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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because under the broadest reasonable interpretation, a claim to a “recording medium” may encompasses transitory forms of signal transmission. Transitory signal transmissions does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter. Since the current specification does not explicitly exclude such a possibility, the claim covers non-statutory subject matter. Therefore it is not patent eligible and is rejected under 35 USC 101. See MPEP 2106.03(II).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-7 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Honda (US 2016/0093036).
Regarding Claims 1, 11 and 12, Honda teaches a recording medium recording a program, the program causing a computer (Figure 2; Control Section 30) to execute:
executing first processing of acquiring, based on a plurality of captured images obtained by respectively capturing a plurality of pattern images sequentially projected from a projector (Figure 2; Projector 100) onto a projection region, measurement information used for adjustment of a projection image projected onto the projection region (see Paragraph [0083]; wherein it is disclosed that motion detecting section 552 calculates the motion speed of the indicator 80 based on data on images continuously captured by the imaging section 51 and an imaging interval (time) of the imaging section 51); and
executing, in a period in which the first processing is executed, second processing that is processing different from the first processing and concerning the projection image (see Paragraph [0043]; wherein it is disclosed that projector 100 detects an indication operation performed using the indicator 70 or 80 by a user to reflect the detected indication operation into an image displayed on the screen SC. Specifically, the projector 100 performs a process of drawing a figure or arranging characters or signs at an indication position, a process of drawing a figure along a locus of indication positions, a process of deleting a drawn figure, arranged characters or signs, or the like).
Regarding Claim 2, Honda teaches the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
Honda further teaches when input from a user is received in the period in which the first processing is executed, the second processing is executed (see Paragraph [0043]; wherein it is disclosed that projector 100 detects an indication operation performed using the indicator 70 or 80 by a user to reflect the detected indication operation into an image displayed on the screen SC. Specifically, the projector 100 performs a process of drawing a figure or arranging characters or signs at an indication position, a process of drawing a figure along a locus of indication positions, a process of deleting a drawn figure, arranged characters or signs, or the like).
Regarding Claim 3, Honda teaches the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
Honda further teaches the second processing includes selecting a content image used in at least a part of the projection image (see Paragraph [0043]; wherein it is disclosed that projector 100 detects an indication operation performed using the indicator 70 or 80 by a user to reflect the detected indication operation into an image displayed on the screen SC. Specifically, the projector 100 performs a process of drawing a figure or arranging characters or signs at an indication position, a process of drawing a figure along a locus of indication positions, a process of deleting a drawn figure, arranged characters or signs, or the like).
Regarding Claim 4, Honda teaches the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
Honda further teaches the program further causing the computer to execute displaying a plurality of candidates of a content image, wherein the second processing includes selecting one candidate among the plurality of candidates as the content image (see Paragraph [0043]; wherein it is disclosed that projector 100 detects an indication operation performed using the indicator 70 or 80 by a user to reflect the detected indication operation into an image displayed on the screen SC. Specifically, the projector 100 performs a process of drawing a figure or arranging characters or signs at an indication position, a process of drawing a figure along a locus of indication positions, a process of deleting a drawn figure, arranged characters or signs, or the like).
Regarding Claim 5, Honda teaches the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
Honda further teaches the second processing includes processing using information obtained halfway in the execution of the first processing (see Paragraph [0043]; wherein it is disclosed that projector 100 detects an indication operation performed using the indicator 70 or 80 by a user to reflect the detected indication operation into an image displayed on the screen SC. Specifically, the projector 100 performs a process of drawing a figure or arranging characters or signs at an indication position, a process of drawing a figure along a locus of indication positions, a process of deleting a drawn figure, arranged characters or signs, or the like).
Regarding Claim 6, Honda teaches the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
Honda further teaches the plurality of captured images include an initially captured image (see Paragraph [0117]), which is a captured image obtained by capturing an image of the projection region in an initial state (see Paragraph [0117]), and the second processing includes processing using the initially captured image (see Paragraphs [0115] and [0117]; wherein it is disclosed that detecting section 55 of the position detecting section 50 receives, as an input, data on an image captured by the imaging section 51 from the imaging control section 52 and that the detection control section 33 performs a process of drawing a figure based on the acquired coordinates of the indication position or the acquired locus of the indication position, and projecting the drawn figure onto an input image that is input through the image I/F section 12 in an overlapping manner, by the image processing section 4).
Regarding Claim 7, Honda teaches the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
Honda further teaches the second processing includes processing of displaying a content image superimposed on the initially captured image (see Paragraph [0115]; wherein it is disclosed that the detection control section 33 performs a process of drawing a figure based on the acquired coordinates of the indication position or the acquired locus of the indication position, and projecting the drawn figure onto an input image that is input through the image I/F section 12 in an overlapping manner, by the image processing section 40).
Regarding Claim 10, Honda teaches the limitations of claim 1 as detailed above.
Honda further teaches the program further causing the computer to execute generating the projection image by editing a content image using the measurement information (see Paragraph [0043]; wherein it is disclosed that projector 100 detects an indication operation performed using the indicator 70 or 80 by a user to reflect the detected indication operation into an image displayed on the screen SC. Specifically, the projector 100 performs a process of drawing a figure or arranging characters or signs at an indication position, a process of drawing a figure along a locus of indication positions, a process of deleting a drawn figure, arranged characters or signs, or the like).
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 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Honda (US 2016/0093036) as applied to claim 7, in view of Kurtz et al (US 2010/0177929; hereinafter referred to as Kurtz).
Regarding Claim 8, Honda teaches the limitations of claim 7 as detailed above.
Honda does not expressly disclose that the projection region includes an object, and the program further causes the computer to execute, after completion of the first processing, displaying, instead of the initially captured image, an image in which a contour of the object is indicated by a line.
Kurtz discloses a projection region includes an object (Figure 5f; Object 100), and the program further causes the computer to execute, after completion of the first processing, displaying, instead of the initially captured image, an image in which a contour of the object is indicated by a line (see Figures 5f and 5g and Paragraph [0058]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the invention of Honda such that the projection region includes an object, and the program further causes the computer to execute, after completion of the first processing, displaying, instead of the initially captured image, an image in which a contour of the object is indicated by a line, as taught by Kurtz, because doing so would protect a user against accidental eye exposure to the projection light (see Kurtz Paragraph [0062]).
Regarding Claim 9, Honda teaches the limitations of claim 7 as detailed above.
Honda does not expressly disclose that the projection region includes an object, and the second processing further includes displaying, instead of the initially captured image, an image in which a contour of the object is indicated by a line; and receiving input for stopping the execution of the first processing.
Kurtz discloses the projection region includes an object (Figure 5f; Object 100), and a second processing further includes displaying, instead of the initially captured image, an image in which a contour of the object is indicated by a line (see Figures 5f and 5g and Paragraph [0058]); and receiving input for stopping the execution of the first processing (see Figures 5f and 5g and Paragraphs [0058]-[0060]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the invention of Honda such that the projection region includes an object, and the second processing further includes displaying, instead of the initially captured image, an image in which a contour of the object is indicated by a line; and receiving input for stopping the execution of the first processing, as taught by Kurtz, because doing so would protect a user against accidental eye exposure to the projection light (see Kurtz Paragraph [0062]).
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER A LAMB II whose telephone number is (571)270-0648. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am - 5pm EST.
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, Minh-Toan Ton can be reached at (571) 272-2303. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER A LAMB II/Examiner, Art Unit 2882
Prosecution Insights