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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 08/26/2024 and 03/19/2025 are in compliance with the provisions on 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
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 1-26 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 1 recites the limitation "the end of the first accumulation period" in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the end of the second accumulation period" in lines 13-14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-23 are rejected as being dependent on claim 1.
Claim 24 recites the limitation "the end of the first accumulation period" in line 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 24 recites the limitation "the end of the second accumulation period" in lines 14-15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 25 recites the limitation "the end of the first accumulation period " in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 25 recites the limitation "the end of the second accumulation period " in lines 11-12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 26 recites the limitation "the end of the first accumulation period " in line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 26 recites the limitation "the end of the second accumulation period " in lines 12-13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 1-6, 10, 14-15, 22-23 and 25-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikedo (US 2020/0351464 A1) in view of Takahashi et al. (US 2022/0236533 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ikedo teaches a photoelectric conversion device (Ikedo, Fig. 1) comprising:
a plurality of pixels (Ikedo, Fig. 2, pixel area 200, Paragraph 0044) each including a photoelectric conversion unit configured to emit pulses in response to photons (Ikedo, Fig. 3, PD 303, Paragraph 0050), a counter configured to count the number of the pulses (Ikedo, Fig. 3, counter circuit 306, Paragraph 0054), and a memory configured to store a count value of the counter (Ikedo, Fig. 3, memory 307, Paragraph 0055);
a first pixel region and a second pixel region of a sensor unit consisting of the plurality of pixels (Ikedo, Fig. 2, A first pixel region may be a first arbitrary portion of the pixel array. A second pixel region may be a second arbitrary portion of the pixel array.);
one or more memories (Ikedo, Paragraph 0147) storing instructions; and
one or more processors (Ikedo, Fig. 1, control/arithmetic unit 104, Paragraph 0041 and 0147) executing the instructions to:
generate a signal based on a difference between count values of the counter at a start time and an end time of an accumulation period (Ikedo, Fig. 23-24, Paragraphs 0137-0144, A start time is t702 and an end time is t703.);
perform control such that a signal generated in a first accumulation period (Ikedo, Fig. 24, The first accumulation period may be any of times t702-t2401, t702-t2404 or t702-t2405.) is output between the end of the first accumulation period and the end of a second accumulation period (Ikedo, Fig. 24, The second accumulation period may be any of times t702-t2404, t702-t2405 or t702-t703 dependent on the first accumulation period.) the first accumulation period and the second accumulation period that is longer than the first accumulation period being included in one full frame period (Ikedo, Fig. 24, Time t702-t703); and
perform control such that an accumulation period of the first pixel region is set to the first accumulation period and an accumulation period of the second pixel region is set to the second accumulation period, or that an accumulation period of the first pixel region is set to the second accumulation period and an accumulation period of the second pixel region is set to the first accumulation period (Ikedo, Figs. 2 and 24, The first and second pixel regions have both the first accumulation period and the second accumulation period.).
However, Ikedo does not teach an optical system configured to form an object image having different resolutions in a first pixel region and a second pixel region of a sensor unit consisting of the plurality of pixels.
In reference to Takahashi et al. (hereafter referred as Takahashi), Takahashi teaches an optical system configured to form an object image having different resolutions in a first pixel region and a second pixel region (Takahashi, Figs. 9-10, Paragraphs 0032-0034) of a sensor unit consisting of the plurality of pixels (Takahashi, Fig. 3, image plane 21, Paragraph 0028, image sensor on the image plane. The first and second pixel regions are regions of different image heights (distance from center of the image sensor).).
These arts are analogous since they are both related to imaging devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the invention of Ikedo with the optical system as seen in Takahashi to provide an optical system having a projection characteristic compatible with both a fisheye lens and a telephoto lens, a sufficient angle of view, and a sufficient resolution (Takahashi, Paragraph 0004).
