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 required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on May 17, 2024 was filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings filed May 17, 2024 are accepted.
Abstract
The Abstract filed May 17, 2024 is accepted.
Specification
The specification filed May 17, 2024 has been entered.
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 4 – 8 and 14 – 16 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.
Claims 4 and 6 recite the term “target direction calculation model” which is considered indefinite because the metes and bounds of the claimed subject matter cannot be fully ascertained. The claimed subject matter lacks clarity because it is not clear how the calculation model is obtained.
In claims 5 - 8, the phrases “compensate a deviation from an exact orientation of the axis of rotation”, and “directly compensate misalignments of the axis of rotation, “compensate based on the further position a change of relative position” and “compensate based on the further degree of freedom of the code carrier” are considered to lack clarity because it is not clear whether there is a difference between each compensating step as each step appears to compensate for the same parameter. The claimed subject matter is considered indefinite because the metes and bounds of the claimed subject matter cannot be fully ascertained.
Claim 14 recites “calibration reference values are defined by a factory calibration procedure which includes self-calibration step…” however, claim 13 fails to claim and define the “calibration reference value” and “factory calibration procedure” or any calibration steps. In addition, a link between the two claimed features has not been clearly established, therefore the steps as recited in claim 14 cannot be obtained as claim 13 fails to provide the necessary steps to accomplish the requirements of claim 14. Specifically, are the “factory calibration position” and the “calibration reference values” different parameters? How are these obtained or related to each other? Therefore, the claimed subject matter is considered indefinite because the metes and bounds of the claimed subject matter cannot be fully ascertained.
Claims 15 – 17 are rejected due to their dependency on claim 13.
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, 2, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumagai et al. (EP 2 607 845 A2) in view of Lippuner et al. (WO 2011064317 A2).
With respect to claim 1, Kumagai et al. discloses a geodetic surveying instrument (Figures 8 and 9) comprising:
a sighting unit (telescope unit 35) for aiming in a target direction at a measurement target point,
an opto-electronic distance meter (distance measuring unit, paragraph [0073]) built to determine a target distance to the measurement target point aimed at,
at least one defined axis of rotation for setting the target direction by rotation about the axis (See Figures 8and 9),
an axis angle encoder for determining the target direction, having a code carrier (angle detection pattern 11, figure 1A) and at least one 2D-image sensor (image sensor 12, Figure 1A and paragraph [0033]; CCD or CMOS sensors, in general are two dimensional sensors); and
a controller (14) configured to derive measured coordinates of the measurement target point based on the determined target direction and target distance of the measurement target point (signal processing unit 14, Figure 1A), wherein the controller is configured to determine the actual target direction (vertical rotation angle detecting apparatus 71 and horizontal rotation angle detecting apparatus 55; paragraph [0084]-[0093]) based on evaluation of a code image generated by the 2D-image sensor and/or code images of the 1D-image sensors in the rotational position of the actual target direction,
the evaluation being made with respect to a rotational position relative to the axis of rotation in said first degree of freedom of code carrier relative to image sensor (Paragraph [0084] – [0093]), and/or
image sensor arrangement and with respect to a further position in at least a further degree of freedom of code carrier relative to image sensor and/or image sensor arrangement (Figure 1B, paragraph [0008]-[0009]; a rotational displacement amount of the angle detection pattern with respect to the reference position is detected; a tilt angle of the rotation shaft is detected based on a deviation between the detected center position of the angle detection pattern image and the reference image on the image sensor, paragraph [0020], [0033] and [0041]-[0050]).
Kumagai et al. does not disclose an arrangement of at least four distributed 1D-image sensors as recited in claim 1.
Regarding claim 1, Lippuner et al. discloses an arrangement of at least four 1D image sensors (Figures 2 and 3b) which can be attached in various positions in order to calculate the true orientation more accurately. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the teachings of Kumagai et al. by replacing the 2D image sensor arrangement with a 1D sensor arrangement as taught by Lippuner et al. in order to calculate the true orientation more accurately.
Referring to claim 2, the combination of Kumagai et al. and Lippuner et al. teaches a geodetic surveying instrument wherein the further degree of freedom relates to a tilt of the code carrier relative to the plane spanned by the image sensor and/or image sensor arrangement 9as taught by Kumagai et al.).
In regards to claim 5, the combination of Kumagai et al. and Lippuner et al. shows a geodetic surveying instrument wherein the controller (14) is configured to determine and/or compensate a deviation from an exact orientation of the axis of rotation (See paragraphs [0020], [0022] and [0045]).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Kumagai et al. and Lippuner et al. sets forth a geodetic surveying instrument wherein the controller (14) is configured to determine and/or compensate based on a change of relative position (See paragraphs [0020], [0022] and [0045]).
With regards to claim 8, the combination of Kumagai et al. and Lippuner et al. discloses a geodetic surveying instrument wherein the controller (14) is configured to determine and/or compensate based on the further degree of freedom of the code carrier, of the sighting unit with respect to a support (Paragraphs [0078]-[0079]).
Referring to claim 9, the combination of Kumagai et al. and Lippuner et al. sets forth a geodetic surveying instrument wherein the controller (14) is configured to determine the target direction based on said image evaluation with respect to the further position in dependence on a tilting of the surveying instrument, in particular by weighting the further position in dependence on a degree of tilting of the surveying instrument.
In regards to claim 11, the combination of Kumagai et al. and Lippuner et al. teaches a geodetic surveying instrument wherein the controller (14) is configured to collect and evaluate a history of position values in order to determine a wearing condition of the geodetic surveying instrument, in particular of an axis bearing (Figure 1A, bearing 2).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Kumagai et al. and Lippuner et al. shows a geodetic surveying instrument wherein the geodetic surveying instrument is embodied as a total station (as taught by Kumagai et al. in paragraph [0002]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 and 10 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.
Reasons for Allowance
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claims 3 and 10 are allowable because the prior art fails to teach or suggest a geodetic surveying instrument according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to evaluate the code image and/or code images with respect to all six degrees of freedom of a respective code carrier relative to the image sensor or image sensor arrangement and wherein the controller is configured to put out a notice or a user warning, if a defined threshold for the further position is exceeded in combination with the remaining limitations of the claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Aebischer et al. (US 2024/0125597 A1) discloses a surveying instrument, comprising a rotational position encoder, an acceleration sensor such as a MEMS-accelerometer, a mechanism designed to move the accelerometer from a first orientation in at least a second orientation, the second orientation being different to the first orientation, wherein the mechanism is designed and arranged in such a way that the targeting direction is uninfluenced by a movement of the accelerometer by the mechanism, and an evaluation unit configured to derive a calibrated leveling for the instrument.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YARITZA GUADALUPE-MCCALL whose telephone number is (571)272-2244. The examiner can normally be reached Mon -Thu, 8:00am - 6:00pm.
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, Laura E Martin can be reached at 571-272-2160. 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.
YARITZA GUADALUPE-MCCALL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2855
June 8, 2026
/YARITZA GUADALUPE-MCCALL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights