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 § 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, 7, 8 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grover (US Pub. No. 2006/0227417 A1) in view of Heinen et al. (US Pub. No. 2020/0312029 A1).
As to claim 1, Grover shows a method for generating a binocular (para. 126) stereoscopic panoramic image (Figs. 7A – 7E and para. 46), comprising: obtaining a depth image corresponding to the panoramic image (para. 33); mapping the panoramic image into a left-eye panoramic image and a right-eye panoramic image (Figs. 7A – 7E and para. 46) based on a preset pupil distance and the depth image (para. 33); and generating a binocular stereoscopic panoramic image based on the left-eye panoramic image and the right-eye panoramic image (Figs. 7A – 7E and para. 46).
Grover does not show inputting a panoramic image into a predetermined depth estimation model, the depth image including depth information corresponding to each pixel point in the panoramic image.
Heinen shows inputting a panoramic image into a predetermined depth estimation model (Fig. 22a and para. 304), the depth image including depth information corresponding to each pixel point in the panoramic image (Fig. 22a and para. 304).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Grover with those of Heinen because designing the system in this way allows the device to exhibit enhanced usefulness AR configurations (para. 304).
As to claim 7, Grover shows a system for generating a binocular (para. 126) stereoscopic panoramic image (Figs. 7A – 7E and para. 46), comprising: on or more physical processors configured by machine-readable instructions (Fig. 17 and para. 78) to: obtain a depth image corresponding to a panoramic image (para. 33); map the panoramic image into a left-eye panoramic image and a right-eye panoramic image (Figs. 7A – 7E and para. 46) based on a preset pupil distance and the depth image (para. 33); and generate a binocular stereo panoramic image based on the left-eye panoramic image and the right-eye panoramic image (Figs. 7A – 7E and para. 46).
Grover does not show inputting a panoramic image into a predetermined depth estimation model, the depth image including depth information corresponding to each pixel point in the panoramic image.
Heinen shows inputting a panoramic image into a predetermined depth estimation model (Fig. 22a and para. 304), the depth image including depth information corresponding to each pixel point in the panoramic image (Fig. 22a and para. 304).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Grover with those of Heinen because designing the system in this way allows the device to exhibit enhanced usefulness AR configurations (para. 304).
As to claim 8, Grover does not show that the obtaining a depth image corresponding to a panoramic image comprises: inputting a panoramic image into a predetermined depth estimation model to obtain a depth image corresponding to the panoramic image.
Heinen shows that obtaining a depth image corresponding to a panoramic image comprises: inputting a panoramic image into a predetermined depth estimation model to obtain a depth image corresponding to the panoramic image (Fig. 22a and para. 304).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Grover with those of Heinen because designing the system in this way allows the device to exhibit enhanced usefulness AR configurations (para. 304).
As to claim 14, Grover shows an electronic device comprising a memory and a processor (Fig. 17 and para. 78), the memory storing a computer program (Fig. 17 and para. 78), wherein the processor, when executing the program, implements steps (Fig. 17 and para. 78) of generating a binocular (para. 126) stereoscopic panoramic image (Figs. 7A – 7E and para. 46), comprising: obtaining a depth image corresponding to the panoramic image (para. 33); mapping the panoramic image into a left-eye panoramic image and a right-eye panoramic image (Figs. 7A – 7E and para. 46) based on a preset pupil distance and the depth image (para. 33); and generating a binocular stereoscopic panoramic image based on the left-eye panoramic image and the right-eye panoramic image (Figs. 7A – 7E and para. 46).
Grover does not show inputting a panoramic image into a predetermined depth estimation model, the depth image including depth information corresponding to each pixel point in the panoramic image.
Heinen shows inputting a panoramic image into a predetermined depth estimation model (Fig. 22a and para. 304), the depth image including depth information corresponding to each pixel point in the panoramic image (Fig. 22a and para. 304).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Grover with those of Heinen because designing the system in this way allows the device to exhibit enhanced usefulness AR configurations (para. 304).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 contains allowable subject matter because claim 2 recites that “… the mapping the panoramic image into the left-eye panoramic image and the right-eye panoramic image based on the preset pupil distance and the depth image comprises: obtaining a left-eye mapping relationship and a right-eye mapping relationship based on the preset pupil distance and the depth image; the left-eye mapping relationship comprising a correspondence between a first coordinate of a pixel point in the panoramic image and a second coordinate of the pixel point in the left-eye panoramic image; the right-eye mapping relationship comprising a correspondence between the first coordinate and a third coordinate of the pixel point in the right-eye panoramic image; and mapping and projecting the panoramic image separately to generate the left-eye panoramic image and the right-eye panoramic image according to the left-eye mapping relationship and the right-eye mapping relationship.”
The prior art does not show this configuration; therefor this subject matter constitutes allowable subject matter.
Claims 3 – 5 contain allowable subject matter at least by virtue of their dependence on claim 2.
Claim 6 contains allowable subject matter because claim 6 recites “… obtaining a training sample; the training sample comprising a panoramic sample image and a sample depth image corresponding to the panoramic sample image; and training the initial depth estimation model according to a predetermined loss function to obtain the depth estimation model with the panoramic sample image as a reference input of an initial depth estimation model and the sample depth image as a reference output of the initial depth estimation model.”
The prior art does not show this configuration; therefor this subject matter constitutes allowable subject matter.
Claim 9 recites similar subject matter as that of claim 2, and therefore contains allowable subject matter for the reasons above.
Claims 10 – 12 contain allowable subject matter at least by virtue of their dependence on claim 9.
Claim 13 recites similar subject matter as that of claim 6, and therefore contains allowable subject matter for the reasons above.
Claim 15 recites similar subject matter as that of claim 2, and therefore contains allowable subject matter for the reasons above.
Claims 16 – 18 contain allowable subject matter at least by virtue of their dependence on claim 9.
CONCLUSION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARL ADAMS whose telephone number is (571)270-7448. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9AM - 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, Ke Xiao can be reached at 571-272-7776. 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.
/CARL ADAMS/Examiner, Art Unit 2627
Prosecution Insights