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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-16, 21-22 and 24-25 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Miyazaki (US 2009/0295926).
Regarding claim 25, Miyazaki discloses circuitry in an electronic device, comprising:
a processing circuit that receives external object information on an external object in a scene and computes an object brightness of the external object based on the external object information; and a control circuit that: determines whether the external object is sufficiently illuminated based at least partly on the object brightness of the external object; and activates a supplemental emitter in the electronic device to illuminate the external object in response to determining that the external object is not sufficiently illuminated (Miyazaki: see par. [0031], wherein the control unit 102 determines that a flash is necessary when the brightness of an object, which is a tracking target, is low and sends an instruction for turning on a flash to the EF processing unit 110).
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.
Claims 1-4 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daedalus (WO2022/060547) in view of Miyazaki (US 2009/0295926).
Regarding claim 1, Daedalus discloses a method of operating an electronic device, comprising:
capturing an image of a scene using one or more image sensors (Daedalus: see fig. 3 and pars. [0030]-[0031], wherein the camera captures an image of a scene using one or more image sensors);
detecting an external object using one or more external object sensors (Daedalus: see par. [0031], wherein tracking cameras detect user’s hand);
Daedalus does not explicitly disclose that computing an object brightness of the external object; determining whether the external object is sufficiently illuminated based at least partly on the object brightness of the external object; and in response to determining that the external object is not sufficiently illuminated, activating one or more supplemental emitters to illuminate the external object.
However, Miyazaki teaches computing an object brightness of the external object; determining whether the external object is sufficiently illuminated based at least partly on the object brightness of the external object; and in response to determining that the external object is not sufficiently illuminated, activating one or more supplemental emitters to illuminate the external object (Miyazaki: see par. [0031], wherein the control unit 102 determines that a flash is necessary when the brightness of an object, which is a tracking target, is low and sends an instruction for turning on a flash to the EF processing unit 110).
One would have been modified to include computing an object brightness as taught by Miyazaki in the apparatus of Daedalus to obtain object brightness more precise.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Miyazaki with the Daedalus’s system to include computing an object brightness of the external object; determining whether the external object is sufficiently illuminated based at least partly on the object brightness of the external object; and in response to determining that the external object is not sufficiently illuminated, activating one or more supplemental emitters to illuminate the external object.
Regarding claim 2, Daedalus in the combination with Miyazaki discloses the method of claim 1.
Miyazaki further disclose comprising: in response to determining that the external object is sufficiently illuminated, deactivating the one or more supplemental emitters (Miyazaki: see par. [0031], wherein the bright ness of an object is not low, so the flash is not on).
One would have been modified to include deactivating the one or more supplemental emitter as taught by Miyazaki in the apparatus of Daedalus and Miyazaki to reduce the power consumption.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Miyazaki with the Daedalus and Miyazaki’s system to include comprising: in response to determining that the external object is sufficiently illuminated, deactivating the one or more supplemental emitters.
Regarding claim 3, Daedalus in the combination with Miyazaki discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising:
determining whether the captured image of the scene is sufficiently bright (Daedalus: see par. [0068], during the operations of block 150, monitor for the occurrence of conditions indicating that supplemental illumination should be switched on or off); and
in response to determining that the captured image of the scene is not sufficiently bright, activating the one or more supplemental emitters to illuminate the scene and the external object (Daedalus: see pars. [0070]-[0071], in response to determine that the satisfactory is not met, activating the light sources 58 to illuminate the user’s hand. In addition, the user’s hand is in the scene, so when the light sources 58 is activated, it also illuminates the scene).
Regarding claim 4, Daedalus in the combination with Miyazaki discloses the method of claim 3, further comprising: in response to determining that the captured image of the scene is sufficiently bright, deactivating the one or more supplemental emitters (Daedalus: see par. [0068], during the operations of block 150, monitor for the occurrence of conditions indicating that supplemental illumination should be switched on or off for satisfactory operation of the tracking cameras. The Examiner interprets the condition for satisfactory including the brightness of the scene).
