This is illustrated in figure 5 or figure 10, which show a pixel circuit group (702) comprising at least one pixel circuit of white pixel (W) surrounded by a plurality of pixel circuits of color pixels (i.e. R, G, G, and B pixels).
Claim 1 goes on to recite that “each pixel circuit row of the pixel circuit array shares one control signal line, and each pixel circuit column of the pixel circuit array shares one output signal line”. This is also supported by figure 5 or figure 10, which show individual rows of pixels having shared control signal lines coming from the pixel control signal generation module (800) and individual columns of pixels having shared output signal lines leading to the pixel output signal processing module (900).
Finally, claim 1 recites that “the pixel circuit array comprises at least two pixel circuit rows and at least two pixel circuit columns, at least one of the pixel circuit row comprises the pixel circuit of white pixel and the plurality of pixel circuits of color pixels, and at least one of the pixel circuit column comprises the pixel circuit of white pixel and the plurality of pixel circuits of color pixels”. Once again, figures 5 and 10 show at least two pixel circuit rows and at least two pixel circuit columns. However, in figure 5 each pixel circuit row only includes one of color pixels (e.g. R and B pixels or R and G pixels) or white pixels (W), and each pixel circuit column only includes one of color pixels (e.g. R and B pixels or R and G pixels) or white pixels (W). There are no pixel rows comprising both white pixels and color pixels, and there are no pixel columns including both white pixels and color pixels. In figure 10, each pixel circuit row and each pixel circuit column may include both white pixels and color pixels. However, a single row does not include all of the pixel circuit of white pixel and the plurality of pixel circuits of color pixels, and a single pixel column does not include all of the pixel circuit of white pixel and the plurality of pixel circuits of color pixels, as is required by claim 1. Therefore, claim 1 contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Based upon the combination of elements found therein, claim 1 would require that the pixels (W, R, G, G, B) of each pixel circuit group (702) of figure 5 or figure 10 be found in a same row and in a same column, and that all of these pixels (W, R, G, G, B) share one control signal line and output signal line. Figures 5 and 10 do not support this, and the Examiner has been unable to find support for this elsewhere in the original disclosure. For instance, figure 10 shows columns of pixels having both white (W) and color (R or G or B) pixel circuits. However, figure 10 does not provide support for all of the pixels of the group (702) being in a same row and a same column and sharing one column signal line and one output signal line, as is required by claim 1. As such, claim 1 contains new matter for these additional reasons.
Claims 2-7 depend from claim 1 and thus contain the same new matter as claim 1.
Claims 8 and 13 are each similar in scope and content to claim 1, and are thus rejected for the same reasons provided with respect to claim 1.
Claims 9-12 depend from claim 8 and thus contain the same new matter as claim 8.
Claims 14-20 depend from or otherwise require all of the limitations of claim 13, and are thus rejected for the same reasons provided with respect to claim 13.
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 1-20 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.
Claim 1 recites “the pixel circuit of white pixel” (3x) at lines 4, 8 and 9-10 thereof. However, claim 1 previously recites “at least one pixel circuit of white pixel”. As such, there may be more than one pixel circuit of white pixel. Therefore, it is unclear which pixel circuit of white pixel “the pixel circuit of white pixel” limitations recited at lines 4, 8 and 9-10 are referring to. As such, claim 1 is deemed indefinite by the Examiner.
Claims 2-7 are indefinite as depending from claim 1 and not remedying the deficiencies of claim 1.
Claim 2 recites “the pixel circuit of white pixel” at lines 7-8 thereof. However, parent claim 1 previously recites “at least one pixel circuit of white pixel”. As such, there may be more than one pixel circuit of white pixel. Therefore, it is unclear which pixel circuit of white pixel “the pixel circuit of white pixel” limitation recited at lines 7-8 of claim 2 is referring to. As such, claim 2 is deemed indefinite by the Examiner.
Claim 3 recites “the pixel circuit of white pixel” at line 2 of page 3. However, parent claim 1 previously recites “at least one pixel circuit of white pixel”. As such, there may be more than one pixel circuit of white pixel. Therefore, it is unclear which pixel circuit of white pixel “the pixel circuit of white pixel” limitation recited in claim 3 is referring to. As such, claim 3 is deemed indefinite by the Examiner.
Claim 4 recites “the pixel circuit of white pixel” at line 2 thereof. However, parent claim 1 previously recites “at least one pixel circuit of white pixel”. As such, there may be more than one pixel circuit of white pixel. Therefore, it is unclear which pixel circuit of white pixel “the pixel circuit of white pixel” limitation recited in claim 4 is referring to. As such, claim 4 is deemed indefinite by the Examiner.
Claim 5 recites “the pixel circuit of white pixel” at lines 8 and 9 thereof. However, parent claim 1 previously recites “at least one pixel circuit of white pixel”. As such, there may be more than one pixel circuit of white pixel. Therefore, it is unclear which pixel circuit of white pixel “the pixel circuit of white pixel” limitation recited in claim 5 is referring to. As such, claim 5 is deemed indefinite by the Examiner.
