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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-17 are currently pending and have been examined.
Claims 1-17 have been rejected.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed for Application No. CN202311609788.1 on 06/25/2024.
The instant application therefore claims the benefit of priority under 35 U.S.C 119(a)-(d). Accordingly, the effective filing date for the instant application is 11/28/2023 claiming benefit to CN202311609788.1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1 – Statutory Categories of Invention:
Claims 1-17 are drawn to a method, device, or system, which are statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A – Judicial Exception Analysis, Prong 1:
Independent claim 1 recites a method for calibrating position and orientation of a stage light fixture. Independent claim 13 recites a device for calibrating position and orientation of a stage light fixture.
These independent claims recite the following steps best characterized as mathematical concepts under MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(I) citing the abstract idea grouping for mathematical concepts in general and mental process under MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III) citing the abstract idea grouping for mental processes:
acquiring light spot images and light fixture angle information when light beams of a target stage light fixture respectively project onto at least three different positions on a stage, and
respectively calculating first coordinates of a light beam center line projection point image in each of the light spot images in a camera coordinate system
wherein the light beam center line projection point image refers to an image of a projection point of a light beam center line of the target stage light fixture on a floor of the stage
deducing second coordinates of a light beam center line projection point on the stage in a stage coordinate system based on the first coordinates and information about internal parameters and a position and an orientation of a camera for acquiring the light spot images, and
recording corresponding relationship between the second coordinates and the light fixture angle information; and
determining a calibrated position and orientation of the target stage light fixture based on the second coordinates, the light fixture angle information and the corresponding relationship therebetween
Under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the limitations reciting acquiring light fixture angles relative to three points on a stage, calculating coordinates for a beam center point relative to a camera, determining a second coordinate system relative to camera features, and determining a calibration position and orientation based on the second coordinates limitations are best characterized as representing mathematical relationships - see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(I)(A) and the limitations reciting recoding the relationship between the coordinates and the light angles amount to applying a mental process to a generic computing environment - see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(c)(2).
Dependent claim 2 recites, in part, establishing a calibration equation set based on the second coordinates, the light fixture angle information and the corresponding relationship therebetween, and solving the calibration equation set by a nonlinear optimization algorithm to obtain an optimal solution as the calibrated position and orientation of the target stage light fixture.
Dependent claim 3 recites, in part, calibration equation set is as follows:
PNG
media_image1.png
44
648
media_image1.png
Greyscale
where (xi, yi, zi, 1)T denotes the corresponding second coordinates when the light beams of the target stage light fixture project onto a ith position on the stage, Tlight denotes a first transformation matrix, which is used to transform the second coordinates into third coordinates of the light beam center line projection point on the stage in a light fixture coordinate system, (yawi, pitchi) denotes the corresponding light fixture angle information when the light beams of the target stage light fixture project onto the ith position on the stage, Tlight_rotation (yawi, pitchi) denotes a second transformation matrix, which is a known quantity related to the light fixture angle information and is used to transform the third coordinates into fourth coordinates in a rotating coordinate system formed after the target stage light fixture rotates by an angle of (yawi, pitchi), (li,0,0,1)T denotes the fourth coordinates, li denotes a distance from an intersection point between the light beam center line of the target stage light fixture and the floor of the stage to an optical center of the light beam of the target stage light fixture, and N denotes the total number of different positions on the stage projected by the target stage light fixture; and the method of solving the calibration equation set to acquire an optimal solution as the calibrated position and orientation of the target stage light fixture comprises: solving the calibration equation set to acquire an optimal value of the first transformation matrix as the calibrated position and orientation of the target stage light fixture.
Dependent claim 4 recites, in part, wherein the nonlinear optimization algorithm is a Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm.
Dependent claim 5 recites, in part, wherein the method of acquiring light spot images and light fixture angle information when light beams of the target stage light fixture respectively project onto at least three different positions on the stage comprises:… correspondingly recording angle information of the target stage light fixture as the light fixture angle information when the light beams of the target stage light fixture project onto the corresponding positions.
