TAILED 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 Preliminary Amendment
The Preliminary Amendment filed on 01/14/2025 has been entered.
Response to Preliminary Remarks
Applicant's Preliminary Remarks filed 01/14/2025 concerning the Preliminary Amendment have been considered and those amendments have been entered.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In paragraph [0001]:
Update status of 18/310,095 to reflect US Patent No. in manner similar to following parent US Applications and corresponding US Patents.
Appropriate correction is required.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Claims 2-9 have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) to not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) claim interpretation.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 2-9 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,033,291. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because pending claims 2-9 are device versions of patented method claims 1-8 claiming the same patented steps as functions. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to draft device versions of patented method claims to extend patent coverage. Refer to the following side by side comparison of pending device claims 2-9 with patented method claims 1-8.
Claims filed on 01/14/2025
2. A visual aid device, comprising:
a frame;
a camera mounted to the frame and configured to capture images of a scene;
one or more motion sensors configured to sense a motion component of the visual aid device;
a display mounted within the frame and configured to present images of the scene to one or more eyes of a user; and
a processor configured to
evaluate the motion component of the visual aid device,
determine a motion state of the device based on the motion component, and;
a) if the motion state indicates that a user of the visual aid device is engaged in head motions that exceed a motion threshold,
present first video images on the display of the visual aid device in a neutral setting with limited enhancements or adjustments applied to the images of the scene;
b) if the motion state indicates that the user of the visual aid device is engaged in head motions that do not exceed the motion threshold,
locate text-like features in a high-acuity portion of the images of the scene,
apply visual enhancements to at least the text-like features; and
present second video images including the visually enhanced text-like features on the display.
3. The device of claim 2,
wherein when the motion state indicates that the user is engaged in head motions that do not exceed the motion threshold, the processor is configured to
apply visual enhancements to the text-like features that are optimized for reading.
4. The device of claim 3,
wherein the visual enhancements applied to the text-like images comprise color mapping to give high-contrast two-level images.
5. The device of claim 3,
wherein the visual enhancements applied to the text-like images comprise binarization to give high-contrast two-level images.
6. The device of claim 3,
wherein the visual enhancements applied to the text-like images comprise a tiered-radial warp.
7. The device of claim 6,
wherein the visual enhancements applied to the text-like images comprise a tiered-radial warp with moderate magnification.
8. The device of claim 2,
wherein when the motion state indicates that the user is engaged in head motions that do not exceed the motion threshold, the processor is configured to
apply visual enhancements to the text-like features that increase a size of the text-like features to a preferred text size.
9. The device of claim 2, further comprising:
an input device configured to
receive an input from the user that a spotting configuration is desired;
wherein the processor is configured to reduce a magnification of the second video images and restore a more natural and less-distorted field-of-view in response to the input.
U.S. Patent # 12033291
Claims
1. A method of providing autonomous enhancements to a video output of a visual aid device, comprising:
obtaining real-time images of a scene with the visual aid device;
evaluating a motion component of the visual aid device;
determining a motion state of the visual aid device based on the motion component;
if the motion state indicates that a user of the visual aid device is engaged in head motions that exceed a motion threshold:
presenting first video images on a display of the visual aid device in a neutral setting with limited enhancements or adjustments applied to the real-time images;
if the motion state indicates that the user of the visual aid device is engaged in head motions that do not exceed the motion threshold:
locating text-like features in a high-acuity portion of the real-time images;
applying visual enhancements to at least the text-like features; and
presenting second video images including the visually enhanced text-like features on the display of the visual aid device.
2. The method of claim 1,
wherein when the motion state indicates that the user is engaged in head motions that do not exceed the motion threshold,
applying visual enhancements to the text-like features that are optimized for reading.
3. The method of claim 2,
wherein the visual enhancements applied to the text-like images comprise color mapping to give high-contrast two-level images.
4. The method of claim 2,
wherein the visual enhancements applied to the text-like images comprise binarization to give high-contrast two-level images.
5. The method of claim 2,
wherein the visual enhancements applied to the text-like images comprise a tiered-radial warp.
6. The method of claim 5,
wherein the visual enhancements applied to the text-like images comprise a tiered-radial warp with moderate magnification.
7. The method of claim 1,
wherein when the motion state indicates that the user is engaged in head motions that do not exceed the motion threshold,
applying visual enhancements to the text-like features that increase a size of the text-like features to a preferred text size.
8. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving an input from the user that a spotting configuration is desired; and
reducing a magnification of the second video images and restoring a more natural and less-distorted field-of-view.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kim, US Patent No. 10,438,410, corresponds to Kim, US Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0176748, which was cited on the July 23, 2024 IDS on page 5 of 7, refer to FIGs. 4A, 4B, 6, and 8. This US Patent claims and describes different responses to detected motion relative to a threshold.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-9 would be allowable if a proper terminal disclaimer is filed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Similar to the reasons for allowance in parent US Patent Application 18/310,095 the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest in the context of independent claim 2:
a) if the motion state indicates that a user of the visual aid device is engaged in head motions that exceed a motion threshold,
present first video images on the display of the visual aid device in a neutral setting with limited enhancements or adjustments applied to the images of the scene;
b) if the motion state indicates that the user of the visual aid device is engaged in head motions that do not exceed the motion threshold,
locate text-like features in a high-acuity portion of the images of the scene,
apply visual enhancements to at least the text-like features; and
present second video images including the visually enhanced text-like features on the display.
The same above identified limitations distinguish this child application's claims from the claims in parent U.S. Patent # 11,676,352; parent U.S. Patent # 11,282,284; and parent U.S. Patent # 10,872,472.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFERY A BRIER whose telephone number is (571)272-7656. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri from 8:30am-3:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Xiao M Wu, can be reached at telephone number 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 an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
JEFFERY A. BRIER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2613
/JEFFERY A BRIER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2613