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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Regarding 35 USC § 112.
Applicant argues:
Claim Interpretation under under 35 U.S.C. §112(f) In the office action (page 5), Office recites that the claims limitations "communicator","first user interfacer", and "second user interfacer" in claim 16 are interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because the claim limitations use a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient corresponding structure, material, or acts to the function.
Applicant respectfully submits that the "communicator","first user interfacer", and "second user interfacer" recite sufficient structure or acts to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
Regarding the limitation "communicator" in claim 16 (and dependent claims), the structure is shown at least in Figure 2.
Furthermore, there are numerous descriptions of the acts throughout the specification including at least the following:
"... the software components may be loaded into the memory 210 through the communicator 230, instead of the computer- readable recording medium ..." as described in paragraph [0047].
"... the processor 220 may control the communicator 230 to transmit and receive signals ..." as described in paragraph [0048] "... The communicator 230 performs functions to transit and receive a signal through a wireless channel ...1" as described in paragraph [0054] "... The communicator 230 or a part thereof may be referred to as a transmitter, a receiver, or a transceiver ..." as described in paragraph [0054].
"... the communicator 230 may receive input information required to generate the simulation view screen 110 ..." as described in paragraph [0054].
"... the communicator 230 may transmit the simulation view screen 110 to an external device ..." as described in paragraph [0054].
Regarding the limitation "first user interfacer" in claim 16 (and dependent claims), there are numerous descriptions of the acts throughout the specification including at least the following:
a first user interfacer, and a second user interfacer by the simulation server 130, and the operations may be processed as the information processor" as described in paragraph [0058].
"... the first user interfacer, and the second user interfacer are transmitted to the simulation apparatus 120 through the communicator 230" as described in paragraph [0058].
"... The first user interfacer may determine the first U!
information for displaying a map image in the first U! region, based on the map information" as described in paragraph [0060].
Regarding the limitation "first user interfacer" in claim 16 (and dependent claims), there are numerous descriptions of the acts throughout the specification including at least the following:
"... a first user interfacer, and a second user interfacer by the simulation server 130, and the operations may be processed as the information processor" as described in paragraph [0058].
"... the first user interfacer, and the second user interfacer are transmitted to the simulation apparatus 120 through the communicator 230" as described in paragraph [0058].
"... The second user interfacer may determine the second UI region corresponding to the second UI information, based on the map information, and determine the second UI information for displaying the FoV in the second UI region, based on the camera performance information and the camera setting information" as described in paragraph [0061].
"... The second user interfacer may determine a map size based on a map image size and a map scale, and determine the second UI region based on the map size" as described in paragraph [0062].
"... The second user interfacer may determine a maximum working distance of the camera in the second U! region, based on the map image size and the map scale, and calculate the FoV based on the maximum working distance" as described in paragraph [0063].
"... The second user interfacer may generate the second UI information for displaying the FoV in the second UI region, based on the second UI region and the virtual object information" as described in paragraph [0064].
At least in view of the above showing, Applicant would like to respectfully request that the limitations "communicator","first user interfacer", and "second user interfacer" in claim 16 not be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because their corresponding acts are abundantly described throughout the specification as discussed above.
Examiner replies that:
Applicants arguments are not found persuasive. Applicant argues “the "communicator","first user interfacer", and "second user interfacer" recite sufficient structure or acts to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). “
Applicant has cited corresponding physical structure, which means there is no 112 2nd rejection, but does not avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). The terms are generic placeholder terms, the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, and the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure for performing the claimed function.
Regarding 35 USC § 102/103.
Applicant argues:
With all due respect, without conceding and for the sake of argument, Brimhall might receive a graphical representation of a map. With all due respect, Applicant submits that one would never receive a "scale" of a "particular map image" whenever one receives a graphical representation of a map such as a CAD data because a graphical representation of a map of a CAD data is scale free.
With all due respect, Brimhall does not show receiving a "map scale" and in just the opposite actually teaches away from receiving a "map scale".
Examiner replies that:
Applicants arguments are not found persuasive. A CAD or other vector image can be scaled without a loss in quality, but that does not make it “scale free”, and CAD data is not devoid of scale information. Applicant argues there is a “teaching away” but has not provided any explanation or argument. Use of CAD is not by itself a teaching away.
Applicant argues:
With all due respect, Segev does not cure the above deficiency of Brimhall.
In view of the amendments to claim 2, Applicant respectfully submits that with regard to a specific map image, Segev does not show:
1) receiving a size for the specific map image; and 2) receiving a scale for the specific map image.
With all due respect, without conceding and for the sake of argument, Segev might receive a graphical representation of a map. Applicant points out [0122] of Segev, which is reproduced below for ease of reference.
... As used herein, a floor plan may include any graphic representation of a layout, partial layout or section of a building, which may include an interior of the building, an exterior of the building, or both.....
With all due respect, one would never receive a "scale" of a "particular map image" whenever one receives a graphical representation of a map such as a CAD data.
Examiner replies that:
Applicants arguments are not found persuasive. Applicant argues Segev does not teach “scale” because it uses CAD data. Segev uses a variety of formats (Segev [0123] “For example, the floor plan may be represented as a hand-drawn or scanned image, in a vector-based format (e.g., CAD, PDF, DWG, SVG, or other 2D drawing formats), in an image format (e.g., BMP, JPG, PNG, or similar image files), in 3D models, in Building Information Models (“BIM”) in Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) or Revit™ (.RVT) format, or any other graphical or digital format.”)
Segev also discusses the use of scale with CAD (Segev [0688] A height may be relative to the scale of the floor plan or the scale of the floor plan file. For example, some CAD programs are vector based software, and may not use real world units but rather an abstraction called drawing units. Drawing units may differ from real world units in scale. For example, a line in a CAD file which is 10 drawing units long might represent 10 mm, 10 meters, or ten inches in the real world. This may be further complicated when a CAD file is printed, and the paper units (a mm on paper) needs to be correlated to both the drawing units and the real world units. The scale of the CAD file refers to the real world units a drawing unit represents (e.g., one file may be in meters, another may be in inches). The scale of an image describes the relation between sizes on the paper and real world sizes (one mm on paper is 10 mm in the real world 1:10). Scaling a CAD file, image, or other 2D floor plan may include to changing this relation. Accordingly, the method may include accessing a rule defining a scale of the 2D floor plan. A BIM model may be generated using the scale of the 2D floor plan. In other embodiments, generating a BIM model may include scaling the 2D floor plan and generating the BIM model using a different scale than the scale of the accessed rule.)
