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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yoshida (JP 2011-118168).
Regarding Claim 16, Yoshida discloses glasses provided with a variable focus lens [ #410, #401 of Fig 6, 7; 0063] allowing a refractive index thereof to be changed from a refractive index for hyperopic to a refractive index for myopic by application of a voltage [0063-65], comprising: a controller configured to control the voltage to be applied to the variable focus lens [#403 of Fig 6, 7; 0063-67]; and a short-distance sensor configured to measure a distance of a short-distance range [#402 of Fig 6, 7; 0063], the distance being from the variable focus lens and less than a predetermined threshold value [0063-66], and output a distance to an object contained within the short-distance range as a distance measurement value, wherein the controller applies the voltage to the variable focus lens upon output of the distance measurement value by the short-distance sensor [0065-70].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-10, 12-13 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (US 2021/0255461) (also published as WO 2020003361 A1) in view of Yokota (US 2011/0211068).
Regarding Claim 1, Watanabe teaches a portable terminal, comprising: at least one camera [#3, #120 of Fig 1, 2; 0035]; a distance measurement device [#167 of Fig 2; 0039]…; and a processor configured to determine a distance to an object based on a result of distance measurement by the distance measurement device and output the result as a distance measurement value [#121 of Fig 2; 0035]. Watanabe broadly teaches a distance measurement device capable of measuring a distance of a first distance measurement range included in an imaging distance of the at least one camera and a distance of a second distance measurement range different from the first distance measurement range [0035-39]. Yokota explicitly teaches a distance measurement device capable of measuring a distance of a first distance measurement range included in an imaging distance of the at least one camera and a distance of a second distance measurement range different from the first distance measurement range [0042-51]. It would have been obvious to modify the device of Watanabe to include a distance sensor having different detection ranges to better detect and categorize different types of objects in the wider field of view.
Regarding Claim 2, Watanabe does not explicitly teach – but Yokota does teach wherein the distance measurement device includes: a first distance sensor configured to measure the distance of the first distance measurement range to obtain the result of distance measurement; and a second distance sensor configured to measure the distance of the second distance measurement range to obtain the result of distance measurement [0042-51]. It would have been obvious to modify the device of Watanabe to include a distance sensor having different detection ranges to better detect and categorize different types of objects in the wider field of view.
Regarding Claim 3, Watanabe does not explicitly teach – but Yokota does teach a distance sensor activation section configured to activate the second distance sensor when the result of distance measurement by the first distance sensor has not been obtained [0042-51]. It would have been obvious to modify the device of Watanabe to include a second distance sensor with overlapping detection ranges to better detect and categorize different types of objects in the wider field of view in case of sensor failure or visual obstruction.
Regarding Claim 5, Watanabe does not explicitly teach – but Yokota does teach wherein a direction of a center of distance measurement of the second distance sensor is tilted by a predetermined angle with respect to the portable terminal [0042-51]. It would have been obvious to modify the device of Watanabe to include a distance sensor having different tilts to better detect and categorize different types of objects in the wider field of view.
Regarding Claim 6, Watanabe does not explicitly teach – but Yokota does teach wherein the second distance sensor is installed at a center of a lower portion of the portable terminal [0039-51]. It would have been obvious to modify the device of Watanabe to adjust second distance sensor placement to have different detection ranges to better detect and categorize different types of objects in the wider field of view.
Regarding Claim 7, Watanabe does not explicitly teach – but Yokota does teach wherein the at least one camera comprises a first camera and a second camera, the first distance measurement range contains an imaging distance of the first camera, and the second distance measurement range contains an imaging distance of the second camera [0039-51]. It would have been obvious to modify the device of Watanabe to including two distance cameras to have different detection ranges to better detect and categorize different types of objects in the wider field of view.
Regarding Claim 8, Watanabe does not explicitly teach – but Yokota does teach the at least one camera, a first camera of which an imaging distance is contained in the first distance measurement range; and a second camera of which an imaging distance is contained in the second distance measurement range, wherein a direction of a center of distance measurement of the first distance sensor and a direction of a center of distance measurement of the second distance sensor are substantially the same as an optical axis of a lens of the first camera and an optical axis of a lens of the second camera, respectively [0039-51]. It would have been obvious to modify the device of Watanabe to including two distance cameras to have different detection ranges to better detect and categorize different types of objects in the wider field of view while improving alignment between the images from the two cameras.
Regarding Claim 9, Watanabe does not explicitly teach – but Yokota does teach wherein the portable terminal activates, among the first camera and the second camera, one whose imaging distance contains the result of distance measurement output from the distance measurement device [0039-51]. It would have been obvious to modify the device of Watanabe to including two distance cameras to have different detection ranges to better detect and categorize different types of objects in the wider field of view depending on where the target objects are in the field of view.
Regarding Claim 10, Watanabe does not explicitly teach – but Yokota does teach: first data that associates an imaging field of view of the first camera with a distance measurement area in distance measurement of the first distance measurement range; and second data that associates an imaging field of view of the second camera and a distance measurement area in distance measurement of the second distance measurement range, wherein the portable terminal calculates a distance value corresponding to each pixel position of one of the first camera and the second camera based on the result of distance measurement by the distance measurement device [0039-51]. It would have been obvious to modify the device of Watanabe to including two distance cameras to have different detection ranges to better detect and categorize different types of objects in the wider field of view depending on where the target objects are in the field of view.
