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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/25/24 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because claim 17 recites a computer readable medium, which does not fall into any one of the four statutory subject matter. §101 as covering both non-statutory subject matter and statutory subject matter. In an effort to assist the Applicant in overcoming a rejection or potential rejection under 35 U.S.C. §101 in this situation, the Examiner suggests the following approach: a claim drawn to such a computer-readable storage medium storing a program that covers both transitory and non-transitory embodiments may be amended to narrow the claim to cover only statutory embodiments to avoid a rejection under 35 U.S.C. §101 by adding the limitation "non-transitory" to the claim; the Examiner respectfully suggest changing the claim to recite "A non-transitory computer- readable storage medium storing a program that causes a computer...". For the convenience of the Applicant, a copy of the pertinent excerpt from the Feb 2010 Gazette is attached to this Office Action.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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) 1-4, 14, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lasenby et al US 20130002832 in view of Yamada et al US 20180299382.
Regarding claim 1, Lasenby et al teaches a method for characterizing material properties of an object, said object having a form and comprising at least one material, the method comprising the steps of:
receiving imaging data associated to the object, said imaging data being obtained by the process of irradiating at least one illumination pattern comprising a plurality of illumination features onto the object (a pattern of radiation is projected onto an object that is to be monitored (paragraph 0076 and fig 1), and receiving at least one first image comprising a spot pattern originating from the object in response to the irradiated illumination pattern (one pattern of radiation may include a spatially-varying intensity pattern comprising a combination of distinct and readily locatable pattern elements, for example a combination of spatially distributed crossing points, corners or small circular patches. The pattern of radiation may be a simple repeated pattern and/or may be selected with a complex repeating pattern of features such as spots (paragraph 0090);
Lasenby et al fails to teach determining, by processing the received imaging data, at least one reflection feature corresponding to a spot in the first image;
comparing, by processing the at least one reflection feature, the spot pattern comprised in the first image with reference spot patterns for obtaining a comparison result;
determining a material property of the object as a function of the comparison result
Yamada et al teaches determining, by processing the received imaging data, at least one reflection feature corresponding to a spot in the first image (the processing unit 11 processes the fluorescence image to acquire a bright spot pattern of the fluorescence in the fluorescence image, and selects, from a plurality of reference patterns corresponding to a plurality of measurement items stored in the storage unit 12, a reference pattern corresponding to a measurement item of the sample 10 (paragraph 0042);
comparing, by processing the at least one reflection feature, the spot pattern comprised in the first image with reference spot patterns for obtaining a comparison result (the processing unit 11 performs respective processes in an image acquisition step S1, a bright spot pattern acquisition step S2, a comparison step S3 of a bright spot pattern and a reference pattern, a display step S4 of a determination result of whether a cell is an abnormal cell or a normal cell (paragraph 0044); and
determining a material property of the object as a function of the comparison result (a generation step S5 of information used for determination of the sample, and a display step S6 of the information used for determination of the sample (paragraph 0045).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lasenby et al to include: determining, by processing the received imaging data, at least one reflection feature corresponding to a spot in the first image;
comparing, by processing the at least one reflection feature, the spot pattern comprised in the first image with reference spot patterns for obtaining a comparison result;
determining a material property of the object as a function of the comparison result
The reason for doing so would be to identify and compare objects to be processed.
Regarding claim 2, Lasenby et al in view of Yamada et al teaches further comprising the step of generating the imaging data, generating comprising:
irradiating at least one illumination pattern comprising a plurality of illumination features onto the object (Yamada et al: the processing unit 11 processes the fluorescence image to acquire a bright spot pattern of the fluorescence in the fluorescence image, and selects, from a plurality of reference patterns corresponding to a plurality of measurement items stored in the storage unit 12, a reference pattern corresponding to a measurement item of the sample 10 (paragraph 0042), and
receiving at least one first image comprising a spot pattern originating from the object in response to the irradiated illumination pattern at an optical sensor unit (Yamada et al: The optical unit 151 has a configuration in which four dichroic mirrors are combined. The four dichroic mirrors of the optical unit 151 reflect the first to third fluorescence and the transmitted light at slightly different angles from each other and separate the light on a light receiving surface of the imaging unit 160 (paragraph 0038). the processing unit 11 acquires a bright spot pattern of the first fluorescence in the first image based on the first fluorescence and acquires a bright spot pattern of the second fluorescence in the second image based on the second fluorescence (paragraph 0046).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lasenby et al to include: further comprising the step of generating the imaging data, generating comprising:
irradiating at least one illumination pattern comprising a plurality of illumination features onto the object ; receiving at least one first image comprising a spot pattern originating from the object in response to the irradiated illumination pattern at an optical sensor unit
The reason for doing so would be to identify features of and object.
Regarding claim 3, Lasenby et al in view of Yamada et al teaches further comprising:
irradiating the at least one illumination pattern through a translucent display unit;
and/or passing the at least one first image comprising the spot pattern through said translucent display unit prior to the step of receiving (Lasenby et al: the monitoring device 10 comprises a projection system 26 arranged to project radiation onto an reflective optics device 64, for example a mirror, which reflects the radiation emitted from the projection system onto a baby 62 located in the incubator 60, and two cameras of a recording system 24 (paragraph 0103).
Regarding claim 4, Lasenby et al in view of Yamada et al teaches wherein the process of obtaining the imaging data further comprises irradiating illumination light onto the object and receiving reflected light from the object for obtaining a second image of the object (Lasenby et al: second image data is recorded at a second instant in time, different from the first instant in time. The second image data is representative of at least a portion of the pattern of radiation projected onto the object and contains data representative of a three dimensional configuration of the object at the second instant in time (paragraph 0078).
Regarding claim 14, Lasenby et al further in view of Yamada et al teaches wherein a processing unit is configured to cause the display device to carry out the method steps according to claim 1 (Lasenby et al: data processing (paragraph 0087).
Regarding claim 17, Lasenby et al in view of Yamada et al teaches A computer-readable medium storing computer program instructions, wherein the computer program instructions, when executed by a processing unit in a display device, cause the display device to perform operations comprising the method according to claim 1 (Lasenby et al: storage device 44 may be a computer disk or solid-state storage device (paragraph 0088).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lasenby et al US 20130002832 in view of Yamada et al US 20180299382 further in view of Bakalis US 20190303951.
Regarding claim 9, Lasenby et al in view of Yamada et al teaches all of the limitations of claim 1
Lasenby et al in view of Yamada et al fails to teach further comprising:
detecting, by processing the imaging data, a security marker at the object being indicative of an authenticity and/or origin of the object; recognizing, by processing the imaging data a contour of the object; and/or
generating an authenticity signal for the object as a function of the determined material property and information derived from the security marker and/or the determined material property and the contour of the object.
Bakalis teaches further comprising:
detecting, by processing the imaging data, a security marker at the object being indicative of an authenticity and/or origin of the object (the system may use an infrared camera or infrared sensor to read a code in the security features of a passport.(paragraph 0154);
recognizing, by processing the imaging data a contour of the object; and/or
generating an authenticity signal for the object as a function of the determined material property and information derived from the security marker and/or the determined material property and the contour of the object (the system may use an infrared camera or infrared sensor to read a code in the security features of a passport (paragraph 0154).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lasenby et al to include: further comprising:
detecting, by processing the imaging data, a security marker at the object being indicative of an authenticity and/or origin of the object; recognizing, by processing the imaging data a contour of the object; and/or
generating an authenticity signal for the object as a function of the determined material property and information derived from the security marker and/or the determined material property and the contour of the object.
The reason for doing so would be to identify features of and object.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lasenby et al US 20130002832 in view of Yamada et al US 20180299382 further in view of Diederichs et al US 20070223789.
Regarding claim 11, Lasenby et al in view of Yamada et al teaches all of the limitations of claim 1
Lasenby et al in view of Yamada et al fails to teach further comprising:
generating contour image features from the image data;
comparing the contour image features with reference image features generated from reference objects; and
recognizing a contour of the object as a function of the comparison.
Diederichs et al teaches further comprising:
generating contour image features from the image data (The recognition feature is checked for belonging to a certain class of recognition features or to a certain geometric contour (paragraph 0008);
comparing the contour image features with reference image features generated from reference objects (the recognition feature is checked for belonging to a certain class of recognition features or to a certain geometric contour or to a relative arrangement to at least one other recognition feature of the material (paragraph 0008); and
recognizing a contour of the object as a function of the comparison (the material may be embodied as a bank note or as an official stamp (paragraph 0008).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Lasenby et al to include: further comprising:
generating contour image features from the image data;
comparing the contour image features with reference image features generated from reference objects; and
recognizing a contour of the object as a function of the comparison.