Applicant argues:
In addition, Segev does not show receiving a "map scale" and actually teaches away from receiving a "map scale". For illustration, Applicant wishes to point out [0123] of Segev which recites:
... the floor plan may be represented as a hand-drawn or scanned image, in a vector-based format (e.g., CAD, PDF, DWG, SVG, orother2D drawing formats), in an image format (e.g., BMP, JPG, PNG, or similar image files), in 3D models, in Building Information Models ("BIM') in Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) or RevitT M(.RVT) format, or any other graphical or digital format. The floor plan may be in digital or hard copy formats or both. In some embodiments, the floor plan may be represented as a data structure, described in further detail below. ....
Examiner replies that:
Applicants arguments are not found persuasive. Applicant has provided no evidence of a teaching away (Furthermore, “the prior art’s mere disclosure of more than one alternative does not constitute a teaching away from any of these alternatives because such disclosure does not criticize, discredit, or otherwise discourage the solution claimed….” In re Fulton, 391 F.3d 1195, 1201, 73 USPQ2d 1141, 1146 (Fed. Cir. 2004). See also UCB, Inc. v. Actavis Labs, UT, Inc., 65 F.4th 679, 692, 2023 USPQ2d 448 (Fed. Cir. 2023) (“a reference does not teach away if it merely expresses a general preference for an alternative invention but does not criticize, discredit or otherwise discourage investigation into the invention claimed.”) (internal quotations omitted) (quoting DePuy Spine, Inc. v. Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc., 567 F.3d 1314, 1327 (Fed. Cir. 2009));))
Applicant argues:
What would be the size of the "hand-drawn or scanned" map image of Segev?
What is clearly explained by Segev in [0123] above is that the size of the paper would be meaningless. What if the paper is A4 or Letter size? The size of the paper has nothing to do with the map.
Applicant submits that any use of a "scale" and "size of an image" would be futile if one uses a hand-drawn drawings which would introduce inherent error.
Furthermore, [0133] of Segev recites:
... For example, information derived from a geometric analysis may include: line length, line direction, the location of geometric objects in the floor plan, ...
How would Segev determine the length of a line in a floor plan? Applicant is not interested in finding out how Segev determines a line length. However, the ability to determine a line length shows that Segev calculates and works with a graphical representation which is inherently free from any kind of "scale" of a "image file".
Examiner replies that:
Applicants arguments are not found persuasive. Applicant argues hand-drawn or scanned, but even if they were devoid of scale information, numerous other formats are recited by Segev as noted above.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
a communicator in claim 16 (and dependent claims).
a first user interfacer in claim 16 (and dependent claims).
a second user interfacer in claim 16 (and dependent claims).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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) 2-8, 10-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brimhall U.S. Patent/PG Publication 11830126 in view of Segev U.S. Patent/PG Publication 20210073449.
Regarding claim 2:
A simulation method of a simulation apparatus for providing a simulation view screen related to a field of view of a camera, the simulation method comprising; (Brimhall Abstract - Systems and methods for accurate representation of camera field of view in two-dimensional mapping applications).
receiving camera performance information and camera setting information (Brimhall Col. 8, line 39-42 - the electronic processor 305 determines a plurality of characteristics for the camera 502. In one example, the electronic processor 305 retrieves characteristics corresponding to the camera from the database 204; Col. 8, lines 23-25 - the electronic processor 305 provides on the graphical user interface, a two-dimensional map representing a real-world area; Col. 8, lines 42-44 - In some embodiments, the camera characteristics are input by a user of the system; Col. 8, lines 46-48 - Camera characteristics include a location within the area, a pan value, a tilt value, a height relative to a ground level of the area, an aspect ratio, and a focal length.);
receiving, by the simulation apparatus, a map image, wherein the map image has a map image size and a map scale; receiving, by the simulation apparatus, the map size and the map scale, wherein a map information comprises the map image size and the map scale (Brimhall In Col. 10, lines 33-36, Brimhall states, “In some embodiments, the first graphical representation 802 is scaled based on a relative size difference between the three-dimensional model 602 and the map 500.” The phrase “relative size difference” implies that the system determines the size of the map image to scale the graphical representation. By using the relative size difference, the system is also inherently considering the map scale to ensure that the representation is accurate. In Col. 8, lines 63-67, Brimhall states, “To display the three-dimensional field of view on a two-dimensional map, the electronic processor 305 must determine from where along the height of the three-dimensional representation it should take the length and width dimensions.” This further rationalizes that the electronic processor determines the dimensions based on the map’s scale, ensuring accurate representation on the two-dimensional map. Collectively, these quotes meet the limitation of the claim.)
determining first user interface (UI) information for displaying a map image in a first UI region, based on the map information (Brimhall Col. 8, line 23-25 - At block 402, the electronic processor 305 provides on the graphical user interface, a two-dimensional map representing a real-world area; Col. 8, lines 30-32 - as illustrated in FIG. 5, a two-dimensional map 500, which represents a real-world office space, is displayed);
determining a second UI region corresponding to second UI information, based on the map information (Brimhall Col. 9, lines 45-52 - the electronic processor 305 generates, based on the intersection plane, a two-dimensional slice of the three-dimensional model. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 6, the intersection plane that includes point 603 is projected through the three-dimensional model 602 to produce the two-dimensional slice 604. The two-dimensional slice 604 is representative of the field of view of the camera 502 within the area depicted in the map 500; Col. 10, lines 1-3 - the electronic processor 305 generates a first graphical representation 802 of the two-dimensional slice 604).
and determining the second UI information for displaying the field of view in the second UI region, based on the camera performance information and the camera setting information (Brimhall Col. 8, lines 49-60 - At block 406, the electronic processor 305 generates a three-dimensional model 602 for the field of view based on the plurality of characteristics... In one example, as illustrated in FIG. 6, the electronic processor 305 utilizes the mounting height 601 of the camera 502 (relative to the ground level of the area), a pan value, a tilt value, and the aspect ratio of the camera 502 to calculate a three-dimensional model 602 for the field of view of the camera 502).
Brimhall discloses map image size and map scale being obtained describe above. However, for the purposes of compact prosecution and for further clarity, in a related field of endeavor, Segev teaches:
receiving camera performance information and camera setting information (Segev [0144] Non-limiting examples of functional requirements may include values or parameters specifying sensor properties (e.g., image capture quality, resolution, frame rate per second, movement detection type, occupancy detection type, detection range, facial recognition, or other image or video properties), energy consumption, wattage, temperature, exchange rate, humidity, air flow, air quality, heat dissipation, comfort level, cooling or heating capacity, thermal comfort, network bandwidth, network speed, signal strength, signal to noise ratio, signal coverage, radio frequency range, screen size, speech intelligibility, noise levels, water pressure, angle, dimensions, fire rating, energy rating, environmental rating, occupancy, quantity of desks or workstations, or any other variables, objectives or properties that may be present in a building, space, room, group of rooms, or floor plan.)
receiving, by the simulation apparatus, a map image, wherein the map image has a map image size receiving, by the simulation apparatus, the map size and the map scale, wherein a map information comprises the map image size (Segev [0138] Alternatively or additionally, accessing a floor plan may include identifying a floor plan which satisfies a minimum or maximum size)(Segev [0132] For small object detection such as doors and door sills, a floor plan may be cropped into a reduced size such as, 1000×1000 pixels, and afterwards may be recomposed and used with non-maximum suppression. Floor plans may be resized to 1024×1024, 512-512,or other suitable sizes before inputting them to the artificial intelligence model for larger holistic objects such as walls and room.) and the map scale (Segev [0688] The scale of an image describes the relation between sizes on the paper and real world sizes (one mm on paper is 10 mm in the real world 1:10). Scaling a CAD file, image, or other 2D floor plan may include to changing this relation. Accordingly, the method may include accessing a rule defining a scale of the 2D floor plan. A BIM model may be generated using the scale of the 2D floor plan. In other embodiments, generating a BIM model may include scaling the 2D floor plan and generating the BIM model using a different scale than the scale of the accessed rule.)(Segev [0688] A height may be relative to the scale of the floor plan or the scale of the floor plan file. For example, some CAD programs are vector based software, and may not use real world units but rather an abstraction called drawing units. Drawing units may differ from real world units in scale. For example, a line in a CAD file which is 10 drawing units long might represent 10 mm, 10 meters, or ten inches in the real world. This may be further complicated when a CAD file is printed, and the paper units (a mm on paper) needs to be correlated to both the drawing units and the real world units. The scale of the CAD file refers to the real world units a drawing unit represents (e.g., one file may be in meters, another may be in inches). The scale of an image describes the relation between sizes on the paper and real world sizes (one mm on paper is 10 mm in the real world 1:10). Scaling a CAD file, image, or other 2D floor plan may include to changing this relation. Accordingly, the method may include accessing a rule defining a scale of the 2D floor plan. A BIM model may be generated using the scale of the 2D floor plan. In other embodiments, generating a BIM model may include scaling the 2D floor plan and generating the BIM model using a different scale than the scale of the accessed rule.)
and determining the second UI information for displaying the field of view in the second UI region, based on the camera performance information and the camera setting information (Segev [0187] As described above, in some embodiments, the functional requirements may define a coverage requirement for a room or area. In these embodiments, outputting the first technical specification with the first equipment may include displaying a coverage map spatially indicating regions covered by at least one of sensors, wireless emitters, Wi-Fi Access Points, Bluetooth™ beacons or speakers. As used herein, a coverage map may refer to a graphical representation depicting a coverage range of a piece of equipment. For example, a coverage map may include coverage areas for one or more pieces of equipment overlaid on a floor plan. In some embodiments, a coverage map may indicate the field of view of a camera, the detection area of a smoke sensor, the range of a motion sensor, the area of effect of a sounding device (e.g., a speaker, an alarm, or other sound emitting device), the range of a light (e.g., a light source, an indicator light, or any other light-emitting device), the effective range at which a Wi-Fi access point, Bluetooth™ beacon or other device can provide a wireless network, or any other functional area associated with a piece of equipment. In some embodiments, the coverage map may be related to information regarding a functional requirement such as the field of view of a camera that provides a certain pixel resolution or the area in which an alarm sounder is heard at a certain decibel level.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have size and scale as taught by Segev. The rationale for doing so would have been that it combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, where Brimhall is using an image, and images have size and scale, and Segev is using an image, which explicitly discusses and uses the size and scale, where the end result for both is using an image to be displayed. Further, it would be obvious to try, since images have a limited amount of information (such as size, resolution, bit depth), where there is a reasonable expectation of success since both are manipulating an image, and size/resolution is basic image information. Therefore it would have been obvious to combine Segev with Brimhall to obtain the invention.
Regarding claim 3:
The simulation method of claim 2, has all of its limitations taught by Brimhall in view of Segev. Brimhall further teaches wherein the camera setting information comprises camera position information (Brimhall Col. 8, line 46-48 - Camera characteristics include a location within the area, a pan value, a tilt value, a height relative to a ground level of the area, an aspect ratio, and a focal length; Col. 8, line 55-60 - the electronic processor 305 utilizes the mounting height 601 of the camera 502 (relative to the ground level of the area), a pan value, a tilt value, and the aspect ratio of the camera 502 to calculate a three-dimensional model 602 for the field of view of the camera 502).
Regarding claim 4:
The simulation method of claim 3, has all of its limitations taught by Brimhall in view of Segev. Brimhall further teaches wherein the determining of the second UI region comprises:
determining a map size based on the map image size (Brimhall Col. 10, lines 33-36 - the first graphical representation 802 is scaled based on a relative size difference between the three-dimensional model 602 and the map 500) and the map scale (Brimhall Col. 8, lines 63-67 - To display the three-dimensional field of view on a two-dimensional map, the electronic processor 305 must determine from where along the height of the three-dimensional representation it should take the length and width dimensions).
and determining the second UI region based on the map size (Brimhall Col. 10, lines 23-33 - the electronic processor 305 presents the first graphical representation 802 on the two-dimensional map 500. For example, the electronic processor 305 may use points within the three-dimensional space 600, which are mapped to points in the area represented by the map 500, to overlay the first graphical representation 802 on the two-dimensional map 500. In some embodiments, the first graphical representation 802 is presented on the two-dimensional map 500 by locating it at a distance from and angle relative to the camera 502, both calculated using the three-dimensional model 602).
Brimhall discloses map image size and map scale being obtained describe above. However, for the purposes of compact prosecution and for further clarity, in a related field of endeavor, Segev teaches:
determining a map size based on the map image size (Segev [0138] Alternatively or additionally, accessing a floor plan may include identifying a floor plan which satisfies a minimum or maximum size)(Segev [0132] For small object detection such as doors and door sills, a floor plan may be cropped into a reduced size such as, 1000×1000 pixels, and afterwards may be recomposed and used with non-maximum suppression. Floor plans may be resized to 1024×1024, 512-512,or other suitable sizes before inputting them to the artificial intelligence model for larger holistic objects such as walls and room.) and the map scale (Segev [0688] The scale of an image describes the relation between sizes on the paper and real world sizes (one mm on paper is 10 mm in the real world 1:10). Scaling a CAD file, image, or other 2D floor plan may include to changing this relation. Accordingly, the method may include accessing a rule defining a scale of the 2D floor plan. A BIM model may be generated using the scale of the 2D floor plan. In other embodiments, generating a BIM model may include scaling the 2D floor plan and generating the BIM model using a different scale than the scale of the accessed rule.)
and determining the second UI region (Segev [0189] The system may use a generative analysis, as described above, to identify technical specifications and placement locations for cameras within floor plan 310. For example, the generative analysis may result in the placement of cameras 322, 324, and 326, as shown in FIG. 3A. The system may then output the technical specifications for cameras 322, 324, and 326, as well as the equipment placement locations. For example, the output may be displayed via a user interface 330. The output may include a coverage map 350, which may include the equipment placement locations for cameras 322, 324, and 326, as well as the corresponding coverage areas. ) based on the map size (Segev [0525] At step 1901, the process may include receiving a floor plan demarcating contours of a room. As discussed herein, a floor plan may be received in any medium containing a representation of a floor plan. For example, a floor plan may be received as a digital, textual, hand drawn, hard copy, photographic, or any other representation of a floor plan capable of being stored in a data structure. [0530] At step 1913, the process may include displaying the updated solution. Displaying the solution may include generating and displaying a graphical representation of a floor plan that includes equipment placement locations, equipment technical specifications, a solution performance score, or other information related to the solution. Alternatively, displaying the updated solution may include displaying information in non-graphical form or in a different graphical form.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have size and scale as taught by Segev. The motivation OR rationale for doing so would have been that it combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, where Brimhall is using an image, and images have size and scale, and Segev is using an image, which explicitly discusses and uses the size and scale, where the end result for both is using an image to be displayed. Therefore it would have been obvious to combine Segev with Brimhall to obtain the invention.
Regarding claim 5:
The simulation method of claim 3, has all of its limitations taught by Brimhall in view of Segev. Brimhall further teaches wherein the determining of the second UI information comprises:
determining a maximum working distance of the camera within the second UI region, based on the map image size (Brimhall Col. 10, lines 33-36 - the first graphical representation 802 is scaled based on a relative size difference between the three-dimensional model 602 and the map 500) and the map scale (Brimhall Col. 8, lines 63-67 - To display the three-dimensional field of view on a two-dimensional map, the electronic processor 305 must determine from where along the height of the three-dimensional representation it should take the length and width dimensions).
and calculating the field of view based on the maximum working distance (Brimhall Col. 10, lines 29-33 - In some embodiments, the first graphical representation 802 is presented on the two-dimensional map 500 by locating it at a distance from and angle relative to the camera 502, both calculated using the three-dimensional model 602).
Brimhall discloses map image size and map scale being obtained describe above. However, for the purposes of compact prosecution and for further clarity, in a related field of endeavor, Segev teaches:
determining a maximum working distance of the camera within the second UI region (Segev [0527] At step 1905, the process may include generatively analyzing the room to obtain a plurality of solutions that at least partially conform to the at least one functional requirement or equipment specification. The generative analysis may consider a functional requirement or equipment specification, as discussed earlier. As described here, generative analysis may include, for example, image analysis, geometric analysis, or semantic enrichment. Generative analysis may further include machine learning.), based on the map image size and the map scale (Segev [0332] In some embodiments, semantic enrichment may include performing a geometric analysis on the floor plan. As used herein, a geometric analysis may include any form analysis for extracting information from a floor plan based on geometries represented in the floor plan. A geometric analysis may include an interrogation of a floor plan represented in a BIM, CAD, PDF or any file format containing geometric entities such as lines, polylines, arcs circles or vectors. The geometric analysis may use coordinates (e.g., XYZ coordinates) of end points of entities to determine properties of the entities and their relationship each other. For example, information derived from a geometric analysis may include line length, line direction, the location of geometric objects in the floor plan, or any other properties represented in the floor plan. The geometric analysis may include searching the floor plan for sets of parallel lines or vectors, perpendicular lines or vectors or lines in a certain angle, which may be indicative of walls or other boundaries of a room. The geometric analysis may include measuring distances between entities and find pairs of entities close to each other, identifying sets of entities that create patterns which repeat in different locations in the floor plan, finding relations of inclusion between a point and a closed geometry, or any other relationships between points, lines, or shapes represented in the floor plan that may indicate room contours.)(Segev [0334] Embodiments consistent with the present disclosure may include an image analysis. An image analysis may include but is not limited to an analysis of a pixel-based image such as a jpg or bmp which uses pixel color and/or location within the image to gather information regarding the geometry it represents. In this context, an image analysis may be used for analyzing a floor plan if no vector information exists, such as with hand drawn or scanned plans and/or for semantic enrichment. For example, image analysis may be used to demarcate contours of spaces, differentiate between spaces, or identify other features of spaces in a floor plan. In some embodiments, algorithms from the world of computer vision can used to reconstruct geometric features from pixel-based images.)
and calculating the field of view based on the maximum working distance (Segev [0523] By way of another example, FIGS. 18A through 18C depict another exemplary method for updating a solution. FIG. 18A depicts an exemplary solution as a result of generative analysis indicating the placement of camera 1811, camera 1817, and camera 1821. The solution may include a depiction of coverage area 1813, coverage area 1819, and coverage area 1823 associated with camera 1811, camera 1817, and camera 1821, respectively. The solution may include a rating of the solution 1815, 1825 for each room expressed in a coverage percentage. FIG. 18B depicts exemplary user input 1827 varying the orientation of camera 1817. User input 1827 depicts a user selecting camera 1817 and changing the orientation of camera 1817. FIG. 18C depicts an exemplary updated solution as a result of an updated generative analysis reflecting the updated orientation of camera 1817 and providing updated specification details 1825 for the room consistent with the updated orientation.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have size and scale as taught by Segev. The motivation OR rationale for doing so would have been that it combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, where Brimhall is using an image, and images have size and scale, and Segev is using an image, which explicitly discusses and uses the size and scale, where the end result for both is using an image to be displayed. Further, it would be obvious to try, since images have a limited amount of information (such as size, resolution, bit depth), where there is a reasonable expectation of success since both are manipulating an image, and size/resolution is basic image information. Therefore it would have been obvious to combine Segev with Brimhall to obtain the invention.
Regarding claim 6:
The simulation method of claim 5, has all of its limitations taught by Brimhall in view of Segev. Brimhall further teaches wherein the maximum working distance is a diagonal distance of the second UI region or an outermost distance that is largest from among straight distances from a position of the camera included in the camera position information to boundaries of the second UI region (Brimhall Col. 10, lines 29-33 - In some embodiments, the first graphical representation 802 is presented on the two-dimensional map 500 by locating it at a distance from and angle relative to the camera 502, both calculated using the three-dimensional model 602; Col. 6, lines 1-5 - Camera data also includes data on the characteristics of the cameras, for example, a pan value, a tilt value, a height relative to a ground level (at which the camera is deployed), an aspect ratio, a focal length, a resolution, a storage capacity, a lens type, and the like; Col. 7, lines 34-37 - A camera's ability to capture images is limited by, among other things, its resolution, frame rate, night vision capability, its location, and its field of view. For example, the first camera 208 has a field of view 216 and the second camera 210 has a field of view 218).
Brimhall discloses maximum working distance as describe above. However, for the purposes of compact prosecution and for further clarity, in a related field of endeavor, Segev teaches:
wherein the maximum working distance is a diagonal distance of the second UI region or an outermost distance that is largest from among straight distances from a position of the camera included in the camera position information to boundaries of the second UI region (Segev [0170] In stage 120, the generative analysis may run a plurality of simulations 122,124 and 126 representing different option for placement of camera 114. The initial simulations may be generated randomly (e.g., with random placements of camera 114 according to the functional requirements), or according to an algorithm, as described above. Each of the simulations 122, 124, and 126 may then be assessed with respect to the functional requirements. For example, the generative analysis may determine that simulation 124 results in a coverage region 116 representing 65% of room 112, as shown in FIG. 1. In stage 130, the generative analysis may include running additional simulations 132, 134, and 136 based on one or more of the simulations from stage 120. For example, the generative analysis may include selecting the simulation in stage 120 with the greatest coverage (i.e. simulation 122) and running slight variations in stage 130. In the current example, the variations may include different camera models or properties, different camera angles, different camera heights, or any other variations that may affect coverage. In some embodiments, stage 130 may include variations of other simulations from stage 120. For example, stage 130 may also run additional simulation on any simulations from stage 120 that exceed a threshold conformance, a predefined number of top simulations (e.g., top 5, top 10, etc.), a predefined top percentage of simulations (e.g., top 10% of simulations based on coverage percentage, etc.), or various other metrics.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to maximize distance as taught by Segev. The motivation for doing so would have been to obtain the greatest coverage (Segev [0170]). Therefore it would have been obvious to combine Segev with Brimhall to obtain the invention.
Regarding claim 7:
The simulation method of claim 2, has all of its limitations taught by Brimhall in view of Segev. Brimhall further teaches wherein the second UI region overlays at least a portion of the first UI region (Brimhall Col. 10, lines 23-29 - At block 414, the electronic processor 305 presents the first graphical representation 802 on the two-dimensional map 500. For example, the electronic processor 305 may use points within the three-dimensional space 600, which are mapped to points in the area represented by the map 500, to overlay the first graphical representation 802 on the two-dimensional map 500; Col. 11, lines 14-16 - FIG. 12 illustrates a second graphical representation 1200 overlaid on the first graphical representation 802).
Regarding claim 8:
The simulation method of claim 2, has all of its limitations taught by Brimhall in view of Segev. Brimhall further teaches further comprising:
obtaining virtual object information (Brimhall Col. 6, lines 12-14 - Terrain data may also include data describing objects within the area (for example, the size, shape, and location of the objects); Col. 6, lines 36-39 - object data may include height, width, shape, colors, and an expected location for a particular target object or a type or class of target objects; Col. 10, lines 41-56 - the electronic processor 305 may provide, on the two-dimensional map, a second graphical representation of a terrain feature of the real-world area. A terrain feature may be an object located within the area (for example, furniture, partition walls, equipment, trees, infrastructure, and the like)… the electronic processor 305 generates the three-dimensional model for the field of view based on at least one characteristic (for example, a length, a width, a height, and an opacity) of the terrain feature).
and generating the second UI information for displaying the field of view in the second UI region, based on the second UI region and the virtual object information (Brimhall Col. 10, line 51-61 - In the example illustrated in FIG. 10, a second graphical representation 1002 is presented. In such embodiments, the electronic processor 305 generates the three-dimensional model for the field of view based on at least one characteristic (for example, a length, a width, a height, and an opacity) of the terrain feature. Because the three-dimensional model is generated taking into account the terrain feature, the resulting field of view 1004 illustrated in FIG. 10 accurately represents the portion of the area that can be captured in images of the camera 502 in light of the terrain feature).
Regarding claim 10:
The claim is a parallel version of claim 2. As such it is rejected under the same teachings.
Regarding claim 11:
The claim is a parallel version of claim 3. As such it is rejected under the same teachings.
