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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05 May 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Objections
Claims 4-5 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 4: “the pixel units” in line 2 should be “the plurality of pixel units” for further clarity and continuity in the claim language.
Claim 5: “every 2x2 pixel units” in line 2 should be “every 2x2 pixel unit” for further clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-10 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.
Regarding claim 1, “a plurality of image pixel units” in line 6 is unclear as “image pixel units” has been mentioned previously in the same claim (Note: image pixel units is claimed in the plural form). Is this limitation referring to the same image pixel units mentioned previously or different image pixel units? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to the same image pixels units mentioned previously. Additionally, “a plurality of phase pixel units” in line 7 is unclear as “phase pixel units” has been mentioned previously in the same claim (Note: phase pixel units is claimed in the plural form)> Is this limitation referring to the same phase pixel units mentioned previously or different phase pixel units? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to the same phase pixel units mentioned previously. Additionally, “the first phase-pixel unit tuples” in lines 10-11 and “the second phase-pixel unit tuples” in lines 11-12 both lack proper antecedent basis and are therefore both unclear (Note: a single first phase-pixel unit tuple and a single second phase-pixel unit tuple have been mentioned previously, but not a plurality).
Claims 2-10 are rejected for their dependency on claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, “them” in line 2 is unclear. To what element is this limitation referring? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting “them” to be referring to “every 2x2 pixel unit.” Additionally, “those” in line 4 is unclear. To what element(s) is this limitation referring? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to TX control signals applied to image pixel units in the same row as that first phase-pixel unit tuple. Additionally, “those” in line 6 is unclear. To what element(s) is this limitation referring? In light of the specification, the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to TX signals applied to image pixel units in the same row as that second phase-pixel unit tuple.
Regarding claim 6, “every single pixel” in line 2 is unclear as no pixels have been mentioned previously. The Examiner is interpreting this limitation as referring to every single pixel unit.
Regarding claim 7, “the phase-pixel unit tuples” in line 2 is unclear as first phase-pixel unit tuples, second phase-pixel unit tuples, and phase-pixel unit tuple pairs have been mentioned previously in claim 1, on which claim 7 is dependent. Is this limitation referring to the same first phase-pixel unit tuples mentioned previously, the same second phase-pixel unit tuples mentioned previously, the same phase-pixel unit tuple pairs mentioned previously, or a different phase-pixel unit tuple? In light of the specification (specifically figures 5 and 6), the Examiner is interpreting this limitation to be referring to the same phase-pixel unit tuple pairs mentioned previously.
Claims 8-9 are rejected for their dependency on claim 7.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Yu (CN 115988299 A).
Regarding claim 1, Yu teaches a pixel array (10) of an image sensor (¶3, A typical image sensor consists of multiple photosensitive image units (“pixels”) arranged in a two-dimensional array), comprising: a plurality of pixel units regularly arranged in a row-wise direction and a column-wise direction (see figure 5; and ¶7, A pixel array consisting of multiple pixel unit groups, each pixel unit group including four pixel units arranged in a 2×2 form, each pixel unit including four pixels arranged in an n×n form), the plurality of pixel units including image pixel units and phase pixel units (see figure 5, image pixel units disposed in pixel units 103, 104, 105, and 106 and phase pixel units disposed in focusing pixel unit 111), the image pixel units for collecting image information and the phase pixel units for collecting phase information necessary for focusing (see figure 5, image pixel units disposed in pixel units 103, 104, 105, and 106 for collecting red, blue, and green light (i.e. image information); and ¶59, The focusing pixel unit 111 is used to acquire phase focusing information); and microlenses (122) provided on the plurality of pixel units, a plurality of image pixel units sharing one of the microlenses (122) (see figure 5; and ¶7, all pixels of each pixel unit corresponding to a filter of the same color and sharing a microlens), a plurality of phase pixel units sharing another one of the microlenses (122) (see figure 5; and ¶28, the focusing pixel unit arrangement in the repeating unit of the image sensor pixel array with shared microlens partially obscuring phase focusing according to the present invention), each microlens (122) commonly shared by an equal plurality of pixel units (see figure 5), wherein the plurality of phase pixel units sharing the common microlens (122) make up a first phase-pixel unit tuple (111) or a second phase-pixel unit tuple (111) (see figure 8, focusing pixel units (not labeled) being either left L (i.e. first tuple) or right R (i.e. second tuple); and ¶7, each pixel unit including four pixels arranged in an n×n form); wherein the first phase-pixel unit tuples (111) are in different rows from, and in the same columns as, the second phase-pixel unit tuples (111) (see figure 8, left pixel units (i.e. first tuple) arranged in different rows yet same columns as right pixel units (i.e. second tuple)), and wherein the first phase-pixel unit tuples (111) and the second phase-pixel unit tuples (111) are paired into phase-pixel unit tuple pairs to be detected for phase differences (¶10, the pixels in the focusing pixel unit are divided into left and right parts, and the left and right pixels are respectively set as the masking pixels to form a pair of focusing pixel units).
Regarding claim 2, Yu teaches the pixel array according to claim 1, wherein 2x2 image pixel units (103/104/105/106) share one of the microlenses (122), and wherein 2x2 phase pixel units (111) share another one of the microlenses (122) (see figure 8).
