Ex Parte Fowler

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardApr 18, 2016

12717609 (P.T.A.B. Apr. 18, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR 121717,609 03/04/2010 Boyd Fowler 22500 7590 04/18/2016 BAE SYSTEMS PO BOX 868 NHQl-719 NASHUA, NH 03061-0868 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www .uspto.gov ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. BAEP-1729 3145 EXAMINER KAO, YIH-SIEN ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2662 MAILDATE DELIVERY MODE 04/18/2016 PAPER Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication. PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte BOYD FOWLER1 Appeal2014-008237 Application 12/717,609 Technology Center 2600 Before MICHAEL J. STRAUSS, DANIEL N. FISHMAN, and JAMES W. DEJMEK, Administrative Patent Judges. STRAUSS, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 134(a) from the Examiner's Final Rejection of claims 1-10. Claim 11 is allowed. Final Act. 13. We have jurisdiction over the pending claims under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 6(b). We reverse. 1 Appellant identifies BAE Systems Imaging Solutions, Inc. as the real party in interest. App. Br. 1. Appeal2014-008237 Application 12/717,609 STATEMENT OF THE CASE Introduction Appellant's invention is directed to a "CMOS imaging array with improved noise characteristics." Spec. Title. Claim 1 is illustrative of the subject matter on appeal and is reproduced below with the disputed limitations emphasized in italics: 1. A pixel cell comprising: a photodiode; a floating diffusion node; a transfer gate that couples said photodiode to said floating diffusion node in response to a first gate signal; a shielding electrode that shields said floating diffusion node from said first gate signal; and an output stage that generates a signal related to a charge on said floating diffusion node, said shielding electrode being held at a constant potential while said transfer gate couples said photodiode to said floating diffusion node. The Examiner's Rejections Claims 1and6 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 102(e) as being anticipated by Yaghmai (US 2010/0231771 Al; Sept. 16, 2010 (filed Mar. 12, 2009)). Final Act. 6-9. Claims 2 and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Yaghmai and Rhodes (US 2004/0053436 Al; Mar. 18, 2004). Final Act. 9-10. 2 Appeal2014-008237 Application 12/717,609 Claims 3 and 8 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Yaghmai, Rhodes, and Asaba (US 7,414,233 B2; Aug. 19, 2008). Final Act. 10-12.2 Claims 4 and 9 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Yaghmai and Gulbransen et al. (US 7,492,399 Bl; Feb. 17, 2009) ("Gulbransen"). Final Act. 12. Claims 5 and 10 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Yaghmai. Final Act. 12-13. APPELLANT'S CONTENTION3 Because Yaghmai's gates 310 and 320 are not configured to conduct at the same time so as to create a contiguous electrical path, gate 310 does not couple photodiode 302 to region 306 as required by claim 1. App. Br. 5---6. ISSUE ON APPEAL Based on Appellant's arguments in the Appeal Brief (App. Br. 3-9) the issue presented on appeal is whether the Examiner erred in concluding a reasonable interpretation of the term "couple" is not limited to electrical conduction but includes the physical joining or connection of elements and 2 The Examiner mistakenly refers to Kawasaki in combination with Y aghmai even though the Kawasaki reference no longer forms part of the rejections. See Final Act. 2-3, 10, and 11. We find the extraneous references to the no-longer-applied Kawasaki publication constitute harmless error. 3 We note Appellant raises additional contentions of error, but we do not reach them as our resolution of this contention is dispositive of the appealed rejections. 