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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/02/2026 has been entered.
Claim Interpretation
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a projector circuit”, “a receiver circuit”, and “a control circuit” within the claim(s).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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.
Claim(s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Jia et al. (2007/0206204 A1, previously cited reference) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Jia et al. (2007/0206204 A1, previously cited reference) in view of Lu (2008/0130015 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 14, Jia discloses a depth sensor device/method (claim 14) for measuring a depth map of an object is included in a 3-D measurement apparatus and/or a method and system for full-field fringe-projection for 3-D surface-geometry measurement (figs. 1-3, 10), the depth sensor device comprising:
projector 32 is functionally equivalent to a projector circuit configured to configured to illuminate different locations of the object an object 35 implicitly during different time periods with an illumination pattern included in fringe-projection and/or fringe patterns (see abstract) [pars. 0073-74];
CCD camera 33 pixels detect [pars. 0020] a receiver circuit configured to detect on each pixel of a plurality of pixels intensities of light reflected from the object the object 35 while it is illuminated with the illumination pattern fringe patterns, and intended to generate an event at one of the pixels if the intensity detected at the pixel changes (i.e. from zero that is at no illumination or reflection from object to “1” one that is when illumination or reflection from object illuminate or reflected on a pixel) by more than a predetermined threshold (i.e. “0”) based on a comparison of a difference between a current photoreceptor signal (i.e. “1”) and a past photoreceptor signal (i.e. “0”) to the predetermined threshold, as can be seen in (fig. 13) [pars. 0005, 0020, 0024, 0074]; and
a computer 31 is a control circuit configured to generate for each of the different time periods a total number of detected events and pixel information indicating for each event the pixel that detected the event, and to calculate from the pixel information and the total number a position of the image of the illumination pattern on the pixels with sub-pixel accuracy [pars. 0005, 0020, 0022, 0024, 0073-74, and 0118].
In the alternative, if the Applicant argues that Jia does not anticipates "a comparison of a difference between a current photoreceptor signal and a past photoreceptor signal to the predetermined threshold" as defined in amended Claim 1.
Then in view of Lu teaching of a theory based on comparison/observations is a routine practice and known to a person skilled in the art, Lu teachings of comparing the projected pattern of light and an original pattern of light to compute ……… the projected pattern of light) [pars. 0012, 0056 and 0060-61 and 0075] in order to correct the position of the measurement object between each of the images and/or in order to employed a processing means to treat the information collected by the sensor pixel(s) using a desire algorithm to determine the form and area of the illuminating beam with accuracy.
Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Jia as desired appropriate, such as in the manner set forth in applicant's claims 1 and 14, in order to correct the position of the measurement object between each of the images and/or in order to employed a processing means to treat the information collected by the sensor pixel(s) using a desire algorithm to determine the form and area of the illuminating beam with accuracy, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art, In re Stevens, 101 USPQ 284 (CC1954).
For the purposes of clarity, the structure recited in claim 14 is symmetrical to the structure recited in claim 1, as such, the method claim 14 is taught/suggested by the functions shown/stated/set forth with regards to the apparatus claim 1 as rejected above as being obvious over Jia in view of Lu.
Additionally, pixels are arranged in a 2D grid, forming an array. A CCD imager consists of a large number of light-sensing elements/pixels arranged in a two-dimensional array on a thin silicon substrate. The camera pixels detect the intensity of light by counting photons that hit a photodiode during exposure, converting them into an electrical charge. This charge corresponds directly to light intensity, which is converted to a digital value representing brightness levels (e.g., from black to white), “reliance on the knowledge of one of ordinary skill at the time the invention was made in order to provide an enabling disclosure, In re BODE et al, 193 USPQ 12 at 16 (CCPA, 1977).”.
In addition, a predetermined threshold is a limit or value established in advance that acts as a benchmark or trigger or a specific, pre-set limit.