Dependent claim 6 recites, in part, wherein the light fixture angle information of the target stage light fixture is determined and recorded by determining rotation information of a horizontal motor and rotation information of a vertical motor of the target stage light fixture.
Dependent claim 7 recites, in part, wherein the method of calculating the first coordinates of the light beam center line projection point image in each of the light spot images in the camera coordinate system comprises: detecting the light spots in the light spot images by a … algorithm, and determining a position of the light beam center line projection point image according to brightness distributions and shapes of the light spots; and calculating the first coordinates of the light beam center line projection point image in the camera coordinate system according to the position of the light beam center line projection point image.
Dependent claim 8 recites, in part, wherein light spot center points on the ground of the stage are taken as the projection point of the light beam center line of the target stage light fixture on the floor of the stage, and accordingly, the light spot center points in the light spot images are taken as the light beam center line projection point images.
Dependent claim 9 recites, in part, herein the method of calculating the first coordinates of the light beam center line projection point image in each of the light spot images in the camera coordinate system comprises: detecting the light spots in the light spot images by a… algorithm, and solving coordinates of the light spot center points in the light spot images in the camera coordinate system as the first coordinates of the light beam center line projection point image by a corresponding geometric algorithm according to a geometric characteristic of the light spots in the light spot images.
Dependent claim 10 recites, in part, wherein the light spots in the light spot images are in the shape of an ellipse, the elliptic light spots in the light spot images are detected accordingly by an ellipse detection algorithm, center points of the ellipse light spots are detected as the light spot center points in the light spot images according to geometric symmetry of the elliptic light spots, and the first coordinates of the spot center points in the spot images are calculated.
Dependent claim 11 recites, in part, wherein the method of deducing second coordinates of the light beam center line projection point on the stage in the stage coordinate system based on the first coordinate and information about internal parameters and the position and orientation of the camera when the light spot images are acquired comprises: determining a back projection ray by a back projection method based on the first coordinates and the information about the internal parameters and the position and the orientation of the camera; and based on the back projection ray, determining corresponding points of the light beam center line projection point images in the light spot images on the floor of the stage as the projection points of the light beam center lines on the floor of the stage, and calculating the second coordinates of the projection points in the stage coordinate system.
Dependent claim 12 recites, in part, wherein if the first coordinates of the light beam center line projection point images in the light spot images when the light beams of the target stage light fixture project onto the ith position on the stage are (xipixel, yipixel)T, the back projection ray in the camera in the stage coordinate system is denoted as:
PNG
media_image2.png
42
373
media_image2.png
Greyscale
where K,Tcamera denotes the information about the internal parameters and the position and the orientation of the camera, respectively, (K*Tcamera)+ denotes a pseudo-inverse of K*Tcamera, and ui denotes a straight line on which an imaging focus of the camera and the light beam center line projection point images in the light spot images are located.
Dependent claim 14 recites, in part, execute the program or instruction, the steps of the method according to claim 1 are implemented
Dependent claim 15 recites, in part, when the program or instruction is executed, the steps of the method according to claim 1 are implemented.
Dependent claim 16 recites, in part, when the program instruction is executed, the computer is configured to execute the method according to claim 1.
Each of these steps of the preceding dependent claims only serve to further limit or specify the features of independent claims 1 or 10 accordingly, and hence are nonetheless directed towards fundamentally the same mathematical concept abstract idea grouping as the independent claim and utilize the additional elements analyzed below in the expected manner.
Step 2A – Judicial Exception Analysis, Prong 2:
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements within the claims only amount to instructions to implement the judicial exception using a computer [MPEP 2106.05(f)].