The reason for doing so would be to identify features of and object.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paesen et al US 20200034644 in view of Lasenby et al US 20130002832 in view of Yamada et al US 20180299382.
Regarding claim 13, Paesen et al teaches A display device comprising:
a monochromatic light source configured to generate at least one illumination pattern comprising a plurality of illumination features (a solid-state light source arranged for projecting a pattern of discrete spots of laser light towards the object in a sequence of pulses. the solid-state radiation source emits substantially monochromatic light (paragraph 0018);
Paesen et al fails to teach at least one processing unit configured:
to receive the imaging data;
Lasenby et al teaches at least one processing unit configured:
to receive the imaging data (a pattern of radiation is projected onto an object that is to be monitored (paragraph 0076 and fig 1);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Paesen et al to include: at least one processing unit configured to receive the imaging data;
The reason for doing so would be to identify features of and object.
Paesen et al in view of Lasenby et al fails to teach an optical sensor unit configured to capture at least one first image comprising a spot pattern originating from an object and to generate imaging data associated with the object;
to determine, by processing the received imaging data, at least one reflection feature corresponding to a spot in the first image, to compare, by processing the at least one reflection feature, the spot pattern comprised in the first image with reference spot patterns for obtaining a comparison result
to determine a material property of the object as a function of the comparison result;
an output unit configured to output the comparison result and/or the determined material property
Yamada et al teaches an optical sensor unit configured to capture at least one first image comprising a spot pattern originating from an object and to generate imaging data associated with the object (The optical unit 151 has a configuration in which four dichroic mirrors are combined. The four dichroic mirrors of the optical unit 151 reflect the first to third fluorescence and the transmitted light at slightly different angles from each other and separate the light on a light receiving surface of the imaging unit 160 (paragraph 0038). the processing unit 11 acquires a bright spot pattern of the first fluorescence in the first image based on the first fluorescence and acquires a bright spot pattern of the second fluorescence in the second image based on the second fluorescence (paragraph 0046).;
Yamada et al teaches to determine, by processing the received imaging data, at least one reflection feature corresponding to a spot in the first image (the processing unit 11 processes the fluorescence image to acquire a bright spot pattern of the fluorescence in the fluorescence image, and selects, from a plurality of reference patterns corresponding to a plurality of measurement items stored in the storage unit 12, a reference pattern corresponding to a measurement item of the sample 10 (paragraph 0042), to compare, by processing the at least one reflection feature, the spot pattern comprised in the first image with reference spot patterns for obtaining a comparison result (the processing unit 11 performs respective processes in an image acquisition step S1, a bright spot pattern acquisition step S2, a comparison step S3 of a bright spot pattern and a reference pattern, a display step S4 of a determination result of whether a cell is an abnormal cell or a normal cell (paragraph 0044); and
to determine a material property of the object as a function of the comparison result (a generation step S5 of information used for determination of the sample, and a display step S6 of the information used for determination of the sample (paragraph 0045); and
an output unit configured to output the comparison result and/or the determined material property (a display step S6 of the information used for determination of the sample (paragraph 0045).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Paesen et al to include: teach an optical sensor unit configured to capture at least one first image comprising a spot pattern originating from an object and to generate imaging data associated with the object;
to determine, by processing the received imaging data, at least one reflection feature corresponding to a spot in the first image, to compare, by processing the at least one reflection feature, the spot pattern comprised in the first image with reference spot patterns for obtaining a comparison result
to determine a material property of the object as a function of the comparison result;
an output unit configured to output the comparison result and/or the determined material property
The reason for doing so would be to identify features of an object.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-8, 10, 12, 15, 16 18-20 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL L BURLESON whose telephone number is (571)272-7460.
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, Akwasi Sarpong can be reached on 571 270-3438 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.
Michael Burleson
Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2683
Michael Burleson
June 26, 2026
/MICHAEL BURLESON/
/AKWASI M SARPONG/SPE, Art Unit 2681
Prosecution Insights