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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-10 are pending. Claims 1, and 9-10 are amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The newly added/amended limitation is disclosed in Matsumura (US 20080184153 A1) reference. For further details see the rejection below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TAMIR et al. (US 2021/0304495; hereinafter Tamir) in view of Matsumura et al. (US 20080184153 A1; hereinafter Matsumura).
Regarding claim 1, Tamir discloses an information processing apparatus (830, fig. 9) comprising:
at least one memory (920, fig. 9) storing instructions, and at least one processor (910, fig. 9) configured to execute the instructions (¶0082, ¶0086, ¶0016) to:
identify a shape of an object included in point cloud data (steps s210-s220, fig. 2, At S220, volumes within the cloud of points, acquired at S210, are labeled. In the example embodiment, the cloud of points may contain representations of one or more human bodies. In the embodiment, possible labels may include, and are not limited to, ears, eyes, face, legs, and other, like labels. The labeling of volumes within the cloud of points may include those methods, processes, and features described with respect to step S120 in FIG. 1, above, ¶0035);
generate first mesh data of a first object whose shape is identified, and generate second mesh data of a second object whose shape is identified, by using a mesh resolution different from a mesh resolution used in generating the first mesh data (steps s230-s250, fig. 2, ¶0035-0038);
generate three-dimensional data acquired by combining the first mesh data and the second mesh data (steps s250, fig. 2), and
wherein the first mesh data and the second mesh data are generated using different mesh resolutions (¶0002, ¶0085).
Tamir is not found disclosing expressly the limitation of, display the first mesh data and the second mesh data in different colors.
However, Matsumura discloses different chroma colors are rendered on different regions depending on meshing density [¶0064].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to display the first mesh data and the second mesh data in different colors in Tamir’s display according to the teaching of Matsumura, because, combining prior art elements ready to be improved according to known method to yield predictable results is obvious. Furthermore, such combination would enhance the discernability of mesh density variability using an additional dimension.
Regarding claim 2, Tamir in view of Matsumura discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to generate mesh data of each object by using a mesh resolution associated with each object included in the point cloud data (In the embodiment, possible labels may include, and are not limited to, ears, eyes, face, legs, and other, like labels, ¶0035,
At S240, the mesh density is set based on a determination that the labeled volume is a face at S230. In an embodiment, where, at S230, a given volume is determined to be a face, the mesh density may be adjusted to specify a high mesh density. Alternatively, where, at S230, the given volume is determined not to be a face, the mesh density may be adjusted to specify a low mesh density. In adjusting parameters to set the mesh density, reference may be made to step S130 of FIG. 1 which describes, as above, a generic process of adjusting algorithm parameters based on data labels, ¶0037).
Regarding claim 3, Tamir in view of Matsumura discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to generate mesh data by using a predetermined resolution when a mesh resolution is not associated with an object whose shape is identified (Alternatively, where, at S230, the given volume is determined not to be a face, the mesh density may be adjusted to specify a low mesh density, ¶0037).
Regarding claim 4, Tamir in view of Matsumura discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to manage a parameter defining a mesh resolution used for each of the objects (In adjusting parameters to set the mesh density, reference may be made to step S130 of FIG. 1 which describes, as above, a generic process of adjusting algorithm parameters based on data labels, ¶0037).
Regarding claim 5, Tamir in view of Matsumura discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the mesh resolution defines a distance between two points at a plurality of points used for mesh data (this is understood as inherent, higher the resolution, distance between two points are smaller).
Regarding claim 6, Tamir in view of Matsumura discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the mesh resolution defines an upper limit number of points used in generating mesh data in a specific region (…given volume is determined to be a face, the mesh density may be adjusted to specify a high mesh density. Alternatively, where, at S230, the given volume is determined not to be a face, the mesh density may be adjusted to specify a low mesh density, ¶0037).
Regarding claim 7, Tamir in view of Matsumura discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to display the three-dimensional data indicating that a resolution used for the first mesh data and a resolution used for the second mesh data are different from each other (¶0002, … sending FVV renders for display, and the like, ¶0085).
Regarding claim 8, Tamir in view of Matsumura discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to determine, from the point cloud data, a shape of the object included in the point cloud data by using a learning model in which a shape of the object has been learned (¶0030).
Regarding claim 9, Tamir in view of Matsumura discloses a data generation method comprising:
identifying a shape of an object included in point cloud data;
generating first mesh data of a first object whose shape is identified;
generating second mesh data of a second object whose shape is identified, by using a mesh resolution different from a mesh resolution used in generating the first mesh data; and generating three-dimensional data acquired by combining the first mesh data and the second mesh data (see substantially similar claim 1 rejection above).
Regarding claim 10, Tamir in view of Matsumura discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program causing a computer to execute a set of method steps (¶0082-¶0086):
identifying a shape of an object included in point cloud data; generating first mesh data of a first object whose shape is identified; generating second mesh data of a second object whose shape is identified, by using a mesh resolution different from a mesh resolution used in generating the first mesh data; and generating three-dimensional data acquired by combining the first mesh data and the second mesh data (for this portion see substantially similar claim 1 rejection above).
----
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NURUN FLORA whose telephone number is (571)272-5742. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 am -5:00 pm.
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, Jason Chan can be reached at (571) 272-3022. 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.
/NURUN FLORA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2619
Prosecution Insights