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 filed 12/20/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues Kolesov does not disclose wherein the controller is configured to cause the output interface to output shooting guide information to reduce a failed image caused in view of shot image quality in the image shooting operation, according to the recognized situation in the image shooting operation, the shooting guide information including an alert against the failed image in the image shooting operation for guiding the user to succeed in shooting of each of a plurality of images for modeling of the subject.
Examiner disagrees, Kolesov discloses wherein the controller is configured to cause the output interface to output shooting guide information to reduce a failed image caused in view of shot image quality in the image shooting operation, according to the recognized situation in the image shooting operation, the shooting guide information including an alert against the failed image in the image shooting operation for guiding the user to succeed in shooting of each of a plurality of images for modeling of the subject. (5: 25-46; 28:33-47; 28:63-29:26; Figs. 3-6, 18: e.g. 1820, 20-21).
The missing data could be considered part of image quality e.g. may identify portions of the object with missing data (e.g., image, depth measurement, feature points, or object points) based on a position, angle, or orientation of the image capture component, relative to the object, deviating from an expected position, angle, or orientation in executing a movement of the first set of movements
And the alert could be considered changing the direction of movement with dynamic guiding e.g. The dynamic guiding may, in real time, compensate for inadequate scanning of portions of the object, unexpected or improper positioning of the mobile computing device, and other actions, operations, or circumstances relating to scanning or collecting images or other data
Applicant argues Kolesov in view of Greco does not teach
a controller configured to control image shooting operation for modeling of the subject, the image shooting operation including a plurality of times of imaging based on predetermined shooting setting for a plurality of shooting portions in the subject, predetermined shooting setting including a first imaging parameter defined per a captured image of the subject, wherein in addition to the image shooting based on the predetermined shooting setting, the controller is configured to control the image shooting operation to perform additional image shooting with respect to a specific shooting portion among the plurality of shooting portions, the additional image shooting based on additional shooting setting that is different from the predetermined shooting setting, the additional shooting setting including a second imaging parameter different from the first imaging parameter, and the specific shooting portion has a feature amount for modeling that is less than a predetermined value in an image shot based on the predetermined shooting setting.
Examiner disagrees they Kolesov discloses
12. An imaging apparatus for performing image shooting for modeling of a subject, the imaging apparatus comprising: an image sensor configured to capture an image of a subject to generate image data (3:32-4:15 e.g. “The application may be a vision-based system configured to map and reconstruct a three-dimensional model using sensors (e.g., a visible light camera, a depth sensor, a gyroscope, and an accelerometer) available on a smart phone or a mobile device in real-time or near real-time”); and a controller configured to control image shooting operation for modeling of the subject, the image shooting operation including a plurality of times of imaging based on predetermined shooting setting for a plurality of shooting portions in the subject (Fig. 3; Figs 4-6; Figs. 20-21), wherein in addition to the image shooting based on the predetermined shooting setting, the controller is configured to control the image shooting operation to perform additional image shooting with respect to a specific shooting portion among the plurality of shooting portions, the additional image shooting based on additional shooting setting that is different from the predetermined shooting setting (Fig. 3; Figs 4-6; Figs. 20-21), the additional shooting setting including a second imaging parameter different from the first imaging parameter, and the specific shooting portion has a feature amount for modeling that is less than a predetermined value in an image shot based on the predetermined shooting setting (Fig. 18; 10:4-49; 28:14-29:26; Upon detecting the portions of the object without sufficient data or the deviation in the movement, the trajectory selection component 230 and the presentation component 240 cooperate to identify movements (e.g., the second set of movements) which properly position the image capture component to capture the missing views. At this point, the presentation component 240 may halt, pause, or otherwise interrupt presentation of the first set of movements, present the corrective movements sequentially, and resume presentation of the first set of movements after completion of the second set of movements or after obtaining the data by the pose estimation component 250).
Kolesov does not explicitly disclose the following, however Greco teaches predetermined shooting setting including a first imaging parameter defined per a captured image of the subject (Fig. 3: 308-24).
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., poor shot image quality (e.g., over/under-exposure, blur, obstruction, etc.)) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). 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).
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, 6-7, 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kolesov et al. US10841486
Kolesov discloses:
1. An imaging apparatus for causing a user to perform image shooting for modeling of a subject, the imaging apparatus comprising: an image sensor configured to capture an image of a subject to generate image data (3:32-4:15 e.g. “The application may be a vision-based system configured to map and reconstruct a three-dimensional model using sensors (e.g., a visible light camera, a depth sensor, a gyroscope, and an accelerometer) available on a smart phone or a mobile device in real-time or near real-time”); an output interface configured to output information to the user (3:32-4:15 e.g. “The application generates augmented reality elements describing movements of the image capture device and presents these augmented reality elements to the user”); and a controller configured to recognize a situation in which image shooting operation is executed by the imaging apparatus, to control the output interface, the image shooting operation including a plurality of times of imaging by the image sensor for modeling the subject, wherein the controller is configured to cause the output interface to output shooting guide information to reduce a failed image caused in view of shot image quality in the image shooting operation, according to the recognized situation in the image shooting operation, the shooting guide information including an alert against the failed image in the image shooting operation for guiding the user to succeed in shooting of each of a plurality of images for modeling of the subject. (5: 25-46; 28:33-47; 28:63-29:26; Figs. 3-6, 18: e.g. 1820, 20-21).
