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 § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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, 2, 4-12, 16, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gravelle et al. (US 2025/0104431, hereinafter Gravelle) in view of Cho et al. (US 20250022414, hereinafter Cho).
Re claim 1, Gravelle discloses, an image sensing device, comprising: an alert sensor (462) comprising a[n] alert pixel and configured to sense light changes corresponding to the plurality of alert pixel (pars [0082]-[0085]); and a first image sensor (image sensor/camera, par [0082]) comprising a pixel array and configured to capture an image (par [0082]); wherein the alert sensor is initially turned on and the first image sensor is initially turned off (pars [0082]-[0085], beginning recording and processing video is viewed as the image sensor/camera turning on. Therefore, the image sensor/camera is initially “turned off” to conserve power), when the light changes meet a predetermined condition, the alert sensor turns on the first image sensor to capture the image (pars [0082]-[0085]).
Gravelle fails to explicitly disclose limitations which are disclosed by Cho as follows: an alert sensor comprising a plurality of alert pixels and configured to sense light changes corresponding to the plurality of alert pixels (IPX pixel, pars [0041] and [0096]); wherein the plurality of alert pixels are arranged around a periphery of the pixel array (figs 2, 3, and 8-11); there is a distance between each alert pixel and the pixel array (figs 2, 3, and 8-11); and the alert pixels and the pixel array are formed on a same substrate (pars [0027] and [0032], substrate).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to combine an alert sensor comprising a plurality of alert pixels and configured to sense light changes corresponding to the plurality of alert pixels; wherein the plurality of alert pixels are arranged around a periphery of the pixel array; there is a distance between each alert pixel and the pixel array; and the alert pixels and the pixel array are formed on a same substrate of Cho with the image sensing device of Gravelle in order to generate image data corresponding to a user gaze based on the pixel signals to control features of the device; meanwhile reducing overall power consumption.
The combination of Gravelle and Cho fails to explicitly disclose that the alert sensor is turned off accordingly.
Official Notice is taken to note that turning off components, for example the alert sensor, when not in use, is notoriously well known and used in the related art.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the alert sensor is turned off accordingly with the image sensing device of Gravelle and Cho in order to reduce power consumption and elongate battery life of the image sensing device.
Re claim 2, the combination of Gravelle and Cho discloses the limitations of claim 1 including wherein the first image sensor further comprises: an image sensor control circuitry configured to operate the pixel array to capture the image in response to the light changes (Gravelle pars [0082]-[0085]).
Re claim 4, the combination of Gravelle and Cho discloses the limitations of claim 1 including wherein the first image sensor is further configured to be triggered to capture another image by an external trigger signal or an instruction from a post processor (Gravelle par [0110]).
Re claim 5, the combination of Gravelle and Cho discloses the limitations of claim 1 including wherein the plurality of alert pixels are arranged as a pixel line around the periphery of the pixel array (Cho figs 2, 3, and 8-11).
Re claim 6, the combination of Gravelle and Cho discloses the limitations of claim 1 including wherein the pixel array comprises a plurality of image pixels (Cho IPX pixel, pars [0041] and [0096]). The combination fails to explicitly disclose each alert pixel is larger than each image pixel in size. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to select each alert pixel to be larger than each image pixel in size, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Re claim 7, the combination of Gravelle and Cho discloses the limitations of claim 1 including wherein the pixel array has a rectangular shape, the alert pixels forms a first linear portion disposed in parallel to a first edge of the pixel array, a second linear portion disposed in parallel to a second edge of the pixel array, a third linear portion disposed in parallel to a third edge of the pixel array, and a fourth linear portion disposed in parallel to a fourth edge of the pixel array (Cho figs 2, 3, and 8-11).
Re claim 8, the combination of Gravelle and Cho discloses the limitations of claim 7 including wherein a second end of the first linear portion is connected to a first end of the second linear portion, a second end of the second linear portion is connected to a first end of the third linear portion, and a second end of the third linear portion is connected to a first end of the fourth linear portion (Cho figs 2, 3, and 8-11).