Regarding claim 16, Daedalus in the combination with Miyazaki discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: using the one or more supplemental emitters to emit infrared light to illuminate the external object (Daedalus: see par. [0032], wherein the supplemental infrared light is used to augment ambient light).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daedalus (WO2022/060547) in view of Choi et al. (“Choi”, US 2017/0324909).
Regarding claim 21, Daedalus discloses a head-mounted device comprising:
support structures configured to mount the head-mounted device on a user's head (Daedalus: see par. [0015], wherein head-mounted devices include head-mounted support structures that allow the devices to be worn on the heads of users);
one or more scene cameras configured to capture images of a scene (Daedalus: see pars. [0015], [0031], in which camera may be used to capture images of a scene);
one or more hands cameras configured to detect a user's hands (Daedalus: see par. [0031], note that tracking camera configured to detect a user’s hands);
one or more supplemental emitters configured to provide supplemental illumination for the user's hands (Daedalus: see pars. [0036], [0049], wherein supplemental emitters 58 configured to provide supplemental illumination for the user’s hands); and
control circuitry configured to:
determine whether the user's hands are sufficiently illuminated (Daedalus: see pars. [0070]-[0071], [0097], determining whether the external object is sufficiently illuminated as satisfactorily track the user’s hands based on captured image obtained by the tracking sensor),
determine whether the captured images are properly exposed (Daedalus: see pars. [0070]-[0071], [0097], when the satisfactory is met, the captured images are properly exposed)
Daedalus does not explicitly disclose determining whether the captured images are properly exposed by obtaining a scene brightness of the captured images and comparing the scene brightness to a low light scene threshold, and adjust the one or more supplemental emitters based on whether the user's hands are sufficiently illuminated and based on whether the captured images are properly exposed.
On the other hand, Choi teaches determining whether the captured images are properly exposed by obtaining a scene brightness of the captured images and comparing the scene brightness to a low light scene threshold, and adjust the one or more supplemental emitters based on whether the user's hands are sufficiently illuminated and based on whether the captured images are properly exposed (Choi: see fig. 10, and pars. [0166]-[0167], wherein the final capture images are properly exposed by obtaining the luminance of the second area of the second image and comparing the luminance to a threshold, and adjust the luminance based on the first areas are sufficiently illuminated and based on whether the second area of the second images are properly exposed).
One would have been modified to include the teachings as taught by Choi in the apparatus of Daedalus to obtain better captured images.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Choi with the Daedalus’s system to include determining whether the captured images are properly exposed by obtaining a scene brightness of the captured images and comparing the scene brightness to a low light scene threshold, and adjust the one or more supplemental emitters based on whether the user's hands are sufficiently illuminated and based on whether the captured images are properly exposed.
Claims 5-8, 10-11 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daedalus (WO2022/060547) in view of Miyazaki (US 2009/0295926) and further in view of Choi et al. (“Choi”, US 2017/0324909).
Regarding claim 5, Daedalus in the combination with Miyazaki discloses the method of claim 3.
Daedalus in the combination with Miyazaki does not explicitly disclose comprising: computing a scene brightness of the captured image of the scene, wherein determining whether the captured image of the scene is sufficiently bright comprises comparing the computed scene brightness to a low light scene target.
However, Choi teaches computing a scene brightness of the captured image of the scene, wherein determining whether the captured image of the scene is sufficiently bright comprises comparing the computed scene brightness to a low light scene target (Choi: see fig. 10 and par. [0166], wherein determining the capture image is sufficiently bright comprises comparing the second area of the second image to a threshold).
One would have been modified to include the teachings as taught by Choi in the apparatus of Daedalus and Miyazaki to obtain better captured images.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Choi with the Daedalus and Miyazaki’s system to include computing a scene brightness of the captured image of the scene, wherein determining whether the captured image of the scene is sufficiently bright comprises comparing the computed scene brightness to a low light scene target.
Regarding claim 6, Daedalus in the combination with Miyazaki and Choi discloses the method of claim 5, further comprising: detecting an additional external object, different than the external object, using the one or more external object sensors; and computing an additional object brightness of the additional external object, wherein the object brightness of the external object is less than the additional object brightness of the additional external object (see the analysis of claim 1 and one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that computing an additional object brightness of the additional external object, wherein the object brightness of the external object is less than the additional object brightness of the additional external object).
