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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species IV, corresponding to claims 1, 3-6 and 8-11, in the reply filed on 7/1/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “the office alleged that all pending claims do not relate to a single general inventive concept “because the pending claims lacked an inventive concept in view of a prior art reference.” And cites the restriction at page 4 paragraph 3 and then concludes by stating this is not the standard under PCT.
This is not found persuasive and Applicant’s quote can not be found in the cited paragraph.
Paragraph 3 of the Restriction Requirement states the species lack the same or corresponding special technical feature as follows:
The species lack unity of invention because even though the inventions of these groups require the technical feature of providing a I2C interface for image sensors, this technical feature is not a special technical feature as it does not make a contribution over the prior art in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2021/0218898 A1 to Moon which is found in Applicant’s IDS filed 2/5/2024.
That is the linking claim 1 that comprises the shared technical feature of providing an I2C interface for mode changing is known within the art. Therefore, they do not share a single general inventive concept if the novelty is found within the species differences. The art rejection below is further evidence this is the case as the applied reference discloses the single general inventive concept of the I2C interface for switching between power modes of an image sensor.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 7 and 12-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 7/1/2025. NOTE: Applicant did not elect apparatus claim 26 citing the elected embodiment was for a control method, however, that method throughout supports the device performing the method as seen in claim 26, thus claim 26 has been examined by the Examiner and not withdrawn from consideration.
Claim Objections
Claims 3, 7, 8, 12 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities: improper dependency.
Claims 3, 7, 8, 12 and 20 have not been amended to update their dependency after cancellation of claim 2. They have been examined as being dependent from claim 1 as that is the what claim 2 previously depended upon.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 4, 6 and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0412972 A1 to Kadambala et al.
With respect to claim 1 Kadambala discloses, in Fig. 1A-8, an operation mode switching control method (paragraph 57), applied to an electronic device (Fig. 4-6), wherein the electronic device comprises a processor and a camera (paragraph 34 and 55), an image sensor in the camera comprises at least two operation modes (paragraph 57), and the operation mode switching control method comprises: sending, by the processor, a signal to the image sensor through an I2C interface, wherein the signal is used to control the image sensor to run in an operation mode corresponding to the signal (paragraph 47 and 49).
With respect to claim 3 Kadambala discloses, in Fig. 1A-8, the operation mode switching control method according to claim 1, wherein the signal is an I2C address; and wherein the image sensor comprises an I2C control module, and the sending, by the processor, a signal to the image sensor through an I2C interface comprises: sending, by the processor, the I2C address to the image sensor through the I2C interface to trigger the I2C control module corresponding to the I2C address to run, to control the image sensor to run in an operation mode corresponding to the I2C address (paragraph 47).
With respect to claim 4 Kadambala discloses, in Fig. 1A-8, the operation mode switching control method according to claim 3, wherein one I2C control module corresponds to two I2C addresses, and one I2C address corresponds to at least one operation mode of the image sensor (paragraph 49 and 51; where the modes are LPM or normal operation controlled by the I2C interface).
With respect to claim 6 Kadambala discloses, in Fig. 1A-8, the operation mode switching control method according to claim 4, wherein one I2C address corresponds to at least two operation modes of the image sensor, and the operation mode switching control method further comprises: controlling, by the image sensor in response to a switching signal, the image sensor to run in one of operation modes corresponding to a same I2C address, wherein the switching signal is sent by the processor to the image sensor or is generated by the image sensor (paragraph 49 and 51).
Claim 26 is rejected for similar reasons as above as Kadambala discloses a device performing the method of claim 1, having a display and programmable processor in paragraph 39 and 55.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 8-11 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 DANIEL M PASIEWICZ whose telephone number is (571)272-5516. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 AM - 5:30 PM EST.
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, George Eng can be reached at (571)272-7495. 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.
/DANIEL M PASIEWICZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2699
September 17, 2025