DETAILED ACTION
This is the First Action on the Merits for U.S. Patent Application No. 18/661,311, filed 10 May 2024.
Claims 1–38 are pending.
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 Objections
Claim 29 is objected to for the following informality: in the preamble, “The method claim 28” should be “The method of claim 28”.
Claim 26 is objected to under 37 C.F.R. § 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim must refer back to its parent claims “in the alternative only”. See M.P.E.P. § 608.01(n).
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 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.
Claims 25 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
In United States practice, a claim that refers back to a previous claim is considered dependent on the previous claim; one cannot create a new independent claim that overlaps the limitations of a previous claim by referring to the previous claim. 35 U.S.C. § 112(d). Here, claim 25 refers to claim 1, and so is considered dependent on claim 1. However, claim 1 recites a method and dependent claim 25, a pseudo-independent claim that is actually dependent on claim 1, is a system of circuitry. It is unclear whether Applicant intended claim 25 to be infringed merely by making, selling, or offering to sell the circuitry, or whether claim 25 is not intended to be infringed until the claim 1 method is actually executed on the circuitry. IPXL Holdings LLC v. Amazon.com Inc., 77 U.S.P.Q. 1140, 1145 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (claim is indefinite if it cannot be determined if infringement occurs at the creation of a recited structure or its use); see also M.P.E.P. § 2173.05(p)(ii) (single claim directed to apparatus and method steps of its use is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b)). It is suggested that Applicant amend claim 25 to either be in unambiguously independent form (e.g., “A driver monitoring system comprising circuitry that executes an image capture method comprising . . . ”), or to be unambiguously dependent on claim 1 (e.g., “The method of claim 1, wherein the method is executed on a driver monitoring system comprising circuitry.”)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. § 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(d) as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 26 recites the system of claim 25, “further comprising the image sensor of claim 1, the pixel-array of the image sensor including each of the target pixel-group, the first remaining pixel-group, and the second remaining pixel-group”). However, claim 1 already recites the image sensor having a pixel array that includes a “target pixel-group having pixel-coordinates of a target region of the pixel array”, a “first remaining pixel-group having pixel-coordinates of a first remaining pixel-array region of the pixel array”, and a “second remaining pixel-group having pixel-coordinates of a second remaining pixel-array region of the pixel array”, so claim 26 does not contain any limitation that is not already in one of the two putative (see 37 C.F.R. § 1.75(c) objection supra) parent claims 1 or 25. Applicant may cancel the claim, amend the claim to place the claim in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1–24 27, 28, and 30–38 are allowed.
Claim 29 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the objection for informality set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(b) and M.P.E.P. § 707.07(a).
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 1 recites reading from an image sensor having a pixel array a target pixel-signal group with a first remaining pixel-signal group, followed by reading that same target pixel-signal group with a second remaining pixel-signal group. The closest prior art would be a combination of US 2010/0134662 A1 (“Bub”) with US 2009/0066782 A1 (“Choi”). Bub is representative of image sensors subdivided into regions that may be read selectively or as a whole. Specifically, Bub Figs. 4–5 show four pixel subsets, all of which may be read out simultaneously for a single high-resolution still image, or may be read out in a sequential pattern for low-resolution video images. Choi is representative of an image sensor that reads pixels in a region of interest at a fast frame rate, and pixels not in the region of interest at a slower frame rate. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing may be able to combine these references by modifying Choi to use the Bub pixel groups alternatingly for the background region, or to modify Bub to read all four pixel subsets within a region of interest. However, these two references teach away from each other, and this kind of combination would require impermissible hindsight. Specifcally, Bub states at ¶ 0005 that reading a whole frame of an image sensor at high speed introduces noise, and Bub is designed to reduce the number of pixels read – one of ordinary skill in the art would not seek to combine this with a reference that has a full-resolution, full-speed image sensor region.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 2022/0007040 A1
US 2021/0168372 A1
US 2014/0125815 A1
US 2009/0097704 A1
US 5,847,758 A
US 2021/0258530 A1
The following prior art was found using an Artificial Intelligence assisted search using an internal AI tool that uses the classification of the application under the Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC) system, as well as from the specification, including the claims and abstract, of the application as contextual information. Where possible, English-language equivalents are given, and redundant results within the same patent families are eliminated. See “New Artificial Intelligence Functionality in PE2E Search”, 1504 OG 359 (15 November 2022), “Automated Search Pilot Program”, 90 F.R. 48,161 (8 October 2025).
US 2023/0075657 A1
US 2020/0312899 A1
US 2022/0141401 A1
US 2020/0137338 A1
US 2017/0176344 A9
US 2010/0182468 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David N Werner whose telephone number is (571)272-9662. The examiner can normally be reached M--F 7:30--4:00 Central.
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, Dave Czekaj can be reached at 571.272.7327. 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.
/David N Werner/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487