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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues Plank does not teach acquiring plural sets of image data at different frame rates, as Plank's process is continuous and single-regime, not comparative across different frame rate operation modes.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. While it is true Plank doesn't switch frame rates and instead switches frequencies ([0029]-[0030]), Tachibana does teach changing frame rates. Thus, this argument is not persuasive.
Applicant argues Tachibana discloses switching frame rate, which is not the same as selectively switching between operation modes (different frame rates) for the purpose of jointly analyzing image data.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant does not adequately explain how Tachibana's frame rate switching is different than the claimed switching between operation modes.
Further, in response to applicant's argument that the cited references do not teach “for the purpose of jointly analyzing image data”, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Applicant argues parameter adjustment is not the same as claimed mode switching.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. As cited in the non-final rejection, Tachibana teaches that changing a frame rate means changing frequency, and vice versa. Additionally, Plank teaches mode switching between frequencies. Further, applicant does not adequately explain how these are different. Thus, the combination teaches mode switching between frequencies and frame rates.
Applicant argues neither reference discloses acquiring image data at multiple frame rates for the purpose of frequency estimation and modulation frequency of an external light source clock, as Tachibana only teaches changing a frame rate.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Plank teaches frequency estimation in [0083]. Tachibana was only used in the independent claims for the relationship between frequency and frame rate. Thus, this argument is not persuasive.
Further, in response to applicant's argument that the cited references do not teach “for the purpose of frequency estimation and modulation frequency of an external light source clock”, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1, 2, 7, 8 15, 16, and 24-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Plank (US 20180259628 A1) in view of Tachibana (US 20150285623 A1).
Claim 1: Plank teaches a distance measuring device comprising:
a ToF (time of flight) sensor configured to perform imaging by reflecting, on a surface of an object, emission light of a light source that emits pulse light ([0026] - external light signal and [0033] - pulsed light),
the ToF sensor having a sensor clock that controls an imaging timing ([0027] - reference frequency [0049-0052]),
the sensor clock being a device- specific clock different from a light source clock that controls a modulation frequency of a light emission pulse of the light source ([0026] - external modulation frequency, [0049]);
a distance calculation unit configured to calculate a distance to the object based on image data captured by the ToF sensor ([0063] - calculating distance information);
a mode switching unit configured to selectively switch operation modes of the ToF sensor between the first operation mode and a second operation mode (Fig 1, synchronization circuitry 106 and [0029-0030] switching frequency can be considered switching operation modes);
and an estimation unit configured to estimate a modulation frequency of the light source generated from the light source clock based on a plurality of pieces of image data captured by switching the operation mode by the first imaging […] and the second imaging […] (Fig 3A - frequency estimation and adaptation and [0083]).
Plank does not teach wherein a first imaging is performed at a first operation mode having a first frame rate
a second operation mode having a second frame rate different from the first frame rate, wherein a second imaging is performed at the second operation mode.
And the first imaging at the first frame rate and the second imaging at the second frame rate.
Tachibana teaches that, when a light emission interval is constant, a change in frame rate means a change in light emission frequency (and thus a frequency of a modulation clock) ([0039]).
It would be obvious that this principle, as taught by Tachibana, could be applied to the distance measuring device as taught by Plank if the light emission interval is kept constant. This would lead to a system wherein, as a frequency changes (such as in Plank) so does the frame rate. Thus, Plank’s mode switching would include changing a frame rate. Further, it would be obvious to change a frame rate because, as Tachibana teaches, this increases accuracy (Tachibana [0039]).
Claim 2: Plank, as modified in view of Tachibana teaches the distance measuring device according to claim 1, further comprising an adjustment unit configured to adjust a modulation frequency of the distance measuring device generated from the sensor clock based on the modulation frequency of the light source estimated by the estimation unit (Plank Fig 1, synchronization circuitry 106 and [0029]).
Claim 7: Plank teaches a distance measuring system comprising:
a light source having a light source clock that controls a modulation frequency of a light emission pulse, and configured to emit pulse light ([0033]);
and a distance measuring device configured to measure a distance to an object using emission light of the light source ([0063] - calculating distance information);
wherein the distance measuring device includes:
a ToF (time of flight) sensor configured to perform imaging by reflecting, on a surface of an object, emission light of a light source that emits pulse light ([0026] - external light signal and [0033] - pulsed light),
the ToF sensor having a sensor clock that controls an imaging timing ([0027] - reference frequency),
the sensor clock being a device- specific clock different from a light source clock that controls a modulation frequency of a light emission pulse of the light source ([0026] - external modulation frequency);
a distance calculation unit configured to calculate a distance to the object based on image data captured by the ToF sensor ([0063] - calculating distance information);
a mode switching unit configured to selectively switch an operation mode of the ToF sensor between the first operation mode and a second operation mode (Fig 1, synchronization circuitry 106 and [0029]);
and an estimation unit configured to estimate a modulation frequency of the light source generated from the light source clock based on a plurality of pieces of image data captured in the first imaging […] and the second imaging […] (Fig 3A - frequency estimation and adaptation and [0083]).
