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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, a scanner frame (Claim 125); a subset (Claims 125, 135, 137-138, 141,) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 125 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 125 “a scanner frame” should be changed to --a frame structure-- so that claim limitation aligns with the specification.
Claim 125 recites the limitation "and discrete coded elements" in line 9. The limitation should be changed to --and a discrete coded elements--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a light projector unit” (Claim 125, 126)
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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) 125, 129-150, 157-163 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raab et al. (2017/0054965) in view of JP 2009517634.
Claim 125
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) discloses a scanner for generating 3D data relating to a surface of a target object (See Abstract), the scanner comprising: a scanner frame (Fig. 1, Ref. 20); a set of imaging modules (Fig. 1, Ref. 30, 60, 70) mounted to the scanner frame (Fig. 1, Ref. 20) in an arrangement defining a plurality of epipolar planes (Fig. 13A, Ref. 72A, 76A, 132A), the set of imaging modules (Fig. 1, Ref. 30, 60, 70) including: a light projector unit (Fig. 1, Ref. 30) for projecting a structured light pattern (Fig. 14A, Ref. 1410, 1412, 1414) onto the surface of the target object (Fig. 10, Ref. 1070) (Para. 0114), wherein the projected structured light pattern (Fig. 14A, Ref. 1410, 1412, 1414) includes a plurality of elongated light stripes arranged alongside one another (Fig. 14A, Ref. 1410, 1412, 1414; each reference number is an elongated light stripe); for a subset of adjacent elongated light stripes (Fig. 14A, Ref. 1410, 1412, 1414) in the plurality of elongated light stripes (Fig. 14A, Ref. 1410, 1412, 1414), an even line (Fig. 13A, Ref. 1313A) corresponding to a specific epipolar plane (Fig. 13A, Ref. 72A, 76A, 132A) in the plurality of epipolar planes intersects (Fig. 13A, Ref. 72A, 76A, 132A); and a set of cameras (Fig. 1, Ref. 60, 70) positioned alongside the light projector unit (Fig. 1, Ref. 30) for capturing data conveying a set of images (Para. 0007) including reflections of the projected structured light pattern projected (Fig. 14A, Ref. 1410, 1412, 1414) onto the surface of the target object (Fig. 10, Ref. 1070); and one or more processors (Fig. 7, Ref. 720) in communication with the set of imaging modules (Para. 0085) for receiving and processing the data conveying the set of images (Para. 0095).
PNG
media_image1.png
430
544
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
458
478
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
426
346
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) substantially teaches the claimed invention except that it does not show a discrete coded elements extending from at least some elongated light stripes in the plurality of elongated light stripes and wherein, only a single discrete coded element extending from the subset of adjacent elongated light stripes; or multiple discrete coded elements extending from the subset of adjacent elongated light stripes, each discrete coded element in said multiple discrete coded elements being of a different type. JP 2009517634 shows that it is known to provide a discrete coded elements extending (See Fig. 4, multiple rectangular shapes) from at least some elongated light stripes (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, 4.2) in the plurality of elongated light stripes (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, 4.2) and wherein multiple discrete coded elements extending (rectangular shapes extends from the elongated light stripes) from the subset of adjacent elongated light stripes, each discrete coded element (rectangular shapes) in said multiple discrete coded elements being of a different type (See Fig. 4, with multiple elongated light strips with multiple discrete coded elements; different sizes of rectangular shapes) for an a device creating 3D model of an object. It would have been obvious to combine the device of Raab et al. (2017/0054965) with the discrete coded elements in elongated light strips of JP 2009517634 before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of providing a pattern that uniquely identifies each strip of light, therefore solving light ambiguities and providing high precision and accuracy during image analysis.
PNG
media_image4.png
646
734
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claim 129
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) discloses the set of cameras includes a first camera (Fig. 1, Ref. 60) and a second camera (Fig. 1, Ref. 70), wherein the first camera (Fig. 1, Ref. 60) and the second camera (Fig. 1, Ref. 70) are spaced from one another and oriented such as to define a baseline for the plurality of epipolar planes (Fig. 13A, Ref. 72A, 76A, 132A).
