DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments see remarks, filed 05/06/2026, with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the current combinations of references being used in the current rejection.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 7, the term “are not overlapping,” should be changed to “are not overlapping;” in order to correct grammar and punctuation.
In claim 1, line 11, the term “equivalent pupil plane,” should be changed to “equivalent pupil plane;” in order to correct grammar and punctuation.
In claim 1, line 15, the term “selecting a reference working distance” should be changed to “adjusting a reference working distance” in order to avoid a 112(a) new matter rejection as the specification filed on 04/12/2024 has clear support for the term adjusting and does not have clear support for the term selecting, which is far different from the term adjusting.
In claim 1, line 18, the term “reconstructed target image,” should be changed to “reconstructed target image;” in order to correct grammar and punctuation.
In claim 1, line 21, the term “phase of the mutual intensity, and reconstructing the object image” should be changed to “phase of the mutual intensities, and reconstructing the object image” in order to correct grammar and punctuation.
In claim 1, line 23, the term “reference working distance, and” should be changed to “are not overlapping; and” in order to correct grammar and punctuation.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for FIG. 2 shows the composition and working principle of the checkerboard imager, where A is an aperture pair array for acquiring object light, B is a 2D Photonic Integrated Circuit (PIC) optical waveguide array for beam splitting, C is a 3D optical waveguide array for transmitting light beams and matching optical path differences, D is a 2D PIC optical waveguide array for aperture pair coherence, and E is a readout circuit and data processing system, where B.1 is a waveguide array cross-section, B.2 is a splitting grating, and E.1 is a phase retarder, E. 2 is a balanced quadri-orthogonal coupler, as described in Paragraph [0033] in the specification, does not reasonably provide enablement for explicitly disclosing the claim language “wherein the optical interference computational imaging system comprises an aperture pair array for acquiring object light without an active light source,”, as claimed in claim 1.
The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to use the invention commensurate in scope with these claims. The claimed subject matter, not taught by the specification is wherein the optical interference computational imaging system comprises an aperture pair array for acquiring object light without an active light source.
The office respectfully requests the Applicant to indicate where in the specification teaches the limitation in claims 1 or amend in order to overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a.).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MARRON et al. (US 7405834 B1), hereinafter referenced as MARRON, in view of WATSON et al. (US 20180249100 A1), hereinafter referenced as WATSON, and further in view of BANERJEE et al. (US 10152059 B2), hereinafter referenced as BANERJEE.
Regarding claim 1, MARRON explicitly teaches a passive 3D imaging method based on optical interference computational imaging (Fig. 1. Col. 7 Lines [3-5]-MARRON discloses a method to retrieve high resolution images. Further in col 12. Lines 5-15-MARRON discloses interferometric images.), comprising:
providing an optical interference computational imaging system (Fig. 7A-C. Col. 12. Lines [8-12]-MARRON discloses interferometric images are shown where the dark and light banding across the individual apertures indicate TTP errors. Note that the interferometer has been adjusted so that the central subaperture has negligible TTP errors and therefore has negligible banding.),
the aperture pair array comprises a plurality of aperture pairs (Fig. 8 and 16, illustrates example aperture array geometries with a plurality of aperture pairs. Col. 12. Lines [39-41]-MARRON discloses one can then proceed to other pairings or groups of apertures until the entire array is phased as is further discussed below. Further in Col. 15. Lines [28-34]-MARRON discloses the example illustrated the invention under the assumption of a specific geometry of subapertures (hexagonal) as illustrated in FIG. 4. The invention is not dependent on a specific geometry. Examples of geometries are shown in FIGS. 8(a)-8(f). The example used above is shown in FIG. 8(a) showing a front view of 7 densely packed hexagonal subaperture transceivers.), each of the aperture pairs defines an interference baseline midpoint, and at least a few of the baseline midpoints of the aperture pairs of the aperture pair array are not overlapping (Fig. 8 and 16, illustrates example aperture array geometries where baseline midpoints do not overlap and where the aperture pairs form interference baseline midpoints. Col. 15. Lines [28-34]-MARRON discloses the example illustrated the invention under the assumption of a specific geometry of subapertures (hexagonal) as illustrated in FIG. 4. The invention is not dependent on a specific geometry. Examples of geometries are shown in FIGS. 8(a)-8(f). The example used above is shown in FIG. 8(a) showing a front view of 7 densely packed hexagonal subaperture transceivers. Please see annotated Fig. 8 below.),
performing interference recording of mutual intensities of an object (Fig. 6. Col. 10. Lines [35-37]-MARRON discloses intensity data is recorded at the detector array 505, which is then processed digitally to recover images), wherein each of the mutual intensities of the object (Fig. 6. Col. 10. Lines [40-45]-MARRON discloses in FIG. 6, the illuminated object 601 is a star whose scattered light produces a speckle pattern at the entrance pupil. This speckle pattern is reimaged to the detector array plane, and a tilted local oscillator beam is mixed with the scattered signal light. An intensity image received at the detector array is shown as image 602.) is acquired through an interference baseline of the aperture pair of the aperture pair array located on an equivalent pupil plane (Fig. 4A, illustrates an aperture pair of the aperture pair array located on an equivalent pupil plane. Col. 7. Lines [63-66]-MARRON discloses FIG. 4(a) illustrates the top-level approach to imaging and shows the system comprising an array of coherent transmitters/receivers (transceivers) with a 1.5 m baseline full aperture 401. Further see annotated Fig. 8 below.),
