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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/17/2023, 04/03/2024 and 07/25/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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 1-5, 7-13 and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yukinao Kenjo (US 20240061123 A1) in view of Serge Hustin (US 20190346542 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kenjo discloses a method (¶ [6]), comprising:
acquiring an image in response to projecting a spot pattern onto a scene (¶ [80]), each pixel of the image obtained from electric charges accumulated during collection phases (¶ [80-81]);
determining an in-phase component value and a quadrature component value for each pixel (¶ [61]);
determining a confidence value for each pixel as a function of the electric charges (¶ [61]);
forming a confidence map based on the confidence values (¶ [61] confidence values for each pixel yields confidence image);
determining a plurality of local maximum points for the confidence map, the determining comprising determining a pixel within a first window for each local maximum point with the greatest value and with a value greater than a first threshold (¶ [56] ¶ [84]);
selecting, for each local maximum point, one or more pixels within a second window having a value greater than a second threshold, wherein the second window includes the local maximum point (¶ [84]), and wherein each local maximum point and the one or more pixels form a respective confidence area (¶ [84-85]); and
determining, for each local maximum point, a corresponding depth (¶ [84]).
Kenjo fails to explicitly disclose determining, for each confidence area of the image, an average in-phase component value and an average quadrature component value; and determining a corresponding depth based on the average in-phase component value and the average quadrature component value.
Hustin, in the same field of endeavor of utilizing the Time-of-Flight principle which requires a plurality of subsequent measurements as from which depth computations are performed to estimate real distance of objects from a camera (¶ [2]), teaches determining an average in-phase component value and an average quadrature component value (¶ [66]) and determining a corresponding depth based on the average in-phase component value and the average quadrature component value (¶ [41-42] and ¶ [73]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed for the method as disclosed by Kenjo comprising acquiring an image in response to projecting a spot pattern onto a scene and determining, for each local maximum point of a confidence image, a corresponding depth to utilize the teachings of Hustin which teaches determining an average in-phase component value and an average quadrature component value and determining a corresponding depth based on the average in-phase component value and the average quadrature component value to reduce errors caused by changes in a scene and improve accuracy of distance calculations.
Regarding claim 2, Kenjo discloses the method of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1), wherein the first threshold is greater than the second threshold (¶ [37-38]).
Regarding claim 3. Kenjo discloses the method of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1), wherein each local maximum point in the first window is not located on an edge of the first window (¶ [84] spot peak pixels located in center of spot).
Regarding claim 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the second window is larger or equal to the first window (¶ [84] same spot pixel region indicates equal-sized windows).
Regarding claim 5, Kenjo discloses the method of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1), wherein the method is based on indirect time of flight (iToF) principles (¶ [3]).
Regarding claim 7, Kenjo discloses the method of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1), wherein the confidence value is determined based on an amplitude value of the pixel or the amplitude value of the pixel and an offset value for the pixel (¶ [84]).
Regarding claim 8, Kenjo discloses a device (¶ [29]), comprising:
a non-transitory memory storage comprising instructions (¶ [103]); and
a processor in communication with the non-transitory memory storage (¶ [103]), the processor configured to execute instructions to:
acquire an image in response to projecting a spot pattern onto a scene, each pixel of the image obtained from electric charges accumulated during collection phases (see rejection of claim 1);
determine an in-phase component value and a quadrature component value for each pixel (see rejection of claim 1);
determine a confidence value for each pixel as a function of the electric charges (see rejection of claim 1);
form a confidence map based on the confidence values (see rejection of claim 1);
determine a plurality of local maximum points for the confidence map, the determining comprising determining a pixel within a first window for each local maximum point with the greatest value and with a value greater than a first threshold (see rejection of claim 1);
select, for each local maximum point, one or more pixels within a second window having a value greater than a second threshold, wherein the second window includes the local maximum point, and wherein each local maximum point and the one or more pixels form a respective confidence area (see rejection of claim 1);
determine, for each confidence area of the image, an average in-phase component value and an average quadrature component value (see rejection of claim 1); and
determine, for each local maximum point, a corresponding depth based on the average in-phase component value and the average quadrature component value (see rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 9, Kenjo discloses the device of claim 8 (see rejection of claim 8), wherein the first threshold is greater than the second threshold (see rejection of claim 2).
Regarding claim 10, Kenjo discloses the device of claim 8 (see rejection of claim 8), wherein each local maximum point in the first window is not located on an edge of the first window (see rejection of claim 3).
Regarding claim 11, Kenjo discloses the device of claim 8 (see rejection of claim 8), wherein the second window is larger or equal to the first window (see rejection of claim 4).
Regarding claim 12, Kenjo discloses the device of claim 8 (see rejection of claim 8), wherein the device comprises an image sensor configured to acquire the image (¶ [46]).
Regarding claim 13, Kenjo discloses the device of claim 8 (see rejection of claim 8), wherein device operates under indirect time of flight (iToF) principles (see rejection of claim 5).
Regarding claim 15, Kenjo discloses a non-transitory computer-readable media storing computer instructions (¶ [103]), that when executed by a processor, cause the processor to:
acquire an image in response to projecting a spot pattern onto a scene, each pixel of the image obtained from electric charges accumulated during collection phases (see rejection of claim 1);
determine an in-phase component value and a quadrature component value for each pixel (see rejection of claim 1);
determine a confidence value for each pixel as a function of the electric charges (see rejection of claim 1);
form a confidence map based on the confidence values (see rejection of claim 1);
determine a plurality of local maximum points for the confidence map, the determining comprising determining a pixel within a first window for each local maximum point with the greatest value and with a value greater than a first threshold (see rejection of claim 1);
select, for each local maximum point, one or more pixels within a second window having a value greater than a second threshold, wherein the second window includes the local maximum point, and wherein each local maximum point and the one or more pixels form a respective confidence area (see rejection of claim 1);
determine, for each confidence area of the image, an average in-phase component value and an average quadrature component value (see rejection of claim 1); and
determine, for each local maximum point, a corresponding depth based on the average in-phase component value and the average quadrature component value (see rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 16, Kenjo discloses the non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15 (see rejection of claim 15), wherein the first threshold is greater than the second threshold (see rejection of claim 2).
Regarding claim 17, Kenjo discloses the non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15 (see rejection of claim 15), wherein each local maximum point in the first window is not located on an edge of the first window (see rejection of claim 3).
Regarding claim 18, Kenjo discloses the non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15 (see rejection of claim 15), wherein the second window is larger or equal to the first window (see rejection of claim 4).
Regarding claim 19, Kenjo discloses the non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15 (see rejection of claim 15), wherein the corresponding depth is calculated as a function of phase lag, the phase lag calculated from the average in-phase component value and the average quadrature component value (see rejection of claim 1).
Claims 6, 14 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kenjo in view of Hustin as applied to claims 1, 8 and 15 above, and further in view of Fumiyuki Shiratani (US 20020075456 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Kenjo discloses the method of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1).
Kenjo fails to explicitly disclose determining a color for each spot pattern based on the corresponding depth determined for each local maximum point.
Shiratani, in the same field of endeavor of depth image acquisition using pattern projection to project a pattern on an object to be measured (Abstract), teaches determining a color for each spot pattern based on the corresponding depth determined for each local maximum point (¶ [29] and ¶ [91]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed for the method as disclosed by Kenjo comprising acquiring an image in response to projecting a spot pattern onto a scene and determining, for each local maximum point of a confidence image, a corresponding depth to utilize the teachings of Shiratani which teaches determining a color for each spot pattern based on the corresponding depth determined for each local maximum point to provide a 3D image acquisition method for performing spatial pattern encoding with improved accuracy in color determination.
Regarding claim 14, Kenjo discloses the device of claim 8 (see rejection of claim 8), wherein the processor is configured to execute instructions to determine a color for each spot pattern based on the corresponding depth determined for each local maximum point (see rejection of claim 6).
Regarding claim 20, Kenjo discloses the non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15 (see rejection of claim 15), wherein the computer instructions, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to determine a color for each spot pattern based on the corresponding depth determined for each local maximum point (see rejection of claim 6).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMARES Q WASHINGTON whose telephone number is (571) 270-1585. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30am-4:30pm.
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, Akwasi M. Sarpong can be reached at (571) 270-3438. 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.
/JAMARES Q WASHINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2681
September 17, 2025