Re claim 9, the combination of Gravelle and Cho discloses the limitations of claim 1 including wherein: the pixel array has a rectangular shape; the alert pixels comprises a plurality of first linear arrays each disposed in perpendicular to a first edge of the pixel array and beside the first edge of the pixel array; a plurality of second linear arrays each disposed in perpendicular to a second edge of the pixel array and beside the second edge of the pixel array; a plurality of third linear arrays each disposed in perpendicular to a third edge of the pixel array and beside the third edge of the pixel array; and a plurality of fourth linear arrays each disposed in perpendicular to a fourth edge of the pixel array and beside the fourth edge of the pixel array; the plurality of first linear arrays being in parallel with one another; the plurality of second linear arrays being in parallel with one another; the plurality of third linear arrays being in parallel with one another; and the plurality of fourth linear arrays being in parallel with one another (Cho figs 2, 3, and 8-11).
Re claim 10, turning off the alert sensor after the alert sensor transmits an alert signal has been addressed with respect to Official Notice of claim 1.
Re claim 11, the combination of Gravelle and Cho discloses the limitations of claim 1 including wherein the first image sensor is turned off after generating at least one image, and then the alert sensor is turned on (Gravelle pars [0082]-[0085]).
Re claim 12, the combination of Gravelle and Cho discloses the limitations of claim 1 including wherein: the alert sensor further comprises an alert sensor control circuitry (Gravelle 400) coupled to the plurality of alert pixels (Cho IPX); the first image sensor further comprises an image sensor control circuitry (400) coupled to the pixel array and the alert sensor control circuitry; the plurality of alert pixels transmit light signals to the alert sensor control circuitry; the alert sensor control circuitry transmit an alert signal to the image sensor control circuitry when the alert sensor control circuitry determines the light changes meet the predetermined condition according to the light signals; the image sensor control circuitry turns on the pixel array according to the alert signal (Gravelle pars [0082]-[0085]).
Claims 16, 19, and 20 are rejected for the reasons stated in claims 1, 11, and 11, respectively. The method steps as claimed would have been obvious and expected by the device of Gravelle and Cho.
Claim(s) 15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gravelle and Cho as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Holland et al. (US 2023/0038159, hereinafter Holland).
Re claim 15, the combination of Gravelle and Cho discloses the limitations of claim 1 but fails to explicitly disclose the limitations of Holland as follows: a second image sensor, wherein when the alert sensor senses the light changes, the alert sensor turns on the second image sensor in addition to the first image sensor (pars [0042] and [0066]-[0067]).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to combine a second image sensor, wherein when the alert sensor senses the light changes, the alert sensor turns on the second image sensor in addition to the first image sensor of Holland with the image sensing device of Gravelle and Cho in order to control camera setting adjustments based on event mapping; meanwhile reducing overall power consumption.
Claim 17 is rejected for the reasons stated in claim 15. The method steps as claimed would have been obvious and expected by the device of Gravelle, Cho, and Holland.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 13, 14, and 18 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Re claim 3, the combination of Gravelle and Cho fails to disclose “wherein: the plurality of alert pixels transmit light signals; the alert sensor further comprises an alert sensor control circuitry configured to receive the light signals and output an alert signal to control the first image sensor based on the light signals if the light changes meet the predetermined condition in a temporal domain” in combination with all other limitations of claim 1.
Re claim 13, the combination of Gravelle and Cho fails to disclose “wherein the alert sensor control circuitry comprises: a readout circuit coupled to the alert sensors, and configured to generate readout signals when receiving the light signals; an event detector coupled to the readout circuit, and configured to generate the alert signal when the readout signals are corresponding to a variation reaching a threshold” in combination with all other limitations of claims 12 and 1.
Claim 14 depends on claim 13.
Re claim 18, the combination of Gravelle and Cho fails to disclose “wherein: the plurality of alert pixels transmit light signals; each of the light signals is related to bright intensity; the alert sensor further comprises an alert sensor control circuitry configured to receive the light signals and output an alert signal based on the light signals if the light changes meet the predetermined condition in a temporal domain; and the alert signal is generated based on change degrees of the light signals in the temporal domain” in combination with all other limitations of claim 16.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOEL W FOSSELMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3728. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 - 5:00 M-F.
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, Twyler Haskins can be reached at (571)272-7406. 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.
/JOEL W FOSSELMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2639