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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Previously cited references Iwasaki, Themelis, Boettiger, Roh, and Nakamura teach all the limitations of amended claims 1-7, 8-9, 11, and 15-17. See below.
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 8-9 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 claims contain 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 inventors, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 8 includes the limitation “wherein the second light receiving element is positioned radially inward from the sub-group of light receiving elements” which is neither recited in the specification nor shown in the figures of the instant application. The limitation “radially inward” implies a circular cross-section of the sub-group of light receiving elements which is neither described in the specification nor shown in the figures of the instant application.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) insofar as it depends upon and requires all the limitations of claim 8 as claimed.
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 and 15 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.
Claims 1 and 15 recite the limitation "the filter" in page 1 and page 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3, 6-7, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Iwasaki (US 20110235017 A1; hereinafter Iwasaki).
Regarding claim 1, FIGS. 14A-14B of Iwasaki teach a solid-state imaging apparatus (314 ¶ [0098]), comprising: a plurality of light receiving elements (light receiving elements of detection layer) that photoelectrically convert incident light (incident light B/G/R/IR ¶ [0082],[0105]), wherein the plurality of light receiving elements (light receiving elements of detection layer) are arranged in groups (e.g. group of light receiving elements shown in FIGS. 14A-14B) and at least one group of light receiving elements of the plurality of light receiving elements (group of light receiving elements shown in FIGS. 14A-14B) includes a first light receiving element (first light receiving element) and a second light receiving element (second light receiving element, see Examiner annotated FIGS. 14A-14B); an optical filter (520) that controls a color of light incident on the at least one group of light receiving elements (group of light receiving elements ¶ [0195]); a first multi-bandpass filter (first instance of 540) to receive light incident (incident light B/G/R/IR) through the optical filter (520 ¶ [0215]), the first multi-bandpass filter (first instance of 540) disposed above the first light receiving element (first light receiving element) and having a first transmission band (R/G/B); and a second multi-bandpass filter (second instance of 540) to receive light incident (incident light B/G/R/IR) through the optical filter (520 ¶ [0215]), the second multi-bandpass filter (second instance of 540) disposed above the second light receiving element (second light receiving element) and having a second transmission band (IRS) different than the first transmission band (¶ [0155],[0216]), wherein at least one peak of a transmitted frequency band of the first multi-bandpass filter (e.g. R, G, B) and the second multi-bandpass filter (e.g. IR) has a frequency different from a peak of transmitted light in the filter (R/G/B filter 520 transmits light of one of R/G/B but no other frequencies).
Regarding claim 2, Iwasaki teaches the solid-state imaging apparatus according to claim 1, and FIGS. 14A-14B of Iwasaki further teach further comprising: a plurality of lenses (318) each being positioned over a respective group of light receiving elements (group of light receiving elements shown in FIGS. 14A-14B ¶ [0148]).
Regarding claim 3, Iwasaki teaches the solid-state imaging apparatus according to claim 1, and FIGS. 14A-14B of Iwasaki further teach wherein the optical filter (520) is at least one of a color filter, a plasmon filter, or an organic photoelectric conversion film (e.g. color filter ¶ [0195]).
Regarding claim 6, Iwasaki teaches the solid-state imaging apparatus according to claim 1, and FIGS. 14A-14B of Iwasaki further teach wherein the first transmission band (R/G/B) includes a first plurality of transmission bands (R/G/B) that correspond with the color of light incident on the optical filter (520, e.g. incident light R/G/B) and the second transmission band (IRS) includes a second plurality of transmission bands (IRS comprises a plurality of transmission bands) that correspond with the color of light incident on the optical filter (520, e.g. IR).
The Examiner notes the term “transmission band” has been interpreted under broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI, MPEP § 2111.01) as meaning a range of transmitted frequencies/wavelengths of light. For example, visible light may arbitrarily comprise one wavelength band of light (~380 to ~750 nm represents the entire spectrum visible to the human eye) or several wavelength bands of light (~380-450 nm represents violet, 450-485 nm represents blue, 485-500 nm represents cyan, 500-565 nm represents green, etc.). Similarly, infrared light may comprise any number of different wavelength bands.
Regarding claim 7, Iwasaki teaches the solid-state imaging apparatus according to claim 6, and FIG. 2 of Iwasaki teaches wherein the first light receiving element (first light receiving element) outputs a first signal having a first plurality of spectral peaks (e.g. signal shown in FIG. 2) through the first multi-bandpass filter (540 ¶ [0055]) and the second light receiving element (second light receiving element) outputs a second signal having a second plurality of spectral peaks (e.g. signal shown in FIG. 2) through the second multi-bandpass filter (540 ¶ [0055]).
