DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 9, filed 19 December 2025, with respect to claims 57, 65-66, 68, 70, and 77 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the objections to claims 57, 65-66, 68, 70, and 77 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 9, filed 19 December 2025, with respect to claims 28, 65, and 76-77 have been fully considered and are partially persuasive. Therefore, the §112 rejections of claims 28 and 65 have been withdrawn. However, the §112 rejections of claims 76-77 have been maintained.
In an attempt to overcome the initial §112 rejection of claim 76, Applicant amended the claim to now recite: “wherein the spectral imager data and the spectral imager data of the earthen material and spectral imager data of the reference object are captured generally simultaneously.” Therefore, there is still an issue of “the spectral imager data” that is not associated with any specific element.
Furthermore, in claims 76-77, Applicant has recitations of “spectral imager data” (with and without a preceding “the”), which confusion due to potential lack of antecedent.
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 9-11, filed 19 December 2025, with respect to claims 5-7, 10-11, 16-21, 29, 40-43, 47-50, 57-69. and 76-77 have been fully considered, but are not persuasive. Therefore, the §103 rejections of claims 5-7, 10-11, 16-21, 29, 40-43, 47-50, 57-69, and 76-77 have been maintained.
On Page 9, Applicant argues that, although Moshe discloses a light source 12 that provides illumination [0071], Moshe does not disclose the illumination as being “varying and uncontrolled”. However, recitation of “varying and uncontrolled illumination” is both broad and vague. Without a clear disclosure of the parameters for illumination to be “varying and uncontrolled”, the broadest reasonable interpretation of Moshe’s illumination meets the criteria of “varying” (“at least one light source 12 for providing a beam of light of different wavelengths” [0071]) and “uncontrolled” (although the computer 34 and controller 36 are used to control the system 10 [0078], there is no disclosure of direct control of the light source 12).
On Page 10, Applicant argues that Moshe does not disclose a material movement place and that Moshe is silent with respect to the focal length of a lens defining the material movement plane. However, in response to Applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which Applicant relies (i.e., the focal length of a lens corresponding a material movement plane) are not recited in the rejected claims. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Furthermore, the Examiner has clearly cited element 50 of Moshe as the material movement plane [0076].
On Page 10, Applicant argues that the reference object of Oguchi does not meet the claimed limitation of being “beyond the image location”. However, Oguchi discloses that “the reference object 39 may be… advanced into the imaging range when performing the calibration of the spectroscopic camera 30” [0088], which implies that the reference object is initially out of the imaging range (i.e. beyond the image location).
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 19, filed 19 December 2025, with respect to claim 72 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the §103 rejection of claim 72 have been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 76-77 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the Applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 76-77 recite the limitation "the spectral imager data" in Lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claims. Furthermore, the distinction of “the spectral imager data” from either “the spectral imager data of the earthen material” or “the spectral imager data of the reference object” is unclear.
Therefore, for purposes of examination, the Examiner assumes that claims 76-77 should actually read: “wherein spectral imager data of the earthen material and spectral imager data of the reference object are captured generally simultaneously/sequentially.” Alternatively, if claims 76-77 are actually meant to depend on claim 66, then claims 76-77 should read: “wherein the spectral imager data of the earthen material and the spectral imager data of the reference object are captured generally simultaneously/sequentially.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 5, 7, 10-11, 16-21, 40-43, 47-50, 57-58, 60, 62-64, 66-69, and 76-77 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moshe et al. (US 2012/0250025), hereinafter Moshe, in view of Oguchi et al. (US 2019/0271593), hereinafter Oguchi.
Claim 5: Moshe further discloses wherein the support structure (16) extends over the image location (evident from Fig. 1), the spectral imager (20) is directed downward towards the image location (evident from Fig. 1), and the reference object is directed upwards (evident from modification of Moshe in claim 66).
