DETAILED ACTION
This office action is responsive to communication filed on August 20, 2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed September 16, 2026 was received and has been considered by the Examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed August 20, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, with respect to claims 1 and 10, that The Examiner alleged that Mauritzson discloses the claimed arrangement at Figure 10 and paragraph [0057], reasoning that "a single microlens (44) overlies a pair of red tiles (R1, R2)" and that, "[a]s such, the blue tiles (B1, B2) may also share a single microlens (44)." Office Action, 11. The Examiner implicitly acknowledges, in other words, that Mauritzon does not disclose a single microlens overlying the blue tiles, as recited in claims 1 and 10. On the contrary, paragraph [0057] and Figure 10 of Mauritzson expressly assign different arrangements to different colors, showing multiple microlenses 44 overlying each of the blue sub-pixels B 1 and B2, a one microlens overlying each of the green sub-pixels GI and G2, and a single microlens shared by the red sub-pixels Ri and R2. Mauritzson thus describes only the red sub-pixels as sharing a single microlens, while the blue sub-pixels are each provided with multiple microlenses-contrary to the claimed single microlens shared over the blue pair. The Examiner's contrary position rests on a supposition, unsupported by any actual disclosure in Mauritzson, that the blue sub-pixels "may also share a single microlens." Anticipation, however, requires that every limitation of the claim be disclosed in the single reference, and a limitation supplied by inference must be inherent that is, necessarily present. As set forth in MPEP § 2112, "[t]he fact that a certain result or characteristic may occur or be present in the prior art is not sufficient to establish the inherency of that result or characteristic" (emphasis in original). Mauritzon does not meet the burden of inherent disclosure: A single microlens shared over the blue pair is not merely absent from Mauritzson; it is affirmatively contradicted by Mauritzson, which shows the blue sub-pixels each provided with multiple microlenses. Because that limitation is not necessarily present in-and indeed is inconsistent with-the disclosure of Mauritzson, it cannot be relied upon to anticipate the present claims. Mauritzson fails to disclose each and every limitation of claim 1 and of claim 10, and thus does not anticipate either claim.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Mauritzson et al. makes clear that the microlens configuration shown in figure 10 is only an example, stating in paragraph 0057 that “any desired arrangement for microlenses 44 may be provided for array 20 (e.g., each pixel 22 in unit cell 76 may be provided with the same microlens arrangement or may each be provided with different microlens arrangements)”. Mauritzson et al. recites in paragraph 0057, “Elongated sub-pixels 34 may each be provided with multiple microlenses 44 (e.g., as shown by blue sub-pixels B1 and B2), may each be provided with respective microlenses 44 (e.g., as shown by green sub-pixels G1 and G2), may be provided with no microlenses 44, or may share a single microlens 44 with other sub-pixels 34 (e.g., as shown by red sub-pixels R1 and R1).” The abbreviation “e.g.” stands for “for example”. As such, the microlens (44) configuration of the blue (B1, B2) photodetectors (34) is clearly not limited to the specific example shown in figure 57. In the above-cited recitation, Mauritzson et al. explicitly states that the elongated sub-pixels 34 “may share a single microlens 44 with other sub-pixels 34”. The blue photodetectors (B1, B2) are labeled “34”. It is therefore clear that the blue photodetectors (34) may share a single microlens (44), based on the teachings of paragraph 0057 of Mauritzson et al.
Therefore, the rejection is maintained by the Examiner.
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 § 112
All previous claim rejections under 35 USC 112 are hereby removed in view of Applicant’s response.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 5-7, 9-11, 14-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mauritzson et al. (US 2015/0350583).
The Examiner’s response to Applicant’s arguments, as outlined above, is hereby incorporated into the rejection of claims 1, 2, 5-7, 9-11, 14-16 and 18-20 by reference.
