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
1. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
2. With respect to applicant’s remarks filed on 03/26/26 regarding rejected claim 1 on pages 5-8, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
Applicants argues “Ulrich does not disclose a dual-objective (e.g., dual lens) optical assembly …
Ulrich does not actually disclose the claimed optical beam splitter, which is configured to split the light beam reflected from the object into a first light beam directed along the first optical arm and a second light beam directed along the second optical arm. This holds true for two reasons. First, as previously stated, Ulrich does not describe a dual-lens optical assembly with two arms and thus cannot split the beam to be directed along the first and second arms. Second, Ulrich teaches positioning lens 420 upstream of the optical beam splitter 820 relative to the direction of light propagation from the object 99, in a manner completely contrary to the recitations of claim 1. In order for the beam splitter to function as recited in claim 1, i.e., splitting the beam along the first and second arm, the optical assembly (e.g., the lens(es)) must be positioned downstream of the beam splitter with respect to the light reflected from the object 100.
Moreover, since Ulrich does not disclose the second optical arm, Ulrich cannot disclose a second horizontal optical arm, and therefore certainly cannot disclose that said second horizontal optical arm is positioned at a first offset angle relative to the axis of the first sensor of the first camera as recited in claim 1”.
First: Current specification discloses: “a dual objective optical group 55, comprising one or more lenses and possibly other optical elements, which acts as an optic …”, (Applicant’s Pub. No. 2015/0060316, [0045]). According to current Applicant’s specification, a dual objective optical group can comprise one lens and possibly other optical elements. As indicated in previous Office Action, Ulrich’s figure 8, 9A-C discloses that a dual objective optical group can comprise one lens 420, and possibly other optical elements beam splitter 820 or 820A-C. In the other words, the beam splitter 820, 820A-C are not different from possibly other optical elements, and the combination of beam splitter 820, 820A-C with lens 420 is not different from a dual objective optical group.
Second: The following Ulrich’s figure 8 clearly discloses splitting the beam along the first arm AA and second arm BB, and the optical assembly lens 420 is positioned downstream of the beam splitter 820 with respect to the light reflected from the object 90.
Third: To the Examiner point of view, the following figure 8 discloses that the portion BB of the beam splitter 820 is not different from the second arm. Therefore, certainly Ulrich has clearly disclosed that the second horizontal optical arm BB is positioned at a first offset angle relative to the axis of the first sensor 423A of the first camera 422A as recited in claim 1.
Further, according to Applicant’s figure 1, both dual objective optical group 55 and beam splitter 50 are positioned at the same place. In the other words, it is not clear what Applicant’s figure disclosed the limitation “the optical assembly (e.g., the lens(es)) must be positioned downstream of the beam splitter with respect to the light reflected from the object 100”?
[AltContent: rect][AltContent: rect][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (AA)][AltContent: textbox (BB)]
PNG
media_image1.png
594
460
media_image1.png
Greyscale
3. With the above explanation, it is believed that the application could not be in condition for allowance. Therefore, grounds for the rejection of claims are maintained and provided below as necessitated by amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. 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.
5. Claim(s) 1-10, 13-14, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being unpatentable over Ulrich et al. (Pub. No. 2002/0014577). Hereafter “Ulrich”.
Regarding Claim(s) 1, Ulrich teaches an apparatus for acquiring three-dimensional information of objects and surfaces for an artificial vision system for automatic optical inspection of the visual quality of an underlying object (figures 1, 3, 8, is not different from an apparatus for acquiring three-dimensional information of objects and surfaces for an artificial vision system with object 99, optical scanning head 401 ; [0012, 0013, 0074]), comprising a first camera having a vertical optical axis and a first flat sensor having orthogonal axes lying in a horizontal plane (figures 8, 9, first detector 422A is not different from a first camera having a vertical optical axis Z, the three lines of semiconductor imaging pixels of trilinear array 423A of detector 422A is not different from a first flat sensor) and a second camera having a horizontal optical axis and a second flat sensor having orthogonal axes lying in a vertical plane (figures 8, 9, second detector 422B is not different from a second camera having a horizontal optical axis X, the three lines of semiconductor imaging pixels of trilinear array 423B of detector 422B is not different from a second flat sensor), a system for illuminating the object from above comprising a plurality of light projectors (figures 6, 8, projectors 602A, 602B, 802A, 802B), a dual objective optical group having a first vertical optical arm associated with said first camera and coaxial with said vertical optical axis and a second horizontal optical arm associated with said second camera and coaxial with said horizontal optical axis (figures 8, 9A-C, beam splitter 820, 820A-C in combination with lens 420 is not different from a dual objective optical group, having a first vertical optical arm that is the direction going through lens 420 and beam splitter 820 in Z direction, associated with said first camera 422A, and second camera 422B), an optical beam splitter configured to split the light beam reflected by said object into a first light beam directed along said first optical arm and a second light beam directed along said second optical arm (figures 3, 8, 9A-C, optical beam splitter 820 splits the light beam reflected by said object 99, the first optical arm having the direction going through lens 420 and beam splitter 820 in Z direction and detector 422A, the second optical arm having the direction going through lens 420 and beam splitter 820 in Y direction and detector 422B), wherein the light projectors are angularly spaced around the vertical optical axis of said first camera (figure 8, projectors 802A-B spaced around the vertical optical axis Z of the first camera 422A), and wherein said first and second flat sensor have the same shape and are arranged to acquire said object with the same field of view (figures 8, 9A-C, the three lines of semiconductor imaging pixels of trilinear array 423A/423B of detector 422A/422B is not different from a first/second flat sensor, which have the same shape, with the same field of view).
Regarding Claim(s) 2, Ulrich teaches optical group is telecentric or bi-telecentric (optical group of figures 3, 4A-D, 4I, 8, 9A-C, 13A-C, 14A, 14C is not different from telecentric or bi-telecentric optical group).
Regarding Claim(s) 3, Ulrich teaches first/second camera is a high-resolution camera ([0185], lines 2-3, a high-resolution linear position encoder is not different from a high-resolution camera).
Regarding Claim(s) 4, Ulrich teaches one of said first camera and said second camera is a camera capable of acquiring images containing information related to the polarization of the light incident on the sensor ([0120], lines 12-15; [0127], lines 12-15).
Regarding Claim(s) 5, Ulrich teaches at least one light projector is set, relative to said vertical optical axis of said first camera, in an angular position coinciding with that of said axis of said first sensor of said first camera (figure 8, projector 802A, first camera 422A, first sensor 423A).
Regarding Claim(s) 6, Ulrich teaches a plurality of monochromatic or polychromatic light emitting rings, coaxial with said vertical optical axis of said first camera having an increasing diameter and increasing distance away from said first camera ([0104], lines 3-6; Figure 4D, light ring 403).
Regarding Claim(s) 7, Ulrich teaches plurality of light projectors comprises at least four light projectors angularly evenly spaced around said vertical optical axis of said first camera (figure 4D, ring light source 403 contains at least four light projectors around the vertical optical axis Z).
Regarding Claim(s) 8, Ulrich teaches plurality of light projectors have a vertical projection axis parallel to said vertical optical axis of said first camera (figure 4D, ring light source 403 contains plurality light projectors have a vertical projection axis parallel to said vertical optical axis Z of said first camera 423).
Regarding Claim(s) 9, Ulrich teaches a plurality of mirrored reflectors reciprocally interposed between said plurality of projectors and the station for the object for the conversion of the plurality of optical paths of the light from said plurality of projectors to said object ([0087], figure 4A, mirror 408; [0187], figure 12, mirrors 1220, 1270).
Regarding Claim(s) 10, Ulrich teaches plurality of light projectors have inclined projection axes arranged se as to converge on the station for said object (figure 4D, ring light source 403 contains plurality light projectors, have inclined projection axes arranged se as to converge on the station for said object 99).
Regarding Claim(s) 13, Ulrich teaches a means for reconfiguring the images projected onto the object (figures 4C-D, projection pattern element 412 is not different from a means for reconfiguring the images projected onto the object).
Regarding Claim(s) 14, Ulrich teaches first and second flat sensors are two-dimensional pixel sensors (figures 8, 9, first detector 422A with the two dimension three lines of semiconductor imaging pixels of trilinear array 423A of detector 422A is not different from two-dimensional pixel sensors).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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 of this title, 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.
7. Claim(s) 11-12, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ulrich et al. (Pub. No. 2002/0014577) in view of Lee et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 12,135,204). Hereafter “Ulrich” and “Lee”.
Regarding Claim(s) 11, 12, Ulrich teaches each light projector of the plurality of light projectors (figure 4D, ring light source 403 contains plurality light projectors) comprises at least one LED light source ([0159], lines 8-16), at least one lens (figures 4A, 4C, 4D, lens 414), an optical beam splitter (figure 13A, beam splitter 1312), wherein the lens can be positioned between the LED light source and the optical beam splitter (figure 8, lens 420, beam splitter 820), and at least one further lens can be positioned between said object to be illuminated (figure 13A, lens 410, object 99).
Regarding Claim(s) 12, Ulrich teaches all limitations as indicated in claim 11 above. Ulrich also collimated laser beam ([0110], lines 15-18).
However, Ulrich does not teach a digital micromirror display. Lee teaches a digital micromirror display, (column 10, lines 4-5). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify Ulrich by having a digital micromirror display in order to irradiate pattern lights efficiently.
Conclusion
8. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Fax/Telephone Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRI T TON whose telephone number is (571)272-9064. The examiner can normally be reached on 8am-4pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached on (571)270-5789. 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 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Prosecution Insights