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 § 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.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kuroda (US 11,212,473).
Regarding claim 16, Kuroda shows in Figs.1-5 the following elements of applicant’s claim: a pixel array (12) comprising one or more pixels (Fig.1); a counter (FFa0-FFa3; Fig.4) provided in each of the one or more pixels and configured to count a number of pulse signals generated by photons incident on the one or more pixels; and a control logic (SWa0-SWa3; Fig.4) configured to output a signal for controlling an operation of a single photon avalanche diode provided in the one or more pixels.
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) 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuroda (US 11,212,473).
Regarding claims 17-18, the specific configuration and scheme utilized to operate the counter and the control logic would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of meeting different design requirements and achieving the particular desired performance.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-15 are allowed.
Claims 19-20 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: Regarding claims 1-6, the prior art fails to disclose or make obvious a method of obtaining an image comprising, in addition to the other recited features of the claim, the features of determining a parameter for splitting a frame into a plurality of subframe, wherein the parameter comprises a frame period, a subframe period and a threshold value of a counter; obtaining an image signal during at least one subframe period corresponding to the determined parameter, by using a counted number of a counter; and estimating image information of the frame in the manner recited in claim 1. Regarding claims 7-15, although Kuroda (i.e. US 11,212,473) disclose the use of a pixel array and a counter (Figs.1 and 4), it fails to disclose or make obvious a device for obtaining an image comprising, in addition to the other recited features of the claim, the features of determining a parameter for splitting a frame into a plurality of subframe, wherein the parameter comprises a frame period, a subframe period and a threshold value of a counter; obtaining an image signal during at least one subframe period corresponding to the determined parameter, by using the counted number of the counter; and estimating image information of the frame in the manner recited in claim 7. Regarding claims 19-20, the prior art fails to disclose or make obvious a photon counting image sensor comprising, in addition to the other recited features of the claim, the details and functions of a controller in the manner recited in claim 19.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Price et al (US 2024/0251182 A1) is cited for disclosed a system for dark current compensation in SPAD imagery.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN K PYO whose telephone number is (571)272-2445. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:30 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, Georgia Y 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.
/KEVIN K PYO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights