DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission has been entered.
Election/Restrictions
Newly submitted claim 45 is directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons: there is no special technical feature shared with the originally presented claim as evidenced by the rejection of claim 25.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claim 45 is withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Claim Interpretation
Design an image (“defining…”)
Form the image by spreading and pressing ceramic powder (“spreading… pressing…”)
Use image analysis to check that the image was formed (“acquiring… comparing…)
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered.
Applicant argues that there is no motivation to use OpenCV to perform image processing in Bosi.
Examiner does not find this persuasive because Bosi describes a process of comparing a real image to a reference image and specifically mentions using the OpenCV library to do so, it would have been obvious for a skilled person to use OpenCV's known feature-matching techniques to arrive at the invention.
Applicant argues that “Bosi is concerned with correcting for bulk geometric distortion, essentially the "stretching" of the ceramic slab after pressing. The claims of the present application solve a more complex "map-matching" problem: finding the precise positional correspondence between the deformed real-world slab and the master digital design to ensure detailed features (like marble veins) align perfectly.”
Examiner does not find this persuasive because this is the same as the problem in Bosi.
Bosi explains that this is the problem being solved at “The lack of synchronization between the chromatic effects obtained in the thickness and the surface chromatic effects significantly compromises the aesthetics of the ceramic product, making the relative difference to a natural product much more marked.“ (end of paragraph 11)
Bosi solve the problem using “printing device 15 applies the decoration based on the derived shape. In this way, the decoration applied on the surface by means of printing device 15 is arranged in the area of zones 8′, which extend into the thickness of compacted layer 11. In other words, in this way, the decoration (in particular the ink) is applied substantially over the surface portion of zone 8′.” (P0066). Fig 2 shows that Zones 8 are veins.
Like the claimed invention, the purpose of correcting for stretching in Bosi is for alignment of features. When Bosi corrects for expansion of the compact, it is a correction of the mismatch of bulk and surface features which “compromises the aesthetics of the ceramic product “ (paragraph 11 of Bosi). The expansion occurs as a result of compacting. Subsequent to compacting of Bosi a decoration step is performed. The decoration step preceded by “a step of transformation, during which the given shape is transformed based on the first expansion value and/or the second expansion value so as to obtain a derived shape,
wherein during the step of printing, the decoration is applied based on the derived shape.”
In other words, Bosi applies a ceramic powder, compacts its, recognizes that compaction causes distortion of the powder (expansion), which results in a mismatch of features if not corrected. Bosi thus uses a computer and image analysis (e.g., OpenCV) to adjust the decoration to fit the distorted compact. This is the same as the invention.
OpenCV is a well-known image analysis tool that has many tools. Similarly, Photoshop has many tools for image editing. The rejection is that using OpenCV to accomplish the tasks set forth by Bosi would render the use of specific tools of OpenCV including feature matching (e.g., the particularly cited pages of the OpenCV NPL referenced in the office action).
The rejection does not seek to combine a software manual and a manufacturing method. The idea is to use the OpenCV software that is explicitly cited by Bosi in order to conduct the operation of matching certain features sought to be performed by Bosi. In doing so, a person of skill in the art would use the software manual to determine which specific tools would be suitable for matching features. They would use the feature matching tools of OpenCV.
Applicant argues that “Bosi's single, generic mention of the vast OpenCV library is merely an "invitation to experiment". It does not provide a roadmap that would lead one to your specific solution.
Examiner does not find this persuasive. Bosi has a clearly defined problem:
“The lack of synchronization between the chromatic effects obtained in the thickness and the surface chromatic effects significantly compromises the aesthetics of the ceramic product, making the relative difference to a natural product much more marked.“ (end of paragraph 11)
Bosi solves this problem by using a controller to align the printed decoration of veins to the compacted veins. This is the same as the claimed invention.
Bosi specifically describes modifying the decoration based on the expansion of the ceramic after it has been compacted (abstract of Bosi). The ceramic of Bosi comprises veins (see element 8 in Fig 2). The “printing device 15 applies the decoration based on the derived shape. In this way, the decoration applied on the surface by means of printing device 15 is arranged in the area of zones 8′, which extend into the thickness of compacted layer 11. In other words, in this way, the decoration (in particular the ink) is applied substantially over the surface portion of zone 8′.” (P0066).
