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
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-8, 11-15, and 18-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by an article entitled “A Novel Setup and Protocol to Measure the Range of Motion of the Wrist and Hand” by Nizamis et al. (“Nizamis”).
As to claim 1, Nizamis discloses a machine vision-based method for determining a range of motion of a joint of a hand of a subject, comprising:
facilitating the subject to perform a hand movement at a preset position;
capturing at least two prior-movement images of the hand when the hand is in a neutral posture before performing the hand movement (see Fig 2 and Section 2.3 – each movement was completed three times starting at neutral each time);
capturing at least two post-movement images of the hand when the hand is in an assessment posture after performing the hand movement (see Fig 2 and Section 2.3 – each movement was completed three times starting at neutral each time);
processing the captured prior-movement images to obtain a plurality of prior-movement key point positions (see Section 2.2 – all data is saved into a .mat file for each tested movement);
processing the captured post-movement images to obtain a plurality of post-movement key point positions (see Section 2.2 – all data is saved into a .mat file for each tested movement); and
calculating the range of motion of the joint based on the plurality of prior-movement key point positions and the plurality of post-movement key point positions (see Fig 5 and Table 1 for computed angles).
As to claim 4, Nizamis further discloses wherein the projection plane is a plane in parallel with a palm plane of the hand or a plane perpendicular to the palm plane (see Fig 1).
As to claim 5, Nizamis further discloses wherein the plurality of sampling points of the hand include: finger tips, distal interphalangeal (DIP) joints, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints and metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints of the hand (see Section 2.3).
As to claim 6, Nizamis further discloses wherein the hand movement is designed by employing a kinematic model presuming a plurality of degrees of freedom of the hand (see Section 2.2 describing the Brekel Pro Hands modeling software).
As to claim 7, Nizamis further discloses wherein the plurality of presumed degrees of freedom of the hand includes: flexion and extension movements of the distal interphalangeal (DIP) joints and the proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints; and flexion, extension, abduction, adduction, and circumduction movements of the metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints (see Fig 2 and associated text).
As to claim 8, Nizamis discloses a machine vision-based system for determining a range of motion of a joint of a hand of a subject, the system comprising:
a supporter configured to facilitating the subject to perform a hand movement at a preset position (see Fig 1 with arm platform (5) and support (4));
at least two cameras configured to:
capture at least two prior-movement images of the hand when the hand is in a neutral posture before performing the hand movement (see Section 2.2 and Fig 2 and associated text; data of a “neutral” position is collected); and
capture at least two post-movement images of the hand when the hand is in an assessment posture after performing the hand movement (see Section 2.2 and Fig 2 and associated text; data of particular movements are collected); and
a processor configured to:
process the captured prior-movement images to obtain a plurality of prior-movement key point positions (see Section 2.2, which describes the software and sensor requirements);
process the captured post-movement images to obtain a plurality of post-movement key point positions (see Section 2.2, which describes the software and sensor requirements); and
calculate the range of motion of the joint based on the plurality of prior-movement key point positions and the plurality of post-movement key point positions (see Table 1).
As to claim 11, Nizamis further discloses wherein the projection plane is a plane in parallel with a palm plane of the hand or a plane perpendicular to the palm plane (see Fig 1).
As to claim 12, Nizamis further discloses wherein the plurality of sampling points of the hand include: finger tips, distal interphalangeal (DIP) joints, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints and metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints of the hand (see Section 2.3).
As to claim 13, Nizamis further discloses wherein the hand movement is designed by employing a kinematic model presuming a plurality of degrees of freedom of the hand (see Section 2.2 describing the Brekel Pro Hands modeling software).
As to claim 14, Nizamis further discloses wherein the plurality of presumed degrees of freedom of the hand includes: flexion and extension movements of the distal interphalangeal (DIP) joints and the proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints; and flexion, extension, abduction, adduction, and circumduction movements of the metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints (see Fig 2 and associated text).
As to claim 15, Nizamis discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program including instructions for performing the machine vision-based method of claim 1 (see treatment of claims 1 and 8).
As to claim 18, Nizamis further discloses wherein the projection plane is a plane in parallel with a palm plane of the hand or a plane perpendicular to the palm plane (see Fig 1).
As to claim 19, Nizamis further discloses wherein the plurality of sampling points of the hand include: finger tips, distal interphalangeal (DIP) joints, proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints and metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints of the hand (see Section 2.3).
As to claim 20, Nizamis further discloses wherein the hand movement is designed by employing a kinematic model presuming a plurality of degrees of freedom of the hand (see Section 2.2 describing the Brekel Pro Hands modeling software).
As to claim 21, Nizamis further discloses wherein the plurality of presumed degrees of freedom of the hand includes:
flexion and extension movements of the distal interphalangeal (DIP) joints and the proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joints; and flexion, extension, abduction, adduction, and circumduction movements of the metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints (see Fig 2 and associated text).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2-3, 9-10, and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nizamis in view of US 2015/0341618 A1 to He et al. (“He”).
As to claim 2, Nizamis fails to disclose the further step of calibrating each of at least two cameras, which are configured to capture images of the hand from at least two perspectives respectively, with respect to a 3D space to obtain a respective camera projection matrix.
However, He discloses calibration of a similar device that is configured to capture images of the hand from at least two perspectives respectively, with respect to a 3D space to obtain a respective camera projection matrix (see [0038]-[0046]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the range of motion method of Nizamis with the calibration shown by He in order to achieve the predictable result of ensuring that the reference coordinate system is correct.
As to claim 3, Nizamis further discloses wherein the plurality of prior-movement key point positions is obtained by:
mapping 2D positions of a plurality of sampling points of the hand in the prior-movement images into the 3D space through the camera projection matrixes to obtain a plurality of 3D prior-movement key point positions; and
projecting the plurality of 3D prior-movement key point positions on a projection plane to obtain the plurality of prior-movement key point positions; and the plurality of post-movement key point positions is obtained by:
mapping 2D positions of the plurality of sampling points of the hand in the post-movement images into the 3D space through the camera projection matrixes to obtain a plurality of 3D post-movement key point positions; and projecting the plurality of 3D post-movement key point positions on the projection plane to obtain the plurality of post-movement key point positions (see Section 2.2, which shows that the 2D images are used to reconstruct the 3D movements of the joints in the local coordinate frame).
As to claim 9, Nizamis fails to disclose wherein each of the at least two cameras are calibrated with respect to a 3D space to obtain a respective camera projection matrix and configured to capture images of the hand from a corresponding perspective.
However, He shows this (see [0038]-[0046]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the range of motion method of Nizamis with the calibration shown by He in order to achieve the predictable result of ensuring that the reference coordinate system is correct.
As to claim 10, Nizamis further discloses wherein the processor is further configured to obtain the plurality of prior-movement key point positions by:
mapping 2D positions of a plurality of sampling points of the hand in the prior-movement images into the 3D space through the camera projection matrixes to obtain a plurality of 3D prior-movement key point positions; and
projecting the plurality of 3D prior-movement key point positions on a projection plane to obtain the plurality of prior-movement key point positions; and
the processor is further configured to obtain the plurality of post-movement key point positions by:
mapping 2D positions of the plurality of sampling points of the hand in the post-movement images into the 3D space through the camera projection matrixes to obtain a plurality of 3D post-movement key point positions; and
projecting the plurality of 3D post-movement key point positions on the projection plane to obtain the plurality of post-movement key point positions (see Section 2.2, which shows that the 2D images are used to reconstruct the 3D movements of the joints in the local coordinate frame).
As to claim 16, Nizamis fails to disclose wherein the method further comprises:
calibrating each of at least two cameras, which are configured to capture images of the hand from at least two perspectives respectively, with respect to a 3D space to obtain a respective camera projection matrix.
However, He discloses this (see [0038]-[0046]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the range of motion method of Nizamis with the calibration shown by He in order to achieve the predictable result of ensuring that the reference coordinate system is correct.
As to claim 17, Nizamis further discloses wherein the plurality of prior-movement key point positions is obtained by:
mapping 2D positions of a plurality of sampling points of the hand in the prior-movement images into the 3D space through the camera projection matrixes to obtain a plurality of 3D prior-movement key point positions; and
projecting the plurality of 3D prior-movement key point positions on a projection plane to obtain the plurality of prior-movement key point positions; and
the plurality of post-movement key point positions is obtained by:
mapping 2D positions of the plurality of sampling points of the hand in the post-movement images into the 3D space through the camera projection matrixes to obtain a plurality of 3D post-movement key point positions; and
projecting the plurality of 3D post-movement key point positions on the projection plane to obtain the plurality of post-movement key point positions (see Section 2.2, which shows that the 2D images are used to reconstruct the 3D movements of the joints in the local coordinate frame).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Eric Messersmith whose telephone number is (571)270-7081. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 830am-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JACQUELINE CHENG can be reached at 571-272-5596. 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.
/ERIC J MESSERSMITH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791