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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 12 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-11, 13, 15, 17, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (Wang) (US 2021/0216163) in view of Wood et al. (Wood) (US 2011/0134249).
Regarding claims 1, 17, and 18, Wang discloses an optoelectronic module (FIG. 2) comprising:
an illuminator comprising a plurality of light sources (FIG. 5, [0042], a plurality of infrared light sources 80) configured to emit light towards a scene at an illumination wavelength ([0045], the light source illuminates a scene);
a detector layer (FIG. 2, sensor layer 70, 71 and pixels 31) configured to detect light having the illumination wavelength reflected by the scene ([0044], the light sensor chip 70 detects reflected light);
a mask layer disposed over the detector layer, the mask layer being configured to interact with light having the illumination wavelength (FIG. 7, layers 50, 62 receive the reflected light); and
a processor (FIG. 5, [0043], processor IC), the processor configured to:
modulate the plurality of light sources ([0011], [0042], [0049], the light is modulated to a square wave); and
reconstruct as image of the scene ([0008], [0051], a 3D image is generated).
Wang is silent about wherein the mask layer is configured as a passive mask layer comprising a pattern defined by a dye-based polymer, or wherein the mask layer is configured as an active mask layer comprising a reconfigurable pattern as defined by a plurality of vanadium oxide transistors or a digital micro- mirror device; and wherein the mask layer is free from lenses.
Wood from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses wherein the mask layer is configured as an active mask layer comprising a reconfigurable pattern as defined by a a digital micro- mirror device ([0060], [0061], a DMD mask layer is implemented to filter unwanted light from reaching pixels of the image sensor); and wherein the mask layer is free from lenses ([0060], [0061], a DMD mask layer is implemented).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Wood into the teachings of Wang for more accurate image reproduction for more accurate range detection (Wood: [0095]).
Regarding claim 2, Wang discloses wherein the illuminator is disposed over the mask layer (FIG. 7, illuminator 80 is disposed above mask layer 50, 62).
Regarding claim 3, Wang discloses wherein the illuminator is integrated with the detector layer (FIG. 6, illuminator 80 and detector layer 71).
Regarding claim 4, Wang discloses wherein the plurality of light sources of the illuminator are disposed around a periphery of the optoelectronic module (FIG. 5, [0042], [0055], [0059], light sources are disposed around the boundary of a display area),
and wherein a center portion of the illuminator, surrounded by the plurality of light sources disposed around the periphery of the optoelectronic module, includes no light sources (FIG. 5, [0042], [0055], [0059], light sources are disposed around the peripheral region of the layer 1060).
Regarding claim 5, Wang discloses wherein the detector layer is integrated with a display layer (FIG. 2, [0039], [0047], subpixels 31 are arranged in display layer 30).
Regarding claim 6, Wang discloses wherein the mask layer is configured to be transmissive to visible light ([0042], layer 20-60 allow light to reach sensor 71).
Regarding claim 7, Wang discloses wherein the illumination wavelength is an infrared wavelength (FIG. 5, [0042], a plurality of infrared light sources 80).
Regarding claim 8, Wang discloses wherein the mask layer comprises a uniformly redundant array ([0040], the multiple gaps 35 between the active subpixels can be arranged in such a way that they are separated from each other by a certain distance substantially uniform across entire display panel).
Regarding claim 9, Wang discloses wherein the mask layer comprises a controllable mask, and wherein the processor is further configured to control the controllable mask ([0053], a controllable micro lens liquid crystal layer).
Regarding claim 10, Wood further discloses wherein the controllable mask comprises one or more of:
a digital micromirror device ([0060], [0061], a DMD mask layer is implemented to filter unwanted light from reaching pixels of the image sensor).
Regarding claim 11, Wang discloses wherein the mask layer comprises a passive mask (FIG. 8, [0049], [0051], the mask layer is arranged to passively allow light to reach the sensor).
