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.
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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: conversion unit, holding units, transfer unit, discharge unit, read unit in claim 1, 14, and 15.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 – 15 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.
Claims 1, 14, and 15 use the preposition “…in accordance with ... “ in a way that renders the claim unclear. For example, “to read a signal in accordance with an amount of electric charge transferred from the charge holding units ...” may be interpreted as defining that a read operation is controlled by an amount of electric charge transferred from the charge holding units, which is not supported by the description. How is the read signal related to the amount of electric charge transferred? For art examination, broadest reasonable interpretation will be exercised.
Claims 1, 14, and 15 include the limitation "a control unit configured to perform batch drive control of simultaneously driving at least one of the transfer units and the charge discharge units for the plurality of pixels ... ". According to the description the transfer units are driven by signals GS_L 1, GS_L2, GS_S1,GS_S2 and the charge discharge units are driven by the signals OFG. In all embodiments, see fig. 3, 8, 11, 13 the signals OFG are not simultaneously applied with any of the signals GS_L 1, GS_L2, GS_S1,GS_S2 as claimed. For art examination, broadest reasonable interpretation will be exercised.
Claim 1, 14, and 15 recites the limitation "the time for the batch drive control" in the last limitation. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2 – 13 are rejected as being dependent on claim 1.
Claim 2 asserts " ... control one of a first read operation ... and a second read operation ... to be performed at a timing that does not overlap the timing of the batch drive control”.
Claim 3 asserts " ... one of the first read operation and the second read operation at the same timing as the batch drive control."
Claim 4 asserts " ... one of the first read operation and the second read operation at the same timing as the batch drive control."
Claim 5 asserts " ... one of the first read operation and the second read operation at different timing from the batch drive control"
Since claims 1 – 5 are all mutually dependent it is unclear which one of the first and second read operations overlap or do not overlap the timing of the batch drive. For art examination, broadest reasonable interpretation will be exercised.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the other" in the last limitation. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 include the limitation " ... correct one of the first signal and the second signal on which noise generated by the batch drive control is superimposed with the other signal on which the noise is not superimposed". How is determined that on one of the signals a noise generated by the batch drive control is superimposed? For art examination, broadest reasonable interpretation will be exercised.
Claim 8 states that" ... the charge discharge unit, the transfer unit, and the read unit are configured to perform the second read operation at the same timing ... ". This is unclear because a read operation is performed for every row, and thus always for at least one row the read operation will overlap with the batch operation for the second read operation. For art examination, broadest reasonable interpretation will be exercised.
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.
Claim(s) 1 – 15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hayashi (US 2024/0171874).
Regarding claim 1, Hayashi discloses an imaging system comprising a plurality of pixels (12), each pixel including: a photoelectric conversion unit configured to generate an electric charge by photoelectric conversion (¶26: "Each of the plurality of pixels 12 includes a photoelectric conversion unit including a photoelectric conversion element such as a photodiode); two or more charge holding units configured to hold the electric charge (¶34]: charge holding portion MEM L1...charge holding portion MEM L2); a transfer unit configured to transfer the electric charge from the photoelectric conversion unit to the charge holding units (¶33: transfer transistors M1 L1, M1 L2, M1 S1, M1 S2); a charge discharge unit configured to discharge the electric charge accumulated in the photoelectric conversion unit (¶34: the charge discharging transistor M7); and a read unit configured to read a signal in accordance with an amount of electric charge transferred from the charge holding units (¶33: a reset transistor M4, an amplifier transistor M5, a select transistor M6), and further comprising at least one processor or circuit configured to function as: a control unit configured to perform batch drive control of simultaneously driving at least one of the transfer units and the charge discharge units for the plurality of pixels (¶42: 3 illustrates temporal changes of the control signals GS_L 1, GS_L2, GS_S1, GS_S2, and OFG respectively supplied to the transfer transistors M1 L1, M1 L2, M1 S1, and M1 S2 and the charge discharging transistor M7 in the (2N-1 )-th frame and the 2N-th frame. Here, N is an integer of 1 or more. When each control signal is at highlevel, the corresponding transistor becomes active (on-state). In the present embodiment, since the global shutter method is performed, the driving related to the exposure operation and the timing thereof are simultaneously performed in the pixels 12 in all the rows), and perform the photoelectric conversion during two or more different exposure periods in one frame period (¶43]: In each frame, a plurality of times (Ks times) of accumulation periods Ts and a plurality of times (Kl times) of accumulation periods Tl are executed) and control one of times for reading signals in accordance with electric charges accumulated in each exposure period not to overlap the timing for the batch drive control (¶63: Since the rows are read line by line, 4 illustrates temporal changes of the control signals TX_L 1, TX_L2, TX_S1, TX_S2, RES and SEL supplied to the transfer transistors M3 L 1, M3 L2, M3 S 1, M3 S2, the reset transistor M4 and the select transistor M6 in the (2N-1 )-th frame and the 2N-th frame .... ", there is always at least one line of pixels which do not overlap with any of the globally applied pulses GS and OFG of fig. 3).