compensating a phase of the mutual intensities of each spatial frequency domain corresponding to the interference baseline of each aperture pair (Fig. 6. Col. 10. Lines [44-47]-MARRON discloses an intensity image received at the detector array is shown as image 602. Examination of a portion 603 of this image 602 reveals that the speckle pattern is modulated by a spatial carrier frequency.), and
reconstructing an object image by Fourier transform algorithm to obtain a reconstructed target image (Fig. 6, illustrates reconstructing an object image by a Fourier transform algorithm to obtain a reconstructed target image. Col. 10. Lines [35-39]-MARRON discloses intensity data is recorded at the detector array 505, which is then processed digitally to recover images. This is a straightforward process since for coherent imaging the image amplitude can be recovered by a Fourier transform (FT) of the pupil data.),
evaluating sharpness of each reconstructed target image using an image optimization evaluation algorithm (Fig. 7. Col. 20. Lines [1-7]-MARRON discloses another class of algorithm for maximizing image sharpness is the simplex method. This method is also an iterative method and involves first computing the sharpness for three sets of parameter values. The sharpness values are then compared and the parameter set that gives the lowest sharpness is then modified; the modification is determined using simple geometric construction.),
compensating the phase of the mutual intensity (Fig. 6. Col. 10. Lines [44-47]-MARRON discloses an intensity image received at the detector array is shown as image 602. Examination of a portion 603 of this image 602 reveals that the speckle pattern is modulated by a spatial carrier frequency.),
reconstructing the object image by Fourier transform algorithm until a reconstructed image with clear scene or locally clear scene is obtained with a corresponding reference working distance (Fig. 6, illustrates reconstructing an object image by a Fourier transform algorithm to obtain a reconstructed target image. Col. 10. Lines [35-39]-MARRON discloses intensity data is recorded at the detector array 505, which is then processed digitally to recover images. This is a straightforward process since for coherent imaging the image amplitude can be recovered by a Fourier transform (FT) of the pupil data. Further in Col. 16. Lines [48-56]-MARRON discloses interference between the object light and the glint light will produce the same type of carrier modulate intensity distribution as the conventional spatial heterodyne case described in detail above. The difference, however, is that temporal coherence between the glint light and the object light only requires that the difference in range between the glint origin and the object is within the coherence length of the laser. This may strongly relax the requirement on coherence length of the source, particularly for imaging at great distances (wherein the corresponding reference working distance is the coherence length is a corresponding reference working distance as the reconstructed image is obtained by (i.e. “with”) the aperture pair array at the coherence length).).
PNG
media_image1.png
528
707
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated diagram of MARRON’s Fig. 8 geometries of aperture pair arrays. (Please note Fig. 8(e) was selected for illustrative purposes and the annotations can be repeated onto the other geometries)
MARRON fails to explicitly teach wherein the optical interference computational imaging system comprises an aperture pair array for acquiring object light without an active light source.
However, WATSON explicitly teaches wherein the optical interference computational imaging system comprises an aperture pair array for acquiring object light without an active light source (Fig. 8A. Paragraph [0051]-WATSON discloses embodiments of the passive case uses a three or six sub-aperture array arranged in an array pattern to maximize the received resolution while maintaining the necessary sampling at lower frequencies. The passive case is implemented using the homodyne technique. The main advantage of this system is that the technology to implement it is at a higher readiness level and does not require a laser to operate. One obvious downside is that it is unable to operate at night.),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of MARRON of a passive 3D imaging method based on optical interference computational imaging, comprising: providing an optical interference computational imaging system, the aperture pair array comprises a plurality of aperture pairs, each of the aperture pairs defines an interference baseline midpoint, and at least a few of the baseline midpoints of the aperture pairs of the aperture pair array are not overlapping, performing interference recording of mutual intensities an object, wherein each of the mutual intensities of the object is acquired through an interference baseline of the aperture pair of the aperture pair array located on an equivalent pupil plane, compensating a phase of the mutual intensities of each spatial frequency domain corresponding to the interference baseline of each aperture pair, and reconstructing an object image by Fourier transform algorithm to obtain a reconstructed target image, evaluating sharpness of each reconstructed target image using an image optimization evaluation algorithm, compensating the phase of the mutual intensity, and reconstructing the object image by Fourier transform algorithm until a reconstructed image with clear scene or locally clear scene is obtained with a corresponding reference working distance, and with the teachings of WATSON of wherein the optical interference computational imaging system comprises an aperture pair array for acquiring object light without an active light source.