Claims 25 and 26 are rejected for the same reasons as claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 analysis), wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to control the first pixel region to have at least the first accumulation period and the second accumulation period (Ikedo, Figs. 2 and 24, The first and second pixel regions have both the first accumulation period and the second accumulation period.).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 analysis), wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to control the second pixel region to have at least the first accumulation period and the second accumulation period (Ikedo, Figs. 2 and 24, The first and second pixel regions have both the first accumulation period and the second accumulation period.).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 analysis), wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to make the first accumulation period and the second accumulation period overlap (Ikedo, Fig. 24, The first accumulation period may be times t702-t2401 and the second accumulation period may be t702-t2404.).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 analysis), wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to start the first accumulation period and the second accumulation period at the same time (Ikedo, Fig. 24, The first accumulation period may be times t702-t2401 and the second accumulation period may be t702-t2404.).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 analysis), wherein an end time of the second accumulation period coincides with an end time of a full frame period (Ikedo, Fig. 24, The second accumulation period may be t702-t703.).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 analysis), wherein the photoelectric conversion unit includes an avalanche photodiode (Ikedo, Fig. 3, PD 303, Paragraph 0050).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 analysis), wherein the second pixel region is provided inside the first pixel region (Takashi, Figs. 9-10, The second pixel region may be considered to be the center region and the first pixel region may be considered to be the peripheral region.).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 analysis), wherein the second pixel region is adjacent to the first pixel region (Takashi, Figs. 9-10, The second pixel region may be considered to be the center region and the first pixel region may be considered to be the peripheral region.)
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 analysis), wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to set a length of at least one of the first accumulation period and the second accumulation period based on luminance information of a signal generated in at least one of the first accumulation period and the second accumulation period (Ikedo, Paragraphs 0042, 0091-0092).
Regarding claim 23, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 analysis), wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to control whether or not to perform predetermined processing in the control unit according to luminance information of a signal generated in at least one of the first accumulation period and the second accumulation period (Ikedo, Paragraphs 0042, 0091-0092).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikedo (US 2020/0351464 A1) in view of Takahashi et al. (US 2022/0236533 A1) in view of Sato (US 2020/0304745 A1).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 analysis), further comprising a display unit (Ikedo, Fig. 1, Display unit 106).
However, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi does not explicitly state the display unit is configured to display a signal generated in the second accumulation period as an image.
In reference to Sato, Sato teaches a display unit is configured to display a signal generated in a second accumulation period as an image (Sato, Fig. 1, Display unit 107, Paragraphs 0014 and 0066)
These arts are analogous since they are all related to imaging devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi with the explicit teaching of displaying the image as seen in Sato to allow a user to view the captured image.
Claim(s) 7-8, 11, 13, 16-19, 21 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikedo (US 2020/0351464 A1) in view of Takahashi et al. (US 2022/0236533 A1) in view of Huggett (US 2022/0261963 A1).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 analysis), a signal generated in at least the first accumulation period (Ikedo, Fig. 24, Paragraphs 0144-0145, The final pixel output or final image output is a signal generated in at least the first accumulation period or based on a signal generated in at least the first accumulation period.).
However, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi does not teach wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to recognize an object based on a signal generated in at least the first accumulation period.
In reference to Huggett, Huggett teaches one or more processors further executes instructions to recognize an object based on an image signal (Huggett, Paragraphs 0020 and 0026).
These arts are analogous since they are all related to imaging devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi with method of detecting objects and encoding images as seen in Huggett to selectively encode objects to have higher resolutions and provide greater functionality to the device. Further, the limitation “executes instructions to recognize an object based on a signal generated in at least the first accumulation period” is met since the image signal is, or is based on, a signal generated in at least the first accumulation period.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Ikedo, Takahashi and Huggett teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 7 (see claim 7 analysis wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to further recognize the object based on a signal generated in the second accumulation period (Huggett, Paragraphs 0020 and 0026, Ikedo, Fig. 24, Paragraphs 0144-0145, The final pixel output or final image output is a signal generated in at least the first and second accumulation periods or based on a signal generated in at least the first and second accumulation periods.).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 analysis), and a case where a resolution in the vicinity of the optical axis of the optical system is higher than a resolution on a peripheral side away from the optical axis (Takahashi, Figs. 9-10, Paragraphs 0032-0034).
However, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi does not teach wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to set the second pixel region on the center side of a light receiving surface of the sensor unit in a case where a resolution in the vicinity of the optical axis of the optical system is higher than a resolution on a peripheral side away from the optical axis.
In reference to Huggett, Huggett teaches wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to set a pixel region on the center side of a light receiving surface of the sensor unit (Huggett, Fig. 3, Paragraphs 0027 and 0029).
These arts are analogous since they are all related to imaging devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi with method of detecting objects and encoding images as seen in Huggett to selectively encode objects to have higher resolutions and provide greater functionality to the device. Further, the limitation “wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to set the second pixel region on the center side of a light receiving surface of the sensor unit in a case where a resolution in the vicinity of the optical axis of the optical system is higher than a resolution on a peripheral side away from the optical axis” is met since a pixel region set near the center side may be considered to be a “second pixel region” and since Takahashi discloses the case of the resolution in the vicinity of the optical axis of the optical system is higher.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 analysis), and the relatively high resolution of a light receiving surface of the sensor unit in the second pixel region (Takahashi, Figs. 9-10, Paragraphs 0032-0034)
However, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi does not teach wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to set a pixel region having the relatively high resolution of a light receiving surface of the sensor unit in the second pixel region.
In reference to Huggett, Huggett teaches wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to set a pixel region (Huggett, Fig. 3, Paragraphs 0027 and 0029).
These arts are analogous since they are all related to imaging devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi with method of detecting objects and encoding images as seen in Huggett to selectively encode objects to have higher resolutions and provide greater functionality to the device. Further, the limitation “wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to set a pixel region having the relatively high resolution of a light receiving surface of the sensor unit in the second pixel region” is met when a pixel region is set in in the center region.
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 analysis). However, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi does not teach wherein at least one of a position and a size of the first pixel region and the second pixel region can be set by a user.
In reference to Huggett, Huggett teaches wherein at least one of a position and a size of the first pixel region and the second pixel region can be set by a user (Huggett, Fig. 3, Paragraphs 0027 and 0029-0030, A first and second window may be set by a user of the system.).
These arts are analogous since they are all related to imaging devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi with method of user selected windows and encoding images as seen in Huggett to selectively encode user selected regions to have higher resolutions and provide greater functionality to the device.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 analysis). However, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi does not teach wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to set the first pixel region or the second pixel region based on at least one of characteristic information on a characteristic of the photoelectric conversion device, installation information on an installation state of the photoelectric conversion device, and environmental information on a surrounding environment of the photoelectric conversion device.
In reference to Huggett, Huggett teaches one or more processors further executes instructions to set a first pixel region or a second pixel region (Huggett, Fig. 3, windows W1-W4 are considered to be first and second pixel regions.) based on at least one of characteristic information on a characteristic of the photoelectric conversion device (Huggett, Paragraphs 0018, 0020 and 0026-0029, The pixels on which an object is imaged on the image sensor is based on the lenses and characteristics of the image sensor.), installation information on an installation state of the photoelectric conversion device, and environmental information on a surrounding environment of the photoelectric conversion device (Huggett, Paragraphs 0020 and 0026-0029, Detected objects are environmental information. Windows are determined based on the pixel regions containing the object.).
These arts are analogous since they are all related to imaging devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi with method of detecting objects and encoding images as seen in Huggett to selectively encode objects to have higher resolutions and provide greater functionality to the device.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Ikedo, Takahashi and Huggett teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 17 (see claim 17 analysis), wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to set at least one of a position, a size, and an accumulation period of the first pixel region or the second pixel region based on at least one of the characteristic information, the installation information, and the environmental information (Huggett, Paragraphs 0020 and 0026-0029, Size and position of the first pixel region or the second pixel region based on at least one of the characteristic information and the environmental information.).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Ikedo, Takahashi and Huggett teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 17 (see claim 17 analysis), wherein the characteristic information includes optical characteristic information of the optical system, a resolution of the sensor unit, and a pixel size of the sensor unit (Takahashi Figs. 9-10, Huggett, Paragraphs 0026-0029, The pixels on which an object is imaged on the image sensor is based on the lenses and characteristics of the image sensor including a resolution of the sensor unit, and a pixel size.).
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 analysis). However, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi does not teach wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to set the first pixel region or the second pixel region according to distance information of an object.
In reference to Huggett, Huggett teaches wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to set the first pixel region or the second pixel region according to distance information of an object (Huggett, Fig. 3, Paragraphs 0020, 0026 and 0027-0028, Huggett teaches determining distances to objects in images and selecting objects moving towards the image sensor for window selection.).
These arts are analogous since they are all related to imaging devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi with method of detecting objects and encoding images as seen in Huggett to selectively encode objects to have higher resolutions and provide greater functionality to the device.