3 Appeal2014-008237 Application 12/717,609 is disclosed by the physical joining or connection of Y aghmai' s photodiode 302 to region 306 through the intermediate physical structures of transistors 310 and 320. Ans. 2-3. ANALYSIS4 We agree with Appellant the Examiner erred by finding Y aghmai discloses "a transfer gate that couples said photodiode to said floating diffusion node in response to a first gate signal," as recited in claim 1 and as similarly recited in independent claim 6. App. Br. 5---6. In particular, we agree with Appellant's argument Yaghmai's transistor 310 can only couple photodiode 302 to region 306 if both transistors 310 and 320 are made conductive at the same time, a condition that is not disclosed by Y aghmai. App. Br. 5 (citing Yaghmai i-f 28, Figure 3). The meaning of a claim term may be determined by reviewing a variety of sources including the claims themselves, dictionaries and treatises, and the written description, the drawings, and the prosecution history. Brookhill-Wilk 1, LLC v. Intuitive Surgical, Inc., 334 F.3d 1294, 1298 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (citations omitted). Accordingly, we find the language from claim 1 itself defines "couples" as occurring "in response to a first gate signal." Claim 1. That is, coupling selectively does or does not occur based on a control signal. Consistent with exercising coupling control with an electrical signal, we find a broadest reasonable interpretation of the recited 4 In this Opinion, we refer to Appellant's Appeal Brief ("App. Br.," filed January 30, 2014); Appellant's Reply Brief ("Reply Br.," filed July 15, 2014); the Final Office Action ("Final Act.," mailed January 8, 2014); the Examiner's Answer ("Ans.," mailed on June 4, 2014); and the original Specification (Spec.," March 4, 2010). 4 Appeal2014-008237 Application 12/717,609 coupling of two elements consistent with Appellant's Specification requires the presence of a continuous (i.e., electrically contiguous) signal path between the two elements. App. Br. 2 (citing Spec. 5:22-24). See In re Amer. Acad. of Sci. Tech Ctr., 367 F.3d 1359, 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (citations omitted). Here, we find the Examiner has failed to adequately explain how, nor are we able to ascertain that, Yaghmai discloses a transfer gate that couples the photodiode to the floating diffusion node in response to a first gate signal, as claimed. Specifically, in explaining the rejection of claim 1, as the Examiner "[b]roadly interpreted the term 'couple' means [sic] to join; connect" (Ans. 2), the Examiner finds "the storage transistor 310 (reading on the claimed transfer gate) always physically couples photosensor 302 (reading on the claimed 'photodiode') to floating diffusion region 306 (reading on the claimed 'floating diffusion node'), whether the storage transistor 310 conducts or not." Ans. 4 (citing Figures 3, 5) (emphases omitted, and emphasis added). See also Final Act. 3. We disagree mere physical coupling satisfies the disputed limitation. Figure 3 of Yaghmai is illustrative and is reproduced below: 5 Appeal2014-008237 Application 12/717,609 FIG. 3 300 5 I t-~soa l I Figure 3 of Yaghmai illustrates a pixel circuit (300). Yaghmai i-fi-127- 29. As shown, the pixel circuit (300) comprises photosensor (302) (e.g., a photodiode) connected to a floating diffusion region (306) through a storage transistor (310, including gate SG), a storage region (304), and a transfer transistor (320, including gate TX). Id. i-fi-127----28. "Photosensor 302 is connected to storage region 304 when the storage transistor 310 is activated by a storage control signal applied to gate SG." Id. i128. Similarly, "[t]he storage region 304 is connected to the floating diffusion region 306 by the transfer transistor 320 when the transfer transistor 320 is activated by a transfer control signal applied to gate TX." Id. However, because storage transistor 310 and transfer transistor 320 are made conductive only in the alternative (see Y aghmai Figure 5), there is no disclosed condition in which there is an uninterrupted continuous electrical signal path between photosensor 302 and floating diffusion region 306. Thus, we agree with Appellant's conclusion that Y aghmai' s gate 310 does not couple photodiode 302 to region 306 because "signals SG and TX are never high at the same 6 Appeal2014-008237 Application 12/717,609 time" in Figure 5 of Yaghmai. App. Br. 5---6 (citing Y aghmai Figure 5). For the reasons discussed supra, we find Y aghmai does not disclose storage transistor (310) couples the photosensor (302) (e.g., a photodiode) to the floating diffusion region (306) in response to a first gate signal, thereby creating the presence of a continuous electrical signal path between the photosensor (302) and the floating diffusion region (306). In view of the above discussion, and, on the record before us, we find the Examiner erred in rejecting independent claims 1 and 6, and all dependent claims therefrom. DECISION We reverse the Examiner's decision to reject claims 1-10. REVERSED 7