Plank does not teach wherein a first imaging is performed at a first operation mode having a first frame rate
a second operation mode having a second frame rate different from the first frame rate, wherein a second imaging is performed at the second operation mode
And the first imaging at the first frame rate and the second imaging at the second frame rate.
Tachibana teaches that, when a light emission interval is constant, a change in frame rate means a change in light emission frequency (and thus a frequency of a modulation clock) ([0039]).
It would be obvious that this principle, as taught by Tachibana, could be applied to the distance measuring device as taught by Plank if the light emission interval is kept constant. This would lead to a system wherein, as a frequency changes (such as in Plank) so does the frame rate. Thus, Plank’s mode switching would include changing a frame rate. Further, it would be obvious to change a frame rate because, as Tachibana teaches, this increases accuracy (Tachibana [0039]).
Claim 8: Plank, as modified in view of Tachibana, teaches the distance measuring system according to claim 7, wherein the distance measuring device further includes: an adjustment unit configured to adjust at least one of the modulation frequency of the light source and a modulation frequency of the distance measuring device generated from the sensor clock based on the modulation frequency of the light source estimated by the estimation unit (Plank Fig 1, synchronization circuitry 106 and [0029]).
Claim 15: Plank teaches a method of operating a distance measuring device, comprising:
performing first imaging using a ToF (time of flight) sensor to reflect, on a surface of an object, emission light of a light source that emits pulse light ([0026] - external light signal and [0033] - pulsed light),
the ToF sensor having a sensor clock that controls an imaging timing ([0027] - reference frequency [0049-0052]),
the sensor clock being a device- specific clock different from a light source clock that controls a modulation frequency of a light emission pulse of the light source ([0026] - external modulation frequency, [0049]),
[…]
switching the first operation mode of the ToF sensor to a second operation mode[…]; performing second imaging using the ToF sensor to capture the object, the operation mode of the ToF sensor being switched (Fig 1, synchronization circuitry 106 and [0029-0030] switching frequency can be considered switching operation modes);
and estimating a modulation frequency of the light source generated from the light source clock based on a plurality of pieces of image data captured in the first imaging […] and the second imaging […] (Fig 3A - frequency estimation and adaptation and [0083]).
Plank does not teach the first imaging being performed at a first operation mode having a first frame rate; a second operation mode having a second frame rate different from the first frame rate, or the first imaging at the first frame rate and the second imaging at the second frame rate.
Tachibana teaches that, when a light emission interval is constant, a change in frame rate means a change in light emission frequency (and thus a frequency of a modulation clock) ([0039]).
It would be obvious that this principle, as taught by Tachibana, could be applied to the distance measuring device as taught by Plank if the light emission interval is kept constant. Further, it would be obvious to change a frame rate because, as Tachibana teaches, this increases accuracy (Tachibana [0039]).
Claim 16: Claim 16 is a product claim corresponding to method claim 15. Thus, see rejection above.
Claim 24: Plank, as modified, teaches the distance measuring system according to claim 7, but not wherein the estimation unit is configured to estimate the modulation frequency of the light source by comparing a phase deviation between adjacent frames captured at the first frame rate with a phase deviation between adjacent frames captured at the second frame rate ([0083]) - calculation using deviation and ([0029]-[0030] - describing modes, along with Tachibana [0039]).
Claim 25: Plank, as modified, teaches the method of operating a distance measuring device according to claim 15, further comprising: estimating the modulation frequency of the light source by comparing a phase deviation between adjacent frames captured at the first frame rate with a phase deviation between adjacent frames captured at the second frame rate ([0083]) - calculation using deviation and ([0029]-[0030] - describing modes, along with Tachibana [0039]).
Claim 26: Plank, as modified, teaches the non-transitory computer readable medium according to claim 16, wherein the operations further comprise: estimating the modulation frequency of the light source by comparing a phase deviation between adjacent frames captured at the first frame rate with a phase deviation between adjacent frames captured at the second frame rate ([0083]) - calculation using deviation and ([0029]-[0030] - describing modes, along with Tachibana [0039]).
Claims 4-6 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Plank and Tachibana in view of Ikeno (US 20090122297 A1).
Claim 4: Plank, as modified in view of Tachibana, teaches the distance measuring device according to claim 1,
and the estimation unit estimates the modulation frequency of the light source based on phase information of the plurality of pieces of image data captured at a plurality of different modulation frequencies (Plank [0042]).
However, Plank, as modified in view of Tachibana, does not teach wherein the mode switching unit switches the modulation frequency of the light source and a modulation frequency of the distance measuring device to a plurality of different frequencies.
Ikeno teaches a light source which outputs modulated light which changes its modulation frequency for every frame ([0049] and Fig 6).