Regarding Claim 12, Watanabe also teaches wherein the portable terminal is a smartphone [0035-39]
Regarding Claim 15, Watanabe does not explicitly teach – but Yokota does teach wherein the second distance measurement range is for a short distance within 30cm from the portable terminal [0039-51]. It would have been obvious to modify the device of Watanabe to including two distance cameras to have different detection ranges to better detect and categorize different types of objects in the wider field of view depending on where the target objects are in the field of view.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 12 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (US 2021/0255461) (also published as WO 2020003361 A1) in view of Wang (CN 111,025,317).
Regarding Claim 1, Watanabe teaches a portable terminal, comprising: at least one camera [#3, #120 of Fig 1, 2; 0035]; a distance measurement device [#167 of Fig 2; 0039]…; and a processor configured to determine a distance to an object based on a result of distance measurement by the distance measurement device and output the result as a distance measurement value [#121 of Fig 2; 0035]. Watanabe broadly teaches a distance measurement device capable of measuring a distance of a first distance measurement range included in an imaging distance of the at least one camera and a distance of a second distance measurement range different from the first distance measurement range [0035-39]. Wang explicitly teaches a distance measurement device capable of measuring a distance of a first distance measurement range included in an imaging distance of the at least one camera and a distance of a second distance measurement range different from the first distance measurement range [Fig 3; 0050-56]. It would have been obvious to modify the device of Watanabe to include a distance sensor having different detection ranges to better detect and categorize different types of objects in the wider field of view.
Regarding Claim 4, Watanabe does not explicitly teach – but Wang does teach a variable distance sensor configured such that a distance measurement range thereof can be switched between the first distance measurement range and the second distance measurement range [Fig 3; 0050-56]; and a distance measurement range switching section configured to switch the distance measurement range of the variable distance sensor, wherein the variable distance sensor is further configured to: when the distance measurement range is set to the first distance measurement range [Fig 3; 0050-56], measure the distance of the first distance measurement range to obtain the result of distance measurement; and when the distance measurement range is set to the second distance measurement range, measure the distance of the second distance measurement range to obtain the result of distance measurement, and the distance measurement range switching section is configured to switch the distance measurement range of the variable distance sensor to the second distance measurement range when the result of distance measurement has not been obtained under a condition that the distance measurement range of the variable distance sensor is set to the first distance measurement range [Fig 3; 0050-56]. It would have been obvious to modify the device of Watanabe to include range switching in a variable distance sensor in order to improve the signal to noise ratio based on desired target object distance from the sensor apparatus.
Regarding Claim 12, Watanabe also teaches wherein the portable terminal is a smartphone [0035-39].
Regarding Claim 13, Watanabe also teaches wherein the portable terminal is a head-mounted display [0025; 0033-34], and the head-mounted display comprises a line-of-sight sensor configured to detect a line-of-sight direction [0039; 0046]. Watanabe does not explicitly teach – but Yokota does teach distance measurement device decides which distance of the first distance measurement range or that of the second distance measurement range is to be measured depending on the line-of-sight direction detected by the line-of-sight sensor [0039-51]. It would have been obvious to modify the device of Watanabe to including two distance cameras to have different detection ranges to better detect and categorize different types of objects in the wider field of view depending on where the target objects are in the field of view.
Regarding Claim 15, Watanabe does not explicitly teach – but Wang does teach wherein the second distance measurement range is for a short distance within 30cm from the portable terminal [Fig 3; 0050-56]. It would have been obvious to modify the device of Watanabe to include a short range in a variable distance sensor in order to improve the signal to noise ratio based on desired target object distance from the sensor apparatus.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (US 2021/0255461) and Yokota (US 2011/0211068), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kawamae (US 2022/0060680).
Regarding Claim 11, Watanabe does not explicitly teach – but Kawamae teaches a display controller configured to determine a front and rear relation between an object in a real space and a virtual object using the distance measurement value, identify an occlusion area, and display the objects [0059-68]. It would have been obvious to modify the device of Watanabe to include a display controller and determine positional relationships of objects in order to show the complete scene with both computer generated and artificial reality features.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe (US 2021/0255461) and Yokota (US 2011/0211068), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Li (CN 111,025,645 A)
Regarding Claim 14, Watanabe also teaches wherein the portable terminal is a head-mounted display [0025; 0033-34].
Watanabe does not explicitly teach – but Yokota does teach the second distance measurement range is for a short distance of 30cm or less from the head-mounted display [0039-51]. It would have been obvious to modify the device of Watanabe to including two distance cameras to have different detection ranges to better detect and categorize different types of objects in the wider field of view depending on where the target objects are in the field of view.
Watanabe does not explicitly teach – but Aruga does teach the second distance sensor is installed at a side portion of the head-mounted display to measure a side of the head-mounted display [Abstract]. It would have been obvious to modify the device of Watanabe to include sensors on both sides in order to improve alignment in the final virtual image.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES R HULKA whose telephone number is (571)270-7553. The examiner can normally be reached M-R: 9am-6pm, F: 10am-2pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Helal Algahaim can be reached at 5712705227. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
JAMES R. HULKA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3645
/JAMES R HULKA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645