Claim 7: Moshe further discloses wherein the image location is a conveyer belt (150) (Fig. 3, which shows a component of the system of Fig. 1) [0079] for an earthen material processing plant (intended use), and the support structure (16) extends over the conveyer belt (150) and supports the spectral imager (20) above the conveyer belt (150) (evident from Fig. 1).
Claim 10: Moshe further discloses wherein the hyperspectral camera (20) is a line scanning hyperspectral camera (evident since the earthen material P is moving along a conveyor belt 150, so one line of data is captured at a time, Fig. 3) [0079].
Claim 11: Moshe, in view of Oguchi, further discloses wherein the material movement plane (top surface of 11) is generally perpendicular to a straight line from the spectral imager (30) to a center of the image location (evident from Fig. 2 of Oguchi), and the reference object (39) is below the material movement plane (top surface of 11) from the spectral imager (30) (evident from Fig. 2 of Oguchi) [0088].
Claim 16: Moshe further discloses at least one artificial light source (18) mounted to the support structure (16) [0070] and arranged to provide controlled illumination with a known intensity to the image location (“This optional ultraviolet light source adds an additional media of classification that provides a better understanding of an agricultural product's quality” [0071]).
Claim 17: Moshe further discloses wherein a controller (36) is operably coupled to the at least one artificial light source (18) to control when the at least one artificial light source (18) is on and when the at least one artificial light source (18) is off (“head unit controller 36 for controlling the operation of the system 10” implicitly controls operation of light source 18, [0078]).
Claim 18: Moshe further discloses wherein the controller (36) is operable to switch the at least one artificial light source (18) between off and on according to a schedule stored on the at least one data storage device (“head unit controller 36 for controlling the operation of the system 10” implicitly controls operation of light source 18, [0078]).
Claim 19: Moshe further discloses wherein the controller (36) is operable to switch the at least one artificial light source (18) on in response to detection of a shadow at the image location (“head unit controller 36 for controlling the operation of the system 10” implicitly controls operation of light source 18, [0078]).
Claim 20: Moshe, in view of Oguchi, further discloses wherein the reference object (39) is not exposed to the controlled illumination (evident from the modification of Moshe in claim 66; in Fig. 1, the artificial light source 18 is pointed away from where the reference object would be).
Claim 21: Moshe further discloses wherein the reference object is positioned in-line with the material movement plane (50) and a portion of the support structure (16) to which the spectral imager (20) is mounted (evident from the modified imaging system of Moshe from claim 57), whereby a shadow cast by the portion of the support structure (16) on the image location is experienced by the reference object (implicit result).
Claim 40: Moshe further discloses wherein the spectral imager (20) is a hyperspectral camera and spectral imager data are hyperspectral imager data (Abstract).
Claim 41: Moshe further discloses wherein the hyperspectral camera (20) is a line scanning hyperspectral camera (evident since the earthen material P is moving along a conveyor belt 150, so one line of data is captured at a time, Fig. 3) [0079].
Claim 42: Moshe, in view of Oguchi, further discloses wherein the material movement plane (top surface of 11) is a plane extending through the image location and generally perpendicular to a straight line from the spectral imager (30) to a center of the image location (evident from Fig. 2 of Oguchi), and the reference object (39) is below the material movement plane (top surface of 11) from the spectral imager (30) (evident from Fig. 2 of Oguchi) [0088].
Claim 43: Moshe, in view of Oguchi, further discloses wherein the reference object (39) is located below the spectral imager (30) (evident from Fig. 2 of Oguchi).
Claim 47: Moshe further discloses at least one artificial light source (18) arranged to provide controlled illumination to the image location (“This optional ultraviolet light source adds an additional media of classification that provides a better understanding of an agricultural product's quality” [0071]), and wherein determining an intensity of incident light (with light measuring device 26) at the image location includes accounting for the controlled illumination with a known intensity and the varying and uncontrolled illumination [0075].
Claim 48: Moshe further discloses wherein a controller (36) is operably coupled to the at least one artificial light source (18) to control when the at least one artificial light source (18) is on and when the at least one artificial light source (18) is off (“head unit controller 36 for controlling the operation of the system 10” implicitly controls operation of light source 18, [0078]).
Claim 49: Moshe further discloses wherein the controller (36) is operable to switch the at least one artificial light source (18) between off and on according to a schedule stored on the at least one data storage device (“head unit controller 36 for controlling the operation of the system 10” implicitly controls operation of light source 18, [0078]).
Claim 50: Moshe further discloses wherein the controller (36) is operable to switch the at least one artificial light source (18) on in response to detection of a shadow at the image location (“head unit controller 36 for controlling the operation of the system 10” implicitly controls operation of light source 18, [0078]).
Claim 57: Moshe discloses an imaging system (10, Fig. 1) for earthen material (P), comprising:
a. a support structure (16) adjacent an image location (inside 52) [0070] exposed to varying and uncontrolled illumination (from 12) [0071]; and
b. a spectral imager (20) mounted to the support structure (16) [0074], the spectral imager (20) directed at and focused on the image location bounded by a field of view of the spectral imager (20) and a material movement plane (50) [0076] and operable to measure an intensity of illumination reflected from the earthen material (P) in the image location for each of a plurality of wavelength bands of interest (“employing hyper-spectral imaging and analysis” [0070]).
Moshe is silent with respect to a reference object.
Oguchi, however, in the same field of endeavor of optical inspection apparatus, discloses an imaging system (Fig. 2), comprising:
b. a spectral imager (30) mounted to a support structure (inherent) [0075], the spectral imager (30) directed at and focused on an image location bounded by a field of view of the spectral imager (30) and a material movement plane (11) (shown by wedge incident on 11) [0076] and operable to measure an intensity of illumination reflected from a material (P) in the image location for each of a plurality of wavelength bands of interest (inherent since it is a spectroscopic camera [0074]); and
c. a reference object (39) in the field of view of the spectral imager (30) beyond the image location [0088].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Moshe’s imaging system with a reference object for the purpose of calibrating the spectral imager (Ogushi [0088]).
Claim 58: Moshe further discloses wherein the support structure (16) extends over the image location (evident from Fig. 1), the spectral imager (20) is directed downward towards the image location (evident from Fig. 1), and the reference object is below the image location (evident from modification of Moshe in claim 57).
Claim 60: Moshe further discloses wherein the image location is a conveyer belt (150) (Fig. 3, which shows a component of the system of Fig. 1) [0079] for an earthen material processing plant (intended use), and the support structure (16) extends over the conveyer belt (150) and supports the spectral imager (20) above the conveyer belt (150) (evident from Fig. 1).
Claim 62: Moshe, in view of Oguchi, discloses wherein the reference object (39) has a known optical property (Oguchi [0086]), but does not specify the identity of the reference object.
However, the Examiner takes Official notice that it is well known to select a reference object that comprises a background so that a calibrated measurement value is accurate.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Moshe’s reference object to be a conveyor belt for the purpose of allowing the spectral imager measurements to be calibrated, since the conveyor comprises the background in the measurements (see Fig. 3 of Moshe).
Claim 63: Moshe further discloses a plurality of artificial illumination sources positioned within the field of view and generating a known intensity of illumination (“one light source 12… the second light source 18… a third light source” [0071]).
Claim 64: Moshe further discloses wherein the spectral imager (20) is a hyperspectral camera capturing successive spectral images of the image location (Abstract).
Claim 66: Moshe discloses an imaging system (10, Fig. 1) for earthen material (P), comprising:
a. a support structure (16) adjacent an image location (inside 52) [0070] exposed to varying and uncontrolled illumination (from 12) [0071];
b. a spectral imager (20) mounted to the support structure (16) [0074], the spectral imager (20) directed at the image location and operable to measure an intensity of illumination reflected from the image location for each of a plurality of wavelength bands of interest (“employing hyper-spectral imaging and analysis” [0070]);
c. a controller (36) communicatively coupled to the spectral imager (20) to control operations of the spectral imager (20) and receive data from the spectral imager (20) [0078], the controller (36) including at least one processor (34) [0078] and at least one data storage device (“the data processor includes volatile memory for storing instructions and/or data, and/or includes non-volatile storage… for storing instructions and/or data” [0042]) communicatively coupled to the at least one processor (34) and having stored thereon computer-executable instructions for operating the at least one processor (34) to:
i. direct the spectral imager (20) to capture spectral imager data of an earthen material (P) at the image location at a first time [0074], the spectral imager data including the intensity of illumination reflected from the earthen material (P) for each of the plurality of wavelength bands of interest (“employing hyper-spectral imaging and analysis” [0070]); and
ii. receive the spectral imager data from the spectral imager (20) [0078].
Moshe is silent with respect to a reference object.
Oguchi, however, in the same field of endeavor of optical inspection apparatus, discloses an imaging system (Fig. 2), comprising:
c. a controller (34) communicatively coupled to a spectral imager (30) to control operations of the spectral imager (30) and receive data from the spectral imager (20) [0075], the controller (34) including at least one processor (341) and at least one data storage device (342) [0079] communicatively coupled to the at least one processor (341) and having stored thereon computer-executable instructions for operating the at least one processor (341) to:
i. direct the spectral imager (30) to capture spectral imager data of a material (P) at an image location at a first time (step S7) [0131], the spectral imager data including the intensity of illumination reflected from the material (P) for each of the plurality of wavelength bands of interest [0009];
ii. receive the spectral imager data from the spectral imager (30) (Step S8) [0139];
iii. direct the spectral imager (30) to capture spectral imager data of a reference object (39) at a second time (Step S2) [0119], the second time being different from the first time (evident from flowchart of Fig. 4) and the spectral imager data of the reference object (39) including intensity for one or more reference wavelength bands [0009];
iv. receive the spectral imager data of the reference object (39) from the spectral imager (30) (Step S4) [0128];
v. apply the spectral imager data of the reference object (39) to determine an intensity of the varying and uncontrolled illumination at the second time for the one or more reference wavelength bands (inherently part of the calibration process [0119]); and
vi. apply the intensity of the varying and uncontrolled illumination at the second time to infer an intensity of incident light at the material (P) at the first time for each of the plurality of wavelength bands of interest (inherent to having a calibrated spectral imager 30 [0168]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Moshe’s imaging system with a reference object for the purpose of calibrating the system prior to imaging of the material (Oguchi [0030]).
In Moshe’s modified imaging system, the controller (36) then operates the at least one processor (34) to:
vii. apply the intensity of incident light at the earthen material (P) at the first time for each of the plurality of wavelength bands of interest and the spectral imager data to determine a reflectance of the earthen material (P) (“grading an agricultural product employing hyper-spectral imaging and analysis”, Abstract); and
viii. wherein the reference object (39) is positioned in-line with the image location and a portion of the support structure to which the spectral imager is mounted, whereby a shadow cast by the portion of the support structure on the image location is experienced by the reference object (39) (evident from Fig. 2 of Oguchi).
Claim 67: Moshe, in view of Oguchi, further discloses wherein the one or more reference wavelength bands include the plurality of wavelength bands of interest (evident for proper calibration; Oguchi [0075]).
Claim 68: Moshe, in view of Oguchi, further discloses:
wherein the reference object (39) is in the field of view of the spectral imager (30) beyond the image location (evident from Fig. 2of Oguchi),
wherein the data storage device (342) stores predetermined reflectance characteristics of the reference object (39) (evident since the reference object 39 is used for calibration) (Oguchi [0079]), and
wherein the intensity for the one or more reference wavelength bands at the second time is the intensity of illumination reflected from the reference object (39) (inherent), and applying the spectral imager data of the reference object (39) to determine an intensity of the varying and uncontrolled illumination at the second time includes applying the reflectance characteristics of the reference object (39) (inherently part of the calibration process; Oguchi, [0119]).