Regarding claim 24, Ikedo teaches a photoelectric conversion device (Ikedo, Fig. 1) including a plurality of pixels (Ikedo, Fig. 2, pixel area 200, Paragraph 0044) each including a photoelectric conversion unit configured to emit pulses in response to photons (Ikedo, Fig. 3, PD 303, Paragraph 0050), a counter configured to count the number of the pulses (Ikedo, Fig. 3, counter circuit 306, Paragraph 0054), and a memory configured to store a count value of the counter (Ikedo, Fig. 3, memory 307, Paragraph 0055);
a first pixel region and a second pixel region of a sensor unit including the plurality of pixels (Ikedo, Fig. 2, A first pixel region may be a first arbitrary portion of the pixel array. A second pixel region may be a second arbitrary portion of the pixel array.);
one or more memories (Ikedo, Paragraph 0147) storing instructions; and
one or more processors (Ikedo, Fig. 1, control/arithmetic unit 104, Paragraph 0041 and 0147) executing the instructions to:
generate a signal based on a difference between count values of the counter at a start time and an end time of an accumulation period (Ikedo, Fig. 23-24, Paragraphs 0137-0144, A start time is t702 and an end time is t703.);
perform control such that a signal generated in a first accumulation period (Ikedo, Fig. 24, The first accumulation period may be any of times t702-t2401, t702-t2404 or t702-t2405.) is output between the end of the first accumulation period and the end of a second accumulation period (Ikedo, Fig. 24, The second accumulation period may be any of times t702-t2404, t702-t2405 or t702-t703 dependent on the first accumulation period.) the first accumulation period and the second accumulation period that is longer than the first accumulation period being included in one full frame period (Ikedo, Fig. 24, Time t702-t703); and
perform control such that an accumulation period of the first pixel region is set to the first accumulation period and an accumulation period of the second pixel region is set to the second accumulation period, or that an accumulation period of the first pixel region is set to the second accumulation period and an accumulation period of the second pixel region is set to the first accumulation period (Ikedo, Figs. 2 and 24, The first and second pixel regions have both the first accumulation period and the second accumulation period.).
However, Ikedo does not teach a movable apparatus; an optical system configured to form an object image having different resolutions in a first pixel region and a second pixel region of a sensor unit consisting of the plurality of pixels, nor set the first pixel region or the second pixel region based on an output of a movement control unit.
In reference to Takahashi et al. (hereafter referred as Takahashi), Takahashi teaches a movable apparatus (Takahashi, Fig. 16, Paragraph 0081); and an optical system configured to form an object image having different resolutions in a first pixel region and a second pixel region (Takahashi, Figs. 9-10, Paragraphs 0032-0034) of a sensor unit consisting of the plurality of pixels (Takahashi, Fig. 3, image plane 21, Paragraph 0028, image sensor on the image plane. The first and second pixel regions are regions of different image heights (distance from center of the image sensor).).
These arts are analogous since they are both related to imaging devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the invention of Ikedo with the us in a movable apparatus and the optical system as seen in Takahashi to allow the device to be used for capturing images for a vehicle and to provide an optical system having a projection characteristic compatible with both a fisheye lens and a telephoto lens, a sufficient angle of view, and a sufficient resolution (Takahashi, Paragraph 0004).
However, the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi does not teach setting the first pixel region or the second pixel region based on an output of a movement control unit.
In reference to Huggett, Huggett teaches setting the first pixel region or the second pixel region based on an output of a movement control unit (Huggett, Fig. 3, Paragraph 0020, 0026 and 0028-0029).
These arts are analogous since they are all related to imaging devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the combination of Ikedo and Takahashi with method of setting pixel regions (windows) based on moving objects and encoding images as seen in Huggett to selectively encode user selected regions to have higher resolutions and provide greater functionality to the device.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikedo (US 2020/0351464 A1) in view of Takahashi et al. (US 2022/0236533 A1) in view of Huggett (US 2022/0261963 A1) in view of Sawada (US 2021/0300261 A1).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Ikedo, Takahashi and Huggett teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 17 (see claim 17 analysis), However, the combination of Ikedo, Takahashi and Huggett does not teach wherein the installation information includes at least one of a height, an angle, and a direction in which the photoelectric conversion device is installed. (Examiner notes claim 17 recites: set the first pixel region or the second pixel region based on at least one of characteristic information…, installation information…, and environmental information…. Therefore, the installation information is not required.).
In reference to Sawada, Sawada teaches wherein the installation information includes at least one of a height, an angle, and a direction in which the photoelectric conversion device is installed (Sawada, Paragraph 0043).
These arts are analogous since they are all related to imaging devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the combination of Ikedo, Takahashi and Huggett with the explicit teaching of installation information as seen in Sawada since it is known for installation information to include at least one of a height, an angle, and a direction. That is, no modification is made to combination of Ikedo, Takahashi and Huggett since the installation information is not required. Sawada is referenced to explicitly disclose installation information to include at least one of a height, an angle, and a direction.