Claim 8 recites “the pixel circuit of white pixel” (3x) at lines 5, 10 and 11-12 thereof. However, claim 8 previously recites “at least one pixel circuit of white pixel”. As such, there may be more than one pixel circuit of white pixel. Therefore, it is unclear which pixel circuit of white pixel “the pixel circuit of white pixel” limitations recited at lines 5, 10 and 11-12 are referring to. As such, claim 8 is deemed indefinite by the Examiner.
Claims 9-12 are indefinite as depending from claim 8 and not remedying the deficiencies of claim 8.
Claim 9 recites “the pixel circuit of white pixel” at lines 7-8 thereof. However, parent claim 8 previously recites “at least one pixel circuit of white pixel”. As such, there may be more than one pixel circuit of white pixel. Therefore, it is unclear which pixel circuit of white pixel “the pixel circuit of white pixel” limitation recited at lines 7-8 of claim 9 is referring to. As such, claim 9 is deemed indefinite by the Examiner.
Claim 10 recites “the pixel circuit of white pixel” at line 4 thereof. However, parent claim 8 previously recites “at least one pixel circuit of white pixel”. As such, there may be more than one pixel circuit of white pixel. Therefore, it is unclear which pixel circuit of white pixel “the pixel circuit of white pixel” limitation recited in claim 10 is referring to. As such, claim 10 is deemed indefinite by the Examiner.
Claim 11 recites “the pixel circuit of white pixel” at line 2 thereof. However, parent claim 8 previously recites “at least one pixel circuit of white pixel”. As such, there may be more than one pixel circuit of white pixel. Therefore, it is unclear which pixel circuit of white pixel “the pixel circuit of white pixel” limitation recited in claim 11 is referring to. As such, claim 11 is deemed indefinite by the Examiner.
Claim 12 recites “the pixel circuit of white pixel” at lines 8 and 9 thereof. However, parent claim 8 previously recites “at least one pixel circuit of white pixel”. As such, there may be more than one pixel circuit of white pixel. Therefore, it is unclear which pixel circuit of white pixel “the pixel circuit of white pixel” limitation recited in claim 12 is referring to. As such, claim 12 is deemed indefinite by the Examiner.
Claim 13 recites “the pixel circuit of white pixel” (4x) at lines 1, 5, 7 and 8-9 thereof. However, claim 13 previously recites “at least one pixel circuit of white pixel”. As such, there may be more than one pixel circuit of white pixel. Therefore, it is unclear which pixel circuit of white pixel “the pixel circuit of white pixel” limitations recited at lines 1, 5, 7 and 8-9 are referring to. As such, claim 13 is deemed indefinite by the Examiner.
Claims 14-20 are indefinite as depending from claim 13 and not remedying the deficiencies of claim 13.
Claim 14 recites “the pixel circuit of white pixel” at line 2 thereof. However, parent claim 13 previously recites “at least one pixel circuit of white pixel”. As such, there may be more than one pixel circuit of white pixel. Therefore, it is unclear which pixel circuit of white pixel “the pixel circuit of white pixel” limitation recited at line 2 of claim 14 is referring to. As such, claim 14 is deemed indefinite by the Examiner.
Claim 15 recites “the pixel circuit of white pixel” at line 3 thereof and at line 3 of page 7. However, parent claim 13 previously recites “at least one pixel circuit of white pixel”. As such, there may be more than one pixel circuit of white pixel. Therefore, it is unclear which pixel circuit of white pixel “the pixel circuit of white pixel” limitations recited in claim 15 are referring to. As such, claim 15 is deemed indefinite by the Examiner.
Claim 16 recites “the pixel circuit of white pixel” at line 2 thereof. However, parent claim 13 previously recites “at least one pixel circuit of white pixel”. As such, there may be more than one pixel circuit of white pixel. Therefore, it is unclear which pixel circuit of white pixel “the pixel circuit of white pixel” limitation recited in claim 16 is referring to. As such, claim 16 is deemed indefinite by the Examiner.
In the interest of compact prosecution, for prior art purposes the Examiner will interpret each “the pixel circuit of white pixel” limitation to instead read “the at least one pixel circuit of white pixel”, and the claims may be amended in this manner in order to overcome this rejection.
Prior Art
Consider claims 1, 8 and 13, the prior art of record does not teach nor reasonably suggest an image sensor comprising the combination of:
(a) a pixel circuit array, wherein the pixel circuit array comprises a plurality of pixel circuit groups, each pixel circuit group comprises at least one pixel circuit of white pixel and a plurality of pixel circuits of color pixels, and the at least one pixel circuit of white pixel is surrounded by the plurality of pixel circuits of color pixels,
(b) each pixel circuit row of the pixel circuit array shares one control signal line, and each pixel circuit column of the pixel circuit array shares one output signal line, and
(c) at least one of the pixel circuit row comprises the at least one pixel circuit of white pixel and the plurality of pixel circuits of color pixels, and at least one of the pixel circuit column comprises the at least one pixel circuit of white pixel and the plurality of pixel circuits of color pixels.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALBERT H CUTLER whose telephone number is (571)270-1460. The examiner can normally be reached approximately Mon - Fri 8:00-4:30.
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, Sinh Tran can be reached at (571)272-7564. 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.
/ALBERT H CUTLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2637
Prosecution Insights