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 .
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.
Claim 5 is 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.
Regarding claim 5, it conflicts with the independent claim as in constant current mode, a constat current is output to the first storage element. In the independent claim, a charge is output to the first storage element.
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) 1-3, 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kasuga et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2020/0106982) in view of Calder et al. (U.S. PGPUB 2020/0182983).
Regarding claims 1-3, 6-7, Kasuga et al. disclose (Fig. 1) an imaging element comprising: a plurality of pixels (10), each of the plurality of pixels including: a light-receiving element (1); a first storage element (7); and a charge emitter (2, 3, 5, 8) provided in each of the plurality of pixels, the charge emitter being configured to emit a charge to the first storage element for a certain period of time when the light-receiving element detects light. Kasuga et al. also discloses the charge emitter includes a second storage element (2), emits the charge from the second storage element to the first storage element as claimed and prior to emitting the charge, stores the charge of a predetermined amount (FDRSD) in the second storage element. Kasuga et al. does not disclose detection of light emitted from a light source and reflected by a subject. Calder et al. teach (Figs.) a similar device having a light source (115) and detecting light reflected by a subject (150) and providing a timing signal (106) and calculating distance (105) as claimed. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing of the invention to provide such a configuration in the apparatus of Kasuga et al. in view of Calder et al. to implement a LIDAR for additional functionality as taught, known and predictable. Since Kasuga et al. in view of Calder et al. outputs a charge to the storage element, as understood, it operates in a time decrease current source mode as claimed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is 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 THANH LUU whose telephone number is (571)272-2441. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5:30PM.
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, Georgia Epps can be reached at 571-272-2328. 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.
/THANH LUU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights