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 .
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.
Claims 2, 4 and 5 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.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “the three-dimensional model”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 2 recites “a three-dimensional model” and claim 1 recites “a three-dimensional model”, it is not clear to which model the claim is referring. Claim 5 has the same issue.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “the acquired range….”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 1-4 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tong (US 2022/0172429) in view of Wang (US 2022/0148258).
Regarding claim 1, Tong discloses an apparatus wherein
a three-dimensional model of a target object is created from point cloud data in which each point represents three-dimensional coordinates (generating a 3D model for instances of corresponding 2D images using a point cloud data; see at least Figs. 1 and 3 and paragraphs 0027-0028, 0035 and 0046),
the three-dimensional model is superimposed on an image in which a target object of the three-dimensional model is photographed (projecting the 3D model to an image; see at least paragraphs 0037, 0047 and 0088),
a superimposed image generated by the superimposition is displayed (reconstructed image is displayed; see at least Figs. 9-12 and paragraph 0076).
Tong discloses a target object in the superimposed image, the creation of the three-dimensional model using point cloud data in which a point is located and the superimposed image, as above, but is not clear about when a range is input, a model is created again.
Wang discloses a point cloud model reconstruction wherein a range is input, a model is reconstructed; see at least paragraphs 0027, 0029-0030 and 0046-0049.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tong by the teachings of Wang by having the above limitations so to be able to improve resolution of a reconstructed point cloud model and control quality of points in the reconstructed point cloud mode; see at least the Abstract.
Regarding claim 2, Tong in view of Wang disclose the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein
a three-dimensional model is created again using a point cloud within a threshold from an approximate line of the three-dimensional model among point clouds located in the range of the superimposed image (the combination of Tong’s model and superimposed image and Wang’s reconstruction; see at least the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 3, Tong in view of Wang disclose the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein
color information of the target object in the image is assigned to each point superimposed on the target object (Tong; see at least paragraphs 0032, 0051 and 0124), and
when a range of a point cloud having the same color information as the target object is input, a three-dimensional model is created again using the point cloud located in the input range (the combination of target object and colors of Tong; see at least paragraphs 0032, 0051 and 0124 and Wang’s range; see at least the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 4, Tong in view of Wang disclose the apparatus according to claim 1 any one of claims 1, wherein
a size of the target object in the image is acquired by referring to a database storing information on the size of a random target object (the combination of Tong’s size; see at least paragraph 0040 and Wang’s memory; see at least paragraph 0085), and
the acquired range of the size of the target object is displayed on the superimposed image (the combination of Tong’s object and superimposed image and Wang’s range; see at least the rejection of claim 1).
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected on the same grounds as claim 1.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tong in view of Wang and further in view of Maruyama (US 2021/0103727).
Regarding claim 5, Tong in view of Wang disclose the apparatus according to claim 1 any one of claims 1, wherein
an approximate line of the three-dimensional model is calculated (Want; see at least paragraphs 0033-0034 and 0045), and
the superimposed image is displayed by superimposing the three-dimensional model on the image (Tong; see at least the rejection of claim 1), but are not clear about a model extends along an approximate line.
Maruyama discloses the above missing limitation; see at last Figs. 8A-9B and paragraphs 0062-0068.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Tong in view of Wang by the teachings of Maruyama by having the above limitations so to be able to provide an aerial line extraction system; see at least the Abstract.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YASSIN ALATA whose telephone number is (571)270-5683. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7-4 ET.
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, Nasser Goodarzi can be reached at 571-272-4195. 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.
/YASSIN ALATA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426