As to claims 2-9, Jia when modified by Lu, Jia also discloses a structure that is use in a system that is implementing limitations such as, wherein the CCD array each pixel has a response characteristic according to which implicitly an instantaneous change (i.e. intensity ratio at each pixel) of the received intensity to be detected to a given intensity value leads to a gradual change of the detected intensity over time until the detected intensity amounts to the given intensity value, as can be seen in depicted drawing (figs. 11-15) [pars. 0005, 0020, 0024, 0073-74, 0118, 0136] (claim 2);
wherein the projector circuit projector 32 is configured to illuminate project light the object the object 35 with a line (stripe, grid, or more complex shape);
the plurality of pixels included in the CCD 32 are arranged in a two-dimensional array ordered in rows and columns, assigning to each pixel a row number and a column number; the control circuit computer 31 is configured to treat the pixel information for each row separately and for each row the pixel information indicates the column numbers of the pixels in the row [pars. 0002, 0005, 0020, 0024, 0073-74, 0118, 0136]; and
the control circuit computer 31 is configured to calculate using image-processing algorithms for each row a weighted sum of the column numbers of the pixels that detected events, and to calculate the position of the image of the line on the respective row by dividing this sum by the total numbers of events detected in the respective row [pars. 0002, 0005, 0007, 0016-18, 0029-31] (claim 3);
wherein the projector circuit projector 32 is configured to illuminate project light at the object the object 35 with multiple lines (stripe, grid, or more complex shape);
the CCD camera 33 plurality of pixels are implicitly arranged in a two-dimensional array ordered in rows and columns, assigning to each pixel a row number and a column number; the control circuit the computer 31 is configured to treat the pixel information for each row separately and for each row the pixel information indicates the column numbers of the pixels in the row; and
the control circuit the computer 31 is configured implicitly to calculate for each row a plurality of sums of the column numbers of the pixels that detected events, where the number of sums equals the number of projected lines (stripe, grid, or more complex shape), and using image-processing algorithms to calculate the positions of the images of the lines (stripe, grid, or more complex shape) on the respective row by dividing these sums by the numbers of events detected in the respective row that were assigned to the respective sum [pars. 0002, 0005, 0007, 0016-18, 0029-31] (claim 4);
wherein for each of the different time periods the control circuit the computer 31 is configured to consecutively scan (i.e. a laser line is projected onto a scanned object) all columns in the pixel array a plurality of times, implicitly to detect during a scan of one column all pixels in the column that detected an event since the last scan, to add the column number of those pixels to the sum (included in the operation of algorithm calculation) of column numbers for each row of said column containing one of those pixels, and to increase a counter for the total number of events by one for each detected event; the sum of column numbers is for each row formed from the column numbers obtained during the plurality of times of scanning and the counter counts (included in the operation of algorithm calculation) each event detected during the plurality of times of scanning until a next one of the different time periods starts; and
the control circuit is the computer 31 configured to calculate the position of the image of the line from the sum of column numbers and the counted total number of events obtained until the next one of the different time periods starts [pars. 0005, 0020, 0024, 0073-74, and 0118] (claim 5);
wherein the circuitry the computer 31 comprises a memory unit (i.e. processor with memory) that is configured to store consecutively for each of the different time periods the position of the image of the line in each row; and the control circuit the computer 31 is configured to output consecutively for each of the different time periods a column vector containing the position of the image of the line in each row with sub-pixel accuracy [pars. 0039, 0074, and 0162-163] (claim 6);
further comprising a depth map calculation circuit the 3-D measurement apparatus and/or a method and system for full-field fringe-projection for 3-D surface-geometry measurement (figs. 1-3, 10)/phase-measuring profilometry configured to calculate from the column vectors obtained for each of the different time periods a depth map of the object the object 35 [pars. 0110, 0118, 0121] (claim 7);
wherein the control circuit the computer 31 is configured to calculate for each row an intermediate sum of the column numbers of the first k pixels that detected events, and to calculate an approximated position of the image of the line on the respective row by dividing this intermediate sum by k, where k is a predetermined natural number; and
the control circuit is configured to reject events of pixels in each of the rows that are located more than an outlier rejection threshold away from the approximated position calculated for the respective row (claim 8); and
wherein the control circuit the computer 31 is configured to adjust the approximated position and the outlier rejection threshold based on the events detected after the first k detected events analysis of the patterns descriptions of changes in depth and hence the shape of the object [par. 0008] (claim 9).
For the purposes of clarity, the functional recitations in the claims (e.g. “configured to”) in this case does not limit the claim limitation to a particular structure and does not limit the scope of the claim. It has been held that the recitation that an element is “configured to”, perform a function is not a positive limitation but only requires the ability to so perform and does not constitute a limitation in any patentable sense, In re Hutchinson, 69 USPQ 139. (See MPEP 2111.04). In this case, since the circuitry is computer/microcomputer which is the same as prior art computer and prior art shows the same claimed structure, the prior art is capable of performing the function of the circuitry as claimed.
As to claims 10-13, Jia when modified by Lu, Jia also discloses a structure that is use in a system that is implementing limitations such as, wherein the control circuit a computer 31 comprises implicitly hardware components that are configured to generate the total number of detected events and the pixel information and software components that are configured to calculate the position of the image of the illumination pattern [pars. 0018] (claim 10); wherein the camera device CCD camera 33 is configured to generate a depth map of a captured scene based on the positions of the image of the illumination pattern included in fringe-projection and/or fringe patterns (see abstract) [pars. 0073-74] obtained for each of the different time periods as can be seen in depicted drawing (figs. 4-15) (claim 11);
wherein the head mounted display is configured to generate a depth map of an object viewed through the head mounted display based on the position of the image of the illumination pattern obtained for each of the different time periods the image is processed and a reconstructed 3-D shape 37 is displayed on the monitor 36 [pars. 0073] (claim 12);
a scanning system comprises and/or anticipates projector and/or detector being move across the object 35 or verse versa, as such 3-D measurement apparatus and/or a method and system for full-field fringe-projection for 3-D surface-geometry measurement (figs. 1-3, 10) structure is use in a system that is implementing limitations such as, wherein the industrial production device comprises means to move objects in front of the circuitry in order to achieve the projection of the illumination pattern onto different locations of the objects; and the industrial production device is configured to generate depth maps of the objects based on the positions of the image of the illumination pattern fringe-projection and/or fringe patterns (see abstract) [pars. 0073-74] obtained for each of the different time periods (claim 13).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments/remarks, filed on 06/29/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new ground(s) of rejection(s).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Isiaka Akanbi whose telephone number is (571) 272-8658. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tarifur R. Chowdhury can be reached on (571) 272-2287. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 703-872-9306.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/ISIAKA O AKANBI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights