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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-6, 9-16 and 19-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-14 of U.S. Patent No. 11,836,965 to Rau et al. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the present application are anticipated by the claims of the issued Rau patent. The claims of the present application are just slightly broader than the issued Rau patent.
Present Application USPN 11,836,965
1. A method comprising: receiving a first image depicting a 3D surface;
1. A computer-implemented method comprising: receiving a first image depicting a 3D surface;
retrieving a first box encoding of the first image, the first box encoding including parameters defining a first box representing the first image in an embedding space;
inputting the first image into a machine learning model, the machine learning model outputting a first box encoding of the first image, the first box encoding including parameters defining a first box representing the first image in an embedding space;
retrieving a second box encoding of a second image, the second image depicting the 3D surface with a different camera pose from the first image, the second box encoding including parameters defining a second box representing the second image in the embedding space; and
retrieving a second box encoding of a second image, the second image depicting the 3D surface with a different camera pose from the first image, the second box encoding including parameters defining a second box representing the second image in the embedding space; and
determining an asymmetric overlap factor measuring asymmetric surface overlaps between the first image and the second image based on the first box encoding and the second box encoding.
determining an asymmetric overlap factor measuring asymmetric surface overlaps between the first image and the second image based on the first and second box encodings, the asymmetric overlap factor including an enclosure factor indicating how much surface from the first image is visible in the second image and a concentration factor indicating how much surface from the second image is visible in the first image.
Claim 1 of the present invention is entirely anticipated by claim 1 of the issued Rau patent. A terminal disclaimer is according required.
Claim 2 of the present invention is also anticipated by claim 1 of the Rau patent.
Claims 3-6 and 9-10 are likewise anticipated by claims 2-7, respectively, of the Rau patent.
Claim 11 of the present application is anticipated by claim 8 of the Pau patent and the limitations of the claims correspond to the limitations recited in claims 1 respectively as discussed above.
Claim 12 of the present invention is also anticipated by claim 8 of the Rau patent.
Claims 13-16 and 19-20 are likewise anticipated by claims 9-14, respectively, of the Rau patent.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are allowable.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
No found prior art of record teaches or fairly suggest the specific combination of limitations recited in independent claims 1 and 11. USPN 2019/0005670 to De Tone et al. discloses taking images from two different camera poses and determining first and second point clouds from each captured image and using a neural network for the purpose of determining a visual overlap corresponding to percentage of points that are viewable by both camera poses (paragraphs [0053]-[0058] and Fig. 9). DeTone does not teach or fairly suggest generating a box encoding for the images and determining the specific asymmetric overlap factor measuring surface overlaps between the first image and the second image based on the first box encoding and the second box encoding.
USPN 2018/0211401 to Lee discloses first and second feature maps based on patch regions, and teaches calculating a matching cost between a single reference value and each of a plurality of candidate voxels (paragraph [0075]-[0076] and Fig. 3). However, Lee does not teach or fairly suggest or fairly suggest generating a box encoding for the images and determining the specific asymmetric overlap factor measuring surface overlaps between the first image and the second image based on the first box encoding and the second box encoding. Additional relevant prior art is cited in the attached PTO-892 notice of reference cited.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WESLEY J TUCKER whose telephone number is (571)272-7427. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM Monday-Friday.
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 VILLECCO can be reached at 571-272-7319. 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.
/WESLEY J TUCKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2661
Prosecution Insights