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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-8 and 20-22 are 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/25/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 3 – 5, Applicant contends that the combination of Wang and Kim do not disclose:
PNG
media_image1.png
142
950
media_image1.png
Greyscale
More specifically, Applicant states:
Regarding the feature of “analyzing the first image to obtain a foreground contour corresponding to the foreground object”, Wang does not include depth information of “image IM” while Kim’s “foreground object bounding volume setting unit 374” depends on depth maps generated by the “depth information acquisition unit 100”.
Examiner notes that Wang captures an image which is analyzed for foreground/background using correspondence of depth information captured by depth sensing device 110 and image capturing device 130, (Para. [0023][0024]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wang’s depth image analysis with that of Kim since both depend on generated depth information.
Regarding the technical feature “overlaying a selected pattern onto the foreground contour to generate a second image and controlling the projection device to project the second image to the target area”, Applicant indicates Kim merely changes the projection coordinate to track the physical object and fails to generate an image based on the contour.
Examiner notes that Kim discloses a bounding volume, construed as a contour to be projected on, see bounding volume management unit Para. [0050]. Before overlaying an image over the bounding volume on foreground object, images are projected on a static background object 20, Para. [0050]. Once a foreground object 30 is sensed, images may be transferred from background object 20 to foreground object 30, construed as generating a second image, i.e. the first image is projected on static background, and the projection on the foreground is subsequent to the projection on the background, thus a second image is generated when object image is overlaid on bounding volume of a foreground object, Para. [0050-0051]). Therefore, Kim discloses the claimed feature.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (Pub 20170347079) in view of Kim (Pub 20160366396).
Regarding claims 1 and 16, Wang discloses an electronic device, (auto-
calibration device 140 Fig 1- Fig 6) communicatively coupled to a projection device, (projecting device 120 Fig 1), the electronic device comprising a camera, (image capturing device 130 Fig 1), a memory, (storage medium Para. [0022]) and a processor, (corresponding area correcting unit 141 fig 1), wherein: the memory stores an application; and the processor is coupled to the camera and the memory, (fig 1 and Para. [0022]), the processor is configured to execute the following steps of the application:
controlling the projection device to project a marked image having a plurality of
predetermined marks to a target area, (projecting device 120 Fig 1 projects two calibration pattern images S130 Fig 5; Para. [0026]);
controlling the camera to take a first image of the target area, wherein the first
image comprises a foreground object and a background object in the target area, (camera 130 Fig 1 and camera 110 Fig 1 captures projection pattern S140 and Para. [0027], wherein the image comprises foreground and background objects, Para. [0023] and depth information [0023-0024]).
However, analyzing the first image to obtain a foreground contour corresponding to the foreground object, and overlaying a selected pattern onto the foreground contour to generate a second image, and controlling the projection device to project the second image to the target area are not disclosed.
In a similar field of endeavor, Kim discloses analyzing the first image to obtain a foreground contour corresponding to the foreground object, (foreground object bounding volume setting unit 374 fig 2 and Para. [0053] of foreground object 30 fig 1);
and overlaying a selected pattern onto the foreground contour to generate a second image, and controlling the projection device to project the second image to the target area, (transferring, construed as overlaying, object image 24 onto foreground object bounding volume of foreground object 30 fig 1, Para. 0043-0044). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Wang by Kim for the benefit of improving the determination of image projection positioning and enhancing the display of interactive content.
Claim(s) 2, 3, 9, 17, 18, 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Kim in view of Martin (U.S. 11394940).
Regarding claims 2 and 17, the combination discloses claims 1 and 16. However,
wherein the plurality of predetermined marks is respectively distributed at least two corner positions of the marked image is not explicitly disclosed.
In a similar field of endeavor, Martin discloses wherein the plurality of
predetermined marks is respectively distributed at least two corner positions of the marked image, (Fig 3A Col. 6 lines 29 - 47). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the combination by Martin for the benefit of aligning captured images with projection images so that captured images are processed and projected with proper positioning after processing.
Regarding claims 3 and 18, the combination discloses claims 1 and 16. However, wherein the first image comprises the complete marked image projected to the target area is not explicitly disclosed.
In a similar field of endeavor, Martin discloses wherein the first image comprises
the complete marked image projected to the target area wherein the first image comprises the complete marked image projected to the target area, (see capturing test patterns and locating corners using the test patterns, construed as capturing a complete image). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the combination by Martin for the benefit of aligning captured images with projection images so that captured images are processed and projected with proper positioning after processing.
Regarding claims 9 and 23, the combination discloses claims 1 and 16. However, wherein the plurality of predetermined marks are a plurality of QR codes is not explicitly disclosed.
In a similar field of endeavor, Martin discloses wherein the plurality of
predetermined marks are a plurality of QR codes wherein the plurality of predetermined marks are a plurality of QR codes, (fig 3A and 2D barcode in col. 6 line 56). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the combination by Martin for the benefit of aligning captured images with projection images so that captured images are processed and projected with proper positioning after processing.
Claim(s) 4 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Kim in view of Sankoh (Pub 20100166296).
Regarding claims 4 and 19, the combination discloses claims 1 and 16. However,
wherein the processor obtains the foreground contour corresponding to the foreground object of the first image by removing the background object from the first image is not disclosed.
In a similar field of endeavor, Sankoh discloses wherein the processor obtains
the foreground contour corresponding to the foreground object of the first image by removing the background object from the first image, (Para. [0036]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the combination by Sankoh for the benefit of modifying projection images by determining foreground objects and generating foreground objects as interactive content thereby enhancing the enjoyment of the user.
Conclusion
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 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 HUMAM M SATTI whose telephone number is (571)270-1709. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri.
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, John Miller can be reached at (571)272-7353. 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.
HUMAM M. SATTI
Examiner
Art Unit 2422
/JOHN W MILLER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2422
Prosecution Insights