Wherein having MARRON’s high quality imaging method wherein the optical interference computational imaging system comprises an aperture pair array for acquiring object light without an active light source.
The motivation behind the modification would have been to obtain a high quality 3D imaging that enhances the quality of the images and the efficiency of the system. Since both MARRON and WATSON relate to imaging objects in the atmosphere with aperture arrays, wherein MARRON enables high resolution targeting and imaging in the presence of atmospheric turbulence, platform vibration, and practical space limitations while WATSON provides a significant improvement over conventional imaging methods due to the conformal nature of the arrays, smaller volumes and greater cross sections. Please see MARRON et al. (US 7405834 B1), Col. 1-2. Lines [64-5], and WATSON et al. (US 20180249100 A1), Paragraph [0017].
MARRON in view of WATSON fail to explicitly teach selecting a reference working distance, sequentially adjusting the reference working distance step by step within a range, based on the reconstructed image with the clear scene or the locally clear scene and the corresponding reference working distance, calculating a relative position and size of an interested object in an object scene, and reconstructing a passive 3D image of the object scene.
However, BANERJEE explicitly teaches selecting a reference working distance (Fig. 1. Col. 10. Lines [30-36]- BANERJEE discloses the distance determiner 116 may obtain depth information (and/or other information from which depth information may be determined) from the depth sensor(s) 108 (and/or image sensor(s) 104). The depth information may be obtained at one or multiple samplings over time (e.g., a first sampling, a second sampling, etc.) (wherein the reference working distance is depth information).),
sequentially adjusting the reference working distance step by step within a range (Fig. 1. Col. 10. Lines [30-36]- BANERJEE discloses the distance determiner 116 may obtain depth information (and/or other information from which depth information may be determined) from the depth sensor(s) 108 (and/or image sensor(s) 104). The depth information may be obtained at one or multiple samplings over time (e.g., a first sampling, a second sampling, etc.) (wherein adjusting the reference working distance step by step within a range is obtaining depth information by taking multiple samplings over time). Further in Col. 11. Lines [49-55]-BANERJEE a depth map may be a set of depth information (e.g., depth measurements, distances, etc.) over a range (e.g., horizontal range, vertical range and/or angular range relative to the depth sensor(s) 108) of a scene. In some configurations, the distance determiner 116 may receive depth maps from the depth sensor(s) 108. For example, the depth sensor(s) 108 may directly provide depth information (e.g., distances) over the range of the scene.),
based on the reconstructed image with the clear scene (Col. 16. Lines [5-10]-BANERJEE in some configurations, the processor 112 (e.g., computer vision tracker 110) may create one or more three-dimensional (3D) models of the surrounding environment (e.g., street view, landscapes, etc.). This may involve 3D vector analysis techniques and algebraic computation to achieve location determination (e.g., fast location determination).) or the locally clear scene (Col. 16. Lines [5-10]-BANERJEE in some configurations, the processor 112 (e.g., computer vision tracker 110) may create one or more three-dimensional (3D) models of the surrounding environment (e.g., street view, landscapes, etc.). This may involve 3D vector analysis techniques and algebraic computation to achieve location determination (e.g., fast location determination).) and the corresponding reference working distance (Col. 11. Lines [45-44]-BANERJEE discloses the distance determiner 116 may obtain (e.g., determine) one or more depth maps. Col. 16. Lines [5-10]-BANERJEE in some configurations, the processor 112 (e.g., computer vision tracker 110) may create one or more three-dimensional (3D) models of the surrounding environment (e.g., street view, landscapes, etc.). This may involve 3D vector analysis techniques and algebraic computation to achieve location determination (e.g., fast location determination).), calculating a relative position and size of an interested object in an object scene (Fig. 1. Col. 7. Lines [56-63]- BANERJEE discloses examples of instructions and/or data that may be stored by the memory 120 may include measured information, depth information, depth maps, distance data, image data, object data (e.g., location, size, shape, etc.), movement data, movement instructions, tracking data, image obtainer 118 instructions, distance determiner 116 instructions, computer vision tracker 110 instructions, movement controller 114 instructions, etc.), and reconstructing a passive 3D image of the object scene (Col. 16. Lines [5-10]-BANERJEE discloses the processor 112 (e.g., computer vision tracker 110) may create one or more three-dimensional (3D) models of the surrounding environment (e.g., street view, landscapes, etc.). This may involve 3D vector analysis techniques and algebraic computation to achieve location determination (e.g., fast location determination).