Claims 13 recite a first processing module, second processing module, and calibration module. Claims 14 recite an electronic device, comprising a memory, a processor, and a program or instruction stored in the memory and operable on the processor. Claims 15 recite a non-transient computer-readable storage medium, on which a program or instruction is stored. Claim 16 recites a computer program product, comprising a computer program stored on a non-transient computer-readable storage medium, wherein the computer program comprises a program instruction. The specification provides that the (emphasis added) “each embodiment may be implemented by means of software plus a necessary general hardware platform” (Instant disclosure on p. 39 lines 17-19). Therefore, the use of a computer, corresponding hardware, and modules amount to a tool to perform an existing process and only amounts to an instruction to implement the abstract idea using a computer (MPEP § 2106.05(f)(2) see case requiring the use of software to tailor information and provide it to the user on a generic computer within the “Other examples.. v.”).
Claim 5 recites respectively collecting images containing the corresponding light spots as the light spot images. The limitations are only recited as a tool which only serves to input data for use by the abstract idea (MPEP § 2106.05(g) - insignificant pre-solution activity that amounts to mere data gathering to obtain input) and is therefore not a practical application of the recited judicial exception.
Claims 7 and 9 recite a machine vision algorithm. The specification primarily provides the intended use of the machine vision algorithm (see the Instant disclosure on p. 13 lines 15-21 and p. 31 line 23) and only provides the structure that the computer vision algorithm may be an alternative “cross platform” library (Instant disclosure on p. 14 lines 19-22 and p. 26 lines 15-19). The use of a machine vision algorithm, in this case to detect light spot images, only recites the machine vision algorithm as a tool to apply data to an algorithm and report the results (MPEP § 2106.05(f)(2) see case involving a commonplace business method or mathematical algorithm being applied on a general purpose computer within the “Other examples.. i.”) amounting to instruction to implement the abstract idea using a general purpose computer. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. V. CLS Bank Int’l, 134 S. Ct. 2347, 1357 (2014).
Claim 17 recites a system comprising at least one group of stage light fixtures, a camera, and a server. Claim 5 recites controlling the light beams of the target stage light fixture to respectively project onto the at least three different positions to respectively form corresponding light spots. These limitations amount to a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself (MPEP § 2106.05(h) similar to example vi. Limiting the abstract idea of collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis to data related to the electric power grid, because limiting application of the abstract idea to power-grid monitoring is simply an attempt to limit the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1354, 119 USPQ2d 1739, 1742 (Fed. Cir. 2016) wherein the additional elements do not amount to more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use).
The above claims, as a whole, are therefore directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B – Additional Elements that Amount to Significantly More:
The present claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to more than the abstract idea because the additional elements or combination of elements amount to no more than a recitation of instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer.
Claims 13 recite a first processing module, second processing module, and calibration module. Claims 14 recite an electronic device, comprising a memory, a processor, and a program or instruction stored in the memory and operable on the processor. Claims 15 recite a non-transient computer-readable storage medium, on which a program or instruction is stored. Claim 16 recites a computer program product, comprising a computer program stored on a non-transient computer-readable storage medium, wherein the computer program comprises a program instruction. Claims 7 and 9 recite a machine vision algorithm.
Each of these elements is only recited as a tool for performing steps of the abstract idea, such as the use of the storage mediums to store data, the computer and data processing devices to apply the algorithm, and the display device to display selected results of the algorithm. These additional elements therefore only amount to mere instructions to perform the abstract idea using a computer and are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea (MPEP 2016.05(f) see for additional guidance on the “mere instructions to apply an exception”).
Each additional element under Step 2A, Prong 2 is analyzed in light of the specification’s explanation of the additional element’s structure. The claimed invention’s additional elements do not have sufficient structure in the specification to be considered a not well-understood, routine, and conventional use of generic computer components. Note that the specification can support the conventionality of generic computer components if “the additional elements are sufficiently well-known that the specification does not need to describe the particulars of such additional elements to satisfy 35 U.S.C. § 112(a)” (MPEP § 2106.07(a)(III)(A) integrating the evidentiary requirements in making a § 101 rejection as established in Berkheimer in III. Impact on Examination Procedure, A. Formulating Rejections, 1. on p. 3).