Regarding claim 2, Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 1. Hayashi also teaches wherein the control unit is configured to perform accumulation operations during a first exposure period and a second exposure period in one frame period, and to control one of a first read operation to read a pixel signal in accordance with an amount of electric charge accumulated during the first exposure period and a second read operation to read a pixel signal in accordance with an amount of electric charge accumulated during the second exposure period to be performed at a timing that does not overlap the timing of the batch drive control (fig. 3; ¶63: there is always at least one line of pixels which do not overlap with any of the globally applied pulses GS and OFG).
Regarding claim 3, Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 2. Hayashi also teaches wherein the control unit is configured to control one of the first read operation and the second read operation at the same timing as the batch drive control (fig. 3; ¶63: there is always at least one line of pixels which do overlap with any of the globally applied pulses GS and OFG).
Regarding claim 4, Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 2. Hayashi also teaches wherein the control unit is configured to control the charge discharge unit, the transfer unit, and the read unit to perform one of the first read operation and the second read operation at the same timing as the batch drive control (fig. 3; ¶63: there is always at least one line of pixels which do overlap with any of the globally applied pulses GS and OFG).
Regarding claim 5, Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 2. Hayashi also teaches wherein the control unit is configured to control the charge discharge unit, the transfer unit, and the read unit to perform one of the first read operation and the second read operation at different timing from the batch drive control (fig. 3; ¶63: there is always at least one line of pixels which do not overlap with any of the globally applied pulses GS and OFG).
Regarding claim 6, Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 5. Hayashi also teaches wherein the at least one processor or circuit configured to further function as a correction unit configured to use one of a first signal read in the first read operation and a second signal read in the second read operation to correct the other signal (¶90, 132: An image having a wide dynamic range (HDR image) may be obtained by correcting one of the two types of images acquired in this manner according to the ratio of the length of the accumulation period and combining the signals of the other image with one image).
Regarding claim 7, Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 6. Hayashi also teaches wherein the correction unit is configured to correct one of the first signal and the second signal on which noise generated by the batch drive control is superimposed with the other signal on which the noise is not superimposed (¶90, 132: An image having a wide dynamic range (HDR image) may be obtained by correcting one of the two types of images acquired in this manner according to the ratio of the length of the accumulation period and combining the signals of the other image with one image).
Regarding claim 8, Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 2. Hayashi also teaches wherein the first exposure period is longer than the second exposure period, and the charge discharge unit, the transfer unit, and the read unit are configured to perform the second read operation at the same timing as the batch drive control (fig. 3: rows read at time t11 or t15, which show the batch control for the short exposure periods Tsi and Tsi+1).
Regarding claim 9, Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 1. Hayashi also teaches wherein two of the charge holding units are configured to be connectable to the photoelectric conversion unit, and other charge holding units are configured to be connectable in series to each of the two charge holding units (fig. 5; ¶97: MEM1_L,MEM1_S and MEM2_L,MEM2_S).
Regarding claim 10, Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 1. Hayashi also teaches wherein four charge holding units are configured to be connectable in parallel to the photoelectric conversion unit (fig. 2: MEM1_L,MEM1_S and MEM2_L,MEM2_S).
Regarding claim 11, Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 1. Hayashi also teaches wherein the control unit is configured to control an interval of the batch drive control to be at least a predetermined period (fig. 3).
Regarding claim 12, Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 1. Hayashi also teaches wherein the control unit is configured to control an interval of the batch drive control to be less than a predetermined period (fig. 3).
Regarding claim 13, Hayashi discloses the limitations of claim 1. Hayashi also teaches wherein the read unit is configured to perform the operation of reading during an exposure operation of the photoelectric conversion unit (fig. 3, 4; ¶64: the exposure and read out operations are performed during the same frames... the readout operation of each frame may be performed in parallel with the above-described exposure operation.).
Claim 14 and 15 are rejected as applied to claim 1 above. The method steps as claimed would have been implied by the apparatus of Hayashi.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTOINETTE SPINKS whose telephone number is (571)270-3749. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7am - 5pm 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, Twyler Haskins can be reached at 571-272-7406. 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.
/ANTOINETTE T SPINKS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2639
Prosecution Insights