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 Amendment
The amendments entered November 21st 2025 have been entered. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the 35 USC 101 rejections previously set forth in the non-final office action mailed August 21st 2025. Amended claims 1, 3, 4 and 10 no longer invoke interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). Applicants amendments to claims 4 and 10 have overcome the previously set forth 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections. Applicant’s amendments to the specification have overcome the previously set forth objections to the drawings, and they are accordingly withdrawn. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the previously set forth 35 U.S.C. 102 rejections, however, the claims stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103.
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, 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morohoshi (JP 2013051636 A) in view of Nakajima (US 20180367787 A1), Yoshimura (US 20200329227 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Morohoshi teaches an information processing apparatus (paragraph [0001]) comprising a processor (paragraph [0032]-[0037] parallax image converter) configured to:
generate a plane image that includes an image element (paragraph [0034]), wherein
the image element indicates a relative position of a corresponding viewpoint (paragraph [0039]) with respect to a center of a viewing area for each of a plurality of viewpoints of a viewer (paragraph [0039]),
the plurality of viewpoints is set in the viewing area (paragraph [0039]),
generate a test pattern based on a multiplexing operation of a plurality of planes images (paragraphs [0014]-[0016]) wherein an appearance of the image element (paragraph [0014] parallax images) changes (paragraph [0014] & [0015]) based on a viewing position of the viewer (paragraphs [0017], [0026], [0028]), and the plurality of plane images includes the plane image (paragraphs [0034], [0039], [0040]).
Morohoshi describes generating views of a stereoscopic image. The stereoscopic viewing specifically comprises a plurality of parallax images displayed on a liquid crystal panel. Furthermore, the viewing area of Morohoshi is determined according to the “relative positional relationship” between the lenticular lens (analogous to the viewer, as a viewer views through the lens) and the displayed parallax image. Therefore the parallax image has a positional relationship with the viewing area and the lenticular lens. This is analogous to the image element indicating a positional relationship between a viewer and viewing area. Morohoshi describes using the center of the liquid crystal panel (viewing area) as the origin for determining position information of the viewer. Morohoshi also describes dividing pixel information of the nine parallax images to be displayed in the right and left eyes. This process of combining different image signals can be considered multiplexing.
Morohoshi fails to teach the image element includes a rod-shaped portion,
and the rod-shaped portion indicates a rotational posture based on:
a direction of deviation of the corresponding viewpoint from the center of the viewing area; and
a magnitude of the deviation; and
However Nakajima teaches the image element includes a rod- shaped portion, and the rod-shaped portion indicates a rotational posture (paragraph [0140]). Nakajima describes the use of a “marker such as a rod” to designate the viewing direction (referred to as “line of sight of the person”). This rod facing the same direction as the line of sight can be considered analogous to a rod-shaped portion indicating a rotational posture.
Nakajima can be considered analogous to the claimed invention as it is in the same field of invention of image processing and stereoscopic image display. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the rod marker of Nakajima with the teachings of Morohoshi to implement a method of marking the viewing direction.
Nakajima fails to teach a rotational posture based on: a direction of deviation of the corresponding viewpoint from the center of the viewing area; and a magnitude of the deviation;.
However, Yoshimura teaches a rotational posture based on:
a direction of deviation of the corresponding viewpoint from the center of the viewing area (paragraph [0067]); and
a magnitude of the deviation (paragraphs [0048], [0052], [0093]-[0095]);
Yoshimura calculates rotation with respect to the image center and calculates the difference between a rotation base point of a reference viewpoint and a rotation base point of another virtual camera, which is a magnitude of the deviation of the two rotation base points.
Yoshimura can be considered analogous to the claimed invention as it is in the same field of image processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teachings of Yoshimura with the rotation marker of Nakajima and the teachings of Morohoshi to improve updating and generating of viewpoint information for use in displaying multiple or changing viewpoints (Figures 6 & 7)
Regarding claim 3, Morohoshi teaches the information processing apparatus of claim 2, wherein the processor is further configured to control plane images of at least two viewpoints of the plurality of viewpoints for simultaneous observation by each of a right eye and a left eye of the viewer (paragraphs [0002], [0015]), and
the plurality of plane images includes the plane images of the at least two viewpoints (paragraph [0002], [0015]).
Method claim(s) 11 is/are drawn to the method of using the corresponding apparatus claimed in claim(s) 1. Therefore, the method claim(s) 11 correspond(s) to the apparatus claim(s) 1, and is/are rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as anticipation above.
“Program” claim(s) 12 is/are drawn to the method of using the corresponding apparatus claimed in claim(s) 1. Therefore, the claim(s) 12 correspond(s) to the apparatus claim(s) 1, and is/are rejected for the same reasons of anticipation as used above.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morohoshi in view of Nakajima and Yoshimura and in further view of Yoshifuji (US 2011/0316881 A1) .
Regarding claim 4, Morohoshi teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 1.
Morohoshi fails to teach wherein the test processor is configured to: set a distance between specific viewpoints of the plurality of viewpoints as a reference distance, wherein the distance between the specific viewpoints is closest to an inter-pupillary distance; and
control a first viewpoint image of a first viewpoint of the plurality of viewpoints to match a second viewpoint image of a second viewpoint of the plurality of viewpoints, wherein the first viewpoint image and the second viewpoint are separated by the reference distance.
However, Yoshifuji teaches set a distance between specific viewpoints of the plurality of viewpoints as a reference distance, wherein the distance between the specific viewpoints is closest to an inter-pupillary distance (paragraphs [0005], [0045]-[0047], [0088]); and
control a first viewpoint image of a first viewpoint of the plurality of viewpoints to match a second viewpoint image of a second viewpoint of the plurality of viewpoints, wherein the first viewpoint image and the second viewpoint are separated by the reference distance (paragraphs [0008], [0010], Fig. 1).
Yoshifuji describes a process of generating a multi-view autostereoscopic display. The arrangement of the images in the stereoscopic arranges image based on a calculated viewing zone. This viewing zone uses viewer position information to determine the zone. This viewer position information includes a facial recognition unit that determines the interpupillary distance of the viewers eyes. In summary, Yoshifuji uses interpupillary distance in its assignment and arrangement of viewpoint images.
Yoshifuji is considered analogous to the claimed invention as it is in the same field of endeavor of stereoscopic image generation. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to incorporate the teachings of Yoshifuji with the teachings of Morohoshi in view of Nakajima and Yoshimura and include the use of interpupillary distance to calculate position information and use that position information in arranging viewpoint images in order to relive discomfort (paragraph [0005] “position of a viewer or the like is detected, and optical control is performed based on information on the position, thereby relieving the discomfort of the viewer”).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morohoshi in view of Nakajima and Yoshimura and in further view Sumi (US 2018/0192037 A1).
Regarding claim 10, the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor is further (paragraph [0043] viewer detection unit supplies position information, analogous to coordinate calculation) configured to:
generate error information of the viewing position based on an observation result of the test pattern (paragraphs [0043], [0045]);
calculate coordinates of the viewing position based on the error information of the viewing position (paragraphs [0039] - position of viewer is represented by coordinates, [0043], [0045]);
Morohoshi fails to teach execute assignment of a viewpoint index based on the calculated coordinates.
However, Sumi teaches execute assignment of a viewpoint index (paragraphs [0027] & [0028]). Sumi uses a view allocation table to assign view image indices. This is analogous to the viewpoint index image calculation. Sumi also describes using information about the lens structure to generate the view allocation table.
Sumi is considered analogous to the claimed invention as it is in the same field of endeavor of image processing and stereoscopic imaging. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to incorporate the view image index assignment of Sumi with the stereoscopic image system of Morohoshi in view of Nakajima and Yoshimura, using the corrected coordinates of Morohoshi instead of Sumi’s use of lens information. This combination would allow for optimal placement of viewpoint images which can improve reduction in viewing stress for the viewer (Sumi, paragraph [0034]).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morohoshi in view of Nakajima, Yoshimura and in further view of Huang (US 2021/0096392 A1).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Morohoshi, Nakajima and Yoshimura teach the information processing apparatus of claim 1 wherein the plane image includes a plurality of sub-plane images (Morohoshi paragraph [0015], [0034] – subsections of parallax image for each eye can be considered sub-plane images),
the plurality of sub-plane images is arranged two-dimensionally (paragraphs [0015], [0016]),
Morohoshi in view of Nakajima and Yoshimura fails to teach
a first sub-plane image of the plurality of sub-plane images has a same rotation direction and a same rotation amount of the rod-shaped portion as a second sub-plane image of the plurality of sub-plane images.
However, Huang teaches a first sub-plane image of the plurality of sub-plane images has a same rotation direction and a same rotation amount of the rod-shaped portion as a second sub-plane image of the plurality of sub-plane images (paragraphs [0024], [0025], [0028], [0034]). Huang describes a rotation motor and a transparent display device containing multiple transparent displays. These transparent displays rotate together with the rotation motor. This is analogous to sub-plane images having the same rotation direction and amount as some marker.
Huang is considered analogous to the claimed invention as it is in the same field of endeavor of image processing. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to incorporate the teachings of Huang with Morohoshi in view of Nakajima, Yoshimura to substitute the rotation motor with some marker, such as the rod of Nakajima, and incorporate this rotation alignment with the teachings of Morohoshi in view of Nakajima, Yoshimura to allow for simultaneous image viewing (paragraph [0033]).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morohoshi in view of Nakajima and Yoshimura, and in further view of Kawamoto (WO 2020/149142 A1).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Morohoshi, Nakajima and Yoshimura teach the information processing apparatus according to claim 1.
Morohoshi in view of Nakajima and Yoshimura fails to teach, wherein the rod-shaped portion has a visual attraction degree higher than a visual attraction degree of a background portion and
the background portion includes a background of the rod-shaped portion.
However, Kawamoto teaches wherein the rod-shaped portion has a visual attraction degree higher than a visual attraction degree of a background portion (paragraph ~6 (second to last) of page 5). Kawamoto describes the background as having a reduced color contrast and the main subject as having a larger color contrast than the background, this makes the main subject stand out or be more visually attractive.
Kawamoto is considered analogous to the claimed invention as it is in the same field of invention of image processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to replace the main subject of Kawamoto with the rod marker of Nakajima to make the rod marker stand out from the background and enhance the three-dimensional effect (Paragraph 4 of page 6).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 9 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 21st 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on pages 17 and 18 that Yoshimura “at best, describes calculating deviation between different virtual cameras”, and “does not describe a rod-shapen portion which indicates a rotational posture, based on a direction of deviation of a viewpoint of a viewer from a center of the viewing area and a magnitude of the deviation”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Yoshimura’s descriptions of “virtual cameras” are analogous to the a viewpoint of a viewer as these are viewpoints specified by a user (paragraph [0034]). While the method of obtaining the viewpoint information may not be the same in Yoshimura as the claimed invention, its use as viewpoint information and use in indicating deviation is the same. Additionally, the calculated rotation base points C and C’ are both centroids of the respective virtual cameras focused upon a certain object. These rotation base points are additionally described as being “located at the center of the virtual viewpoint image” (paragraph [0067]). This is a center of the viewing area. While both points are centers of respective viewing areas, instead of only one, it is not contradictory for a viewpoint of a viewer to be the same as that of the center of the viewing area. Furthermore, in paragraph [0094], Yoshimura describes controlling changes in positions of viewpoints as corresponding to one another, implying magnitude and direction of deviation are kept consistent. The implied use of a magnitude of change is reinforced by a previous explicit description of calculating the magnitude of a viewing angle between each of the plurality of virtual cameras and the reference virtual camera (paragraphs [0048], [0052]).
Furthermore, examiner has not cited Yoshimura as teaching a rod-shapen portion. Yoshimura is cited as a method of specifying the use of the rod-shapen portion as described in Nakajima in indicating a rotational posture.
Applicant argues, on pages 16 and 17, that Nakajima “at best describes applying a rod marker on the subject for setting display parameters by using a direction of the marker facing as a line of sight of a person” and does not describe “that an image element in which a rod-shaped portion indicates a rotational posture, based on a direction of deviation of a viewpoint of a viewer from a center of the viewing area and a magnitude of deviation”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Nakajima does teach a rod marker which indicates rotational posture. As admitted by the applicant, Nakajima teaches applying a rod marker to set display parameters by using a direction of the marker facing a line of sight of person. The line of sight of a person is analogous the person’s rotational posture and a rod marker in accordance with that person’s line of sight indicates the rotational posture of that person. Furthermore, Examiner is not relying upon Nakajima to teach a rotational posture based on a direction of deviation of a viewpoint of a viewer from a center of the viewing area and a magnitude of deviation.
Applicant argues, on page 18, that the combination of references Nakajima and Yoshimura is improper. Applicant argues that “a person having ordinary having ordinary skill in the art would not have been motivated to combine a rod marker of Nakajima which is merely applied for analysing direction of marker as a line of sight of a person for indicating rotation base points of Yoshimura which are calculated based on different gazing directions of different virtual cameras”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. A gazing direction of a virtual camera is analogous to a line of sight of a person. Additionally, as previously stated, Yoshimura is relied upon for the calculations given from the rotation base points and differences in virtual cameras, which involve these rotational base points. Because of this it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine a rod-marker which indicates directions of a viewpoint and additional information about a the differences between viewpoints, which include the angles between them.
Conclusion
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 Aidan W McCoy whose telephone number is (571)272-5935. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM-5:00 PM EST.
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, Tammy Goddard can be reached at (571)272-7773. 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.
/AIDAN W MCCOY/Examiner, Art Unit 2611
/TAMMY PAIGE GODDARD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2611