Regarding claim 3, Yu teaches the pixel array according to claim 2, wherein two phase pixel units of a first or second column in each first phase-pixel unit tuple (111) are adapted for phase detection, wherein two phase pixel units of a second or first column in each second phase-pixel unit tuple (111) are adapted for phase detection (¶23, where the 2×2 pixels in the focusing pixel unit are divided into left and right parts for focusing; and ¶59, The focusing pixel unit 111 is used to acquire phase focusing information).
Regarding claim 4, Yu teaches the pixel array according to claim 3, wherein color filters (121) are provided between the pixel units and the microlenses (122) (see figure 4, filter 121 disposed between photoelectric conversion element 123 and microlenses 122), wherein for each color, one color filter (121) is commonly shared by 2x2 pixel units, which also commonly share one microlens (122) (¶56, each pixel unit 21 has four 2×2 pixels 22 that share a single color filter material and microlens).
Regarding claim 7, Yu teaches the pixel array according to claim 1, wherein the phase-pixel unit tuple pairs are spaced apart in the column-wise direction and the phase-pixel unit tuples are spaced apart in the row-wise direction (see figures 8 and 14).
Regarding claim 8, Yu teaches the pixel array according to claim 7, comprising a plurality of repetitive units (14) repeatedly arranged in the row-wise direction and the column-wise direction, wherein in each repetitive unit (14), phase-pixel unit tuples (111) in adjacent columns are in different rows (see figures 8 and 14; and ¶66, the pixel array 10 can be divided into multiple repeating units 14. All repeating units 14 have the same structure. All repeating units 14 are arranged in an n×m array to obtain the pixel array 10).
Regarding claim 9, Yu teaches the pixel array according to claim 7, comprising a plurality of repetitive units (14) repeatedly arranged in the row-wise direction and the column-wise direction, wherein in each repetitive unit (14), phase-pixel unit tuple pairs in adjacent rows are in different columns (see figures 8 and 14; and ¶66, the pixel array 10 can be divided into multiple repeating units 14. All repeating units 14 have the same structure. All repeating units 14 are arranged in an n×m array to obtain the pixel array 10).
Regarding claim 10, Yu teaches an image sensor comprising the pixel array of claim 1 (¶3, A typical image sensor consists of multiple photosensitive image units (“pixels”) arranged in a two-dimensional array).
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu (CN 115988299 A) in view of Wang et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11463640 B1).
Regarding claim 5, Yu teaches the pixel array according to claim 4, wherein readout is conducted on every 2x2 pixel units that commonly share one microlens while treating them as one single pixel (¶61, During circuit readout, the non-focusing pixel units directly combine to read out the brightness information). However, Yu fails to explicitly teach wherein the two phase pixel units of the first column in each first phase-pixel unit tuple are applied with TX control signals different from those applied to image pixel units in the same row, and the two phase pixel units of the second column in each second phase-pixel unit tuple are applied with TX control signals different from those applied to image pixel units in the same row.
However, Wang teaches wherein the two phase pixel units of the first column in each first phase-pixel unit tuple are applied with TX control signals different from those applied to image pixel units in the same row, and the two phase pixel units of the second column in each second phase-pixel unit tuple are applied with TX control signals different from those applied to image pixel units in the same row (col. 12, lines 41-50, the transfer transistors of the second PDAF pixel circuit are configured to be controlled in response to PDAF transfer transistor control signals TXPD_L 444B and TXPD_R 446B instead of being controlled by the normal image sensing transfer transistor control signals TX1, TX2, TX3, and TX4. Therefore, it is appreciated that the PDAF photodiodes included in the 2×2 grouping of PDAF photodiodes in columns 11 and 12 in rows 9 and 10 are controlled and read out independently from the image sensing photodiodes).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yu to incorporate the teachings of Wang to include different control signals for phase pixels and image pixels in order to keep the autofocus outputs separate from the image outputs allowing for a faster determination of focus.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu (CN 115988299 A) in view of Haneda et al. (USPGPub 20150373251 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Yu teaches wherein readout is conducted on every single pixel (see ¶22 for details). However, Yu fails to explicitly teach wherein when readout is conducted on every single pixel, the two phase pixel units of the first column in each first phase-pixel unit tuple are applied with the same TX control signals as image pixel units in the same row, and the two phase pixel units of the second column in each second phase-pixel unit tuple are applied with the same TX control signals as image pixel units in the same row.
However, Haneda teaches wherein when readout is conducted on every single pixel, the two phase pixel units of the first column in each first phase-pixel unit tuple are applied with the same TX control signals as image pixel units in the same row, and the two phase pixel units of the second column in each second phase-pixel unit tuple are applied with the same TX control signals as image pixel units in the same row (¶61, The image-signal readout section 28 reads out, as signals of one row, the combined pixel signals and the phase difference pixel signals (both of which are digital signals here) related to one unit row generated by the image-signal generating section 27).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yu to incorporate the teachings of Haneda to have the phase pixel and image pixels output along the same lines to prevent the addition of extra circuitry.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Park et al. (USPGPub 20250080867 A1): Park teaches an array of phase detecting autofocus pixels that have different control signals applied by row.
Kim et al. (USPGPub 20240405048 A1): Kim teaches an imaging array comprising a plurality of phase detection pixels disposed among regular imaging pixels.
Hou et al. (USPGPub 20230137218 A1): Hou teaches phase detection pixels disposed among regular imaging pixels and having either different or same control signal depending on left and right sides of the phase detection pixel.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIN R GARBER whose telephone number is (571)272-4663. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0730-1730.
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, Georgia Y Epps can be reached at (571)272-2328. 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.
/ERIN R GARBER/Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights