DETAILED ACTION
*Note in the following document:
1. Texts in italic bold format are limitations quoted either directly or conceptually from claims/descriptions disclosed in the instant application.
2. Texts in regular italic format are quoted directly from cited reference or Applicant’s arguments.
3. Texts with underlining are added by the Examiner for emphasis.
4. Texts with
5. Acronym “PHOSITA” stands for “Person Having Ordinary Skill In The Art”.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 13 recites the 3D model in last line. Independent Claim 14 and 20 recites the limitation "the physical object" in line 3 and 4 respectively. There is insufficient antecedent basis for those limitations in above claims. Claims 15-19 are rejected due to their dependency on independent Claim 14.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-12 are allowed.
Claims 13-20 would be allowed if above 112(b) rejections are overcome via Claim amendment.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Prior art, either individually or in combination, fails to disclose or render obviousness the limitation of determining, by the electronic device, a first texture map based on the object image, wherein the first texture map is with uneven illuminations; determining, by the electronic device, a second texture map fitting the first texture map, wherein the second texture map is with even illuminations; determining, by the electronic device, a reference texture map of the physical object; modifying, by the electronic device, the reference texture map of the physical object based on the first texture map, the second texture map, and the reference texture map until the reference texture map satisfies a predetermined condition; and determining, by the electronic device, the reference texture map as the texture map of the physical object in response to determining the reference texture map satisfies the predetermined condition as claimed in independent claims 1/14/20. The closest prior arts, Chen et al. (US 2021/0209837 A1), discloses determining a texture based on lighting parameter information. However, Chen fails to disclose the limitation of determining a second texture map fitting the first texture map wherein the second texture map is with even illuminations and the limitation of determining a reference texture map of the physical object; modifying the reference texture map of the physical object based on the first texture map, the second texture map, and the reference texture map until the reference texture map satisfies a predetermined condition; and determining the reference texture map as the texture map of the physical object in response to determining the reference texture map satisfies the predetermined condition as claimed in independent Claim 1/14/20. The other prior art Li et al. (US 2018/0374242 A1) discloses generating a low frequency albedo map and a high albedo map and generating a final texture map. However Li fails to discloses generating a first texture map with uneven illuminations and the limitation of determining a reference texture map of the physical object; modifying the reference texture map of the physical object based on the first texture map, the second texture map, and the reference texture map until the reference texture map satisfies a predetermined condition; and determining the reference texture map as the texture map of the physical object in response to determining the reference texture map satisfies the predetermined condition as claimed in independent Claim 1/14/20.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YINGCHUN HE whose telephone number is (571)270-7218. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00 MT.
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, Xiao M Wu can be reached at 571-272-7761. 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.
/YINGCHUN HE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2613
Prosecution Insights