DETAILED ACTION
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 6-7 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takashi JP 2021013147 hereinafter referred to as Takashi.
In regards to claim 1, Takashi teaches:
“A photoelectric conversion device comprising: a plurality of photoelectric conversion elements”
Takashi paragraph [0019] and Figure 3 teaches the unit pixel 103 in the embodiment has two APDs 203 and 204.
“an acquisition unit configured to acquire a micro-frame constituted by a one-bit signal based on light incident on each of the plurality of photoelectric conversion elements”
Takahashi paragraph [0023] teaches when the APD 203 is on standby, no current is flowing through the APD 203 and the quench transistor 301, and the VAPD indicates H VDD. That is, in the state where the APD 203 is on standby, the APD 203 is in a state in which a voltage capable of causing an avalanche phenomenon due to the incident of photons is applied to the APD 203. At this time, the comparator 305 outputs "L". The Examiner interprets the H and L signals based on a current flowing or not flowing is equal to a 1-bit signal (i.e. ON or OFF). Takahashi paragraph [0026] teaches by these operations, the incident of photons is extracted as a pulse signal. When the counter 306 counts the pulse output of the comparator 305, the signal of the APD 203 is AD-converted and recorded as digital data.
“and a combining unit configured to combine a plurality of the micro-frames to generate a sub-frame constituted by a multi-bit signal”
Takahashi paragraph [0046] teaches all the count values obtained in the plurality of first subframes 1_1, 1_3, 1_5, 1_7, 1_9 are combined. Then, the signals of the photons incident on the APD203 (first photoelectric conversion element) for the time of a plurality of first subframes 1_1, 1_3, 1_5, 1_7, 1_9 can be obtained. As a result, the A signal (first signal) is generated. Takahashi paragraph [0047] teaches all the count values obtained in the plurality of second subframes 1_2, 1_4, 1_6, 1_8, 1_10 are combined. Then, a photon signal incident on APD204, which is one photoelectric conversion element (second photoelectric conversion element) different from APD203, can be obtained for a plurality of hours of the second subframes 1_2, 1_4, 1_6, 1_8, 1_10. As a result, the B signal (second signal) is generated.
“wherein the plurality of photoelectric conversion elements include a first photoelectric conversion element and a second photoelectric conversion element”
Takashi paragraph [0019] and Figure 3 teaches the unit pixel 103 in the embodiment has two APDs 203 and 204.
“and wherein during a period in which one micro-frame is acquired, a first exposure period in which the one-bit signal is generated based on the light incident on the first photoelectric conversion element is different from a second exposure period in which the one-bit signal is generated based on the light incident on the second photoelectric conversion element”
Takahashi paragraph [0044] and Figure 7 teaches a timing diagram schematically showing the drive of the image sensor according to the third embodiment. In the example of FIG. 7, only the APD 203 is in the operating state in the plurality of first subframes 1_1, 1_3, 1_5, 1_7, 1_9. Takahashi paragraph [0045] teaches On the other hand, in the plurality of second subframes 1_2, 1_4, 1_6, 1_8, 1_10, only APD204 is in the operating state.
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) 2-3, 5 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi in view of Kuwahara et al. US 11,276,719 hereinafter referred to as Kuwahara.
In regards to claim 2, Takahashi teaches all the limitations of claim 1 but does not explicitly teach:
“wherein the first photoelectric conversion element is sensitive to light having a first wavelength, and wherein the second photoelectric conversion element is sensitive to light having a second wavelength different from the first wavelength”
Kuwahara teaches in claim 4 visible light pixels each including a first photoelectric converter which converts light in an entire wavelength range of visible light into a signal charge in order to generate a visible image; and infrared light pixels each including a second photoelectric converter which converts infrared light into a signal charge in order to generate an infrared light image and a distance image indicating a time-of-flight (TOF) distance to a subject. It would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have modified Takahashi in view of Kuwahara to have included the features of “wherein the first photoelectric conversion element is sensitive to light having a first wavelength, and wherein the second photoelectric conversion element is sensitive to light having a second wavelength different from the first wavelength” to provide a solid-state imaging device and a distance-measuring imaging device which generate a distance image and a visible image and are suited to generate the distance image with high sensitivity (Kuwahara column 2 lines 13-16).
In regards to claim 3, Takahashi/Kuwahara teaches all the limitations of claim 2 and further teach:
“wherein a cycle at which the micro-frame is acquired based on the light incident on the first photoelectric conversion element is different from a cycle at which the micro-frame is acquired based on the light incident on the second photoelectric conversion element”
Takahashi Figure 7 teaches photoelectric conversion units A and B are active in different cycles.
In regards to claim 5, Takahashi/Kuwahara teaches all the limitations of claim 2 and further teach:
“wherein the signal based on the light incident on the first photoelectric conversion element is used for generating an image, and wherein the signal based on the light incident on the second photoelectric conversion element is used for ranging”
Kuwahara teaches in claim 4 visible light pixels each including a first photoelectric converter which converts light in an entire wavelength range of visible light into a signal charge in order to generate a visible image; and infrared light pixels each including a second photoelectric converter which converts infrared light into a signal charge in order to generate an infrared light image and a distance image indicating a time-of-flight (TOF) distance to a subject. It would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have modified Takahashi in view of Kuwahara to have included the features of “wherein the signal based on the light incident on the first photoelectric conversion element is used for generating an image, and wherein the signal based on the light incident on the second photoelectric conversion element is used for ranging” to provide a solid-state imaging device and a distance-measuring imaging device which generate a distance image and a visible image and are suited to generate the distance image with high sensitivity (Kuwahara column 2 lines 13-16).
In regards to claim 8, Takahashi/Kuwahara teaches all the limitations of claim 2 and further teach:
“wherein the first wavelength is a wavelength in a visible region, and wherein the second wavelength is a wavelength in an infrared region”
Kuwahara teaches in claim 4 visible light pixels each including a first photoelectric converter which converts light in an entire wavelength range of visible light into a signal charge in order to generate a visible image; and infrared light pixels each including a second photoelectric converter which converts infrared light into a signal charge in order to generate an infrared light image and a distance image indicating a time-of-flight (TOF) distance to a subject. It would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed to have modified Takahashi in view of Kuwahara to have included the features of “wherein the first wavelength is a wavelength in a visible region, and wherein the second wavelength is a wavelength in an infrared region” to provide a solid-state imaging device and a distance-measuring imaging device which generate a distance image and a visible image and are suited to generate the distance image with high sensitivity (Kuwahara column 2 lines 13-16).
Conclusion
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