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.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d). The certified copy of Japanese patent application number 2023-147319, filed on September 12, 2023, has been received and made of record.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 2, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Specifically, Applicant argues, that “[i]ndependent claims 1 and 11-13 have been amended to incorporate the features of allowable claim 7 and thus, the rejection as to independent claims 1, 12 and 13 should be withdrawn.”
However, the Examiner notes that the limitations of claim 7 were not incorporated into independent claims 1, 12, and 13, as argued. Consequently, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
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.
Claims 1-5, 9-10, and 12-13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikedo (US Pub. 2020/0351464).
In regard to claim 1, note Ikedo discloses a photoelectric conversion device (figure 1) comprising a photoelectric conversion unit emitting pulses corresponding to photons (paragraph 0050, and figures 2-3: 201, 303), a counter counting the number of the pulses (paragraph 0054, and figures 2-3: 201, 306), a plurality of pixels each including a memory storing a count value of the counter (paragraph 0054, and figures 2-3: 201, 307), one or more memories storing instructions (paragraphs 0041, 0147), and one or more processors executing the instructions (paragraphs 0041, 0147, and figure 1: 104) to generate an image signal on the basis of a difference between count values of the counter at the start and end of an accumulation period (paragraphs 0131-0144, figure 23: 2311, 2312, 2302, and figure 24: T1-T4; the images accumulated during each of the accumulation periods T1-T4 are used to obtain a difference by subtracting), output first to (N−1)th (N≥2) image signals generated during first to (N−1)th accumulation periods during a period from the end of the first accumulation period to the end of the Nth accumulation period, wherein the first to Nth accumulation periods are within one full frame period and each of the first to (N−1)th accumulation periods is shorter than the Nth accumulation period (paragraphs 0131-0144, figure 24: T1-T3; the image signals are generated for each of the accumulation periods T1-T3, wherein each of the accumulation periods T1-T3 are shorter than the Nth accumulation period T4, which corresponds to one frame period), generate a synthetic image signal by synthesizing two or more image signals having different accumulation periods among the first to Nth image signals (paragraphs 0131-0144, figure 23: 2311, 2312, 2002, 2313, and figure 24: T1-T4; the images accumulated during each of the accumulation periods T1-T4 are used to generate a synthesized image), and divide the accumulation period of one full frame into N accumulation periods and output N image signals (paragraph 0136, and figure 24: T1-T4, T; the accumulation period T is divided in to period T1-T4).
And although, Ikedo does not explicitly disclose that the accumulation period is equally divided, Ikedo does state that number of divisions, and the length of each are merely examples, and therefore, use of equally divided accumulation periods is considered to be implicitly disclosed (paragraphs 0136, 0145, and figure 24: T1-T4; as seen in figure 24, the accumulation period is considered to be equally divided into four accumulation periods).
In regard to claim 2, note Ikedo discloses that the first to (N−1)th accumulation periods and the Nth accumulation period overlap each other (figure 24: T1-T4; each of the accumulation periods T1-T4 overlap during the accumulation period T).
In regard to claim 3, note Ikedo discloses that the first to (N−1)th accumulation periods and the Nth accumulation period start simultaneously (figure 24: T1-T4, t702; each of the accumulation periods start at t702).
In regard to claim 4, note Ikedo discloses that the end of the Nth accumulation period coincides with the end of a full frame (figure 24: T4, t703; the accumulation period ends at t703).
In regard to claim 5, note Ikedo discloses wherein the one or more processors further execute the instructions to generate an image signal having a shorter accumulation period than the Nth image signal using the first to Nth image signals, and generate a synthetic image signal using the image signal having a short accumulation period and the Nth image signal (paragraphs 0131-0134, figure 23: 2311, 2312, 2002, and figure 24: T1-T4; the image signal generated from the shorter accumulation periods for each of T1-T4 is used along with the accumulation of T in order to generate a synthetic image signal).
In regard to claim 9, note Ikedo discloses that the one or more processors further execute the instructions to generate a synthetic image signal using an image signal having an accumulation period shorter than the Nth accumulation period and closest to a center of the Nth accumulation period when an image signal having a shorter accumulation period than the Nth image signal is generated (paragraph 0141, and figure 24: T2, t2404; when the second accumulation T2, which is closest to the center of the Nth accumulation T4 is performed, a synthesized image is generated, which is shorter than the Nth accumulation T4, and is stored in memory 2313).
In regard to claim 10, note Ikedo discloses that the photoelectric conversion unit includes an avalanche photodiode (paragraph 0050, and figures 2-3: 201, 303).
In regard to claim 12, this is a method claim, corresponding to the apparatus in claim 1. Therefore, claim 12 has been analyzed and rejected as previously discussed with respect claim 1.
In regard to claim 13, this is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program including instructions for executing the corresponding operation of claim 1. Therefore, claim 13 has been analyzed and rejected as previously discussed with respect claim 1. Additionally, the Examiner notes that Ikedo discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program including instructions for executing the processes (paragraph 0147).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikedo (US Pub. 2020/0351464), in view of Maekawa (US Pub. 2022/0201182).
In regard to claim 11, this is substantially identical to the apparatus of claim 1, with the exception that the device comprises a movable apparatus, and performing movement control for controlling movement of the movable apparatus. However, the primary reference of Ikedo is silent regarding the use of a movable apparatus, and performing movement control for controlling movement of the movable apparatus.
In analogous art, Maekawa discloses an imaging device used in a movable apparatus, and performing movement control for controlling movement of the movable apparatus (paragraphs 0145-0147, and figure 14). Maekawa teaches that the use of an imaging device in a movable apparatus, and performing movement control for controlling movement of the movable apparatus is preferred in order to perform collision determination, and avoid collision and reduce damage (paragraph 0147). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the primary reference such that the device is a movable apparatus, and performing movement control for controlling movement of the movable apparatus, in order to perform collision determination, and avoid collision and reduce damage, as suggested by Maekawa.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-8 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.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISS S YODER III whose telephone number is (571)272-7323. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:00 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, Lin Ye can be reached at (571) 272-7372. 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.
/C.Y./Examiner, Art Unit 2638
/LIN YE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2638