Bosi determines the the derived image by the steps of: “detect at least a detected feature of compacted layer 11 … transform the given shape based on the detected feature so as to obtain a derived shape” (P0061).
Bosi is written in patent language and is not a technical document. The skilled artisan would refer to technical documents such as the cited OpenCV documentation to perform the computer implemented actions of Bosi. In doing so, they would readily be aware of and find it obvious to use tools such as feature matching, filtering, and transforming of OpenCV in order to accomplish the task of detecting features to form a derived shape for performing the decoration as required by Bosi.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 25-26, 28-29, 31-33, 37-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bosi (US 20210276221 A1) as evidenced by OpenCV (documentation1)
In reference to claim 25, Bosi discloses an image identification method for printing on rigid substrates comprising the steps of:
defining a digital graphic design representative of a rigid substrate to be produced, wherein the digital graphic design contains or is representative of characteristics of the rigid substrate before pressing (“control unit 5 contains, in its own internal memory, at least one reference image,” [P0068])
spreading a soft layer of granular or powder ceramic material on a deposition surface in conformance with the digital graphic design; (“ceramic powders are fed based on the reference image defining the given shape” [P0067]);
pressing the soft layer to form a compacted layer, (“a step of feeding, during which at least two ceramic powders different from each other are fed, in particular in the area of feeding station 4 (more in particular, by device 3), so as to obtain strip 6 having at least zone 7 and at least zone 8;
a step of compacting, during which strip 6 is compacted, in particular in the area of compacting station 10 (more in particular, by compacting device 9), to obtain compacted layer 11” [P0095])
acquiring a real image of the compacted layer after said pressing; (“subsequent to the step of compacting, and during which a real image is acquired (in particular by camera 45) of at least a part of compacted layer 11” [P0131])
Bosi suggests using “a camera 45, for acquiring a real image of at least a portion of compacted layer 11” (P0079) and that a “control unit 5 is also configured to identify which portion of the reference image corresponds to the real image” (P0083).
Bosi suggests using OpenCV to accomplish this task at P0088. OpenCV comprises keypoint detection and feature matching.
Using OpenCV to perform image comparison to identify which portion of the reference image corresponds to the real image as suggested by Bosi would comprise
detecting keypoints of the real image, each keypoint having a descriptor comprising spatial
information and neighbourhood information, the spatial information comprising a position coordinate of the keypoint, and the neighbourhood information comprising a value representative of tone, brightness and/or colour of the keypoint;
comparing the keypoints of the real image with keypoints of an image obtained or derived from said digital graphic design; and
calculating a portion of said digital graphic design corresponding to a portion of said real image by applying a transformation function defined by matching keypoints
as evidenced by the OpenCV documentation, e.g., see explanation beginning at Pg. 166, and illustrative examples of feature matching at Pg. 184-189.
Regarding “synthetic images” see OpenCV at Pg. 166-167. OpenCV synthesizes images from real images using filters as a preprocessing step.
Bosi explains that this is the problem being solved at “The lack of synchronization between the chromatic effects obtained in the thickness and the surface chromatic effects significantly compromises the aesthetics of the ceramic product, making the relative difference to a natural product much more marked.“ (end of paragraph 11)
Bosi solve the problem using “printing device 15 applies the decoration based on the derived shape. In this way, the decoration applied on the surface by means of printing device 15 is arranged in the area of zones 8′, which extend into the thickness of compacted layer 11. In other words, in this way, the decoration (in particular the ink) is applied substantially over the surface portion of zone 8′.” (P0066). Fig 2 shows that Zones 8 are veins.
Like the claimed invention, the purpose of correcting for stretching in Bosi is for alignment of features. When Bosi corrects for expansion of the compact, it is a correction of the mismatch of bulk and surface features which “compromises the aesthetics of the ceramic product “ (paragraph 11 of Bosi). The expansion occurs as a result of compacting. Subsequent to compacting of Bosi a decoration step is performed. The decoration step preceded by “a step of transformation, during which the given shape is transformed based on the first expansion value and/or the second expansion value so as to obtain a derived shape,
wherein during the step of printing, the decoration is applied based on the derived shape.”