Regarding claim 12:
The claim is a parallel version of claim 4. As such it is rejected under the same teachings.
Regarding claim 13:
The claim is a parallel version of claim 5. As such it is rejected under the same teachings.
Regarding claim 14:
The claim is a parallel version of claim 6. As such it is rejected under the same teachings.
Regarding claim 15:
The claim is a parallel version of claim 7. As such it is rejected under the same teachings.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brimhall U.S. Patent/PG Publication 11830126 in view of Segev U.S. Patent/PG Publication 20210073449 and Skidmore U.S. Patent/PG Publication 10,796,477.
Regarding claim 16:
A simulation apparatus of a simulation system, the simulation apparatus comprising: (Brimhall Abstract - Systems and methods for accurate representation of camera field of view in two-dimensional mapping applications).
a communicator configured to transmit and receive a signal (Brimhall l (Col.
5, lines 3-7 - The communication interface 315 is configured to receive input and to provide system output. The communication interface 315 obtains information and signals from, and provides information and signals)).
the simulation apparatus receiving a map image, wherein the map image has a map image size and a map scale; the simulation apparatus receiving the map size and the map scale, wherein a map information comprises the map image size and the map scale; (Brimhall In Col. 10, lines 33-36, Brimhall states, “In some embodiments, the first graphical representation 802 is scaled based on a relative size difference between the three-dimensional model 602 and the map 500.” The phrase “relative size difference” implies that the system determines the size of the map image to scale the graphical representation. By using the relative size difference, the system is also inherently considering the map scale to ensure that the representation is accurate. In Col. 8, lines 63-67, Brimhall states, “To display the three-dimensional field of view on a two-dimensional map, the electronic processor 305 must determine from where along the height of the three-dimensional representation it should take the length and width dimensions.” This further rationalizes that the electronic processor determines the dimensions based on the map’s scale, ensuring accurate representation on the two-dimensional map. Collectively, these quotes meet the limitation of the claim.).
a processor configured to obtain camera performance information, map information, and camera position information, wherein: (Brimhall Col. 3, lines 22-28 - The electronic processor is configured to provide, on the graphical user interface, a two-dimensional map representing the real-world area. The electronic processor is configured to determine a plurality of characteristics for the camera. The electronic processor is configured to generate a three-dimensional model for the field of view based on the plurality of characteristics)
and the camera performance information includes a camera resolution, an image sensor size, and a focal length range (Brimhall Col. 6, lines 1-5 - Camera data also includes data on the characteristics of the cameras, for example, a pan value, a tilt value, a height relative to a ground level (at which the camera is deployed), an aspect ratio, a focal length, a resolution, a storage capacity, a lens type, and the like; Col. 7, lines 34-37 - A camera's ability to capture images is limited by, among other things, its resolution, frame rate, night vision capability, its location, and its field of view. For example, the first camera 208 has a field of view 216 and the second camera 210 has a field of view 218;) Brimhall teaches various camera characteristics such as aspect ratio and resolution, which are intrinsically related to the dimensions of the image sensor. The aspect ratio directly reflects the proportional relationship between the width and height of the image, inherently determined by the sensor’s size. Similarly, resolution defines the image’s detail and clarity, directly influenced by the size and pixel density of the image sensor. Therefore, the image sensor are inherently covered by these terms. Collectively, these quotes meet this limitation of the claim.
a first user interfacer configured to determine first UI information for displaying a map image in a first UI region (301), based on the map information (Brimhall Col. 4, lines 30-35 - the server 202 and the database 204 operate to, among other things, provide mapping applications, which display maps (for example, of the area 214) that include graphical representations of cameras (and the cameras' respective fields of view) deployed to monitor the areas depicted in the maps; Col.8, lines 23-5 - the electronic processor 305 provides on the graphical user interface, a twodimensional map representing a real-world area).
a second user interfacer configured to determine a second UI region corresponding to second UI information, based on the map information, (Brimhall Col. 9, lines 45-52 - the electronic processor 305 generates, based on the intersection plane, a two-dimensional slice of the three-dimensional model. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 6, the intersection plane that includes point 603 is projected through the three-dimensional model 602 to produce the two-dimensional slice 604. The two-dimensional slice 604 is representative of the field of view of the camera 502 within the area depicted in the map 500; Col. 10, lines 1-3 - the electronic processor 305 generates a first graphical representation 802 of the two-dimensional slice 604)
and determine the second UI information for displaying a field of view in the second UI region, based on the camera performance information and the camera position information (Brimhall Col. 8, lines 49-60 - At block 406, the electronic processor 305 generates a three-dimensional model 602 for the field of view based on the plurality of characteristics... In one example, as illustrated in FIG. 6, the electronic processor 305 utilizes the mounting height 601 of the camera 502 (relative to the ground level of the area), a pan value, a tilt value, and the aspect ratio of the camera 502 to calculate a three-dimensional model 602 for the field of view of the camera 502).
the simulation apparatus making a determination of whether a maximum working distance is the largest straight distance from among straight distances from a position of the camera included in the camera position information to boundaries of the second UI region, or whether the maximum working distance is a diagonal distance of the second UI region (Brimhall Col. 10, lines 29-33 - In some embodiments, the first graphical representation 802 is presented on the two-dimensional map 500 by locating it at a distance from and angle relative to the camera 502, both calculated using the three-dimensional model 602; Col. 6, lines 1-5 - Camera data also includes data on the characteristics of the cameras, for example, a pan value, a tilt value, a height relative to a ground level (at which the camera is deployed), an aspect ratio, a focal length, a resolution, a storage capacity, a lens type, and the like; Col. 7, lines 34-37 - A camera's ability to capture images is limited by, among other things, its resolution, frame rate, night vision capability, its location, and its field of view. For example, the first camera 208 has a field of view 216 and the second camera 210 has a field of view 218).
the second user interfacer calculating the maximum working distance based on the map information (Brimhall (Col. 9, lines 45-52 - the electronic processor 305 generates, based on the intersection plane, a twodimensional slice of the three-dimensional model. For example, as illustrated in FIG. 6, the intersection plane that includes point 603 is projected through the threedimensional model 602 to produce the two-dimensional slice 604. The two-dimensional slice 604 is representative of the field of view of the camera 502 within the area depicted in the map 500; Col. 10, lines 1-3 - the electronic processor 305 generates a first graphical representation 802 of the two-dimensional slice 604).
the simulation apparatus configured to determine whether to only calculate the field of view limited by the maximum working distance or to calculate the field of view limited by an entire working distance of the camera (Brimhall Col. 8, lines 63-67 - To display the three-dimensional field of view on a two-dimensional map, the electronic processor 305 must determine from where along the height of the three-dimensional representation it should take the length and width dimensions; Col. 10, lines 29-33 - In some embodiments, the first graphical representation 802 is presented on the two-dimensional map 500 by locating it at a distance from and angle relative to the camera 502, both calculated using the three-dimensional model 602).
and the second user interfacer calculating the field of view limited by the maximum working distance (Brimhall In Col. 8, lines 26-28, Brimhall teaches an “electronic processor is configured to generate a three-dimensional model for the field of view based on the plurality of characteristics.” This demonstrates that the system creates a model that defines the camera’s field of view considering various camera characteristics. Furthermore, in Col. 9, lines 5-8, Brimhall teaches “The intersection plane determines from where in the three-dimensional model 602 the twodimensional representation of the field of view is produce.” This shows how the system calculates an intersection plane to translate the 3D model into a 2D slice representing the field of view within the constraints of the maximum working distance. Additionally, in Col. 9, lines 47-52, Brimhall teaches “For example, as illustrated in FIG. 6, the intersection plane that includes point 603 is projected through the three-dimensional model 602 to produce the two-dimensional slice 604. The two-dimensional slice 604 is representative of the field of view of the camera 502 within the area depicted in the map 500.” This quote further clarifies how the 2D slice is generated from the 3D model, ensuring that the field of view is accurately depicted within the specified maximum working distance constraints. Collectively, these quotes meet the limitation of this claim.).
Brimhall discloses map image size and map scale being obtained describe above. However, for the purposes of compact prosecution and for further clarity, in a related field of endeavor, Segev teaches:
receiving, by the simulation apparatus, a map image, wherein the map image has a map image size receiving, by the simulation apparatus, the map size and the map scale, wherein a map information comprises the map image size (Segev [0138] Alternatively or additionally, accessing a floor plan may include identifying a floor plan which satisfies a minimum or maximum size)(Segev [0132] For small object detection such as doors and door sills, a floor plan may be cropped into a reduced size such as, 1000×1000 pixels, and afterwards may be recomposed and used with non-maximum suppression. Floor plans may be resized to 1024×1024, 512-512,or other suitable sizes before inputting them to the artificial intelligence model for larger holistic objects such as walls and room.) and the map scale (Segev [0688] The scale of an image describes the relation between sizes on the paper and real world sizes (one mm on paper is 10 mm in the real world 1:10). Scaling a CAD file, image, or other 2D floor plan may include to changing this relation. Accordingly, the method may include accessing a rule defining a scale of the 2D floor plan. A BIM model may be generated using the scale of the 2D floor plan. In other embodiments, generating a BIM model may include scaling the 2D floor plan and generating the BIM model using a different scale than the scale of the accessed rule.)(Segev [0688] A height may be relative to the scale of the floor plan or the scale of the floor plan file. For example, some CAD programs are vector based software, and may not use real world units but rather an abstraction called drawing units. Drawing units may differ from real world units in scale. For example, a line in a CAD file which is 10 drawing units long might represent 10 mm, 10 meters, or ten inches in the real world. This may be further complicated when a CAD file is printed, and the paper units (a mm on paper) needs to be correlated to both the drawing units and the real world units. The scale of the CAD file refers to the real world units a drawing unit represents (e.g., one file may be in meters, another may be in inches). The scale of an image describes the relation between sizes on the paper and real world sizes (one mm on paper is 10 mm in the real world 1:10). Scaling a CAD file, image, or other 2D floor plan may include to changing this relation. Accordingly, the method may include accessing a rule defining a scale of the 2D floor plan. A BIM model may be generated using the scale of the 2D floor plan. In other embodiments, generating a BIM model may include scaling the 2D floor plan and generating the BIM model using a different scale than the scale of the accessed rule.)
a processor configured to obtain camera performance information, map information, and camera position information, wherein: (Segev [0144] Non-limiting examples of functional requirements may include values or parameters specifying sensor properties (e.g., image capture quality, resolution, frame rate per second, movement detection type, occupancy detection type, detection range, facial recognition, or other image or video properties), energy consumption, wattage, temperature, exchange rate, humidity, air flow, air quality, heat dissipation, comfort level, cooling or heating capacity, thermal comfort, network bandwidth, network speed, signal strength, signal to noise ratio, signal coverage, radio frequency range, screen size, speech intelligibility, noise levels, water pressure, angle, dimensions, fire rating, energy rating, environmental rating, occupancy, quantity of desks or workstations, or any other variables, objectives or properties that may be present in a building, space, room, group of rooms, or floor plan.)
and the camera performance information includes a camera resolution, an image sensor size, and a focal length range (Segev [0144] Non-limiting examples of functional requirements may include values or parameters specifying sensor properties (e.g., image capture quality, resolution, frame rate per second, movement detection type, occupancy detection type, detection range, facial recognition, or other image or video properties))(Segev [0158] In some embodiments, the technical specification may be defined along with the functional requirement. For example, the disclosed methods may further include receiving a technical specification along with the functional requirement for generative analyzing the at least one first room (and/or the at least one second room). Association of technical specifications with a functional requirement may be a constraint in the generative analysis process. For example, the technical specification of specific series of sensors may be defined along with the functional requirement. […] A technical specification associated with a functional requirement may be a generic specification compromised of one or more technical characteristics (e.g. 6 megapixel, IP66) and/or may contain a specific manufacturer and/or series and/or model.)(Segev [0521] Byway of example, FIGS. 16A-C depict another exemplary method for updating a solution. FIG. 16A depicts an exemplary solution as a result of generative analysis indicating the equipment model and focal length 1615 of camera 1611, the equipment model and focal length 1621 of camera 1617, and the equipment model and focal length 1627 of camera 1623.) where the model would define the image sensor size.
the second user interfacer calculating the maximum working distance based on the map information (Segev [0527] At step 1905, the process may include generatively analyzing the room to obtain a plurality of solutions that at least partially conform to the at least one functional requirement or equipment specification. The generative analysis may consider a functional requirement or equipment specification, as discussed earlier. As described here, generative analysis may include, for example, image analysis, geometric analysis, or semantic enrichment. Generative analysis may further include machine learning.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have size and scale as taught by Segev. The motivation OR rationale for doing so would have been that it combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results, where Brimhall is using an image, and images have size and scale, and Segev is using an image, which explicitly discusses and uses the size and scale, where the end result for both is using an image to be displayed. Further, it would be obvious to try, since images have a limited amount of information (such as size, resolution, bit depth), where there is a reasonable expectation of success since both are manipulating an image, and size/resolution is basic image information. Therefore it would have been obvious to combine Segev with Brimhall to obtain the invention.