Consider claim 1, Mauritzson et al. teaches:
An image sensing device (for instance, see figures 1, 2 and 10), comprising:
a semiconductor substrate (Mauritzson et al. teaches a “silicon substrate” in paragraph 0032. Paragraphs 0024 and 0075 detail that the invention may be implemented in a single integrated circuit.);
a first array of photodetectors (sub-pixels, 34) disposed on the substrate (Each sub-pixel (34) comprises a rectangular photosensitive region, as shown in figure 10 and detailed in paragraph 0057.);
readout circuits (e.g. transfer gates, 52, and charge storage node, 54, figure 4, paragraph 0033), which are disposed on the substrate (Mauritzson et al. teaches a “silicon substrate” in paragraph 0032. Paragraphs 0024 and 0075 detail that the invention may be implemented in a single integrated circuit.) and coupled to respective pairs of the photodetectors (For instance, the readout circuits 52-A, 52-B and 54 are connected to photodetectors 34-A and 34-B in figure 4, paragraph 0033. Paragraph 0057 teaches “two elongated sub-pixels 34 that share a common floating diffusion node 54”.), and which are configured to output signals from the respective pairs in at least a first mode, in which the signals are read out individually from each of the photodetector, and a second mode, in which the signals are binned together pairwise (As detailed in paragraph 0079, “the first group of photodiodes may include a first charge transfer gate that is configured to transfer a first charge from the first photodiode to the shared charge storage region and a second charge transfer gate configured to transfer a second charge from the second photodiode to the shared charge storage region. The imaging system may include pixel readout circuitry coupled to the array that is operable in a low resolution mode in which the pixel readout circuitry reads out image signals corresponding to a sum of the first and second charges from the shared charge storage region and is operable in a high resolution mode in which the pixel readout circuitry reads out image signals corresponding to a given one of the first and second charges from the shared charge storage region.” See also paragraph 0035.);
a color filter layer comprising a matrix of red, green, and blue tiles overlying respective pairs of the photodetectors (Figure 10 shows red (R1 or R2), green (G1 or G2 or G3 or G4) and blue (B1 or B2) tiles, paragraph 0057. Paragraph 0031 details that the pairs of pixels (34) are covered in red, blue and green color filters. Figure 3 illustrates the positioning of the color filter element (38) above the photodetector (34), paragraph 0028.); and
a second array of microlenses (microlenses, 44) overlying the color filter layer (38, see figure 3, paragraph 0028), including first microlenses (44) overlying the respective pairs of the photodetectors (34) that are overlain by the red and blue tiles (As shown in figure 10, a single microlens (44) overlies a pair of red tiles (R1, R2). Paragraph 0057 teaches that pairs of sub-pixels (34) may share a single microlens (44). As such, the blue tiles (B1, B2) may also share a single microlens (44).) and second microlenses (44) individually overlying each of the photodetectors (34) in the respective pairs that are overlain by at least some of the green tiles (As shown in figure 10 and detailed in paragraph 0057, second microlenses (44) may overlie each of the green photodetectors (G1, G2).).
Consider claim 2, and as applied to claim 1 above, Mauritzson et al. further teaches that the pairs of the photodetectors that are overlain by the first microlenses (44) define phase detection autofocus (PDAF) pixels (i.e. due to each photodetector (34) capturing half the field of view of each microlens (44), see figures 8 and 10), and wherein the readout circuits are configured to output a difference between the signals output by the photodetectors in the pairs in the PDAF pixels (“Forming multiple microlenses over multiple sub-pixels 34 within a given pixel 22 may, for example, enable readout circuitry 28 to perform stereo depth mapping operations on the image signals (e.g., as each sub-pixel 34 may capture light received from a respective half of the field of view of a single microlens 44).” paragraph 0047).
Consider claim 5, and as applied to claim 1 above, Mauritzson et al. further teaches that the photodetectors (34) have an aspect ratio of 1x2 and are arranged such that the pairs of the photodetectors are square in area (see figure 10).
Consider claim 6, and as applied to claim 1 above, Mauritzson et al. further teaches that some of the pairs of the photodetectors (34) are disposed along respective rows of the first array (see figure 10), while others of the pairs of the photodetectors (34) are disposed along respective columns of the first array (see figure 10).
Consider claim 7, and as applied to claim 1 above, Mauritzson et al. further teaches that each of the red, green, and blue tiles covers a single respective pair of the photodetectors (34, see figure 10, paragraph 0057).
Consider claim 9, and as applied to claim 1 above, Mauritzson et al. further teaches that the color filter layer further comprises additional filters over some of the photodetectors of a color other than red, green, or blue (Paragraph 0043 states that “any desired color filter elements may be used”. As detailed in paragraph 0042, these include infrared color filter elements, ultraviolet color filter elements, magenta color filter elements, cyan color filter elements, clear color filter elements, and/or yellow color filter elements.).
Consider claim 19, and as applied to claim 1 above, Mauritzson et al. further teaches that each of the first microlenses (44) is a single on-chip lens (44, see figure 3) that is shared by and overlies both of the photodetectors in the respective pair overlain by the red or blue tiles (As shown in figure 10, a single microlens (44) overlies a pair of red tiles (R1, R2). Paragraph 0057 teaches that pairs of sub-pixels (34) may share a single microlens (44). As such, the blue tiles (B1, B2) may also share a single microlens (44).), and wherein each of the second microlenses (44) is an on-chip lens (44, see figure 3) that overlies only a single respective one of the photodetectors overlain by the at least some of the green tiles (As shown in figure 10 and detailed in paragraph 0057, second microlenses (44) may overlie each of the green photodetectors (G1, G2).).
Consider claim 10, Mauritzson et al. teaches:
A method for image sensing (for reference, see figures 1, 2 and 10), comprising:
providing a semiconductor substrate (Mauritzson et al. teaches a “silicon substrate” in paragraph 0032. Paragraphs 0024 and 0075 detail that the invention may be implemented in a single integrated circuit.) including a first array of photodetectors (Each sub-pixel (34) comprises a rectangular photosensitive region, as shown in figure 10 and detailed in paragraph 0057.) and readout circuits (e.g. transfer gates, 52, and charge storage node, 54, figure 4, paragraph 0033), which are coupled to respective pairs of the photodetectors (For instance, the readout circuits 52-A, 52-B and 54 are connected to photodetectors 34-A and 34-B in figure 4, paragraph 0033. Paragraph 0057 teaches “two elongated sub-pixels 34 that share a common floating diffusion node 54”.), and which are configured to output signals from the respective pairs in at least a first mode, in which the signals are read out individually from each of the photodetectors, and a second mode, in which the signals are binned together pairwise (As detailed in paragraph 0079, “the first group of photodiodes may include a first charge transfer gate that is configured to transfer a first charge from the first photodiode to the shared charge storage region and a second charge transfer gate configured to transfer a second charge from the second photodiode to the shared charge storage region. The imaging system may include pixel readout circuitry coupled to the array that is operable in a low resolution mode in which the pixel readout circuitry reads out image signals corresponding to a sum of the first and second charges from the shared charge storage region and is operable in a high resolution mode in which the pixel readout circuitry reads out image signals corresponding to a given one of the first and second charges from the shared charge storage region.” See also paragraph 0035.);
overlaying on the first array of the photodetectors a color filter layer comprising a matrix of red, green, and blue tiles overlying respective pairs of the photodetectors (Figure 10 shows red (R1 or R2), green (G1 or G2 or G3 or G4) and blue (B1 or B2) tiles, paragraph 0057. Paragraph 0031 details that the pairs of pixels (34) are covered in red, blue and green color filters. Figure 3 illustrates the positioning of the color filter element (38) above the photodetector (34), paragraph 0028.); and
overlaying on the color filter layer (38) a second array of microlenses (44, see figure 3, paragraph 0028), including first microlenses (44) overlying the respective pairs of the photodetectors (34) that are overlain by the red and blue tiles (As shown in figure 10, a single microlens (44) overlies a pair of red tiles (R1, R2). Paragraph 0057 teaches that pairs of sub-pixels (34) may share a single microlens (44). As such, the blue tiles (B1, B2) may also share a single microlens (44).) and second microlenses (44) individually overlying each of the photodetectors (34) in the respective pairs that are overlain by at least some of the green tiles (As shown in figure 10 and detailed in paragraph 0057, second microlenses (44) may overlie each of the green photodetectors (G1, G2).).
Consider claim 11, and as applied to claim 10 above, Mauritzson et al. further teaches that the pairs of the photodetectors that are overlain by the first microlenses (44) define phase detection autofocus (PDAF) pixels (i.e. due to each photodetector (34) capturing half the field of view of each microlens (44), see figures 8 and 10), and wherein the readout circuits are configured to output a difference between the signals output by the photodetectors in the pairs in the PDAF pixels (“Forming multiple microlenses over multiple sub-pixels 34 within a given pixel 22 may, for example, enable readout circuitry 28 to perform stereo depth mapping operations on the image signals (e.g., as each sub-pixel 34 may capture light received from a respective half of the field of view of a single microlens 44).” paragraph 0047).
Consider claim 14, and as applied to claim 10 above, Mauritzson et al. further teaches that the photodetectors (34) have an aspect ratio of 1x2 and are arranged such that the pairs of the photodetectors are square in area (see figure 10).
Consider claim 15, and as applied to claim 10 above, Mauritzson et al. further teaches that some of the pairs of the photodetectors (34) are disposed along respective rows of the first array (see figure 10), while others of the pairs of the photodetectors (34) are disposed along respective columns of the first array (see figure 10).
Consider claim 16, and as applied to claim 10 above, Mauritzson et al. further teaches that each of the red, green, and blue tiles covers a single respective pair of the photodetectors (34, see figure 10, paragraph 0057).
Consider claim 18, and as applied to claim 10 above, Mauritzson et al. further teaches that the color filter layer further comprises additional filters over some of the photodetectors of a color other than red, green, or blue (Paragraph 0043 states that “any desired color filter elements may be used”. As detailed in paragraph 0042, these include infrared color filter elements, ultraviolet color filter elements, magenta color filter elements, cyan color filter elements, clear color filter elements, and/or yellow color filter elements.).
Consider claim 20, and as applied to claim 10 above, Mauritzson et al. further teaches that each of the first microlenses (44) is a single on-chip lens (44, see figure 3) that is shared by and overlies both of the photodetectors in the respective pair overlain by the red or blue tiles (As shown in figure 10, a single microlens (44) overlies a pair of red tiles (R1, R2). Paragraph 0057 teaches that pairs of sub-pixels (34) may share a single microlens (44). As such, the blue tiles (B1, B2) may also share a single microlens (44).), and wherein each of the second microlenses (44) is an on-chip lens (44, see figure 3) that overlies only a single respective one of the photodetectors overlain by the at least some of the green tiles (As shown in figure 10 and detailed in paragraph 0057, second microlenses (44) may overlie each of the green photodetectors (G1, G2).).
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.
Claims 3, 4, 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mauritzson et al. (US 2015/0350583) in view of Li et al. (US 2023/0090827).
Consider claims 3 and 12, and as applied to claims 2 and 11 above, Mauritzson et al. further teaches objective optics configured to image a target onto the device (“Camera module 12 may include one or more lenses 14 and one or more corresponding image sensors 16. Lenses 14 may include fixed and/or adjustable lenses and may include microlenses formed on an imaging surface of image sensor 16.” paragraph 0023).
Mauritzson et al. does not explicitly teach an autofocus mechanism configured to adjust a focal property of the objective optics; and a controller configured to drive the autofocus mechanism responsively to signals output by the PDAF pixels.
Li et al. similarly teaches an imaging device (figure 2) with an image sensor (202) and objective optics (lens or lens assembly, 204, paragraph 0047), wherein the image sensor includes PDAF pixels (“The 2×1 or 2×2 OCLs over the pixels in the red and blue subsets of pixels 802a, 802d enable the capture of good PDAF information.” Paragraphs 0092 and 0084-0090, see figure 8A).
However, Li et al. additionally teaches an autofocus mechanism configured to adjust a focal property of the objective optics; and a controller configured to drive the autofocus mechanism responsively to signals output by the PDAF pixels (“In some embodiments, the auto-focus mechanism 206 may include (or the functions of the auto-focus mechanism 206 may be provided by) a processor in combination with a voice coil, piezoelectric element, or other actuator mechanism that moves the lens 204, lens assembly, or image sensor 202. The auto-focus mechanism 206 may receive signals from the image sensor 202 and, in response to the signals, adjust a focus setting of the camera 200. In some embodiments, the signals may include PDAF information. The PDAF information may include horizontal phase detection signals, vertical phase detection signals, and/or other phase detection signals. In response to the PDAF information (e.g., in response to an out-of-focus condition identified from the PDAF information), the auto-focus mechanism 206 may adjust a focus setting of the camera 200 by, for example, adjusting a relationship between the image sensor 202 (or plurality of pixels) and the lens 204 or lens assembly (e.g., by adjusting a physical position of the lens 204, lens assembly, or image sensor 202).” paragraph 0050).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the imaging apparatus taught by Mauritzson et al. comprise an autofocus mechanism and controller as taught by Li et al. for the benefit of improving image quality by improving focus (Li et al., paragraph 0050).
Consider claims 4 and 13, and as applied to claims 3 and 12 above, Mauritzson et al. does not explicitly teach that the controller is further configured to reconstruct a full-color image based on signals output by the photodetectors by first computing a green image by interpolating the signals of the photodetectors that are overlain by the green tiles over regions that are overlain by the red and blue tiles, and then computing red and blue images by interpolating the signals of the photodetectors that are overlain by the red and blue tiles using the green image.
Li et al. further teaches that the controller is further configured to reconstruct a full-color image based on signals output by the photodetectors by first computing a green image by interpolating the signals of the photodetectors that are overlain by the green tiles over regions that are overlain by the red and blue tiles (i.e. at step 1106 of figure 11, paragraph 0105), and then computing red and blue images by interpolating the signals of the photodetectors that are overlain by the red and blue tiles using the green image (i.e. at step 1108 of figure 11, paragraph 0106).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the controller taught by Mauritzson et al. perform the interpolation taught by Li et al. for the benefit of producing a full-color image in which each pixel location contains all three color components (Li et al., paragraph 1110).
Claims 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mauritzson et al. (US 2015/0350583) in view of Park et al. (US 2025/0071442).
Consider claims 8 and 17, and as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, Mauritzson et al. does not explicitly teach that each of the red, green, and blue tiles covers a respective group of four pairs of the photodetectors.
Park et al. similarly teaches an imaging device (figure 1, paragraph 0025) including a pixel array (110, paragraph 0026), wherein the pixel array includes red, green and blue tiles (see figure 2, paragraphs 0048-0055).
However, Park et al. additionally teaches that each of red, green, and blue tiles cover a respective group of four pairs of the photodetectors (i.e. four pairs each including a first photoelectric conversion element (PDL) and a second photoelectric conversion element (PDR), see figure 2, paragraphs 0031 and 0055).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have each of the red, green and blue tiles taught by Maurizson et al. cover a respective group of four pairs of photodetectors as taught by Park et al. for the benefit of enabling autofocus modes which consider accuracy and speed (Park et al., paragraph 0005).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ALBERT H CUTLER whose telephone number is (571)270-1460. The examiner can normally be reached approximately Mon - Fri 8:00-4:30.
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, Sinh Tran can be reached at (571)272-7564. 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.
/ALBERT H CUTLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2637
Prosecution Insights