Regarding claim 11, Iwasaki teaches the solid-state imaging apparatus according to claim 1, and FIGS. 3-4 & 14B of Iwasaki further comprising a wavelength extraction circuit (image signal processing section 330 ¶ [0106]-[0108]) that extracts an intensity of light of a predetermined wavelength (e.g. predetermined wavelengths in the visible and infrared range ¶ [0106]) with respect to a first signal output (e.g. SVL ¶ [0107]) by the first light receiving element (first light receiving element) and a second signal output (e.g. SIR ¶ [0107]) by the second light receiving element (second light receiving element).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki in view of Themelis et al. (George Themelis, Jung Sun Yoo, and Vasilis Ntziachristos, "Multispectral imaging using multiple-bandpass filters," Opt. Lett. 33, 1023-1025 (2008); hereinafter Themelis)
Regarding claim 4, Iwasaki teaches the solid-state imaging apparatus according to claim 1.
Iwasaki does not explicitly teach wherein at least one of the first transmission band and the second transmission band includes a half-value width narrower than a half-value width of the optical filter.
FIG. 1 of Themelis teaches a method for multispectral imaging including a CCD covered by a set of CMYG microfilters (see FIG. 1(a)) with broad transmission bands (see dashed lines of FIG. 1(c)) and a multi-bandpass filter (quadruple-bandpass filter (QBPF)) with narrow transmission bands (see solid lines in FIGS. 1(b) and 1(c)); wherein the multi-bandpass filter (QBPF) has a transmission band (e.g. transmission bands shown in FIGS. 1(b) and 1(c)) with a half-value width (i.e. full width at half maximum (FWHM)) narrower than a half-value width (i.e. FWHM) of the optical filter (CMYG microfilter shown in FIG. 1(a)) corresponding to each of the plurality of colors (dashed lines shown in FIG. 1(c), pg. 1023 paragraph 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the solid-state imaging apparatus taught by Iwasaki with the multi-bandpass filter taught by Themelis for the purpose of simultaneously measuring multiple narrow spectral bands (pg. 1024 paragraph 3).
Claims 5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki in view of Boettiger et al. (US 20150381907 A1; hereinafter Boettiger).
Regarding claim 5, Iwasaki teaches the solid-state imaging apparatus according to claim 1, and FIG. 14B of Iwasaki further teaches wherein the multi-bandpass filter (540) is integrally formed in the apparatus (e.g. FIG. 14B).
Iwasaki does not teach explicitly teach wherein the multi-bandpass filter is integrally formed in the apparatus by coating, adhesion, or deposition.
FIG. 1 of Boettiger teaches a solid-state imaging apparatus (12), wherein a dual bandpass filter (20) is integrally formed in the apparatus (12) by coating, adhesion, or deposition (e.g. multiple layers of coating ¶ [0042])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the solid-state imaging apparatus taught by Iwasaki with the bandpass coating taught by Boettiger for the purpose of forming the multi-bandpass filter integrally in the solid-state imaging apparatus.
Regarding claim 8, Iwasaki teaches the solid-state imaging apparatus according to claim 1.
Iwasaki does not teach wherein the at least one group of light receiving elements includes a sub-group of light receiving elements including the first light receiving element and a third light receiving element, wherein the second light receiving element is positioned radially inward from the sub-group of light receiving elements.
FIGS. 1-2, 4, and 7 of Boettiger teach a solid-state imaging apparatus (12 ¶ [0016]) comprising at least one group of light receiving elements (groups of 140 ¶ [0025]) including a sub-group of light receiving elements (sub-group of groups of 140 comprising 140 below 38C) including a first light receiving element (e.g. 140 below blue color filter element 38C) and a third light receiving element (e.g. 140 below green color filter element 38C ¶ [0027]), wherein a second light receiving element (e.g. 140 below 38P ¶ [0027]) is positioned inward from the sub-group of light receiving elements (sub-group of groups of 140 comprising 140 below 38C).
The examiner notes that while a top view of the filters 38C and 38P are not shown, a top view of the IR pass 30P and IR block 30C is illustrated in FIG. 7. As shown in FIG. 4, the IR pass 30P corresponds with the second light receiving element and the IR block 30C corresponds with the sub-group of light receiving elements recited above. The IR pass 30P is shown positioned inward from the IR block 30C in FIG. 7. Thus, the second light receiving element is positioned inward from the sub-group of light receiving elements.
Claims 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwasaki in view of Nakamura et al. (US 20110102308 A1; hereinafter Nakamura).
Regarding claim 15, FIGS. 14A-14B of Iwasaki teach a solid-state imaging apparatus (314 ¶ [0098]), comprising: a plurality of light receiving elements (light receiving elements of detection layer) that photoelectrically convert incident light (incident light B/G/R/IR ¶ [0082],[0105]), wherein the plurality of light receiving elements (light receiving elements of detection layer) are arranged in groups (e.g. group of light receiving elements shown in FIGS. 14A-14B) and at least one group of light receiving elements of the plurality of light receiving elements (group of light receiving elements shown in FIGS. 14A-14B) includes a first light receiving element (first light receiving element) and a second light receiving element (second light receiving element, see Examiner annotated FIGS. 14A-14B); an optical filter (520) that controls a color of light incident on the at least one group of light receiving elements (group of light receiving elements ¶ [0195]); a first multi-bandpass filter (first instance of 540) to receive light incident (incident light B/G/R/IR) through the optical filter (520 ¶ [0215]), the first multi-bandpass filter (first instance of 540) disposed above the first light receiving element (first light receiving element) and having a first transmission band (R/G/B); and a second multi-bandpass filter (second instance of 540) to receive light incident (incident light B/G/R/IR) through the optical filter (520 ¶ [0215]), the second multi-bandpass filter (second instance of 540) disposed above the second light receiving element (second light receiving element) and having a second transmission band (IRS) different than the first transmission band (¶ [0155],[0216]), wherein at least one peak of a transmitted frequency band of the first multi-bandpass filter (e.g. R, G, B) and the second multi-bandpass filter (e.g. IR) has a frequency different from a peak of transmitted light in the filter (R/G/B filter 520 transmits light of one of R/G/B but no other frequencies).