Regarding claim 7, Daedalus in the combination with Miyazaki and Choi discloses the method of claim 6, wherein determining whether the external object is sufficiently illuminated comprises comparing the object brightness of the external object to an external object brightness target (One of ordinary skill in the art would understand determining whether the external object is sufficiently illuminated comprises comparing the object brightness of the external object to an external object brightness target).
Regarding claim 8, Daedalus in the combination with Miyazaki and Choi discloses the method of claim 7, further comprising:
in response to determining that no external object is currently detected by the one or more external object sensors, ramping up an output strength of the one or more supplemental emitters to converge the scene brightness towards the low light scene target (One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that in response to determining that no external object is currently detected by the one or more external object sensors, ramping up an output strength of the one or more supplemental emitters to converge the scene brightness towards the low light scene target).
Regarding claim 10, Daedalus in the combination with Miyazaki and Choi discloses the method of claim 8, further comprising: adjusting the output strength of the one or more supplemental emitters to converge the object brightness to the external object brightness target (One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that adjusting the output strength of the one or more supplemental emitters to converge the object brightness to the external object brightness target).
Regarding claim 11, Daedalus in the combination with Miyazaki and Choi discloses the method of claim 8, further comprising: adjusting the output strength of the one or more supplemental emitters to converge the scene brightness to the low light scene target (One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that adjusting the output strength of the one or more supplemental emitters to converge the scene brightness to the low light scene target).
Regarding claim 24, Daedalus in the combination with Miyazaki discloses the method of claim 1.
Daedalu in the combination Miyazaki does not explicitly disclose comprising: subsequent to activating the one or more supplemental emitters and in response to detecting that the external object is moving towards the head-mounted device, reducing a power level of the one or more supplemental emitters.
However, Choi teaches comprising: subsequent to activating the one or more supplemental emitters and in response to detecting that the external object is moving towards the head-mounted device, reducing a power level of the one or more supplemental emitters (Choi: see par. [0122], adjust the brightness based on the distance).
One would have been modified to include the teaching as taught by Choi in the apparatus of Daedalus and Miyazaki to reduce the power consumption.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Choi with the Daedalus and Miyazaki’ s system to include comprising: subsequent to activating the one or more supplemental emitters and in response to detecting that the external object is moving towards the head-mounted device, reducing a power level of the one or more supplemental emitters.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Daedalus (WO2022/060547) in view of Choi et al. (“Choi”, US 2017/0324909) and further in view of Deluca et al. (“Deluca”, EP2461574).
Regarding claim 22, Daedalus in the combination with Choi discloses the head-mounted device of claim 21.
Daedalus in the combination with Choi does not explicitly disclose that the control circuitry is configured to determine whether the user's hands are sufficiently illuminated by: obtaining a dark hand brightness associated with a darker one of the user's hands; obtaining a bright hand brightness associated with a brighter one of the user's hands; and comparing the dark hand brightness to a predetermined dark hand target.
On the other hand, Deluca teaches that the control circuitry is configured to determine whether the user's hands are sufficiently illuminated by: obtaining a dark hand brightness associated with a darker one of the user's hands (Deluca: see pars. [0016]-[0017], obtaining average brightness of first sub area); obtaining a bright hand brightness associated with a brighter one of the user's hands (Deluca: see pars. [0016]-[0017], obtaining average brightness of second sub area); and comparing the dark hand brightness to a predetermined dark hand target Deluca: see pars. [0016]-[0017], comparing average brightness of the first sub area to an overall average brightness).
One would have been modified to include the control circuitry as taught by Deluca in the apparatus of Daedalus and Choi to ensure the captured image having sufficient brightness.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Deluca with the Daedalus and Choi’s system to include that the control circuitry is configured to determine whether the user's hands are sufficiently illuminated by: obtaining a dark hand brightness associated with a darker one of the user's hands.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHAN T H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3452. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-4PM.
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, Lin Ye can be reached at 571-272-7372. 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.
/CHAN T NGUYEN/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2638
/LIN YE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2638
Prosecution Insights