Claim 5 recites respectively collecting images containing the corresponding light spots as the light spot images. The courts have decided that receiving or transmitting data over a network as well-understood, routine, conventional activity when claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP § 2106.05(d)(II) other types of activities example i. receiving or transmitting data over a network, OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network).
Claim 17 recites a system comprising at least one group of stage light fixtures, a camera, and a server. Claim 5 recites controlling the light beams of the target stage light fixture to respectively project onto the at least three different positions to respectively form corresponding light spots. The technological environment in which the judicial exception is applied is considered well understood, routine, and conventional. This position is supported by (1) El-Nasr and Horswill, Automating Lighting Design for Interactive Entertainment, 2(2) Computers in Entertainment (April 2004) teaching on a camera and lighting allocation computer implemented design system in § 3.3 Selecting Angles on p. 9-10 and § Discussion on p. 17-18 and (2) Fisher (US Patent App Pub No 2015/0231524) teaching on the state of the art for automated theatrical object/component centralized computer control systems including camera and stage lights in the Background in ¶ 0003 and in the Summary in ¶ 0010. Therefore, the technological environment of computer controlled and connected stage lights and cameras is not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited judicial exception.
Thus, taken alone, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the above-identified judicial exception. Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. Their collective functions merely provide conventional computer implementation.
Claims 1-17 are therefore rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Subject Matter Free of the Prior Art
The following is an examiner’s statement of subject matter free of the prior art:
The ordered combination of limitations in independent claim 1 stating: acquiring light spot images and light fixture angle information when light beams of a target stage light fixture respectively project onto at least three different positions on a stage; respectively calculating first coordinates of a light beam center line projection point image in each of the light spot images in a camera coordinate system; and deducing second coordinates of a light beam center line projection point on the stage in a stage coordinate system based on the first coordinates and information about internal parameters and a position and an orientation of a camera is free of the prior art.
The broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language requires projecting a first coordinate system of an at least three light beam projections on a stage floor from a light fixture onto a second coordinate system of a camera position and orientation along with “internal parameters” to calibrate the light fixture positioning/orientation.
The most remarkable prior arts of record are as follows:
Meza et al., What is the best triangulation approach for a structured light system?, 11397 Conference: Dimensional Optical Metrology and Inspection for Practical Applications (April 2020) teaching on the triangulation of a point X in space to obtain its 3D coordinates of a camera wherein the camera’s 3D points are projected into the light projector sensor in the § 3.1.4 Optimal method on p. 5 and § 3.2 Simulations and experiments on p. 5-6
Zhang et al., Novel method for structured light system calibration, 45(8) Optical Engineering 083601-1-8 (2006) teaching on an image projector and camera calibration system wherein a camera’s optical coordinate axis system to mapped independently to coordinated to linear axis system of an image projector in the § 2.4 System Calibration on p. 083601-5-6 and in the § 5 Discussions on p. 083601-7-8
Eichel (US App Pub No 2015/0003084) teaching on a motor controlled theater light fixture that is calibrated relative to coordinates of a specified target in the Detailed Description in ¶ 0034-35 ¶ 0045-46
O’Connel (US App Pub No 2024/0075402) teaching on calibrating a projector light of an AR image array on a screen based on an angle of view generally in the Detailed Description ¶ 0165-166, ¶ 0112, and ¶ 0205
While Meza and Zhang both teach on a calibration of a camera and light project via the consideration of the two coordinate systems in conjunction, both fail to teach on deducing a second camera coordination center onto established the first light fixture device coordinate system on the stage to determine the light angle calibration. Both Eichel and O’Connel teach on the independent light fixture positioning calibration relative to a fixed stage, but fail to teach on the calibration being relative to a camera coordinate axis. Therefore, claims 1-17 are free of the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORDAN LYNN JACKSON whose telephone number is (571)272-5389. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-4:30PM ET.
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, Arleen M Vazquez can be reached at 571-272-2619. 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.
/JORDAN L JACKSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2857