Iwasaki does not teach an electronic device, comprising: a display that displays image information with light emitted by a light emitting element; and an imaging element that captures images through the display on an opposite side of a light emitting surface of the display.
FIG. 1A of Nakamura teaches an electronic device (e.g. FIG. 1A), comprising: a display (10) that displays image information with light emitted by a light emitting element (e.g. OLED ¶ [0056]-[0057]); and an imaging element (20) that captures images through the display (10) on an opposite side of a light emitting surface of the display (see FIG. 1A ¶ [0056]-[0057]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the solid-state imaging apparatus taught by Iwasaki with the electronic device taught by Nakamura for the purpose of enhancing the functionality of the electronic device taught by Nakamura by providing an imaging element which avoids detection of light of undesired wavelengths (¶ [0050]) and has enhanced sensitivity (¶ [0058]) since it has been held in KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007), MPEP 2143(I)(A), that examples of rationales that may support a conclusion of obviousness include combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, wherein in the instant case an electronic device comprising a display and an imaging element together as taught by Nakamura is taught in the art, one having ordinary skill in the art could have combined a display and an imaging element together as taught by Nakamura with the solid-state imaging apparatus taught by Iwasaki with each element performing the same function as it does separately, and one having ordinary skill in the art would have found the combination predictable since the components are commonly used together.
Regarding claim 16, Iwasaki as modified teaches the electronic device according to claim 15, and FIGS. 3-4 & 14B of Iwasaki further teach comprising, inside of the imaging element (314), a wavelength extraction circuit (image signal processing section 330 ¶ [0106]-[0108]) that extracts an intensity of light of a predetermined wavelength (e.g. predetermined wavelengths in the visible and infrared spectrum ¶ [0106]) with respect to a first signal output (e.g. SVL ¶ [0107]) by the first light receiving element (first light receiving element) and a second signal output (e.g. SIR ¶ [0107]) by the second light receiving element (second light receiving element).
Regarding claim 17, Iwasaki as modified teaches the electronic device according to claim 15, and FIGS. 3-4 & 14B of Iwasaki further teach comprising, inside of the imaging element (314), a wavelength extraction circuit (image signal processing section 330 ¶ [0106]-[0108]) that extracts an intensity of light of a predetermined wavelength (e.g. predetermined wavelengths in the visible and infrared spectrum ¶ [0106]) with respect to a first signal output (e.g. SVL ¶ [0107]) by the first light receiving element (first light receiving element) and a second signal output (e.g. SIR ¶ [0107]) by the second light receiving element (second light receiving element).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-14 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:
Claim 12 recites the solid-state imaging apparatus according to claim 11, wherein the multi-bandpass filter includes: a third multi-bandpass filter; and a fourth multi-bandpass filter having a transmission band different from that of the third multi-bandpass filter, wherein light is made incident on the light receiving element through the third multi-bandpass filter and the fourth multi-bandpass filter so as to have different transmission bands with respect to an image height, and the wavelength extraction circuit executes wavelength extraction using a wavelength extraction parameter for light received from the same target at different image heights.
Iwasaki teaches the solid-state imaging apparatus according to claim 11, FIG. 14B of Iwasaki further teaches wherein the wherein the multi-bandpass filter (540) includes: a third multi-bandpass filter (first portion of 540 above R/G/B filters); and a fourth multi-bandpass filter (second portion of 540 above W filter) having a transmission band different from that of the third multi-bandpass filter (first portion of 540); wherein light (light rays shown in FIG. 14B) is made incident on the light receiving element (detection layer) through the third multi-bandpass filter (first portion of 540) and the fourth multi-bandpass filter (second portion of 540).
However, the prior art fails to teach or reasonably suggest “wherein light is made incident on the light receiving element through the third multi- bandpass filter and the fourth multi-bandpass filter so as to have different transmission bands with respect to an image height, and the wavelength extraction circuit executes wavelength extraction using a wavelength extraction parameter for light received from the same target at different image heights” together with all the limitations of claims 1 and 11-12 as claimed. Claims 13-14 contain allowable subject matter insofar as they depend upon and require all the limitations of claims 1 and 11-12.
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 Nora T Nix whose telephone number is (571)270-1972. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 5:00 pm ET.
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, Matthew Landau can be reached at (571) 272-1731. 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.
/Nora T. Nix/Assistant Examiner, Art Unit 2891
/MATTHEW C LANDAU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2891
Prosecution Insights