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 .
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.
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 2-13 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.
Claim 2 recites “the processing section includes a compensation section that performs offset compensation processing…”. It is not clear if offset compensation is part of the correction processing or in addition to the correction processing of claim 1. Therefore, claim 2, and claims 3-5 by dependence, are indefinite. For examining purposes, examiner will interpret offset compensation as part of the correction processing.
Claim 6 recites “the processing section includes: a measurement section that measures…; and a weighting processing section that performs weighting processing…”. It is not clear if the measuring and weighting are part of the correction processing or in addition to the correction processing of claim 1. Therefore, claim 6, and claims 7-13 by dependence, are indefinite. For examining purposes, examiner will interpret offset compensation as part of the correction processing.
Claim 6 recites “a measurement section that measures a reaction count” and “weighting processing…on a basis of a reaction count measurement result…, the reaction count set in advance”. It is unclear how the reaction count is set in advance if it is being measured by the measurement section. Is this a typo, a reaction count threshold, or some calibration reaction count measured in advance? Additionally, claim 6 recites “a predetermined ratio of the reaction count set in advance between the plurality of pixels”, which is similarly unclear due to “the reaction count set in advance”. Therefore, claim 6, and claims 7-13 by dependence, are indefinite. For examining purposes, examiner will interpret “the reaction count set in advance” as “a reaction count value set in advance”, and “a predetermined ratio of the reaction count set in advance between the plurality of pixels” as “a predetermined ratio of the reaction count value set in advance between the plurality of pixels”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-5, 14-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Makimoto WO 2020022137 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Makimoto teaches a distance measuring device comprising:
a time counting section that counts a time from light emission by a light source to an incident timing at which photons are incident on a pixel (TDC’s 72 in Figs. 6, 8, 12A, and 14; [37-43, 50-56, 67-69, 77-80]);
a processing section that performs correction processing on a count value output by the time counting section on a basis of a correction parameter set in advance (75 in Fig. 14 with storage sections 752 in Fig. 14, [55-60, 78-82]); and
a histogram generation section that generates a histogram on a basis of the count value corrected by the processing section (73 in Fig. 14, [77-82]).
Regarding claim 2, Makimoto teaches the distance measuring device according to claim 1, wherein
the processing section includes a compensation section that performs offset compensation processing on the count value output from the time counting section on a basis of an offset of the count value set in advance (75 in Fig. 14 with storage sections 752 in Fig. 14, [55-60, 78-82]; examiner notes that offset compensation is performed by 75 as part of the correction processing), and
the histogram generation section generates the histogram on a basis of the count value subjected to the offset compensation processing (75 in Fig. 14 with storage sections 752 in Fig. 14, [55-90, 78-81]).
Regarding claim 3, Makimoto teaches the distance measuring device according to claim 2, wherein the compensation section performs the offset compensation processing on the count value output from the time counting section such that the count value at which a frequency value of the count value is maximized is same among a plurality of the pixels (maximum bins for pixels lineup after offset correction in Fig. 13, [74-76]).
Regarding claim 4, Makimoto teaches the distance measuring device according to claim 2, wherein the compensation section performs the offset compensation processing for each pixel on a basis of the offset corresponding to each pixel (correction values corresponding to positions of the pixels, [56]; pixels share signal lines in a time division manner, [33-36]).
Regarding claim 5, Makimoto teaches the distance measuring device according to claim 2, wherein the compensation section performs the offset compensation processing for each pixel group on a basis of the offset corresponding to one pixel included in the pixel group including a plurality of the pixels (linear interpolation for columns of pixels, Fig. 12A, [0067-70]).
Regarding claim 14, Makimoto teaches the distance measuring device according to claim 1, wherein the time counting section counts a time from when the light source emits light to the incident timing for each pixel (TOF measurement using TDC’s, [18, 22]).
Regarding claim 15, Makimoto teaches the distance measuring device according to claim 1, further comprising a first storage section that stores the correction parameter, wherein the processing section performs the correction processing on a basis of the correction parameter stored in the first storage section (75 in Fig. 14 with storage sections 752 in Fig. 14, [55-60, 78-82]).
Regarding claim 16, Makimoto teaches a distance measuring system comprising:
a lighting device having a light source (20 in Figs. 1-2, [18-20]); and
a distance measuring device that receives reflected light in which light from the light source is reflected by an object (30 in Figs. 1-2, [18-20]), wherein the distance measuring device includes:
a time counting section that counts a time from light emission by a light source to an incident timing at which photons are incident on a pixel (TDC’s 72 in Figs. 6, 8, 12A, and 14; [37-43, 50-56, 67-69, 77-80]);
a processing section that performs correction processing on a count value output by the time counting section on a basis of a correction parameter set in advance (75 in Fig. 14 with storage sections 752 in Fig. 14, [55-60, 78-82]); and
a histogram generation section that generates a histogram on a basis of the count value corrected by the processing section (73 in Fig. 14, [77-82]).
Regarding claim 17, Makimoto teaches the distance measuring system according to claim 16, wherein the distance measuring device further includes a first storage section that stores the correction parameter, and the processing section performs the correction processing on a basis of the correction parameter stored in the first storage section (75 in Fig. 14 with storage sections 752 in Fig. 14, [55-60, 78-82]).
Regarding claim 19, Makimoto teaches the distance measuring system according to claim 16, wherein the lighting device further includes a third storage section that stores the correction parameter, and the processing section performs the correction processing on a basis of the correction parameter stored in the third storage section (75 in Fig. 14 with a plurality of storage sections 752 in Fig. 14, [55-60, 78-82]).
Regarding claim 20, Makimoto teaches a distance measuring method comprising:
counting, by a time counting section, a time from light emission by a light source to an incident timing at which photons are incident on a pixel(TDC’s 72 in Figs. 6, 8, 12A, and 14; [37-43, 50-56, 67-69, 77-80]);
performing, by a processing section, correction processing on a count value output by the time counting section on a basis of a correction parameter set in advance (75 in Fig. 14 with storage sections 752 in Fig. 14, [55-60, 78-82]); and
generating, by a histogram generation section, a histogram on a basis of the count value corrected by the processing section (73 in Fig. 14, [77-82]).
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 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Makimoto WO 2020022137 A1.
Regarding claim 18, Makimoto teaches the distance measuring system according to claim 16, further comprising a second storage section that is disposed at a different from a position at which the lighting device and the distance measuring device are disposed (7690 in Fig. 15, [084-110])
Makimoto does not explicitly teach the second storage section stores the correction parameter, wherein the processing section performs the correction processing on a basis of the correction parameter stored in the second storage section.
However, Makimoto does teach storing various parameters at 7690 ([99])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Makimoto such that the second storage section stores the correction parameter, wherein the processing section performs the correction processing on a basis of the correction parameter stored in the second storage section with a reasonable expectation of success. This would have the predictable result of providing a backup for the correction values and/or additional configurations of correction parameters.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-13 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The prior art of record does not explicitly teach nor render obvious the distance measuring device of claim 6, specifically including: a weighting processing section that performs weighting processing on a frequency value of the count value output by the time counting section on a basis of a reaction count measurement result of the measurement section for each of a plurality of the pixels, the reaction count set in advance, or a predetermined ratio of the reaction count set in advance between the plurality of pixels, and the histogram generation section generates the histogram on a basis of the frequency value subjected to the weighting processing.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Wang US 20210389462 A1 teaches weighting based on predetermined arrangements (positioning) of pixels ([0110], Fig. 6), but not due to “the reaction count set in advance” as interpreted above.
Mandai US 12442926 B2 teaches histogram offset correction (Col. 2 lns. 24-39)
Caporale US 20220035010 A1 teaches histogram offset correction (Figs. 8-9, [0127-134])
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH C FRITCHMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-5533. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached on 571-272-6970. 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.
/J.C.F./Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/ISAM A ALSOMIRI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645