Claim 130-131
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) substantially teaches the claimed invention except that it does not show the discrete coded elements extending from the at least some elongated light stripes include a plurality of different types of discrete coded elements, wherein different types of discrete coded elements in the plurality of different types of discrete coded elements present different specific shapes when extending from the at least some elongated light stripes; the plurality of different types of discrete coded elements includes at least two different types of discrete coded elements, at least three different types of discrete coded elements, or at least four different types of discrete coded elements. JP 2009517634 shows that it is known to provide the discrete coded elements extending from the at least some elongated light stripes (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, 4.4) include a plurality of different types of discrete coded elements (See Fig. 4; different sized rectangular coded elements), wherein different types of discrete coded elements in the plurality of different types of discrete coded elements present different specific shapes (See Fig. 4; different sized rectangular coded elements) when extending from the at least some elongated light stripes (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, 4.2); the plurality of different types of discrete coded elements includes at least two different types of discrete coded elements (See Fig. 4; different sized rectangular coded elements), at least three different types of discrete coded elements, or at least four different types of discrete coded elements (Fig. 4, shows at least seven different types of coded elements) for a device creating 3D model of an object. It would have been obvious to combine the device of Raab et al. (2017/0054965) with the different codded arrangement listed above with that of JP 2009517634 before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of providing a pattern that uniquely identifies each strip of light, therefore solving light ambiguities and providing high precision and accuracy during image analysis.
Claim 132-133
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) substantially teaches the claimed invention except that it does not show a first specific elongated light stripe of the at least some elongated light stripes includes a first set of discrete coded elements, each discrete coded element of the first set of discrete coded elements being of a first type; and a second specific elongated light stripe of the at least some elongated light stripes includes a second set of discrete coded elements, each discrete coded element of the second set of discrete coded elements being of a second type, wherein the first specific elongated light stripe is distinct from the second specific elongated light stripe; a first specific elongated light stripe of the at least some elongated light stripes includes a first set of discrete coded elements, at least some discrete coded elements of the first set of discrete coded elements being of different types and being arranged in accordance with a first coding pattern; and a second specific elongated light stripe of the at least some elongated light stripes includes a second set of discrete coded elements, at least some discrete coded elements of the second set of discrete coded elements being of different types and being arranged in accordance with a second coding pattern distinct from the first coding pattern. JP 2009517634 shows that it is known to provide a first specific elongated light stripe (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3) of the at least some elongated light stripes (See Fig. 4, multiple light stripes) includes a first set of discrete coded elements (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, multiple rectangular shapes running along the stripe), each discrete coded element of the first set of discrete coded elements being of a first type (See Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, rectangular shaped coded elements); and a second specific elongated light stripe (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.4, multiple rectangular shapes running along the stripe) of the at least some elongated light stripes (See Fig. 4, multiple light stripes) includes a second set of discrete coded elements (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.4, multiple different size rectangular shapes running along the stripe), each discrete coded element of the second set of discrete coded elements being of a second type (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.4, multiple different size rectangular shapes running along the stripe), wherein the first specific elongated light stripe is distinct from the second specific elongated light stripe (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3 and 4.4 have different size rectangular coded elements); a first specific elongated light stripe of the at least some elongated light stripes includes a first set of discrete coded elements (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, multiple rectangular shapes running along the stripe), at least some discrete coded elements of the first set of discrete coded elements being of different types and being arranged in accordance with a first coding pattern (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, multiple rectangular shapes running along the stripe); and a second specific elongated light stripe of the at least some elongated light stripes includes a second set of discrete coded elements (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.4, multiple different size rectangular shapes running along the stripe), at least some discrete coded elements of the second set of discrete coded elements being of different types (different sized rectangular coded elements) and being arranged in accordance with a second coding pattern distinct from the first coding pattern (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, 4.2) for a device creating 3D model of an object. It would have been obvious to combine the device of Raab et al. (2017/0054965) with the different coeded elements listed above with that of JP 2009517634 before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of providing a pattern that uniquely identifies each strip of light, therefore solving light ambiguities and providing high precision and accuracy during image analysis.
Claim 134
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) substantially teaches the claimed invention except that it does not show specific elongated light stripes of the at least some elongated light stripes include respective sets of discrete coded elements, at least some of the discrete coded elements of each set being of different types, and the discrete coded elements of each set being arranged in accordance with a specific one of at least two distinct coding patterns. JP 2009517634 shows that it is known to provide a specific elongated light stripes (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, 4.2) of the at least some elongated light stripes include respective sets of discrete coded elements (See Fig. 4, different size rectangular coded elements for Ref. 4.3, 4.4), at least some of the discrete coded elements of each set being of different types (See Fig. 4, different size rectangular coded elements for Ref. 4.3, 4.4), and the discrete coded elements of each set being arranged in accordance with a specific one of at least two distinct coding patterns (See Fig. 4, different size and spacing of rectangular coded elements for Ref. 4.3, 4.4) for a device creating 3D model of an object. It would have been obvious to combine the device of Raab et al. (2017/0054965) with the discrete coded elements of JP 2009517634 before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of providing a pattern that uniquely identifies each strip of light, therefore solving light ambiguities and providing high precision and accuracy during image analysis.
Claim 135
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) substantially teaches the claimed invention except that it does not show a first discrete coded element extends from a first elongated light stripe of the subset of adjacent elongated light stripes and a second discrete coded element extends from a second elongated light stripe of the subset of adjacent elongated light stripes, wherein a position at which the first discrete coded element extends from the first elongated light stripe is diagonally offset from a position at which the second discrete coded element extends from the second elongated light stripe. JP 2009517634 shows that it is known to provide a first discrete coded element extends from a first elongated light stripe of the subset of adjacent elongated light stripes (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, multiple rectangular shapes running along the stripe) and a second discrete coded element extends from a second elongated light stripe of the subset of adjacent elongated light stripes (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.4, multiple different size rectangular shapes running along the stripe), wherein a position at which the first discrete coded element extends from the first elongated light stripe is diagonally offset from a position at which the second discrete coded element extends from the second elongated light stripe (See Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, 4.4; the rectangular shaped coded element are diagonally offset with each other) for a device creating 3D model of an object. It would have been obvious to combine the device of Raab et al. (2017/0054965) with the diagonally offset of JP 2009517634 before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of providing a pattern that uniquely identifies each strip of light, therefore solving light ambiguities and providing high precision and accuracy during image analysis.
Claim 136
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) substantially teaches the claimed invention except that it does not show the first elongated light stripe is immediately adjacent the second elongated light stripe and wherein the first discrete coded element and the second discrete coded element are of a same type. JP 2009517634 shows that it is known to provide the first elongated light stripe (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3) is immediately adjacent the second elongated light stripe (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.2) and wherein the first discrete coded element and the second discrete coded element (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, 4.2) are of a same type (The rectangular shapes are the same type) for a device creating 3D model of an object. It would have been obvious to combine the device of Raab et al. (2017/0054965) with the same type discrete coded element of JP 2009517634 before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of providing a pattern that uniquely identifies each strip of light, therefore solving light ambiguities and providing high precision and accuracy during image analysis.
Claim 137, 138
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) substantially teaches the claimed invention except that it does not show discrete coded elements extend from at least some elongated light stripes in the subset of adjacent elongated light stripes, and wherein the discrete coded elements extending from the at least some elongated light stripes in the subset of adjacent elongated light stripes are arranged to form an overall diagonally arranged pattern of discrete coded elements. JP 2009517634 shows that it is known to provide discrete coded elements (See Fig. 4, different size rectangular coded elements for Ref. 4.3, 4.4) extend from at least some elongated light stripes (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, 4.2) in the subset of adjacent elongated light stripes (Fig. 4, plurality such as Ref. 4.3, 4.2), and wherein the discrete coded elements (See Fig. 4, different size rectangular coded elements for Ref. 4.3, 4.4) extending from the at least some elongated light stripes (rectangles extending from the stripe Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, 4.2) in the subset of adjacent elongated light stripes (See Fig. 4, multiple light stripes) are arranged to form an overall diagonally arranged pattern (See Fig. 4, the rectangular coded elements are offset to each other creating a diagonal pattern) of discrete coded elements for a device creating 3D model of an object. It would have been obvious to combine the device of Raab et al. (2017/0054965) with the (?) of JP 2009517634 before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of providing a pattern that uniquely identifies each strip of light, therefore solving light ambiguities and providing high precision and accuracy during image analysis.
Claim 139
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) discloses the even line (Fig. 13A, Ref. 1313A) intersects two discrete coded elements (Fig. 14C, Ref. 1430, 1433)(Para. 0105) of a same type extending from two different elongated light stripes (Fig. 14C, Ref. 1430, 1433) in the plurality of elongated light stripes, the two different elongated light stripes (Fig. 14C, Ref. 1430, 1433) being separated from one another by at least a minimum number of elongated light stripes (Fig. 14C, Ref. 1432).
Claim 140
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) discloses the minimum number of elongated light stripes (Fig. 14C, Ref. 1430, 1432, 1433) is greater than a total number of elongated light stripes in the subset of adjacent elongated light stripes (Fig. 14C, Ref. 1434).
Claim 141
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) discloses the subset of adjacent elongated light stripes includes at least three adjacent elongated light stripes (Fig. 14C, Ref. 1430, 1432, 1433), at least six adjacent elongated stripes or at least eight adjacent elongated light stripes (See Fig. 14C).
Claim 142
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) substantially teaches the claimed invention except that it does not show discrete coded elements extending from a same specific elongated light stripe in the plurality of elongated light stripes are spaced apart from each other. JP 2009517634 shows that it is known to provide the discrete coded elements (Fig. 4, different size rectangles extending from the stripes) extending from a same specific elongated light stripe (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, 4.2) in the plurality of elongated light stripes (See Fig. 4) are spaced apart from each other (See Fig. 4) for a device creating 3D model of an object. It would have been obvious to combine the device of Raab et al. (2017/0054965) with the coded element arrangement listed above with that of JP 2009517634 before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of providing a pattern that uniquely identifies each strip of light, therefore solving light ambiguities and providing high precision and accuracy during image analysis.
Claim 143
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) substantially teaches the claimed invention except that it does not show each discrete coded element of the discrete coded elements extending from the at least some elongated light stripes comprise at least one protrusion extending from the at least some elongated light stripes or at least one notch extending from the at least some elongated light stripes. JP 2009517634 shows that it is known to provide each discrete coded element (See Fig. 4; different sized rectangular coded elements) of the discrete coded elements extending from the at least some elongated light stripes (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, 4.2) comprise at least one protrusion extending from the at least some elongated light stripes (the rectangular shape is the protrusion extending from the stripes) or at least one notch extending from the at least some elongated light stripes for a device creating 3D model of an object. It would have been obvious to combine the device of Raab et al. (2017/0054965) with the protrusion of JP 2009517634 before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of providing a pattern that uniquely identifies each strip of light, therefore solving light ambiguities and providing high precision and accuracy during image analysis.
Claim 144
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) substantially teaches the claimed invention except that it does not show the projected structured light pattern includes discrete coded elements extending from fewer than all elongated light stripes in the plurality of elongated light stripes and includes discrete coded elements extending from at most one of 7/8, ¾. ½. ¼ and 1/8 of the plurality of elongated light stripes. JP 2009517634 shows that it is known to provide the projected structured light pattern includes discrete coded elements (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, 4.2) extending from fewer than all elongated light stripes in the plurality of elongated light stripes (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, 4.2) and includes discrete coded elements extending (See Fig. 4; different sized rectangular coded elements) from at most one of 7/8, ¾. ½. ¼ and 1/8 of the plurality of elongated light stripes (the rectangular coded element extending at least a ¼ from the elongated light stripes Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, 4.2) for a device creating 3D model of an object. It would have been obvious to combine the device of Raab et al. (2017/0054965) with the sizing listed above with that of JP 2009517634 before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of providing a pattern that uniquely identifies each strip of light, therefore solving light ambiguities and providing high precision and accuracy during image analysis.
Claim 145
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) discloses the plurality of elongated light stripes (Fig. 14A, Ref. 1410, 1412, 1414) in the projected structured light pattern is comprised of non- intersecting elongated light stripes (Fig. 14A, Ref. 1410, 1412, 1414), wherein the non-intersecting elongated light stripes are substantially parallel to one another (See Fig. 14A, projected stripes running parallel to each other).
Claim 146
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) substantially teaches the claimed invention except that it does not show discrete coded elements extending from one elongated light stripe in the plurality of elongated light stripes assist in identifying the one elongated light stripe amongst the plurality of elongated light stripes. JP 2009517634 shows that it is known to provide a discrete coded elements (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, 4.2) extending from one elongated light stripe in the plurality of elongated light stripes assist in identifying the one elongated light stripe amongst the plurality of elongated light stripes (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, 4.2; each stripe has different sized rectangular coded element) for a device creating 3D model of an object. It would have been obvious to combine the device of Raab et al. (2017/0054965) with the identifying amongst the strips of JP 2009517634 before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of providing a pattern that uniquely identifies each strip of light, therefore solving light ambiguities and providing high precision and accuracy during image analysis.
Claim 147
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) discloses the scanner is a handheld scanner (Para. 0122).
Claim 148
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) discloses the one or more processors (Fig. 7, Ref. 720) are configured for processing the set of images (Para. 0084-0085) including the reflections of the projected structured light pattern to perform a 3D reconstruction process of the surface of the target object, the 3D reconstruction process being performed at least in part using the discrete coded elements extending from the at least some elongated light stripes (Para. 0121-0123).
Claim 149
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) discloses the one or more processors (Fig. 7, Ref. 720) are configured for transmitting the data conveying the set of images including the reflections of the projected structured light pattern to a remote computing system distinct from the scanner (Para. 0087; 0089), the remote computing system being configured for performing a 3D reconstruction process of the surface of the target object using the data conveying the set of images including the reflections of the projected structured light pattern (Fig. 14A, Ref. 1410, 1412, 1414), the 3D reconstruction process being performed at least in part using the discrete coded elements extending from the at least some elongated light stripes (Para. 0121).
Claim 150
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) discloses the scanner (Fig. 1, Ref. 10); and a computing system in communication (Fig. 7, Ref. 720) (Para. 0087; 0089) with said scanner (Fig. 1, Ref. 10), the computing system (Fig. 7, Ref. 720) being configured for performing a 3D reconstruction process of the surface of the target object using the data conveying the set of images including the reflections of the projected structured light pattern captured by the scanner (Fig. 1, Ref 10), the 3D reconstruction process being performed at least in part using the discrete coded elements extending from the at least some elongated light stripes (Para. 0121-0123).
Claim 157
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) discloses a computer-implemented method for 3D measurement of a surface of an object, the method comprising: a receiving at least one image acquired by a sensor (Fig. 1, Ref. 60) that includes reflections of a structured light pattern projected from a light projector (Fig. 1, Ref. 30) onto the surface of the object (Fig. 10, Ref. 1070), wherein the sensor (Fig. 1, Ref. 60) and the light projector (Fig. 1, Ref. 30) are arranged to define a plurality of epipolar planes (Fig. 13A, Ref. 72A, 76A, 132A), wherein the projected structured light pattern comprises a plurality of elongated light stripes (Fig. 14A, Ref. 1410, 1412, 1414), and wherein, for a subset of adjacent elongated light stripes (Fig. 14A, Ref. 1410, 1412, 1414) in the plurality of elongated light stripes (Fig. 14A, Ref. 1410, 1412, 1414), an even line (Fig. 13A, Ref. 1313A) corresponding to a specific epipolar plane in the plurality of epipolar planes intersects (Fig. 13A, Ref. 72A, 76A, 132A); extracting a specific image portion at least in part by identifying areas of the at least one image corresponding to continuous segments of the reflections of the projected structured light pattern (Fig. 14A, Ref. 1410, 1412, 1414); associating the specific image portion with at least one discrete coded element of the discrete coded elements (Para. 0121-0123); and determining a measurement relating to the surface of the object (Fig. 10, Ref. 1070) based on a correspondence between the specific image portion and the at least one discrete coded element (Para. 0123).
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) substantially teaches the claimed invention except that it does not show a discrete coded elements extending from at least some elongated light stripes in the plurality of elongated light stripes and wherein, only a single discrete coded element extending from the subset of adjacent elongated light stripes; or multiple discrete coded elements extending from the subset of adjacent elongated light stripes, each discrete coded element in said multiple discrete coded elements being of a different type. JP 2009517634 shows that it is known to provide a discrete coded elements extending (See Fig. 4, multiple rectangular shapes) from at least some elongated light stripes (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, 4.2) in the plurality of elongated light stripes (Fig. 4, Ref. 4.3, 4.2) and wherein multiple discrete coded elements extending from the subset of adjacent elongated light stripes, each discrete coded element in said multiple discrete coded elements being of a different type (See Fig. 4, with multiple elongated light strips with multiple discrete coded elements) for an a device creating 3D model of an object. It would have been obvious to combine the device of Raab et al. (2017/0054965) with the discrete coded elements in elongated light strips of JP 2009517634 before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of providing a pattern that uniquely identifies each strip of light, therefore solving light ambiguities and providing high precision and accuracy during image analysis.
Claim 158
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) discloses labelling the specific image portion with a unique identifier (Para. 0121-0123, using a coded pattern).
Claim 159
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) discloses selecting a specific epipolar plane of the plurality of epipolar planes (Fig. 13A, Ref. 72A, 76A, 132A); and identifying plausible combinations (matching) on the specific epipolar plane, the plausible combinations including a light stripe label of the plurality of elongated light stripes (Fig. 14A, Ref. 1410, 1412, 1414) and the unique identifier (coded pattern), for a plausible continuous segment of the reflections of the projected structured light pattern (Fig. 1, Ref. 30) selected from the continuous segments of the reflections of the projected structured light pattern in the at least one image (Para.0247-0248).
Claim 160
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) discloses identifying the plausible combinations (matching) by proximity to the associated at least one continuous segment of the reflections of the projected structured light pattern (Fig. 1, Ref. 30) and the at least one discrete coded elements (Para.0247-0248)(coded patterns).
Claim 161
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) discloses calculating a matching error for each of the plausible combinations; determining a most probable combination by computing a figure of merit for each of the plausible combinations using the matching error to find a most probable match; associating each continuous segment of the reflections of the projected structured light pattern with the most probable match; and calculating a set of 3D points using matching points of the most probable match (matching of the difference in the visual appearance of adjacent pattern elements in the projected pattern, first captured image, second captured image)(Para. 0247-0248).
Claim 162
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) discloses validating the matching points to discard the matching points if the figure of merit fails to meet a quality of match threshold (comparing data to specifications)(Para. 0177).
Claim 163
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) discloses the even line (Fig. 13A, Ref. 1313A) intersects two discrete coded elements (coded patterns) of a same type extending from two different elongated light stripes (Fig. 14A, Ref. 1410, 1412, 1414) in the plurality of elongated light stripes, the two different elongated light stripes (Fig. 14A, Ref. 1410, 1412, 1414) being separated from one another by at least a minimum number of elongated light stripes (See Fig. 14A).
Claim(s) 126-128 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raab et al. (2017/0054965) in view of JP 2009517634 and in further view of Smith (2002/0126267).
Claim 126
Raab et al. (2017/0054965) and JP 2009517634 substantially teaches the claimed invention except that it does not show the light projector unit includes a light source and a pattern generator, the pattern generator including an optical element having translucent portions and opaque portions, the translucent portions and the opaque portions being arranged to shape light emitted by the light source into the projected structured light pattern. Smith (2002/0126267) shows that it is known to provide the light projector unit includes a light source (Fig. 1, Ref. 1) and a pattern generator (Fig. 25, Ref. 60; mask), the pattern generator including an optical element having translucent portions and opaque portions, the translucent portions and the opaque portions being arranged to shape light emitted by the light source into the projected structured light pattern (Para. 0056) for a device creating a light projection. It would have been obvious to combine the device of Raab et al. (2017/0054965) and JP 2009517634 with the pattern generator of Smith (2002/0126267) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the purpose of providing a structured light projection that provides contrast between opaque and translucent areas, therefore creating high-contrast, sharp well defined fringe patterns for accurate phase calculation and 3D reconstruction.
Claim 127-128
Raab et al. (2017/0054965), JP 2009517634, and Smith (2002/0126267) discloses the claimed invention except for the optical element includes a glass layer, the translucent portions and the opaque portions being defined upon the glass layer, and the opaque portions include a layer of material disposed on the glass layer, the layer of material being substantially opaque to the light source of the light projector unit or the layer of material comprises at least one of metallic particles or a film. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine Raab et al. (2017/0054965), JP 2009517634, and Smith (2002/0126267) with the materials listed above since it was well known in the art that using a glass layer is chosen for its superior dimensional stability, therefore ensuring the pattern do not distort with temperature during measurement. Further its well known in the art that using a layer of material of one of metallic particles or film enable sharp edge definition, therefore allowing for a better resolution in the measurement.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL PATRICK STAFIRA whose telephone number is (571)272-2430. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6:30am-3pm.
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, Tarifur Chowdhury can be reached at 571-272-2287. 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.
/MICHAEL P STAFIRA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877 February 4, 2026