In other words, Bosi applies a ceramic powder, compacts its, recognizes that compaction causes distortion of the powder (expansion), which results in a mismatch of features if not corrected. Bosi thus uses a computer and image analysis (e.g., OpenCV) to adjust the decoration to fit the distorted compact. This is the same as the invention.
OpenCV is a well-known image analysis tool that has many tools. Similarly, Photoshop has many tools for image editing. The rejection is that using OpenCV to accomplish the tasks set forth by Bosi would render the use of specific tools of OpenCV including feature matching (e.g., the particularly cited pages of the OpenCV NPL referenced in the office action).
The rejection does not seek to combine a software manual and a manufacturing method. The idea is to use the OpenCV software that is explicitly cited by Bosi in order to conduct the operation of matching certain features sought to be performed by Bosi. In doing so, a person of skill in the art would use the software manual to determine which specific tools would be suitable for matching features. They would use the feature matching tools of OpenCV.
Bosi is written in patent language and is not a technical document. The skilled artisan would refer to technical documents such as the cited OpenCV documentation to perform the computer implemented actions of Bosi. In doing so, they would readily be aware of and find it obvious to use tools such as feature matching, filtering, and transforming of OpenCV in order to accomplish the task of detecting features to form a derived shape for performing the decoration as required by Bosi.
In reference to claim 26, the cited prior art discloses the invention as in claim 25.
Bosi further discloses processing said digital graphic design and said real image to make them comparable, wherein said processing comprises identifying, from said real image, one or more of:
a structure of said compacted layer formed through said pressing; and
a mass decoration generated through said spreading,
wherein said processing comprises filtering one or more of:
said digital graphic design to determine a synthetic image of the graphic design; and
said real image to determine a synthetic image of the real image,
said filtering being performed to make said digital graphic design and said acquired real image comparable, said filtering comprising operations selected from the group consisting of at least one of: applying convolution filters, gradients, blurring, colour adjustment and graphic adjustment (Bosi suggests using OpenCV to accomplish processing at P0088 and see “Image blurring is achieved by convolving the image with a low-pass filter kernel. It is useful for removing noise” at Pg. 64 of the OpenCV documentation).
In reference to claim 28-29, the cited prior art discloses the invention as in claim 26 and 25.
Bosi further discloses wherein said structure is a structure with graphics or without graphics and wherein said spreading forms a decoration throughout a whole thickness of the soft layer (“ceramic powders are fed based on the reference image defining the given shape” [P0067]).
In reference to claim 31-33 and 38, the cited prior art discloses the invention as in claim 26.
The use of image analysis, e.g., OpenCV, such that “control unit 5 is also configured to identify which portion of the reference image corresponds to the real image” (P0083) encompasses the claims.
In reference to claim 37, the cited prior art discloses the invention as in claim 26. It would be obvious to process an entire image of the substrate at once in order to simplify the total number of operations required by reducing image acquisition steps.
In reference to claim 39, the cited prior art discloses the invention as in claim 25.
Bosi further discloses wherein said acquiring the real image is performed at the end of said pressing (“subsequent to the step of compacting, and during which a real image is acquired (in particular by camera 45) of at least a part of compacted layer 11” [P0131])
In reference to claim 40, the cited prior art discloses the invention as in claim 25.
Bosi further discloses wherein said acquiring the real image is performed at the end of a cutting step (“separate portions 17 are obtained from compacted layer 11 by means of (transverse) cuts of compacted layer 11” [P0031]; and, Fig 1 shows that the camera 45 is located after the cutting step 39).
In reference to claim 44, the cited prior art discloses the invention as in claim 25. See Fig 2 of Bosi.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS KRASNOW whose telephone number is (571)270-1154. The examiner can normally be reached M-R: 8am-5pm.
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, Xiao Zhao can be reached at 571-270-5343. 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.
/NICHOLAS KRASNOW/Examiner, Art Unit 1744
1 https://readthedocs.org/projects/opencv24-python-tutorials/downloads/pdf/stable/