Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/483,501

EVENT VISION SENSORS WITH DEFECT PIXEL SUPPRESSION, INCLUDING EVENT VISION SENSORS WITH IN-PIXEL DEFECT PIXEL SUPPRESSION BASED ON PROBABILISTIC DETERMINATION OF NOISE EVENT OCCURRENCE FIRING RATES, AND ASSOCIATED SYSTEMS, DEVICES, AND METHODS

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Oct 09, 2023
Examiner
BHUIYAN, FAYEZ A
Art Unit
2638
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Omnivision Technologies Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
470 granted / 559 resolved
+22.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
12 currently pending
Career history
571
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.6%
-37.4% vs TC avg
§103
36.4%
-3.6% vs TC avg
§102
43.5%
+3.5% vs TC avg
§112
7.4%
-32.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 559 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/27/202025 and 04/03/2025 were compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 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 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) 1-2, 4-14 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Seo et al. (US 2020/0410272 A1) hereinafter Seo. Regarding Claim 1, Seo teaches an event vision sensor (fig.1; Vision Sensor 100), comprising: an array of event vision pixels arranged in rows and columns (fig.3; Pixel array Px); and an event signal processor configured to identify a defective event vision pixel of the array based at least in part on a noise event occurrence firing rate corresponding to the defective event vision pixel (fig.3; Para.0075-0076; detection circuit 120 identify defect or noise from pixels of the vision sensor 100), wherein the noise event occurrence firing rate is based at least in part on measurements of a probability of the defective event vision pixel detecting a noise event over time (fig.3; Para.0073-0076; rate controller 130 may increase a threshold voltage for determining noise..). Regarding Claim 2, Seo teaches the event vision sensor of claim 1, wherein the measurements of the probability include indications of whether or not the defective event vision pixel detected noise events during one or more time intervals having one or more durations that each begin from reset of the defective event vision pixel (fig.3-4; Para.0073-0076; rate controller 130 may increase a threshold voltage for detecting a defect in a time period). Regarding Claim 6, Seo teaches the event vision sensor of claim 1, wherein, to identify the defective event vision pixel, the event signal processor is configured to directly solve for the noise event occurrence firing rate corresponding to the defective event vision pixel using an exponential equation that models the measurements of the probability (fig.3-4; Para.0073-0076; rate controller 130 may increase a threshold voltage for detecting a defect for measurements). Regarding Claim 7, Seo teaches the event vision sensor of claim 1, wherein the defective event vision pixel includes a programmable memory component usable to mask an output of the event vision pixel such that events detected by the defective event vision pixel are not output from the defective event vision pixel to the event signal processor (fig.3-4; Para.106; rate controller 130 and memory 1300 detect the defective pixels may increase a threshold voltage to output de noise threshold). Regarding Claim 10, Seo teaches the event vision sensor of claim 1, wherein, to identify the defective event vision pixel, the event signal processor is configured to compare the noise event occurrence firing rate to a threshold (fig.3-4; Para.0073-0076; rate controller 130 may increase a threshold voltage for detecting a defect to compare the noise). Regarding Claim 11, Seo teaches the event vision sensor of claim 10, wherein the threshold represents an average noise event occurrence firing rate corresponding to one or more event vision pixels of the array that neighbor the defective event vision pixel (fig.3-4; Para.0073-0076; rate controller 130 may increase a threshold voltage for detecting a defect in a time period). Regarding Claim 12, Seo teaches same reason as Claim 1 Regarding Claim 13, Seo teaches the method of claim 12, further comprising capturing the measurements of the probability, wherein capturing the measurements of the probability includes recording whether or not the event vision pixel detects a noise event during one or more time intervals following reset of the event vision pixel (fig.3-4; Para.0073-0076; rate controller 130 may increase a threshold voltage for detecting a defect in a time period). Regarding Claim 14, Seo teaches the method of claim 13, wherein capturing the measurements of the probability further includes: exposing the event vision pixel to constant illumination for entire durations of the one or more time intervals; and observing whether or not the event vision pixel detects the noise event (fig.3-4; Para.0073-0076; rate controller 130 may use constant threshold voltage for detecting a defect noise). Regarding Claim 18, Seo teaches the method of claim 12, further comprising directly solving for the noise event occurrence firing rate based on an exponential equation that model the measurements of the probability (fig.3-4; Para.0073-0076; rate controller 130 may increase a threshold voltage for detecting a defect for measurements). Regarding Claim 19, Seo teaches the method of claim 12, wherein identifying the event vision pixel as defective includes (a) comparing the noise event occurrence firing rate to a preset threshold and (b) determining that the noise event occurrence firing rate exceeds the preset threshold (fig.3-4; Para.0073-0076; rate controller 130 may increase a threshold voltage for detecting a defect for measurements whether exceeds or not). Regarding Claim 19, Seo teaches the method of claim 12, wherein identifying the event vision pixel as defective includes (a) determining an average noise event occurrence firing rate based at least in part on noise event occurrence firing rates associated with one or more event vision pixels neighboring the event vision pixel in an array of the event vision sensor (fig.3-4; Para.0073-0076 and 0106), (b) comparing the noise event occurrence firing rate to the average noise event occurrence firing rate (fig.3-4; Para.0073-0076 and 0106; rate controller 130 to compare threshold voltage for detecting a defect), and (c) determining that the noise event occurrence firing rate exceeds the average noise event occurrence firing rate by greater than a threshold amount (fig.3-4; Para.0073-0076 and 0106; rate controller 130 may compare a threshold voltage for detecting a defect for measurements). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3-5, 15-17 and 21 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FAYEZ A BHUIYAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1562. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00 - 6:00 M-F. 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, Lin Ye can be reached on 571-272-73727372. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /FAYEZ BHUIYAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2639 /LIN YE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2638
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 09, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598380
ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12585169
IMAGING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12554146
THIN DUAL-APERTURE ZOOM DIGITAL CAMERA
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12549857
SHAKE CORRECTION DEVICE, IMAGING APPARATUS, SHAKE CORRECTION METHOD, AND SHAKE CORRECTION PROGRAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12542981
PHOTORECEPTOR MODULE AND SOLID-STATE IMAGING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
84%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+12.0%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 559 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month