2. The imaging apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the shooting guide information includes map information indicating a successful region and an unsuccessful region respectively in a plurality of regions corresponding to the plurality of images for modeling of the subject, the successful region being a region where the image shooting for modeling is successful, and the unsuccessful region being a region where the image shooting for modeling is not successful (Fig. 5: progress element 506 and current element 508; Figs. 14-18).
3. The imaging apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the successful region and the unsuccessful region are arranged along a three-dimensional shape of the subject in the map information (Fig. 5: progress element 506 and current element 508; Figs. 18).
4. The imaging apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the shooting guide information includes a pointer indicating a position corresponding to an image being shot by the user in map information associated with the subject (Fig. 11: 1008).
6. The imaging apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to control the shooting guide information to notify precautions to be failure of the image shooting for modeling of the subject, according to the recognized situation in the image shooting operation (Fig. 18; 10:4-49; 28:14-29:26; Upon detecting the portions of the object without sufficient data or the deviation in the movement, the trajectory selection component 230 and the presentation component 240 cooperate to identify movements (e.g., the second set of movements) which properly position the image capture component to capture the missing views. At this point, the presentation component 240 may halt, pause, or otherwise interrupt presentation of the first set of movements, present the corrective movements sequentially, and resume presentation of the first set of movements after completion of the second set of movements or after obtaining the data by the pose estimation component 250).
7. The imaging apparatus according to claim 1, wherein, the controller is configured to control, in response to causing failure of the image shooting for modeling of the subject, the shooting guide information to notify a factor for the failure of the image shooting (Fig. 18; 10:4-49; 28:14-29:26; Upon detecting the portions of the object without sufficient data or the deviation in the movement, the trajectory selection component 230 and the presentation component 240 cooperate to identify movements (e.g., the second set of movements) which properly position the image capture component to capture the missing views. At this point, the presentation component 240 may halt, pause, or otherwise interrupt presentation of the first set of movements, present the corrective movements sequentially, and resume presentation of the first set of movements after completion of the second set of movements or after obtaining the data by the pose estimation component 250).
10. The imaging apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the image shooting operation includes a plurality of times of imaging based on predetermined shooting setting for a plurality of shooting portions in the subject, in addition to the image shooting based on the predetermined shooting setting, the controller is configured to control the image shooting operation to perform additional image shooting with respect to a specific shooting portion among the plurality of shooting portions, the additional image shooting based on additional shooting setting that is different from the predetermined shooting setting, and the specific shooting portion has a feature amount for modeling that is less than a predetermined value in an image shot based on the predetermined shooting setting (Fig. 18; 10:4-49; 28:14-29:26; certain operations of the method 1800 may be performed using one or more operations of the methods 300, 900, 1400, or 1700 or as sub-operations).
11. The imaging apparatus according to claim 10, the controller is configured to control the shooting guide information to instruct the user to pause for the additional image shooting based on the additional shooting setting (Fig. 18; 10:4-49; 28:14-29:26; Upon detecting the portions of the object without sufficient data or the deviation in the movement, the trajectory selection component 230 and the presentation component 240 cooperate to identify movements (e.g., the second set of movements) which properly position the image capture component to capture the missing views. At this point, the presentation component 240 may halt, pause, or otherwise interrupt presentation of the first set of movements, present the corrective movements sequentially, and resume presentation of the first set of movements after completion of the second set of movements or after obtaining the data by the pose estimation component 250).
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.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kolesov in view of Burgess US 2018/0295335
Kolesov discloses:
8. The imaging apparatus according to claim 1,
Kolesov does not explicitly disclose the following, however Burgess teaches wherein the controller is configured to generate shooting data as a result of the image shooting operation, the shooting data including first and second images having different image qualities from each other, and the image quality of the second image is more suitable for information processing for modeling than the image quality of the first image (0067).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify the reference(s) as above in order to make a high resolution stereo pair of the object imaged for visualization (Burgess 0067).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kolesov in view of Kim et al. US 2019/0058834
9. The imaging apparatus according to claim 1,
Kolesov does not explicitly disclose the following, however Kim teaches wherein the controller is configured to remove a specific image from all images shot in the image shooting operation to generate shooting data indicating a remaining image, and the specific image includes at least one of a failed image or an overlap image, the failed image being obtained when the image shooting for modeling of the subject fails, and the overlap image having a positional relation duplicate with the remaining image, the positional relation being defined between the subject and the imaging apparatus at the time of shooting (0205-6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify the reference(s) as above in order to duplicate images are deleted when images taken in the Always on Camera mode are stored, memory may be utilized in an efficient manner, and overuse of the memory may be prevented (Kim 0206).
Claim(s) 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kolesov in view of Greco et al. US 2022/0301266
12. An imaging apparatus for performing image shooting for modeling of a subject, the imaging apparatus comprising: an image sensor configured to capture an image of a subject to generate image data (3:32-4:15 e.g. “The application may be a vision-based system configured to map and reconstruct a three-dimensional model using sensors (e.g., a visible light camera, a depth sensor, a gyroscope, and an accelerometer) available on a smart phone or a mobile device in real-time or near real-time”); and a controller configured to control image shooting operation for modeling of the subject, the image shooting operation including a plurality of times of imaging based on predetermined shooting setting for a plurality of shooting portions in the subject (Fig. 3; Figs 4-6; Figs. 20-21), wherein in addition to the image shooting based on the predetermined shooting setting, the controller is configured to control the image shooting operation to perform additional image shooting with respect to a specific shooting portion among the plurality of shooting portions, the additional image shooting based on additional shooting setting that is different from the predetermined shooting setting (Fig. 3; Figs 4-6; Figs. 20-21), the additional shooting setting including a second imaging parameter different from the first imaging parameter, and the specific shooting portion has a feature amount for modeling that is less than a predetermined value in an image shot based on the predetermined shooting setting (Fig. 18; 10:4-49; 28:14-29:26; Upon detecting the portions of the object without sufficient data or the deviation in the movement, the trajectory selection component 230 and the presentation component 240 cooperate to identify movements (e.g., the second set of movements) which properly position the image capture component to capture the missing views. At this point, the presentation component 240 may halt, pause, or otherwise interrupt presentation of the first set of movements, present the corrective movements sequentially, and resume presentation of the first set of movements after completion of the second set of movements or after obtaining the data by the pose estimation component 250).
Kolesov does not explicitly disclose the following, however Greco teaches predetermined shooting setting including a first imaging parameter defined per a captured image of the subject (Fig. 3: 308-24).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify the reference(s) as above in order to compare the taken image of step 314 to the 3D model or to a variant of the 3D model to ascertain a confidence level. (Greco 0043).
13. The imaging apparatus according to claim 12, wherein with respect to another shooting portion than the specific shooting portion among the plurality of shooting portions, the controller is configured to control the image shooting operation to perform the image shooting based on the predetermined shooting setting, without performing the additional image shooting (Fig. 18; 10:4-49; 28:14-29:26; 1820, “while detecting the first set of object points, the pose estimation component 250 identifies one or more portions of the object without sufficient support (e.g., missing depth information, insufficient object points, or too few images of an object surface), which correspond or may correspond to unmodified portions of the graphical depiction of the object. In some embodiments, the pose estimation component 250 identifies the portions of the object without corresponding object points or surfaces or with an unmodified depiction, which may correspond with one or more points or surfaces, in cooperation with the augmentation component 260. In such instances, the augmentation component 260 detects or identifies areas on a graphical depiction of the object corresponding to portions of the object for which additional views may be gathered”; if there are no instances identified needing additional support the additional shooting won’t happen).
14. The imaging apparatus according to claim 12,
Kolesov does not explicitly disclose the following, however Greco teaches wherein the controller is configured to detect failure or success in the image shooting based on the predetermined shooting setting for each shooting portion in the image shooting operation, wherein the controller is configured to control the image shooting operation to: in a case where the failure of image shooting is detected, perform the image shooting based on the predetermined shooting setting again, with respect to the shooting portion; and in a case where the success of image shooting is detected, perform the additional image shooting based on the additional shooting setting, in response to the shooting portion being the specific shooting portion, in addition to the image shooting based on the predetermined shooting setting (Fig. 3: 308-24).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify the reference(s) as above in order to compare the taken image of step 314 to the 3D model or to a variant of the 3D model to ascertain a confidence level. (Greco 0043).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kolesov and Greco in view of Burgess US 2018/0295335
Kolesov discloses:
15. The imaging apparatus according to claim 12,
Kolesov does not explicitly disclose the following, however Burgess teaches wherein the controller is configured to control the image shooting operation to: shoot first and second images based on the predetermined shooting setting, with respect to another shooting portion than the specific shooting portion among the plurality of shooting portions, the first and second images having mutually different image qualities; and shoot the first image based on the predetermined shooting setting and the second image based on the additional shooting setting, with respect to the specific shooting portion (0067).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify the reference(s) as above in order to make a high resolution stereo pair of the object imaged for visualization (Burgess 0067).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 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.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any 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 JOSEPH W BECKER whose telephone number is (571)270-7301. The examiner can normally be reached flexible usually 10-6.
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, Joseph G Ustaris can be reached at 5712727383. 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.
/JOSEPH W BECKER/Examiner, Art Unit 2483
Prosecution Insights