Ex Parte Fowler

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Apr 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. § 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. § 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. § 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. § 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. § 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. § 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. § 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