DETAILED ACTION
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6 allowed.
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. US 2018/0376076 hereinafter referred to as Park in view of Yin et al. US 2016/0044256 hereinafter referred to as Yin in view of Hu US 2020/0250804 hereinafter referred to as Hu.
In regards to claim 1, Park teaches:
“A method for … operating an optical arrangement comprising a plurality of optical sensors by determining for each of said plurality of optical sensors, properties of at least one frame captured by a respective optical sensor from among said plurality of optical sensors”
Park Figure 3 teaches image sensor A 330 and image sensor B 340. This is equivalent to a plurality of image sensors. Figure 8 teaches between times T1 and T1 output of image sensors A and B. This is a readout period. Park paragraph [0086] teaches the processor 310 may control each of the image sensors A and B 710 and 720 by using a vertical synchronization signal 810 and a horizontal synchronization signal 812. The vertical synchronization signal 810 is configured to synchronize each of frames, and the horizontal synchronization signal 812 is configured to synchronize each of lines included in the frames. Park paragraph [0059] teaches The processor 310 must not receive a next image signal read from the first image sensor 330 while the processor 310 receives the image signal from the temporary memory 320, and thus, the processor 310 may insert a blanking period with respect to a read control signal output to the first image sensor 330, so as not to allow the image signals received from the first image sensor 330 and the second image sensor 340 to overlap each other. This teaches a blanking period. Park paragraph [0059] teaches using the electronic apparatus according to the present embodiment, exposure is precisely simultaneously started and ended. This is a teaching of an exposure period. The Examiner interprets that the horizontal sync, vertical sync, exposure period, blanking period and readout period are properties of captured frames.
“and based on the frames' properties determined, synchronizing their read-out period”
Park Figure 8 illustrates the output of images sensors A and B occur simultaneously. The Examiner interprets that this is a synchronization and is necessarily based on the readout period because it is the output of the sensors.
“upon synchronizing the read-out period of the frames, determining a processing period for each of the optical sensors …”
Park paragraph [0062] teaches the electronic apparatus 100 may additionally include an image processor (not shown) configured to process the image signals, or may have an image processor in the processor 310. Hereinafter, it is assumed that the processor 310 processes the image. The processor 310 may perform various post-processing by using the image signals received via the temporary memory 320. For example, the processor 310 may perform signal processing of gain adjustment or waveform standardization with respect to the received image signals.
“and obtaining at least partially overlapping blank period for all of said plurality of optical sensors”
Park Figure 8 and paragraph [0089] teaches a section between the time point T2 in which the data is received from the temporary memory 730 and a time point T3 in which the data a9 through a16 of the second line is received from the image sensor A 710 may be set as a blanking period. The Examiner interprets that there is an area between time T2 and T3 in which there is no readout from either image sensors which is defined as the blanking interval. This is an overlapping blanking interval.
Park does not explicitly teach:
“[A method for] power saving of an [operating an optical arrangement comprising … at least partially overlapping blank period] … and wherein during said at least partially overlapping blank period, powering off modules comprised within said optical arrangement that are not in-use during that period”
Yin teaches a method of adaptively reducing power consumption and an image sensor (title). Yin teaches in the Abstract a power-saving signal is generated when the integration time is substantially greater than the frame height, and at least a circuitry that is not required to operate during an active period of the power-saving signal is turned off. Yin teaches in paragraph [0027] a power-saving signal may accordingly be generated in an overlapped period 61 overlapped among blanking periods of a reset field 1, a reset field 2 and a read field event. It would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have modified Park in view of Yin to have included the features of “[A method for] power saving of an [operating an optical arrangement comprising … at least partially overlapping blank period] … and wherein during said at least partially overlapping blank period, powering off modules comprised within said optical arrangement that are not in-use during that period” for the reason that conventional image sensors could not effectively save power, a need has thus arisen to propose a novel image sensor to overcome disadvantages of the conventional image sensors (Yin [0007]).