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of MARRON in view of WATSON of a passive 3D imaging method based on optical interference computational imaging, comprising: providing an optical interference computational imaging system, the aperture pair array comprises a plurality of aperture pairs, each of the aperture pairs defines an interference baseline midpoint, and at least a few of the baseline midpoints of the aperture pairs of the aperture pair array are not overlapping, performing interference recording of mutual intensities an object, wherein each of the mutual intensities of the object is acquired through an interference baseline of the aperture pair of the aperture pair array located on an equivalent pupil plane, compensating a phase of the mutual intensities of each spatial frequency domain corresponding to the interference baseline of each aperture pair, and reconstructing an object image by Fourier transform algorithm to obtain a reconstructed target image, evaluating sharpness of each reconstructed target image using an image optimization evaluation algorithm, compensating the phase of the mutual intensity, and reconstructing the object image by Fourier transform algorithm until a reconstructed image with clear scene or locally clear scene is obtained with a corresponding reference working distance, and with the teachings of BANERJEE of selecting a reference working distance, sequentially adjusting the reference working distance step by step within a range, based on the reconstructed image with the clear scene or the locally clear scene and the corresponding reference working distance, calculating a relative position and size of an interested object in an object scene, and reconstructing a passive 3D image of the object scene.
Wherein having MARRON’s high quality imaging method selecting a reference working distance, sequentially adjusting the reference working distance step by step within a range, based on the reconstructed image with the clear scene or the locally clear scene and the corresponding reference working distance, calculating a relative position and size of an interested object in an object scene, and reconstructing a passive 3D image of the object scene.
The motivation behind the modification would have been to obtain a high quality 3D imaging that enhances the quality of the images and the efficiency of the system. Since both MARRON and BANERJEE relate to imaging objects in the atmosphere, wherein MARRON enables high resolution targeting and imaging in the presence of atmospheric turbulence, platform vibration, and practical space limitations while BANERJEE improves the quality of the depth information. Please see MARRON et al. (US 7405834 B1), Col. 1-2. Lines [64-5], and BANERJEE et al. (US 10152059 B2), Col. 11. Lines [38-44].
Conclusion
Listed below are the prior arts made of record and not relied upon but are considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
MENON et al. (US 20220086372 A1) - A multi-modal imaging device can include a sensor array, a metamaterial filter, and a memory unit. The sensor array can be any suitable sensor which detects incoming light and is capable of recording a received image. The metamaterial filter can be oriented adjacent the sensor array and can be patterned with pixels having varied physical heights designed to diffract an incoming image to produce an engineered response which is sensitive to 2D spatial coordinates (x, y), time (t), and at least one of depth spatial coordinate (z), spectrum (λ), and degree of polarization ({right arrow over (S)}). The memory unit can include instructions that, when executed by a processor, reconstruct the engineered response to produce a reconstructed image which includes the 2D spatial coordinates and at least one of z, λ, and {right arrow over (S)}…Abstract, Fig. 5A-5B.
MARRON et al. (US 8068235 B1) - Systems and methods are provided for multi-function coherent imaging comprising directing a first coherent radiation beam and a second coherent radiation beam towards a detector, where the second coherent radiation beam is spatially offset, angularly offset, or spatially and angularly offset from the first coherent radiation beam. A portion of the first coherent radiation beam and a portion of the second coherent radiation beam may be combined to form a composite beam. An object may be radiated with the composite beam. A first intensity pattern may be formed by interfering with return radiation from the radiated object with the first coherent radiation beam and a second intensity pattern is formed with the return radiation from the radiated object and the second coherent radiation beam. A detector may simultaneously record a superposition of the first intensity pattern and the second intensity pattern…Abstract, Fig. 6-7.
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 ETHAN N WOLFSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1898. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Chineyere Wills-Burns can be reached at (571) 272-9752. 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.
/ETHAN N WOLFSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2673
/CHINEYERE WILLS-BURNS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2673
Prosecution Insights