Regarding claim 13, Wang discloses wherein the illuminator is configured to illuminate the scene sequentially at a plurality of different illumination angles ([0055], one of the one or more light sources (not shown) is disposed near an edge region of the backplane substrate, one or more effective micro lenses 410 near the edge region (left one as shown) can be independently adjusted to redirect the infrared light signals 301 emitted from the respective one light source to illuminate the target object 100 along one or more paths in different angles that may not be blocked or even partially blocked by the unwanted object), and wherein the processor is further configured to reconstruct a plurality of images of the scene, each image of the scene corresponding to a different illumination angle ([0046], the integrated circuits associated with all light sensors disposed to the back side of the optical layer of the backplane glass substrate are coupled together to assemble these (n*n) patches of images to a complete image; [0062], a complete 3D image is generated).
Regarding claim 15, Wang discloses wherein the processor is further configured to a 3 dimensional reconstruction of the scene from the plurality of images ([0046], the integrated circuits associated with all light sensors disposed to the back side of the optical layer of the backplane glass substrate are coupled together to assemble these (n*n) patches of images to a complete image; [0062], a complete 3D image is generated).
Claim(s) 12 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (Wang) (US 2021/0216163) in view of Wood et al. (Wood) (US 2011/0134249), and further in view of Mermelstein (WO 00/79345 A1).
Regarding claims 12 and 19, Wang discloses the optoelectronic module according to claim 1.
Wang in view of Wood is silent about wherein the processor is further configured to modulate each of the plurality of light sources individually; and wherein the modulating the plurality of light sources comprises the processor controlling a power of the plurality of light sources separately to illuminate the scene from different angles.
Mermelstein from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses wherein the processor is further configured to modulate each of the plurality of light sources (FIG. 1, 10c) individually (pg. 4, lns. 23-25 – col. 5, lns. 1-6, the light sources 10 are modulated at different frequencies and intensities); and wherein the modulating the plurality of light sources comprises the processor controlling a power of the plurality of light sources separately (FIG. 8, pg. 4, lns. 23-25 – col. 5, lns. 1-6, the light sources 10 are modulated at different intensities by controlling to applied power to the light source) to illuminate the scene from different angles (FIG. 1, light sources 10 image scene 20 from different viewpoints).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Mermelstein into the teachings of Wang in view of Wood for more accurately generating high resolution images.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (Wang) (US 2021/0216163) in view of Wood et al. (Wood) (US 2011/0134249), and further in view of Cole (US 2020/0338986).
Regarding claim 14, Wang in view of Wood discloses the optoelectronic module according to claim 13 (see claim 13 above).
Wang in view of Wood is silent about the processor is further configured is further configured to apply an iterative phase retrieval algorithm to the plurality of images of the scene, and further to generate a complex-valued object image of the scene.
Cole from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses the processor is further configured is further configured to apply an iterative phase retrieval algorithm to the plurality of images of the scene ([0049], a Gerchberg-Saxton algorithm), and further to generate a complex-valued object image of the scene ([0052], a complex valued image is generated).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Cole into the teachings of Wang in view of Wood for more accurately generating high resolution 3D images.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (Wang) (US 2021/0216163) in view of Wood et al. (Wood) (US 2011/0134249), and further in view of Shcherbakov et al. (Shcherbakov) (US 2016/0066790).
Regarding claim 16, Wang in view of Wood discloses the optoelectronic module according to claim 1 (see claim 1 above).
Wang in view of Wood is silent about the processor is configured to determine an intensity of the light detected by the detector layer; and vary a power of the plurality of light sources based on the intensity of the light detected by the detector layer.
Shcherbakov from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses the processor is configured to determine an intensity of the light detected by the detector layer ([0073], the power of the light source is adjusted based on the intensity of light detected by the detector); and vary a power of the plurality of light sources based on the intensity of the light detected by the detector layer ([0073], the power of the light source is adjusted based on the intensity of light detected by the detector).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Shcherbakov into the teachings of Wang in view of Wood for providing the optimal lighting conditions for imaging.
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 JEFFERY A WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)270-7579. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Sath Perungavoor can be reached at 571-272-7455. 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.
/JEFFERY A WILLIAMS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488
Prosecution Insights