DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Claims 1, 13, and 20 have been amended. Currently, elected claims 1-5, 12-17, and 20 are pending.
Applicant's arguments filed 02/25/2026 have been fully considered. Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended independent claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Therefore this action is made FINAL.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 12/24/2025 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) has/have been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 12-14, 16-17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nabatian (WO2021151412A1 see attached translation for referenced paragraphs) in view of Puttamalla (Pub. No. US20210058547A1) and Chen (Patent No. US9886771B1).
Regarding claim 13, Nabatian discloses A computing system comprising: a plurality of cameras configured to capture a plurality of images of a designated object in a damage detection portal, each of the plurality of cameras being located at a respective fixed location in space, (Nabatian paragraph [0112], [0115], and Fig. 1; a light tunnel for taking images of vehicles is disclosed. Elements 102, and 103 seen in Fig. 1 are mounted cameras (i.e. have a fixed location in space).) a processor configured to determine a three-dimensional model of the designated object based on the plurality of images and the calibration; (Nabatian paragraphs [0114]-[0115] and [0078]-[0079]; a construction card or vehicle model and paint color are used to identify vehicles. The 3D CAD model of the vehicle is then used. ¶53 discloses that the cameras are aligned (calibrated) in the light tunnel.) and identify a portion of the designated object that has been damaged based on the three-dimensional model and the plurality of images, (Nabatian paragraph [0075], [0094] and [0097]; the position of the camera and vehicle help identify position of detected damage. Attributes are compared between actual images and target attributes. ¶78-79 explain that the 3D CAD model is used to make the procedure more precise.) wherein a damage map of the designated object is generated, the damage map illustrating the identified portion of the object that has been damaged. (Nabatian paragraphs [0097]-[0099]; coordinates of all the detected damage is found and displayed.)
Although Nabatian does not explicitly disclose the plurality of images including a plurality of subsets of images, each of the subsets of images being captured by a respective one of the cameras as the object travels through a respective field of view associated with the respective camera it would have been obvious to have done so. Nabatian discloses continuously estimating the x-lines in the respective image sections starting when the vehicle enters the light tunnel and ending when the vehicle crosses the end line (Nabatian paragraph 80). This means that at least one of the cameras is taking multiple images (has a subset of images of the object traveling through the field of view) and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to extend continually obtaining images while the vehicle is in the light tunnel to multiple cameras in order to more fully utilize each camera’s field of view to capture details of the full vehicle to create the damage model of the vehicle.
Nabatian discloses that does not explicitly disclose a controller configured to calibrate the plurality of cameras by capturing image data of a calibration object moving through the damage detection portal, determining a three-dimensional calibration model of the calibration object based on the image data, and determining a plurality of correspondence points for the three-dimensional calibration model at designated points in time to identify the respective fixed location in space for each of the plurality of cameras.
Ye, however, discloses a controller configured to calibrate the plurality of cameras by capturing image data of a calibration object moving through the damage detection portal, (Ye ¶27; a planar calibration object with known size and shape is captured by the cameras in different positions and orientations.) determining a three-dimensional calibration model of the calibration object based on the image data, (Ye ¶27; 2D and 3D features of the image (3D model) are related to physical features to calibrate the cameras.) and determining a plurality of correspondence points for the three-dimensional calibration model at designated points in time to identify the respective fixed location in space for each of the plurality of cameras(Ye ¶27; intrinsic and extrinsic camera parameters are estimated. The 3D coordinate space is defined for each camera using the 2D and 3D features. Movement of the board to designated positions indicates that this process is done over time.)
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify computing system of Nabatian with the teachings of Ye by performing camera calibration using a calibration object in order to avoid false readings from the cameras(Ye ¶7).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Nabatian and Ye discloses the claim limitations with regards to claim 13, as described above. They further discloses wherein the three-dimensional model is determined at least in part based on calibration information for the plurality of cameras, the calibration information identifying the respective fixed location in space for each of the plurality of cameras. (Nabatian paragraphs [0078]-[0080]; camera calibration is described. The camera grid line coordinates are predefined for each individual camera by comparing the view with the vehicle CAD model.)
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Nabatian and Ye discloses the claim limitations with regards to claim 14, as described above. They further discloses wherein determining the calibration information comprises: capturing image data of a calibration object captured via the plurality of cameras; and (Nabatian paragraphs [0078]; since there is a 3D CAD model of the vehicle the calibration object is the vehicle.) determining a three-dimensional calibration model of the calibration object. (Nabatian paragraphs [0079]-[0080]; Grid lines are overlaid on the 3D CAD model of the vehicle for camera calibration.)
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Nabatian and Ye discloses the claim limitations with regards to claim 16, as described above. They further discloses wherein determining the calibration information further comprises: determining position information for the three-dimensional calibration model over time based on the image data; and (Nabatian paragraph [0131]; the distance of reference points are measured from the starting line as the vehicle moves through the light tunnel.) determining a plurality of correspondence points for the three-dimensional calibration model at designated points in time based on the position information. (Nabatian paragraph [0087]; reference points on the vehicle are defined and the cameras are aligned to reference points to track the vehicles location.)
Regarding claims 1-2, and 4-5, they are the corresponding method claims to claims 13-14 and 16-17 and are rejected for similar reasons.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Nabatian and Ye discloses the claim limitations with regards to claim 1, as described above. They further discloses wherein the object is a vehicle being driven through each of the respective fields of view. (Nabatian paragraph [0057]; a vehicle is moved through the light tunnel (the fields of view of the cameras).)
Regarding claim 20, it is the corresponding one or more non-transitory computer readable media having instructions stored thereon for performing a method claim to claim 13 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim(s) 3 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nabatian (WO2021151412A1 see attached translation for referenced paragraphs) in view of Puttamalla (Pub. No. US20210058547A1), Chen (Patent No. US9886771B1), and Kumar (US20190043220A1).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Nabatian and Ye discloses the claim limitations with regards to claim 14, as described above.
The combination of Nabatian and Ye does not explicitly disclose wherein the calibration information further identifies color correction information for one or more of the plurality of cameras, the color correction information providing color consistency in images captured by different ones of the plurality of cameras.
Kumar, however, discloses wherein the calibration information further identifies color correction information for one or more of the plurality of cameras, the color correction information providing color consistency in images captured by different ones of the plurality of cameras. (Kumar paragraph [0015] and [0042]; a ROI is found between multiple cameras and is used for color correction.)
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of the combination of Nabatian and Ye with the teachings of Kumar by including color calibration from Kumar in order to achieve a consistent color reproduction among different cameras (Kumar paragraph [0042]).
Regarding claim 3, it is the corresponding method claim to claim 15 and is rejected for similar reasons.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wallack (Pub. No. US20190084160A1) discloses details of camera calibration including the use of a 3D object (see ¶22).
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MEREDITH TAYLOR whose telephone number is (571)270-5805. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30-5.
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, Vincent Rudolph can be reached on (571)272-8243. 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.
/MEREDITH TAYLOR/Examiner, Art Unit 2671
/VINCENT RUDOLPH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2671
Prosecution Insights