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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 8/3/2026 has been entered.
In the Instant Amendment, Claim(s) 1-2, 5-6, 9-11, 14-15 and 18 has/have been amended; Claim(s) 19-20 has/have been added; Claim(s) 1, 10 and 19-20 is/are independent claims. Claims 1-20 have been examined and are pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
The rejections under 35 U.S.C 112(a) and (b) are withdrawn because of the amendment and the persuasive argument in the remark (page 9).
Applicant's arguments filed 8/3/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claims 1 and 10, the Applicant is arguing in the remarks (pages 10-12) that each of Yao and Suzuki fails to teach “setting the transition time interval by adjusting an original transition time interval to the transition time interval, wherein the transition time interval is closer to the first frame time duration than the original transition time interval is”.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with the Applicant. The Examiner respectfully submits that Yao does teach setting the transition time interval by adjusting an original transition time interval to the transition time interval, wherein the transition time interval is closer to the first frame time duration than the original transition time interval is (original FT_b was used in Fig. 1 for High FPS frames after switching from “LOW FPS” mode to “High FPS” mode; fig. 3 shows that the transition time interval is set to be a transition time interval of [the sum of (“LOW FPS” interval, “Re” interval, first “High FPS” interval)] which is closer to FT_1 [or FT_a] than original FT_2 [or FT_b] as shown in figure 3) and Suzuki does teach setting the transition time interval by adjusting an original transition time interval to the transition time interval, wherein the transition time interval is closer to the first frame time duration than the original transition time interval is (Fig. 12 shows that an original transition time interval [hereinafter “OTT”] between frame 2 and frame 3 is longer than FD1; instead of utilizing OTT, fig. 11 shows that “target” transition time interval is set to be FT2 which is closer to FT1 than OTT). For the reasons above, the Examiner respectfully submits that each of Yao and Suzuki does teach the features as claimed in claims 1 and 10.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The period at the end of limitation (d) of claim 20 should be changed to “;” for addressing a typographical error.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 10 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yao et al (US 20200128190 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Yao teaches An image sensor control method, applied to an image senor, comprising:
(a) outputting first sensing frames (LOW FPS frames) by the image sensor in a first mode (LOW FPS mode), wherein a first frame time duration (FT_1) is determined between adjacent ones of the first sensing frames (Fig. 3);131
(b) switching from the first mode to a second mode (High FPS mode) in a transition time interval (Fig. 3) (para. 0026: “the frame rate switch will be triggered at the time point TP_St. Immediately after a reset operation Re, the image sensor 201 is switched to a high frame rate at the time point TP_Sr without waiting the lapsed of the second frame period”);
(c) setting the transition time interval by adjusting an original transition time interval to the transition time interval, wherein the transition time interval is closer to the first frame time duration than the original transition time interval is (original FT_b was used in Fig. 1 for High FPS frames after switching from “LOW FPS” mode to “High FPS” mode; fig. 3 shows that the transition time interval is set to be a transition time interval of [the sum of (“LOW FPS” interval, “Re” interval, first “High FPS” interval)] which is closer to FT_1 [or FT_a] than original FT_2 [or FT_b] as shown in figure 3); and
(d) outputting second sensing frames (High FPS frames) by the image sensor in the second mode (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 4, Yao teaches the image sensor control method of claim 1, wherein one of the first sensing frames is readout at a starting time point of the transition time interval and one of the second sensing frames is readout at an end time point of the transition time interval (Figs. 3, 7; para. 0034).
Regarding claim 10, Yao teaches everything as claimed in claim 1. In addition, Yao teaches An image capturing device (Fig. 2; para. 0022), comprising:
an image sensor (201); and
a processing circuit (203), configured to perform following steps: (as presented in claim 1).
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 reciting features corresponding to claim 4 is also rejected for the same reasons above.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 8-10, 13 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Suzuki (US 20070052811 A1).
PNG
media_image1.png
736
1015
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Suzuki teaches An image sensor control method, applied to an image senor, comprising:
(a) outputting first sensing frames by the image sensor in a first mode (drive mode A), wherein a first frame time duration (FT1) is determined between adjacent ones of the first sensing frames (Fig. 11);
(b) switching from the first mode to a second mode (drive mode B) in a transition time interval (Fig. 12; the transition time interval = FT2);
(c) setting the transition time interval by adjusting an original transition time interval to the transition time interval, wherein the transition time interval is closer to the first frame time duration than the original transition time interval is (Fig. 12 shows that an original transition time interval [hereinafter “OTT”] between frame 2 and frame 3 is longer than FD1; instead of utilizing OTT, fig. 11 shows that “target” transition time interval is set to be FT2 which is closer to FT1 than OTT); and
(d) outputting second sensing frames by the image sensor in the second mode (Fig. 11).
Regarding claim 4, Suzuki teaches the image sensor control method of claim 1, wherein one of the first sensing frames is readout at a starting time point of the transition time interval and one of the second sensing frames is readout at an end time point of the transition time interval (Fig. 11).
Regarding claim 8, Suzuki teaches the image sensor control method of claim 1, wherein one of the first mode and the second mode is a full size mode and the other one of the first mode and the second mode is a binning mode (Fig. 11; paras. 0055-0056; drive mode A (control without addition) and drive mode B (control with addition)).
Regarding claim 9, Suzuki teaches the image sensor control method of claim 1, wherein the transition time interval is equal to the first frame time duration (FT2=FT1) (Fig. 11).
Regarding claim 10, Suzuki teaches everything as claimed in claim 1. In addition, Suzuki teaches An image capturing device (Fig. 6), comprising:
an image sensor (4); and
a processing circuit (12, 14), configured to perform following steps: (as presented in claim 1).
Regarding claims 13 and 17-18, claims 13 and 17-18 reciting features corresponding to claims 4 and 8-9 are also rejected for the same reasons above, respectively.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3, 5-7, 11-12 and 14-16 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.
Claims 19-20 are allowed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
McMahon (US 20200029043 A1): the image sensor can transition between various readout modes without interrupting image output from the image sensor.
Negishi et al (US 20100026835 A1): smooth moving images can be achieved by setting the frame rates of two different modes to be the same.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Quan Pham whose telephone number is (571)272-4438. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-7pm.
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.
/Quan Pham/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2637
Prosecution Insights