Claim 69: Moshe, in view of Oguchi, further discloses wherein the reference object (39) is in the field of view of the spectral imager (30) beyond the image location on which the spectral imager (30) is focused at the first time and at the second time (evident from Fig. 2 of Oguchi).
Claims 76-77: Moshe, in view of Oguchi, further discloses wherein spectral imager data of the earthen material (P) and spectral imager data of the reference object (39) are captured generally sequentially (Oguchi, Step S2 [0119]).
Moshe’s does not explicitly disclose simultaneously capturing the spectral image data of the earthen material and the reference object.
However, the Examiner takes Official notice that it is well known that simultaneous data gathering is more time efficient than sequential data gathering.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Moshe’s imaging system with simultaneous capture of the spectral data of the earthen material and the spectral data of the reference object for the purpose of requiring less runtime for the system, thereby requiring less power.
Claims 6, 29, 59, and 61 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moshe, in view of Oguchi as applied to claims 57-58 and 66 above, and further in view of Wong (US 2022/0291120), hereinafter Wong.
Claim 6: Moshe is silent with respect to the image location being a haul truck route.
Wong, however, in the same field of endeavor of spectrally resolved imaging, discloses an imaging system (10, Fig. 1) for earthen material (130), comprising:
a. a support structure (200, Fig. 2) adjacent an image location exposed to varying and uncontrolled illumination (from 110) [0046]; and
b. a spectral imager (100) mounted to the support structure (200) [0046], the spectral imager (100) directed at the image location (evident from Fig. 1) [0036] and operable to measure an intensity of illumination reflected from the image location for each of a plurality of wavelength bands of interest (“The spectral signature can include one or more wavelengths or wavelength ranges where the relative intensity of the collected light is different…” [0038]),
wherein the image location is a haul truck route for a mine site, and the support structure (200) extends over the haul truck route and supports the spectral imager (100) above the haul truck route (Fig. 2) [0046].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Moshe’s imaging system to use a haul truck route for the purpose of determining “a quality condition of an agricultural product” before it is brought into a facility (Wong, Abstract).
Claim 29: Moshe is silent with respect to the image location including a pathway for a load container.
Wong, however, in the same field of endeavor of spectrally resolved imaging, discloses an imaging system (10, Fig. 1) for earthen material (130), comprising:
a. a support structure (200, Fig. 2) adjacent an image location exposed to varying and uncontrolled illumination (from 110) [0046]; and
b. a spectral imager (100) mounted to the support structure (200) [0046], the spectral imager (100) directed at the image location (evident from Fig. 1) [0036] and operable to measure an intensity of illumination reflected from the image location for each of a plurality of wavelength bands of interest (“The spectral signature can include one or more wavelengths or wavelength ranges where the relative intensity of the collected light is different…” [0038]),
wherein the image location includes a pathway for at least a portion of a load container (142) of a haul truck (140) [0036].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Moshe’s imaging system to image a pathway of a load container of a haul truck for the purpose of determining “a quality condition of an agricultural product” before it is brought into a facility (Wong, Abstract).
Claim 59: Moshe is silent with respect to the image location being a haul truck route.
Wong, however, in the same field of endeavor of spectrally resolved imaging, discloses an imaging system (10, Fig. 1) for earthen material (130), comprising:
a. a support structure (200, Fig. 2) adjacent an image location exposed to varying and uncontrolled illumination (from 110) [0046]; and
b. a spectral imager (100) mounted to the support structure (200) [0046], the spectral imager (100) directed at the image location (evident from Fig. 1) [0036] and operable to measure an intensity of illumination reflected from the image location for each of a plurality of wavelength bands of interest (“The spectral signature can include one or more wavelengths or wavelength ranges where the relative intensity of the collected light is different…” [0038]),
wherein the image location is a haul truck route for a mine site, and the support structure (200) extends over the haul truck route and supports the spectral imager (100) above the haul truck route (Fig. 2) [0046].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Moshe’s imaging system to use a haul truck route for the purpose of determining “a quality condition of an agricultural product” before it is brought into a facility (Wong, Abstract).
