RLambGirl#03Detailed Action
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Acknowledgements
2. Applicant’s arguments/remarks, filed on 06/24/2025, are acknowledged. Amended claims 1, 3, 6-8, 10-14, and newly added on claims 16-17 are acknowledged. Claims 1, 3-17 remain pending and have been examined.
Response to Arguments
3. Claim objection regarding claim 13 is withdraw.
4. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-9 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
5. Applicant’s arguments, see pg.13-14, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 10-13 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Mise et al., US 2013/0002537 A1; see below for claims 10-13.
6. Applicant's arguments with regards to claim 14 has been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claim 14 is still in the alternative with regards to i) and ii); wherein all amended subject matter of claim 14 pertains alternative ii).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
7. Claim 17 is 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.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "carrying out the coarse scan". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim; as claim 17 is directed to being dependent on claim 11.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
8. 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 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.
9. Claims 1, 4-7, 9, 11, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Mise et al. (US 2013/0002537 A1).
10. Regarding claim 1, an autofocus method for automated finding of a present best focal plane (13) associated with an object (3) which is visualized using the imaging system (1) (…Mise teaches an imaging apparatus configured to move a focusing lens with respect to a subject through an autofocus function…) the method comprising:
by tuning a focus lens (6) of an optical imaging system (1),
displacing a location of a focal plane (12) of the optical imaging system (1) in a z-scan (17) within a scanning range (14) along an optical z-axis (8) (…[0147-0148] teaches an auto-focus operation performing a scanning over a scan range, with respect to a focusing lens…), and wherein finding the best focal plane (13) is accelerated by
automatically adapting at least one parameter of the z-scan (17) as a function of at least one of
a) a currently set optical zoom level of the imaging system (…wherein [0159] teaches that driving ranges of the focusing lens are set for obtaining autofocus evaluation values with respect to a zoom position for proper subject focusing…), wherein the at least one parameter comprises at least one of
i) a number of the focal planes (12) optically scanned using the z-scan (17)(…Fig. 13 teaches different scanning ranges that may be performed; as taught in [0144, 0158] in the case a focal point is not detected in a first scanning operation further scanning is performed so to obtain different focal points of subjects; thus it is evident that at least one subject corresponding to a focal point is a component of the scanning operation…),
or
b) a current estimated value which is estimated for a working distance (11) between the imaging system (1) and said object (3), wherein the at least one parameter comprises at least one of i) a length (16) of a scanning range (14) (…wherein [0038, 0042] teach a first or a second scan processing in which a subject distance is estimated as a function of focal distance; further, [0036, 0037] teach the first and second scan processing to include scan ranges which are related to a defined distance or a range of movement…)
11. Regarding claim 4, Mise teaches the autofocus method as claimed in claim 1 (see claim 1 above), wherein
by adapting the at least one parameter at least one of
b) a present change of the depth of field is compensated for, by adapting at least one of a spatial scanning frequency or
a length (16) of the z-scan (…wherein [0149] teaches that an autofocus function scan may be changed (to a different length; see Fig. 13, e.g.) in a case where a focal position is not found in a first scanned region…).
12. Regarding claim 5, Mise teaches the autofocus method as claimed in claim 1 (see claim 1 above), wherein
the estimated value for the working distance is ascertained using at least one of
a) an additional sensor (…wherein [0054] teaches that subject distance information may read on to be obtained by face detection information or monitoring information…).
13. Regarding claim 6, Mise teaches the autofocus method as claimed in claim 1 (see claim 1 above), wherein
the at least one parameter comprises the optical zoom level, and upon increase of the optical zoom level (…wherein [0186] teaches that a completion of a zooming operation may be viewed as a start point for a scanning process…) at least one of
a) a length (16) of the scanning range (14) is shrunken (…wherein [0187-0188], with reference to Fig. 18, teaches the performance of a scanning wherein the scan is based on a start position within a particular restricted region and if an AF evaluation peak is detected a focal position is determined and no further scanning is performed…).
14. Regarding claim 7, the autofocus method as claimed in claim 1 (see claim 1 above), wherein
Upon decrease of the estimated value for the working distance, at least one of
a) the length of the scanning range is shrunken (…wherein [0036] teaches a first scan processing in which a focusing lens position near distance to a subject obtained may be set as a scan range; thus it is evident that the scan range is relative to a distance of a subject that is detected…).
15. Regarding claim 9, Mise teaches the autofocus method as claimed in claim 1 (see claim 1 above), wherein
the scanning range (14) is continuously traversed in that the location of the focal plane (12) is continuously displaced within the scanning range (…wherein, with regards to Fig. 13 (e.g.), [0148] teaches that the arrows in a scanning direction of the scan range are sampling points which may be correspond to a focal position…) (14), by at least one of
b) the focus lens (6) moving continuously (…wherein with regards to Fig. 13, a scanning operation (S502, or S505, or S505) can be viewed as a continues movement until a focal position is obtained…).
16. Regarding claim 11, Mise teaches the autofocus method as claimed in claim 1 (see claim 1 above), wherein
to find the best focal plane (13), at least two z-scans (27, 28) are carried out in succession within the scanning range (14), and in each case the location of a current focal plane (12) is displaced within the scanning range (14) (…wherein as evidenced in Fig. 13, Mise teaches a first scan, a second scan and a third scan wherein in each scan sample points are taught for obtaining AF evaluation, as taught in [0148]…),wherein the two z-scans (27, 28) differ by at least one of
a respective length (…wherein the lengths of the first, second, and third scan have different lengths; Fig. 13…) (18).
17. Regarding claim 16, the method as claimed in claim 11 (see claim 11 above), wherein
the two z-scans (27, 28) at least partially overlap (…wherein as evidenced in Fig. 13 or Fig. 17 (Mise), Mise teaches a first scan, a second scan and a third scan wherein overlap regions are indicated with respect to a couple of scanning groups…).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
18. 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.
19. Claims 10, 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mise et al. (US 2013/0002537 A1) in view of Hung et al. (US 2022/0180492 A1).
20. Regarding claim 10, Mise teaches the autofocus method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the scanning range (14) is continuously traversed in that the location of the focal plane (12) is continuously displaced within the scanning range (…wherein, with regards to Fig. 13 (e.g.), [0148] teaches that the arrows in a scanning direction of the scan range are sampling points which may be correspond to a focal position…).
Mise doesn’t further teach the method further comprising
operating an image sensor (9), via which the different focal planes (12) are acquired or scanned as individual images (19) (…however, Hung, in [0003], teaches a mobile camera captures a series of images by selectively sweeping an autofocus lens to capture an image at each focal distance in the set. Individual focus areas from each of the images in the set are combined to form a single image…), in a rolling shutter mode (…wherein the use of a line-by-line/rolling shutter process of image capturing is well known and applied in many image sensing elements…),
so that different image areas (20a, 20b, 20c) of these individual images correspond to different z-positions (z1, z2, z3) along the optical z-axis (8), since the respective individual image (19) is recorded while the location of the focal plane (12) changes, and adapting an evaluation area (21) within the respective individual image (19), which is evaluated by a controller (10) to assess the respective focal plane (12) and thereby to accelerate finding the best focal plane (13) (…Hung teaches in [0005] a plurality of segments each defining a unique focus area within a field-of-view of the mobile camera, maintaining a set of focal distances corresponding to different segments from the plurality of segments, sweeping an autofocus lens of the mobile camera to one or more of the focal distances from the set of focal distances, and capturing a sample image at each of the one or more of the focal distances from the set of focal distances swept by the autofocus lens; further, [0032] teaches a processor of user equipment which executes instructions to implement functions of a camera module as further detailed in [0043-0044]…), as a function of at least one of
b) the number of focal planes (12) to be acquired (…wherein a plurality of segments may correspond to a number of focal planes.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the teaching of Hung could have been implemented in addition to the teaching of Mise so to capture a plurality of images corresponding to different focus areas in an autofocus process that may produce an all-in-focus image by combining the plurality of images…).
21. Regarding claim 12, Mise teaches the autofocus method as claimed in claim 1 (see claim 1 above), wherein Mise further teaches
to find the best focal plane (13), at least two z-scans (27, 28) are carried out in succession within the scanning range (14) (…wherein Mise teaches that successive scans may be carried out, with regards to Fig. 13…).
Mise does not further teach wherein
the at least two z-scans (27, 28) comprise a coarse scan (27)(…however, Hung teaches in [0040], a higher fidelity depth map may correspond to a coarse scan, as such an original depth map…) and
a fine scan (28) following with respect to time (…wherein the lower fidelity depth map, as taught in [0041], may correspond to a fine scan…)
the coarse scan (27) takes place at a lower zoom level at lower image magnification than the fine scan (28) (…Mise in [0171] teaches a zooming that ranges between wide end and tele end. Thus, a coarse scan may correspond to a wide angle lens scan. Further,
Hung in [0039] teaches the camera module 112 determines a depth map of the camera 110 's field-of-view. The depth map may include an array of points, with each point corresponding to a focal distance (wherein focal distances are at different approximate values) between the camera 110 and an object that is visible at a horizontal and vertical location within the camera 110 's field-of-view; as such the camera module 112 segments the depth map into a discrete quantity of focal distances afterwards (which may correspond to a higher magnification level), as taught in [0041-0042].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the teachings of Hung could further enhance the teachings of Mise, so to implement the sampling point in a scan range as taught by Mise in accordance with the teachings of Hung’s variable approximate focal distance…).
22. Regarding claim 13, Mise teaches the autofocus method as claimed in claim 1 (see claim 1 above), wherein Mise further teaches to find the best focal plane (13), at least two z-scans (27, 28) are carried out in succession within the scanning range (14) (…wherein Mise teaches that successive scans may be carried out, with regards to Fig. 13…).
Mise does not further teach wherein
the at least two z-scans (27), 28) comprise
a coarse scan (27) and a fine scan (28) following with respect to time, and at least one of
a length (18a) of the coarse scan (27) is greater than a length (18b) of the fine scan (28) (…wherein a coarse scan and fine scan are mapped as limited in claim 12 (see claim 12); Hung, in [0041], teaches fewer discrete focal distances defined in a reduction of fidelity vs. an original depth map; thus this may correspond to different lengths defined within two depth maps.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that different scanning methods to autofocus can be implemented as taught by Hung, thus to account for different amounts of focal positions to further compliment the teachings of Mise’s usage of wide angle and telephoto photography.…).
23. Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Bickert et al. US 2015/0177504 A1.
24. Regarding claim 14, an optical imaging system (1) for visualizing an object (3) during a medical intervention (…Bickert in [0050] teaches a microscopy system 100 for examining a specimen, Fig. 1…), the optical imaging system comprising:
a zoom optics unit (4), which is adjustable by a zoom actuator (5), to adapt an optical zoom level (…[0060] teaches a specimen camera 252 to include one or more objective lenses that magnify(zoom) a specimen area to allow the camera to capture a magnified image…),
a focus lens (6), which is tunable by a focus actuator (7), to adapt a location of a focal plane (12) along an optical z-axis (8) during a z-scan(17) (…[0107] teaches image settings of camera 254 may include optical characteristics that may be adjusted automatically, wherein autofocus may be used to focus on a first position in a region of interest within a
specimen; relative movement may be effected by moving a spindle 230 with a z-direction
motor or it may be effected by moving the objective lenses…),
an image sensor (9) for recording image data (…[0106] teaches an image sensor 108 as part of camera 254…), and
a controller (10) for activating the focus actuator (7), wherein the controller (10) is configured to implement an autofocus by activating at least one of
i)the focus actuator (7) (…[0052] teaches a control unit 122 to control the operation of a microscope 104 with instructions executable to control various motors of motion sub-systems, image sensors, and optics 110; wherein as taught in [0050] optics 110 may include lenses; further [0107] teaches [0107] teaches image settings of camera 254 may include optical characteristics that may be adjusted automatically, wherein autofocus may be used to focus on a first position in a region of interest within a specimen…).
25. Regarding claim 15, Bickert teaches the optical imaging system (1) as claimed in claim
14 (see claim 14 above), wherein the controller (10) is configured to activate the at least one of
the focus actuator (7) or the zoom actuator (5) in order to carry out an autofocus method to
determine a present best focal plane (13) including the steps of by tuning the focus lens (6),
displacing a location of the focal plane (12) in a z-scan (17) within a scanning range (14) along
the optical z-axis (8)(…as taught in [0107], during the autofocus procedure, relative motion
between slides 212 and objective lenses of specimen camera 254 may be required in a
longitudinal direction. This relative movement may be effected by moving
spindle 230 with a z-direction motor or it may be effected by moving the objective lenses
of specimen camera 254 while maintaining slides 212 (microscope slides) in the same z-
direction position...), and
automatically adapting at least one parameter of the z-scan (17) as a function of at least
one of
a) a currently set optical zoom level of the imaging system (1) (…[0106] teaches
slide 212 may be moved within the field of view of specimen camera 254 such that image sensor 108 of specimen camera 254 may capture images of specimen area 414 using the
appropriate magnification, wherein as taught in [0107] image settings of specimen
camera 254 may also include optical characteristics that may be adjusted
automatically...).
Allowable Subject Matter
23. Claims 3, 8, and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
24. Regarding claim 3, the prior art references, alone or in combination, do not teach a spatial scanning frequency of the z-scan that is dependent on the length of the scanning range.
25. Regarding claim 8, the prior art teaches sampling points based on contrast along the scanning range that is performed in an autofocus operation. However, the prior art reference does not explicitly teach a width of determination relative to an optical zoom level or the working distance.
26. Regarding claim 17, the prior art fails to teach a setting of a minimal zoom level or the execution of a maximum scanning range with regards to a coarse scan.
(Also, refer to 112b for further correction)
Conclusion
27. 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 SURAFEL YILMAKASSAYE whose telephone number is (703)756-1910. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, TWYLER HASKINS can be reached at (571)272-7406. 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.
/SURAFEL YILMAKASSAYE/Examiner, Art Unit 2639
/TWYLER L HASKINS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2639
Prosecution Insights