Brimhall in view of Segev does not explicitly teach an image sensor size. In a related field of endeavor, Skidmore teaches:
and the camera performance information includes a camera resolution, an image sensor size, and a focal length range (Skidmore Col. 4, lines 42-46 – “A camera includes at least one lens and an Application/Control Number: 18/080,664 Page 22 Art Unit: 2617 image sensor. The lens focuses light, aligns it, and produces a round area of light on an image sensor. Image sensors are typically rectangular in shape, with the result that the round area of light from the lens is cropped to a standard image format.”; Col. 4, lines 55-59 – “Field of view (FOV) is the extent of the observable world seen at a given moment, e.g., by a person or by a camera. In photography, the term angle of view (AOV) is more common but can be used interchangeably with the term field of view (FOV)”; Col. 5, lines 12-15 – “Angle of view is also dependent on sensor size. Sensor size and angle of view are positively correlated. A larger sensor size means a larger angle of view. A smaller sensor size means a smaller angle of view.”; Claim 1 – “determining, by one or more processors, a first value that describes a change in a camera's position or orientation by tracking features across a plurality of images or video frames, wherein the images or video frames originated from the camera, wherein the camera includes at least one lens with a focal length and an image sensor with a sensor size”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use an image sensor size as taught by Skidmore. The motivation for doing so would have been that combination would ensure that the field of view calculations are more precise, as taught by Skidmore, which emphasizes the importance of sensor size in determining the angle of view where Brimhall and Skidmore are analogous as both involve accurately determining and representing a camera’s field of view based on various camera characteristic.. Therefore it would have been obvious to combine Skidmore with Brimhall in view of Segev to obtain the invention.
Claim(s) 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brimhall U.S. Patent/PG Publication 11830126 in view of Segev U.S. Patent/PG Publication 20210073449 and Song U.S. Patent/PG Publication 2019/0128693.
Regarding claim 17:
The simulation method of claim 1, has all of its limitations taught by Brimhall in view of Segev. Segev further teaches further comprising:
determining whether the map image size is less than a threshold value or equal to or greater than the threshold value (Segev [0138] Alternatively or additionally, accessing a floor plan may include identifying a floor plan which satisfies a minimum or maximum size)
Brimhall in view of Segev does not teach a map size threshold tied to the UI. In a related field of endeavor, Song teaches:
determining whether the map image size is less than a threshold value or equal to or greater than the threshold value (Song Paragraph 0107 - the processing engine 112 may compare the scale associated with the display area of the zoomed map with a first threshold and a second threshold; Paragraph 0112 - the processing engine 112 may display an upstream station and a downstream station on the map in response to a determination that the scale associated with the display area of the zoomed map is less than the first threshold);
determining that the map image size is less than the threshold value wherein the second UI region corresponding to the second UI information has a size greater by a ratio of first value in comparison to the map image size (Song Paragraph 0112 - the processing engine 112 may display an upstream station and a downstream station on the map in response to a determination that the scale associated with the display area of the zoomed map is less than the first threshold; Paragraph 0190 - If the changed scale associated with the display area of the map is less than or equal to 10 (i.e., the changed scale associated with the display area of the map is in the first range), the processing engine 112 may display one or more upstream stations and one or more downstream stations on the display area of the map);
determining that the map size is equal to or greater than the threshold value wherein the second UI region corresponding to the second UI information has a size greater by a ratio of second value in comparison to the map image size and wherein the second ratio is less than the first ratio (Song Paragraph 0108 - the processing engine 112 may display an upstream station or a downstream station on the map in response to a determination that the scale associated with the display area of the zoomed map is greater than the first threshold and is less than or equal to the second threshold; Paragraph 0190 - If the changed scale associated with the display area of the map is greater than 10 and is less than or equal to 100 (i.e., the changed scale associated with the display area of the map is in the second range), the processing engine 112 may display an upstream station or a downstream station on the display area of the map.); and wherein the second ratio is less than the first ratio (Paragraph 0158 - The first number may be greater than the second number, and the second number may be greater than the third number. In some embodiments, the third number may be equal to 0; Paragraph 0190 - If the changed scale associated with the display area of the map is greater than 100 (i.e., the changed scale associated with the display area of the map is in the third range), the processing engine 112 hides the upstream station and the downstream station). Brimhall and Song are analogous as both involve methods and systems for controlling and displaying information on a map interface, focusing on optimizing the user interface (UI) based on the map’s size or scale.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a map size threshold tied to the UI as taught by Song. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve efficiency by reducing unnecessary data processing and rendering operations, as taught by Song. Therefore it would have been obvious to combine Song with Brimhall in view of Segev to obtain the invention.
Regarding claim 18:
The claim is a parallel version of claim 17. As such it is rejected under the same teachings.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brimhall U.S. Patent/PG Publication 11830126 in view of Segev U.S. Patent/PG Publication 20210073449 and Skidmore U.S. Patent/PG Publication 10,796,477 and Song U.S. Patent/PG Publication 2019/0128693.
Regarding claim 19:
The claim is a parallel version of claim 16+17. As such it is rejected under the same teachings.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON PRINGLE-PARKER whose telephone number is (571) 272-5690 and e-mail is jason.pringle-parker@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30am-5:00pm est Monday-Friday. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, King Poon can be reached on (571) 270-0728. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, seehttp://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JASON A PRINGLE-PARKER/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2617
Prosecution Insights