Park/Yin do not explicitly teach:
“[determine a processing period] so that the processing periods at least partially overlap each other”
Hu paragraph [0061] teaches The single-channel image fusion component 106 processes image I.sub.1* of the first channel and further processes image I.sub.2* of the second channel, wherein images I.sub.1* and I.sub.2* are processed separately. For example, images I.sub.1* and I.sub.2* can be processed at the same time, e.g., in parallel, staggered, or sequentially. The Examiner interprets that a processing at the same time is equivalent to overlapping periods. It would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have modified Park/Yin in view of Hu to have included the features of “[determine a processing period] so that the processing periods at least partially overlap each other” because there is an ever present need for improved depiction of warm targets in various operating environments, especially more complex operating environments (Hu paragraph [0003]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/2/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the Park reference is not directed to the problem with which the invention seeks to solve. However, the Examiner has used a different reference to address the problem of reducing power consumption. Therefore, this argument is moot.
Applicant argues that according to amended claim 1, “the frame properties associated with each of the plurality of optical sensors, are properties of at least one frame captured by a respective optical sensor from among the plurality of optical sensors which are then used to obtain an appropriate blank period during which the plurality of optical sensors is not operative.” However, this is not stated in claim 1 and is not considered a feature of claim 1. Claim 1 requires:
“determining for each of said plurality of optical sensors, properties of at least one frame captured by a respective optical sensor from among said plurality of optical sensors, and based on the frames' properties determined, synchronizing their read-out period,”
The Examiner has indicated in the above rejection that properties such as horizontal sync, vertical sync, exposure period, blanking period and readout period are properties of captured frames that are determined. Applicant admits that the blank period according to Park is inserted by the processor. It would then seem that properties such as the vertical sync, horizontal sync and blanking period are all known properties used to synchronize the readout of frames. Therefore, Applicant’s argument is not persuasive.
Applicant argues that paragraph [0059] which states “The processor 310 must not receive a next image signal read from the first image sensor 330 while the processor 310 receives the image signal from the temporary memory 320, and thus, the processor 310 may insert a blanking period with respect to a read control signal output to the first image sensor 330, so as not to allow the image signals received from the first image sensor 330 and the second image sensor 340 to overlap each other” is a teaching that the blanking periods do not overlap. However, this is a teaching the blanking period of the next image signal of the first image sensor does not overlap with the previous image of the second image sensor. For clarification, paragraph [0082] The processor 310 may not receive next image signals a9 through a16 from the image sensor A 710, while receiving the image signal from the temporary memory 730, and thus, may set a section before outputting a next horizontal synchronization signal or a next read control signal configured to control the image signal to be read from the image sensor A 710, as a blanking period. The blanking period the Examiner has cited from Figure 8 comes before T3 and is between b1-b8 and a9-a16 and would be considered the blanking interval for a9-a16 and b9-b16 image signals and clearly overlaps for these image signals.
Applicant has addressed the cited portion of the Park reference which states in paragraph [0089] a section between the time point T2 in which the data is received from the temporary memory 730 and a time point T3 in which the data a9 through a16 of the second line is received from the image sensor A 710 may be set as a blanking period, by admitting on page 7 paragraph 2 of the argument filed 4/2/2026 that “Park teaches inserting a blanking period before receiving the next signal from the image sensor”. Therefore, Applicant is admitting that Park determines a blanking period and uses it to synchronize frames by inserting it into the appropriate portion between image signal. This is exactly what is being claimed.
Applicant next state “This is done irrespective of the operation of the other image sensor.” However, there is no evidence provided that this is the case, there is no indication that if this was the case the claimed features would still not be met and how could this even be true when the blanking period must be inserted between an image signal of the first image sensor and second image sensor. It necessarily involves both image sensors and therefore cannot be “irrespective of the other image sensor”. Therefore, this argument is not persuasive.
The Applicant argument directed to Yin and Hu are considered moot because they rely on the fact that Park does not teach overlapping blanking periods.
Based on the analysis above, Applicant arguments are not persuasive.
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 MICHAEL E TEITELBAUM, Ph.D. whose telephone number is (571)270-5996. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30AM-5:00PM EST.
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, John Miller can be reached at 571-272-7353. 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.
/MICHAEL E TEITELBAUM, Ph.D./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2422
Prosecution Insights