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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 3/5/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/5/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 7 of the remarks Applicant argues they believe Park in view of Bitton fails to disclose the feature “said comparison circuit recording said count signal when said ramp signal and said second sensing signal are equal” due to both Park and Bitton failing to disclose the count value recording based on the ramp signal and the second sensing signal while a sensing module is sensing a light signal and an ambient light, and generating said second sensing signal.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Park clearly discloses recording a count value based off of a ramp that is adjusted based on ambient light levels, Bitton then fills in the gap of a way to calculate ambient light levels using pixels from an image sensor. They claim does not require that the count value record is done while a sensing module is sensing all of those things at the same time. They must merely be sensed prior and then used in determining the count value, which they are in Park.
Applicant further argues “Park in view of Bitton fails to disclose the comparison circuit deduces the sensing value of the light signal according to the recorded count signal and the ramp signal”. However, this Examiner respectfully disagrees. Paragraph 36 of Park discloses ultimately the process of comparing an image signal to a ramp while a count is counting and then being latched results in an output of the latched count values into digital values. This is analogous to Applicant’s claimed deducing.
On pages 8-9 of the remarks Applicant again argues Park does not disclose the count value is for when the second sensing signal and the ramp are equal. The Examiner has previously responded to this and maintains the same position as previously disclosed in the Final Office action mailed 12/8/2025 with respect to why the count value is for when the ramp equals the second signal.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 6-10 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 6-10 all depend from claim 5 which had been cancelled, thus the claims are indefinite.
For the purpose of examination, the Examiner will interpret them as depending from claim 1, however, in the next response Applicant should correct the dependencies as they intended.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 6-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2024/0244345 A1 to Park et al in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2016/0239721 A1 to Bitton.
With respect to claim 1 Park discloses, a sensor circuit with noise elimination (paragraph 2), comprising: a reference circuit, generating a ramp signal according to an ambient light amount (paragraph 62); and a comparison circuit, coupled to said reference circuit, receiving a second sensing signal and said ramp signal (paragraph 46), generating a count signal according to said ramp signal and said second sensing signal (paragraph 49), and recording said count signal when said ramp signal and said second sensing signal are equal (paragraph 38); wherein said comparison circuit deducing a sensing value of said light signal according to said recorded count signal and said ramp signal (paragraph 36; where ultimately a digital value is deduced using the ramp and recorded count as part of the process).
Park does not expressly disclose how their ambient light amount is determined, specifically that is it determined by receiving a plurality of first sensing signals from the sensing module, a sensing module, coupled to said comparison circuit, sensing a light signal and an ambient light level, and generating said second sensing signal; and a plurality of noise sensing modules, disposed on one or more side of said sensing module and coupled to said reference circuit, sensing said ambient light, and generating said plurality of first sensing signals; and therefore generates a ramp signal according to said plurality of first sensing signals.
However, in analogous art it is well known and expected in the art to, before the invention was effectively filed, to determine an ambient light amount based on a plurality of first sensing signals received from the image sensor which are averaged to determine an ambient light amount. For example, see Bitton, which discloses determining an ambient light amount from a plurality pixel signals (abstract), where the pixels used are averaged to find an ambient light amount (paragraph 61); the sensing module sensing a light signal, and generating sensing signal; and a plurality of noise sensing modules, disposed on one or more side of said sensing module and coupled to said reference circuit, sensing said ambient light, and generating said plurality of first sensing signals ( paragraph 48-49 and 63-66; where ambient light values are determined by analyzing all or portions of said pixels; thus all the pixels and or ones from one or more sides (as seen in Fig. 4 of Bitton) would be considered and used in the ambient light determination). Therefore, Bitton teaches determining ambient light levels by receiving a plurality of first sensing signals from the sensing module, a sensing module sensing a light signal and an ambient light, and generating said second sensing signal; and a plurality of noise sensing modules, disposed on one or more side of said sensing module and coupled to said reference circuit, sensing said ambient light, and generating said plurality of first sensing signals; and therefore generates a ramp signal according to said plurality of first sensing signals
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for Park to have determined their ambient light amount by receiving a plurality of first sensing signals from their sensing module as taught by Bitton and then using them to generate an ambient light level in the manner taught by Bitton, which would then generate a ramp signal according to said plurality of first sensing signals as doing so would merely be use of a known technique of Bitton to determine ambient light to improve similar devices (i.e. Park) in the same way.
With respect to claim 2 Park in view of Bitton teaches the sensor circuit with noise elimination of claim 1, wherein said reference circuit includes: an averaging circuit, receiving and averaging said plurality of first sensing signals, and generating an average signal (paragraph 61 of Bitton); a first sample-and-hold circuit, coupled to said averaging circuit, sampling said average signal, and generating a sampled average signal (paragraph 61 of Bitton; where all the relevant pixels are averaged thus their value must be sampled); and a ramp generation circuit, coupled to said first sample-and-hold circuit, and generating said ramp signal according to said sampled average signal (paragraph 62-63 of Park).
With respect to claim 3 Park in view of Bitton teaches the sensor circuit with noise elimination of claim 1, wherein said reference circuit includes: a selection circuit, receiving and selecting said plurality of first sensing signals, and generating a selection signal; a first sample-and-hold circuit, coupled to said selection circuit, sampling said selection signal, and generating a sampled selection signal (paragraph 61 and Fig. 2B of Bitton); and a ramp generation circuit, coupled to said first sample-and-hold circuit, and generating said ramp signal according to said sampled selection signal (paragraph 62 of Park).
With respect to claim 4 Park in view of Bitton teaches the sensor circuit with noise elimination of claim 1, wherein said comparison circuit includes: a comparator, used for comparing said ramp signal and said second sensing signal (paragraph 46 of Park); a counter, generating a count signal corresponding to said ramp signal (paragraph 49 of Park); and a data latch circuit, coupled to said comparator and said counter, and recording said count signal when said comparator judges that said ramp signal is equal to said second sensing signal (paragraph 38 and 49 of Park).
With respect to claim 6 Park in view of Bitton teaches the sensor circuit with noise elimination of claim 1, wherein said comparison circuit further includes: a gain circuit, coupled to said sensing module, and amplifying the power of said second sensing signal (paragraph 34 of Park); and a second sample-and-hold circuit, coupled to said gain circuit, sampling and holding said second sensing signal, and transmitting said sampled second sensing signal to said comparator (paragraph 34 and 62 of Park).
With respect to claim 7 Park in view of Bitton teaches the sensor circuit with noise elimination of claim 1, wherein said plurality of noise sensing modules are disposed on two adjacent sides of said sensing module (paragraph 48-49 of Bitton; where all pixels or groups of pixels maybe used for ambient light amount determination which includes those at adjacent sides of the array).
With respect to claim 8 Park in view of Bitton teaches the sensor circuit with noise elimination of claim 1, wherein said plurality of noise sensing modules are disposed on two opposing sides of said sensing module (paragraph 48-49 of Bitton; where all pixels or groups of pixels maybe used for ambient light amount determination which includes those at adjacent sides of the array).
With respect to claim 9 Park in view of Bitton teaches the sensor circuit with noise elimination of claim 1, wherein said sensing module further includes a plurality of pixel structures with each pixel structure including a transistor (paragraph 27 of Park; where they at least include a phototransistor).
With respect to claim 10 Park in view of Bitton teaches the sensor circuit with noise elimination of claim 1, wherein said sensing module and said plurality of noise sensing modules are coupled to a driving circuit (120), respectively; and said driving circuit generates a driving signal for controlling said sensing module and said plurality of noise sensing modules to perform sensing (paragraph 26 of Park).
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
March 17, 2026