Claim 61: Moshe, in view of Oguchi, discloses wherein the reference object (39) has a known optical property (Oguchi [0086]), but does not specify the identity of the reference object.
However, the Examiner takes Official notice that it is well known to select a reference object that comprises a background so that a calibrated measurement value is accurate.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Moshe’s reference object to be a surface of packed soil forming part of the haul truck route for the purpose of allowing the spectral imager measurements to be calibrated, since the packed soil surface comprises the background in the measurements.
Claim 65 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moshe, in view of Oguchi as applied to claim 66 above, and further in view of Wertheim at al. (US 11,035,731), hereinafter Wertheim.
Claim 65: Moshe is silent with respect to an atmospheric sensor, irradiance sensor, and/or photometer, to determine incident radiance at the image location as reference data.
Wertheim, however, in the same field of endeavor of spectrometry, discloses a system comprising an irradiance sensor to determine incident radiance as reference data (Col. 2, Lines 2-7; “when the source is of known spectral irradiance and color characteristics, such as the sun, then that spectral irradiance would be used to calibrate the device”, claim 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Moshe’s imaging system with an irradiance sensor to determine the incident radiance for the purpose of obtaining accurate measurements through calibration of the system (Wertheim, claim 1).
In Moshe’s modified imaging system, it is evident then that applying the intensity of the varying and uncontrolled illumination at the second time to infer an intensity of incident light at the earthen material at the first time for each of the plurality of wavelength bands of interest (step vi. of claim 66) includes applying the reference data to infer the intensity of incident light at the earthen material when the reference object is unavailable due to environmental conditions (implicit so that system can be calibrated).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 72 is allowed.
The following is an Examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 72: None of the prior art of record, alone or in combination, teaches or discloses an imaging method for earthen material, comprising:
b. acquiring, at a second time, spectral imager data of a reference object from a field of view of the spectral imager, the second time being different from the first time and the spectral imager data of the reference object including the intensity for one or more reference wavelength bands;
c. applying the spectral imager data of the reference object to determine an intensity of the varying and uncontrolled illumination at the second time for the one or more reference wavelength bands; and
d. applying the intensity of the varying and uncontrolled illumination at the second time to infer an intensity of incident light at the earthen material at the first time for each of the plurality of wavelength bands of interest,
in combination with the rest of the limitations of independent claim 72.
Any comments considered necessary by Applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claims 28, 51, and 70 are objected to as being dependent upon rejected base claims, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claims and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 28: None of the prior art, alone or in combination, discloses the imaging system of claim 64, further comprising at least one processor in communication with the spectral imager, the at least one processor being operably configured to select at least one spectral image from the captured successive spectral images in response to a likelihood of a vehicle and load carrying container being within the field of view of the spectral imager.
Claim 51: None of the prior art, alone or in combination, discloses the imaging system of claim 47, wherein the reference object is not exposed to the controlled illumination, and at least one data storage device stores emission characteristics of the at least one artificial light source and spacing information indicative of spacing between the at least one artificial light source and the spectral imager, and wherein accounting for the controlled illumination includes accessing and processing the emission characteristics and spacing information.
Claim 70: None of the prior art, alone or in combination, discloses the imaging system of claim 68, wherein the reference object includes a plurality of artificial illumination sources positioned within the field of view and generating a known illumination, and applying the spectral imager data of the reference and the reflectance characteristics of the reference object to determine the intensity of incident light at the reference object at the second time includes subtracting the known illumination from the spectral imager data of the reference to determine reference reflectance data representing the variable and uncontrolled illumination reflected by the reference object.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to HINA F AYUB whose telephone number is (571)270-3171. The Examiner can normally be reached on 9am-5pm ET Mon-Fri.
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, Tarifur Chowdhury can be reached on 571-272-2287. 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, see http://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.
/Hina F Ayub/
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2877