It would have been obvious to use the changing light modulation, as taught by Ikeno, with the distance measuring device as taught by Plank, as modified in view of Tachibana, because, as Ikeno teaches, this reduces error due to other nearby range imagers ([0005]).
Claim 5: Plank, as modified in view of Tachibana, teaches the distance measuring device according to Claim 1, and the estimation unit estimates the modulation frequency of the light source based on phase information of image data captured at one modulation frequency and confidence values of the plurality of pieces of image data captured at a plurality of different modulation frequencies ( Plank [0042] and [0084] – determining whether estimate is in a threshold).
But not wherein the mode switching unit switches the modulation frequency of the light source or a modulation frequency of the distance measuring device to a plurality of different frequencies.
Ikeno teaches a light source which outputs modulated light which changes its modulation frequency for every frame ([0049] and Fig 6).
It would have been obvious to use the changing light modulation, as taught by Ikeno, with the distance measuring device as taught by Plank, as modified in view of Tachibana, because, as Ikeno teaches, this reduces error due to other nearby range imagers ([0005]).
Claim 6: Plank, as modified in view of Tachibana and Ikeno, teaches the distance measuring device according to Claim 5, wherein the mode switching unit changes the modulation frequency of the light source and the modulation frequency of the distance measuring device in increments of a predetermined frame rate (Tachibana [0039] – change in frame rate means change in frequency).
Claim 10: Plank, as modified in view of Tachibana, teaches the distance measuring device according to claim 7,
and the estimation unit estimates the modulation frequency of the light source based on phase information of the plurality of pieces of image data captured at a plurality of different modulation frequencies (Plank [0042]).
However, Plank, as modified in view of Tachibana, does not teach wherein the mode switching unit switches the modulation frequency of the light source and a modulation frequency of the distance measuring device to a plurality of different frequencies.
Ikeno teaches a light source which outputs modulated light which changes its modulation frequency for every frame ([0049] and Fig 6).
It would have been obvious to use the changing light modulation, as taught by Ikeno, with the distance measuring device as taught by Plank, as modified in view of Tachibana, because, as Ikeno teaches, this reduces error due to other nearby range imagers ([0005]).
Claim 11: Plank, as modified in view of Tachibana, teaches the distance measuring device according to Claim 7, and the estimation unit estimates the modulation frequency of the light source based on phase information of image data captured at one modulation frequency and confidence values of the plurality of pieces of image data captured at a plurality of different modulation frequencies (Plank [0042] and [0084] – determining whether estimate is in a threshold).
But not wherein the mode switching unit switches the modulation frequency of the light source or a modulation frequency of the distance measuring device to a plurality of different frequencies.
Ikeno teaches a light source which outputs modulated light which changes its modulation frequency for every frame ([0049] and Fig 6).
It would have been obvious to use the changing light modulation, as taught by Ikeno, with the distance measuring device as taught by Plank, as modified in view of Tachibana, because, as Ikeno teaches, this reduces error due to other nearby range imagers ([0005]).
Claim 12: Plank, as modified in view of Tachibana and Ikeno, teaches the distance measuring device according to Claim 11, wherein the mode switching unit changes the modulation frequency of the light source and the modulation frequency of the distance measuring device in increments of a predetermined frame rate (Tachibana [0039] – change in frame rate means change in frequency).
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Plank, in view of Tachibana, in view of Levy (US 20180196142 A1).
Claim 13: Plank, as modified in view of Tachibana, teaches the distance measuring system according to claim 7, but not wherein the light source includes a communication unit that receives, from the distance measuring device, information regarding the operation mode of the light source set by the mode switching unit.
Levy teaches an interference apparatus which uses GNSS to transmit timing information ([0075]).
It would have been obvious to use the GNSS system, as taught by Levy, with the distance measuring system as taught by Plank, as modified in view of Tachibana, because GNSS systems are well-known in the art, and this would allow for precise timing and accuracy.
Claim 14: Plank, as modified in view of Tachibana, teaches the distance measuring system according to claim 7, wherein the distance measuring device includes a communication unit that receives, from the light source, information regarding the operation mode of the light source, and the mode switching unit sets the operation mode of the distance measuring device based on the operation mode of the light source received by the communication unit.
Levy teaches an interference apparatus which uses GNSS to transmit timing information ([0075]) and adjusts a frequency based on the received signal ([0087]).
It would have been obvious to use the GNSS system, as taught by Levy, with the distance measuring system as taught by Plank, as modified in view of Tachibana, because GNSS systems are well-known in the art, and this would allow for precise timing and accuracy.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-23 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claims 17-23 all recite calculating phase deviation between adjacent frames to find a frequency deviation of a clock during a single frame rate mode (as opposed to Claims 24-26, which recite using the difference between phase deviations of multiple modes to find a frequency). This was not found in prior art.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 CLARA CHILTON whose telephone number is (703)756-1080. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6-2 MT.
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, Helal Algahaim can be reached at 571-270-5227. 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.
/CLARA G CHILTON/ Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/HELAL A ALGAHAIM/ SPE , Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights