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 .
Notice to Applicants
This communication is in response to the Application filed on 3/1/2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/1/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
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 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.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10,12, 14, 16, 17, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2023/0377300 to Becker et al. (hereafter, “Becker”).
With regard to claim 1 Becker discloses a point cloud processing apparatus (Figures 1-2), comprising circuitry configured to: identify, based on labeled training data, a predetermined three-dimensional point cloud corresponding to the labeled training data in a target point cloud being a three-dimensional point cloud (paragraph [0015], “generating the three-dimensional representation of the three-dimensional object can include generating a first representation of the three-dimensional object (e.g., a point cloud)”,); and determine whether a specific point cloud being a specific three-dimensional point cloud is included in a point cloud being another three-dimensional point cloud obtained by excluding the predetermined three-dimensional point cloud from the target point cloud, to obtain a determination result (paragraph [0029], “ the images include one or more additional objects from the capture environment that are not part of the three-dimensional object of interest. For instance, image 302, image 304, image 306, and image 308, each includes three-dimensional object 320 (e.g., tool table) but also includes a second three-dimensional object 322 (e.g., bicycle) different than the three-dimensional object 320. Although not shown in FIG. 3, the images may also capture other objects or aspects of the environment (e.g., floors, walls, trees, doors, sky, mountains, etc.). As described herein, in some examples, the other objects or aspects of the environment may be excluded from the reconstruction process using a bounding box…machine learning or artificial intelligence can be implemented (e.g., as part of the processing circuitry of the computing system) to analyze the images to identify objects or regions to exclude or to identify objects or regions to include for model reconstruction”; paragraph [0039]).
With regard to claim 3 Becker discloses wherein the circuitry is further configured to determine a position of the specific point cloud in the target point cloud (paragraphs [0039, 0052-0053, 0098, 0123, etc.]).
With regard to claim 5 Becker discloses wherein the circuitry is further configured to transmit, to an external apparatus, the determination result (communication circuitry 120; bus 122, 123; paragraph [0020]; model gets created and then outputted, Fig. 5, paragraph [0040]; 3004-3006 in Fig. 30 and 3104 in Fig. 31).
With regard to claim 7 Becker discloses wherein the circuitry is further configured to display, on a display, the determination result (display 106, 107, paragraphs [0020, 0022, 0028, 0034, 0036, etc.]; 3004-3006 in Fig. 30 and 3104 in Fig. 31).
With regard to claim 8 Becker discloses wherein the target point cloud is set based on an operation received on a screen that receives the operation, the operation being for designating one or more three-dimensional point clouds (paragraphs [0032, 0034-0038, 0041, 0044-0045, etc.).
With regard to claim 10 Becker discloses wherein the specific point cloud is set based on an operation received on a screen that receives the operation, the operation being for designating one or more three-dimensional point clouds (specific being repositioning the vase, for example, paragraph [0038-0041]).
With regard to claim 12 Becker discloses wherein the labeled training data includes one or more types of labeled training data, the circuitry is configured to identify the predetermined three-dimensional point cloud corresponding to one of the one or more types of labeled training data, based on a data designation operation received on a data reception screen for receiving the data designation operation, the data designation operation being for designating the one or more types of labeled training data (paragraphs [0029, 0032-0045, etc.]).
With regard to claim 14 Becker discloses wherein the circuitry is further configured to identify the predetermined three-dimensional point cloud in the specific point cloud based on the labeled training data (paragraph [0029]).
With regard to claim 16 Becker discloses wherein the circuitry is further configured to transmit, to an external apparatus, a result obtained by identifying the predetermined three-dimensional point cloud in the specific point cloud (model gets created and then outputted, Fig. 5, paragraph [0040]; 3004-3006 in Fig. 30 and 3104 in Fig. 31).
With regard to claim 17 Becker discloses wherein the circuitry is further configured to display, on a display, a result obtained by identifying the predetermined three-dimensional point cloud in the specific point cloud (display 106, 107, paragraphs [0020, 0022, 0028, 0034, 0036, etc.]; 3004-3006 in Fig. 30 and 3104 in Fig. 31).
With regard to claim 18 Becker discloses the point cloud processing apparatus of claim 1; and a terminal apparatus communicably connected to the point cloud processing apparatus (Fig. 1, paragraphs [0019-0025, 0033-0035), the circuitry of the point cloud processing apparatus being further configured to transmit the determination result to the terminal apparatus (paragraphs [0033-0035]), the terminal apparatus including additional circuitry configured to: receive the determination result transmitted from the point cloud processing apparatus; and display, on a display, the determination result (Fig. 1, paragraphs [0019-0025]).
With regard to claim 20, claim 20 is rejected same as claim 1 and the arguments similar to that presented above for claim 1 are equally applicable to claim 20, and all of the other limitations similar to claim 1 are not repeated herein, but incorporated by reference.
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 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 of this title, 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 2, 4, 6, 9, 11, 13, 15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2023/0377300 to Becker et al. (hereafter, “Becker”) in combination with US 2007/0136288 To Shimada et al. (hereafter, “Shimada”).
With regard to claim 2, Becker teaches the point cloud processing apparatus as disclosed above in claim 1 including identifying based on labeled training data. However, Becker does not teach that the identifying is based on a data category and the predetermined three-dimensional point cloud corresponding to the data on the category in a target point cloud being a three-dimensional point cloud.
Shimada teaches identifying is based on a data category and the predetermined three-dimensional point cloud corresponding to the data on the category in a target point cloud being a three-dimensional point cloud (Fig. 30 onwards, paragraphs [0263-0264, 0270-0271, 0299-0301, etc. throughout the reference).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Becker’s reference to have categories of Shimada’s reference. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to have document/image/objects containing multiple topics and meanings be classified into categories so that the classifications do not different from categories desired by a user, suggested by Shimada at paragraph [0019], improving usefulness of the classification categories at paragraph [0045].
Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known method with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Shimada with Becker to obtain the invention as specified in claim 2.
With regard to claim 4 Becker discloses wherein the circuitry is further configured to determine a position of the specific point cloud in the target point cloud (paragraphs [0039, 0052-0053, 0098, 0123, etc.]).
With regard to claim 6 Becker discloses wherein the circuitry is further configured to transmit, to an external apparatus, the determination result (communication circuitry 120; bus 122, 123; paragraph [0020]; model gets created and then outputted, Fig. 5, paragraph [0040]; 3004-3006 in Fig. 30 and 3104 in Fig. 31).
With regard to claim 9 Becker discloses wherein the target point cloud is set based on an operation received on a screen that receives the operation, the operation being for designating one or more three-dimensional point clouds (paragraphs [0032, 0034-0038, 0041, 0044-0045, etc.).
With regard to claim 11 Becker discloses wherein the specific point cloud is set based on an operation received on a screen that receives the operation, the operation being for designating one or more three-dimensional point clouds (paragraphs [0032, 0034-0038, 0041, 0044-0045, etc.).
With regard to claim 13 Becker in combination with Shimada discloses wherein the category includes one or more types of categories, and the circuitry is configured to identify the predetermined three-dimensional point cloud corresponding to the data on one or more types of categories, based on a data designation operation received on a data reception screen for receiving the data designation operation, the data designation operation being for designating the one or more types of categories (paragraphs [0029, 0032-0045, etc.]; Shimada having the support for categories).
With regard to claim 15 Becker discloses wherein the circuitry is further configured to identify the predetermined three-dimensional point cloud in the specific point cloud based on the data on the category (paragraph [0029]).
With regard to claim 19 Becker discloses the point cloud processing apparatus of claim 1; and a terminal apparatus communicably connected to the point cloud processing apparatus (Fig. 1, paragraphs [0019-0025, 0033-0035), the circuitry of the point cloud processing apparatus being further configured to transmit a determination result to the terminal apparatus (paragraphs [0033-0035]), the terminal apparatus including additional circuitry configured to: receive the determination result transmitted from the point cloud processing apparatus; and display, on a display, the determination result (Fig. 1, paragraphs [0019-0025]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
CN113160117A – discloses a three-dimensional point cloud target detection method in an automatic driving scene, and the method comprises the steps of dividing received point cloud data into three-dimensional grids with the same size, constructing a local neighborhood graph, obtaining the features of high-dimensional points through a graph neural network, splicing the features of multiple-dimensional points, selecting the feature of the most representative point in each grid, and mapping the selected feature to the pseudo image to form a feature map; sending the feature maps to a backbone network and then splicing to obtain a multi-level feature map; generating a plurality of anchor frames on the multi-level feature map.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHEFALI D. GORADIA whose telephone number is (571)272-8958. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8AM-6PM, Friday 8AM-12PM.
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, Henok Shiferaw can be reached at 571-272-4637. 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.
SHEFALI D. GORADIA
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2676
/SHEFALI D GORADIA/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2676
Prosecution Insights