Claim(s) 1 and 25-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikedo (US 2020/0351464 A1) in view of Aihara et al. (US 2019/0273889A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ikedo teaches a photoelectric conversion device (Ikedo, Fig. 1) comprising:
a plurality of pixels (Ikedo, Fig. 2, pixel area 200, Paragraph 0044) each including a photoelectric conversion unit configured to emit pulses in response to photons (Ikedo, Fig. 3, PD 303, Paragraph 0050), a counter configured to count the number of the pulses (Ikedo, Fig. 3, counter circuit 306, Paragraph 0054), and a memory configured to store a count value of the counter (Ikedo, Fig. 3, memory 307, Paragraph 0055);
a first pixel region and a second pixel region of a sensor unit consisting of the plurality of pixels (Ikedo, Fig. 2, A first pixel region may be a first arbitrary portion of the pixel array. A second pixel region may be a second arbitrary portion of the pixel array.);
one or more memories (Ikedo, Paragraph 0147) storing instructions; and
one or more processors (Ikedo, Fig. 1, control/arithmetic unit 104, Paragraph 0041 and 0147) executing the instructions to:
generate a signal based on a difference between count values of the counter at a start time and an end time of an accumulation period (Ikedo, Fig. 23-24, Paragraphs 0137-0144, A start time is t702 and an end time is t703.);
perform control such that a signal generated in a first accumulation period (Ikedo, Fig. 24, The first accumulation period may be any of times t702-t2401, t702-t2404 or t702-t2405.) is output between the end of the first accumulation period and the end of a second accumulation period (Ikedo, Fig. 24, The second accumulation period may be any of times t702-t2404, t702-t2405 or t702-t703 dependent on the first accumulation period.) the first accumulation period and the second accumulation period that is longer than the first accumulation period being included in one full frame period (Ikedo, Fig. 24, Time t702-t703); and
perform control such that an accumulation period of the first pixel region is set to the first accumulation period and an accumulation period of the second pixel region is set to the second accumulation period, or that an accumulation period of the first pixel region is set to the second accumulation period and an accumulation period of the second pixel region is set to the first accumulation period (Ikedo, Figs. 2 and 24, The first and second pixel regions have both the first accumulation period and the second accumulation period.).
However, Ikedo does not teach an optical system configured to form an object image having different resolutions in a first pixel region and a second pixel region of a sensor unit consisting of the plurality of pixels.
In reference to Aihara et al. (hereafter referred as Aihara), Aihara teaches an optical system configured to form an object image having different resolutions in a first pixel region and a second pixel region (Aihara, Fig. 9, Paragraphs 0048-0050) of a sensor unit consisting of the plurality of pixels (Aihara, Fig. 9, image sensor 12, The first and second pixel regions different regions.).
These arts are analogous since they are both related to imaging devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the invention of Ikedo with the optical system as seen in Aihara to obtain a high resolution image of a region corresponding to a portion important for image analysis, while achieving a wide view angle without increasing a size of the apparatus (Aihara, Paragraph 0005).
Claims 25 and 26 are rejected for the same reasons as claim 1.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikedo (US 2020/0351464 A1) in view of Aihara et al. (US 2019/0273889A1) in view of Huggett (US 2022/0261963 A1).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Ikedo and Aihara teaches the photoelectric conversion device according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 analysis), and a case where a resolution on a peripheral side away from the optical axis of the optical system is higher than a resolution in the vicinity of the optical axis (Aihara, Fig. 9, Paragraphs 0048-0050).
However, the combination of Ikedo and Aihara does not teach wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to set the second pixel region on a peripheral side of a light receiving surface of the sensor unit in a case where a resolution on a peripheral side away from the optical axis of the optical system is higher than a resolution in the vicinity of the optical axis.
In reference to Huggett, Huggett teaches wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to set the second pixel region on a peripheral side of a light receiving surface of the sensor unit (Huggett, Fig. 3, Paragraphs 0027 and 0029).
These arts are analogous since they are all related to imaging devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the combination of Ikedo and Aihara with method of detecting objects and encoding images as seen in Huggett to selectively encode objects to have higher resolutions and provide greater functionality to the device. Further, the limitation “wherein the one or more processors further executes instructions to set the second pixel region on a peripheral side of a light receiving surface of the sensor unit in a case where a resolution on a peripheral side away from the optical axis of the optical system is higher than a resolution in the vicinity of the optical axis” is met since a pixel region set near the peripheral side may be considered to be a “second pixel region” and since Aihara discloses the case where a resolution on a peripheral side away from the optical axis of the optical system is higher.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WESLEY JASON CHIU whose telephone number is (571)270-1312. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 8am-4pm.
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.
/WESLEY J CHIU/ Examiner, Art Unit 2639
/TWYLER L HASKINS/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2639