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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/06/2024. The submission is following the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 16-24, 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al., (US 2021/0123732 A1) in view of Bathelet (US 2015/0076353 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Wang et al., disclose a method for calibrating a stereovision device ([0017], “an optical volume measurement device including a main body 100, a pair of photographic lenses 200 a, 200 b, an optical distance measuring unit”) comprising a distance sensor (optical distance measuring unit 300), and an optical sensor (200, Figs. 1-4);
the optical axes of the sensors intersecting each other or being secant (Figs. 104, and [0018], “Each of the photographic lenses 200 a, 200 b may be slightly rotated toward the other photographic lens 200 a, 200 b”, and Fig. 2, the lenses are rotated inward to form an overlapping measurement 203, showing that their optical axis are inherently secant and intersect within the object measurement volume), a control unit consisted of a computation module ([0021] shows the data is collected , processed and transformed for calculation) and a storage module (inherently included),the control unit being connected to the sensors (Fig.2 and [0021]), wherein the calibration method implements the following steps:
a) positioning an object (object 10 having an optical alignment indicator 410, Fig.2) in the field of view of the sensors (see Fig.2 and [0023], the optical alignment indicator 410 is directly into the center of the measurement area), the object being aligned or substantially aligned with the optical axis of the sensor ([0024], “users may position the object 10 within the measurement area 203 by aligning the optical alignment indicator 410 with the object 10”) and at least one dimension of the object is known ([0021], “The length, width and depth of the object 10 may be further calculated based on the three-dimensional coordinates to calculate its volume”, the “based on the three-dimensional coordinates” indicates a known structural dimension);
b) measuring a distance between the object (10) and the distance sensor (300)[0020], “the distance between the optical distance measuring unit 300 and the object 10 located in the measurement area 203 may be measured”);
c) measuring a position of the object and at least one dimension of the object, through the optical sensor (200)([0021], “the image recognition of the images captured by each photographic lens 200 a, 200 b is performed to obtain two-dimensional coordinates of several endpoints on the object 10 in the two images”);
d) recording into a database contained in the storage module the measurements carried out at steps b) and c), in such a way that a known dimension of the object is correlated to the distance measurement, to the measurement of at least one dimension and to the position measurement of the object ([0021], “The two-dimensional coordinates are converted into three-dimensional coordinates according to the distance measured by the optical distance measuring unit. The length, width and depth of the object 10 may be further calculated based on the three-dimensional coordinates to calculate its volume”).
Although Wang et al., disclose (Fig. 1) the optical distance measuring unit 300, which includes a light emitting and a light receiving element to measure distance ([0020]), and photographic lenses for imaging capturing, Wang et al., do not explicitly disclose the optical distance measuring unit and the photographic lenses as a chromatic distance sensor and
an infrared optical sensor as claimed.
Bathelet discloses an optical measurement system comprising a chromatic distance sensor (11, Fig.1 and [0058], “The point-like measurement system 11 is for example a confocal triangulation system with color coding”) and an infrared optical sensor (6, [0054], “each sensor 6 is formed by an infrared camera”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang et al., by utilizing the teaching of Bathelet, in order to avoid the system to be disrupted by the infrared radiation naturally emitted, thereby improving measurement precision under varying conditions (Bathelet, [0058]).
Regarding claim 17, Wang et al., in view of Bathelet, as discussed in claim 16, Wang et al., disclose at least one dimension of the object (10, Fig. 4) is known in a plane (the optical alignment indicator 410 of the object 10 directly onto the center of the measurement area, Figs.2-4) defined by the optical axes of the sensors (see Fig.2). Bathelet, also discloses at least one dimension of the object (2, Fig.3, [0059], “obtaining absolute thickness measurements of the glass according to the metric system, with an accuracy, for example of the order of a tenth of a mm”) is known (“according to the metric system”)
in a plane ([0076], “three point-like thickness measurement systems 11 are positioned on each side of the motion conveyor 5 “) defined by the optical axes of the sensors (see Figs. 1, 3A, [0054], “each sensor 6 forms an angle alpha with the direction N”, and [0057], “each point-like measurement system 11 is positioned relatively to the container 2 so that its measurement axis is perpendicular to the surface of the container 2”, showing a two intersecting line, that are the line of sight of the sensor 6 and perpendicular beam of the thickness sensor, cross each other at point M).
Regarding claim 18, Wang et al., in view of Bathelet, as discussed in claim 16, Wang et al., disclose during step c), a dimension of the object ([0021], “obtain two-dimensional coordinates of several endpoints on the object 10 in the two images”) is measured in a plane defined by the optical axes of the sensors ([0025], “horizontal line and a vertical line that perpendicularly cross the center of the measurement area “).
Regarding claim 19, Wang et al., in view of Bathelet, as discussed in claim 16, Wang et al., do not disclose the object being cylindrical in shape, the longitudinal axis thereof being perpendicular or substantially perpendicular to the plane defined by the optical axes of the sensors, the outer diameter of the object being known as claimed. Bathelet discloses he object being cylindrical in shape ([0052], “ measuring the distribution of the glass thickness in glass containers 2 such as bottles or flasks”, and [0069], “depending on the shape known a priori of the container in the area (conical, cylindrical shape, square section)”), the longitudinal axis thereof (the center vertical of the bottle, see Fig.1 and [0053], “the containers 2 form a queue on the conveyor 5 moving along the direction D”) being perpendicular or substantially perpendicular to the plane defined by the optical axes of the sensors (see Figs.2 and 3, the sensor are arrayed at fixed heights, and the bottle stands up on the conveyor belt. The vertical bottle standing upright at 90 degree angle relative to the horizontal sensor plane), the outer diameter of the object being known ([0069], “depending on the shape known a priori of the container in the area (conical, cylindrical shape, square section), and [0078], “ for a container 2 with a diameter of 100 mm”). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang et al., by utilizing the teaching of Bathelet, to improve measurement stability and accuracy.
Regarding claim 20, Wang et al., in view of Bathelet, as discussed in claim 16, Wang et al., do not disclose consisting in reiterating steps a) to d) of the calibration method, after having moved the object along the optical axis of the chromatic distance sensor as claimed. Bathelet discloses consisting in reiterating steps a) to d) of the calibration method (Figs. 1, 2 and [0053], “the containers 2 form a queue on the conveyor 5 moving along the direction D”), after having moved the object along the optical axis of the chromatic distance sensor ([0077], “each container 2 moves past the point-like measurement system 11 so that the thickness measurement E changes according to the position on the container 2 relatively to the point-like measurement system 11 (FIGS. 4 and 5)”, showing as a cylinder bottle moves past a sensor, the physical distance/position between the sensor and the container chances along the sensor’s measurement axis). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang et al., by utilizing the teaching of Bathelet, to obtain calibration data at different positions along measurement axis, improving calibration accuracy.
Regarding claim 21, Wang et al., in view of Bathelet, as discussed in claim 16, Wang et al., disclose the optical axes of the sensors form an acute angle (see Fig. 2), Wang et al., and Bathelet, do not disclose whose value is between 1 and 300 as claimed. However, these specific boundaries are design choice. Thus, absent any criticality, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the proposed system of Wang et al., and Bathelet, in order to improve the calibration accuracy.
Regarding claim 22, Wang et al., in view of Bathelet, as discussed in claim 16,
Wang et al., disclose the control unit being connected to the sensors ([0021]), wherein the storage module comprises: - a database made based on a calibration method according to claim 16; and-a control method, implementing the following steps:
i. measurement, by the control unit, via the distance sensor, of a distance between the distance sensor and a container present in the optical fields of the sensors ([0020], “the distance between the optical distance measuring unit 300 and the object 10 located in the measurement area 203 may be measured by the optical distance measuring unit “);
ii. measurement, by the computation module, via the optical sensor, of the position (P') and a dimension measurement of the container (10)([0021], “obtain two-dimensional coordinates of several endpoints on the object 10 in the two images);
iii. identification, from the database, of a value correlated with the measurements carried out in steps i and ii ([0021], “the two-dimensional coordinates are converted into three-dimensional coordinates according to the distance measured by the optical distance measuring unit 300. The length, width and depth of the object 10 may be further calculated based on the three-dimensional coordinates to calculate its volume”).
Wang et al., do not disclose the chromatic distance sensor, the infrared optical sensor, and identification of a defect of the container, when the value exceeds a predetermined tolerance range as claimed. Bathelet discloses a chromatic distance sensor (11, Fig.1 and [0058], “The point-like measurement system 11 is for example a confocal triangulation system with color coding”), an infrared optical sensor (6, [0054], “each sensor 6 is formed by an infrared camera”), and iii. identification, from the database, of a value correlated with the measurements carried out in steps i and ii ([0040], “determining a relationship between the measurement of the thickness made at the measurement point and the relevant infrared radiation at said measurement point, and means for determining from said relationship and from the relevant infrared radiation on the inspection area, the glass distribution of the container over the inspection area”, and[0080], “ From this relationship E=fz(Ir) and from the distribution of the relevant infrared radiation Ir(x,y) over the extent of each inspection area Z, the method gives the possibility of determining the distribution of the thickness (E(x,y)) of the container over said inspection area Z”)
iv. identification of a defect of the container, when the value exceeds a predetermined tolerance range ([0044], “an installation for measuring the distribution of the thickness of the glass in glass containers leaving shaping cavities”, and [0077], “The control and processing unit 10 is adapted so as to remove the outlying measurements of the thickness E which appear beyond a determined angle between the measurement direction of the point-like measurement system 11 and the normal to the surface of the container 2”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang et al., by utilizing the teaching of Bathelet, to prevent/produce defective container production.
Regarding claim 23, Wang et al., in view of Bathelet, as discussed in claim 22, do not disclose steps i and ii are carried out simultaneously as claimed. However, Bathelet discloses the orientation of the containers since the thickness and infrared radiation measurements being synchronized ([0081]). The “synchronized” shows that distance point and the thermal profile could be captured simultaneously. However, if not, selecting/implementing this synchronized measurement simultaneously would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for improving the measurement consistency. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the proposed system of Wang et al., in view of Bathelet, accordingly in order to improve the measurement consistency.
Regarding claim 24, Wang et al., in view of Bathelet, as discussed in claim 22, Wang et al., do not disclose when a container moves in the field of view of the sensors, before step iii, steps i and ii are implemented several times as claimed. Bathelet discloses when a container moves in the field of view of the sensors ([0053], “ conveyed on an outlet conveyor 5 so that the containers 2 form a queue on the conveyor 5 moving along the direction D”, [0055], “container 2 passes into their field of vision’), before step iii, steps i and ii are implemented several times ([0055], “each sensor 6 takes at least one image of each of the containers 2 moving past”, and [0077], “each container 2 moves past the point-like measurement system 11 so that the thickness measurement E changes according to the position on the container 2 relatively to the point-like measurement system 11”, showing multiple thickness measurements during movement). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang et al., by utilizing the teaching of Bathelet, to prevent further production of defective container.
Regarding claims 28-29, Wang et al., in view of Bathelet, as discussed in claim 22, Wang et al., do not disclose a glass container production line as claimed. Bathelet discloses a glass container production line (Fig. 1 and [0053], “the containers 2 which have just been shaped by the machine 3 are conveyed on an outlet conveyor 5”), comprising a mould for thermoforming glass containers ([0053], “The shaping machine 3 conventionally includes a series of cavities 4 each providing the shaping of a container 2”), a conveyor adapted to move the containers exiting from the mould ([0053], “the containers 2 which have just been shaped by the machine 3 are conveyed on an outlet conveyor 5 so that the containers 2 form a queue on the conveyor 5 moving along the direction D") to a cooling arch ([0053], “The containers 2 are then successively conveyed to different processing stations and in particular to the measurement installation 1 which is placed as close as possible to the shaping machine 3”), wherein a stereovision device (the combination) according to claim 22 is present along the conveyor, between the mould and the cooling arch ([0052], “The installation 1 is placed so as to allow measurements to be conducted while the container 2 leaving a manufacturing or shaping machine 3 has a high temperature”), the optical sensors being directed so as to detect the passage of each container moving on the conveyor ([0054], “two sensors 6 sensitive to the infrared radiation emitted by the containers 2 passing in front of each sensor 6… In the illustrated example, both sensors 6 are positioned on either side of the conveyor 5 so as to allow both sides of the container 2 to be inspected”, and [0055], “The unit 10 is suitable for controlling the operation of the sensors 6 when a container 2 passes into their field of vision”). Bathelet also discloses the optical axis (“measurement axis”, [0057]) of the chromatic distance sensor (11, being perpendicular or substantially perpendicular ([0057], “each point-like measurement system 11 is positioned relatively to the container 2 so that its measurement axis is perpendicular to the surface of the container 2”) to the moving direction of the containers on the conveyor ([0053], “ the containers 2 which have just been shaped by the machine 3 are conveyed on an outlet conveyor 5 so that the containers 2 form a queue on the conveyor 5 moving along the direction D”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Wang et al., by utilizing the teaching of Bathelet, in order to avoid the system to be disrupted by the infrared radiation naturally emitted, thereby improving measurement precision under varying conditions (Bathelet, [0058]).
Claims 26, 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al., in view of Bathelet, and further in view of Etchepare et al., (US 2023/0081839 A1).
Regarding claims 26-27, Wang et al., in view of Bathelet, as discussed in claim 22, as discussed in 22, do not disclose the control unit comprising an alert module connected to the computation module, and in wherein the alert module is activated by the computation module when the computation module identifies a defect of a observed container during the implementation of the control method as claimed. Etchepare et al., disclose a control unit comprising an alert module connected to the computation module ([0047], “comprises for example generating a computer alert”), and in wherein the alert module is activated by the computation module ([0047], “generating a computer alert”) when the computation module identifies a defect of a observed container (“draw attention of a production operator to the presence of a container 1 determined as being non-compliant”, [00047]) during the implementation of the control method (“Advantageously, the treatment method comprises an operation of discarding or generating a computer alert”, [0047]). Etchepare et al., also disclose the alert module ([0047], “computer alert”) being connected to a control module (inherently included) of a production unit (“a means 23 for discarding the container 1”, [0047]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Wang et al., in view of Bathelet, by utilizing the teaching of Etchepare et al., for better preventing further production of defective container.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al., in view of Bathelet, and further in view of Colton (US 2017/0227472 A1).
Regarding claim 30, Wang et al., in view of Bathelet, as discussed in claim 28, do not disclose the mould being connected to the stereovision device so as to stop the operation of the mould, when the stereovision device detects a defect on a container moving on the conveyor as claimed. Colton discloses a mould being connected to the stereovision device so as to stop the operation of the mould, when the stereovision device detects a defect on a container moving on the conveyor ([0048], “data from the optical inspection unit is recorded during the optical inspection of each preform… the control system adjusts process parameters based on the data received to correct any faults in the preform… to adjust the characteristics of the preform or to stop use of a particular cavity”). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Wang et al., in view of Bathelet, by utilizing the teaching of Colton, in order to prevent further production of defective container.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 25 is 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.
Regarding claim 25, the prior art fails to teach the stereovision device wherein, between the last step ii and step iii, an intermediate step is implemented, consisting in identifying the shortest distance measured by the chromatic distance sensor, this shortest distance being taken into account during step iii to identify the value.
Conclusion
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAI THI NGOC TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272- 3456. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9:00-5:30pm.
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, GEORGIA EPPS can be reached on (571)272-2328. 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. Visithttps://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.
/M.T.T./Examiner, Art Unit 2878
/GEORGIA Y EPPS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights