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 § 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 1-4 and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Berlin (WO 2010/010379 A1).
Claim 1: Berlin teaches a measuring station for measuring an object, the measuring station comprising:
a plurality of measuring columns positioned to define a measurement space between them (pg 10, Fig. 1, sensor assemblies 11 on columns 15) ,
wherein each measuring column comprises a range finding sensor and a servo motor coupled to the range finding sensor (pg 13, lines 27-31, Fig. 3, scanning assemblies 11 and motors 18),
wherein each servo motor is configured to rotate a respective range finding sensor about a rotation axis of the servo motor (pg 7, lines 21-30, rotation),
the range finding sensor being rotated across a first scanning angle directed into the measurement space in a movement plane (pg 5-6 - motor rotates causing horizontal scan),
wherein each range finding sensor is configured to transmit and receive range finding signals in a second scanning angle defining a scanning plane (pg 6, lines 28-31, rotating mirror scans vertically),
the scanning plane being non-parallel with respect to the movement plane (pg 6, lines 28-31 - vertical and horizontal planes),
And wherein the measuring station further comprises or is in communication with a controller configured to:
receive range data from the range finding sensors and angle data from the servo motors describing the angle of the range finding sensors when obtaining the range data (pg 8, lines 12-18 - polar coordinates);
execute a model generation algorithm for generating a scale, three- dimensional map of the object (pg 8, lines 12-18 - 3D image);
execute an object measurement algorithm for obtaining measurement data comprising the length, width and/or height of the object from the three- dimensional map of the object (pg 8, lines 12-18 - dimensional data);
and output the measurement data (pg 8, lines 12-18 - displayed to operator).
Claim 2: Berlin teaches the measuring station according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of measuring columns comprises first to fourth measuring columns, each measuring column being positioned at a respective corner of a quadrilateral forming the measurement space (Fig. 1, 4 columns).
Claim 3: Berlin teaches the measuring station according to claim 2, wherein the rotation axis of each servo motor is positioned to be a first distance from the rotation axis of an adjacent servo motor located in a first direction, and a second distance from the rotation axis of another adjacent servo motor located in a second direction, and wherein the first direction and the second direction are orthogonal to each other (Fig. 10 and pg 15, lines 7-10 - rectangle).
Claim 4: Berlin teaches the measuring station according to claim 3, wherein the first distance is at least 5 meters, and wherein the second distance is at least 5 meters (pg 5, lines 23-25 - rectangle of 20m x 20m).
Claim 10: Berlin teaches the measuring station according to claim 1, wherein the movement plane is horizontal and the scanning plane is vertical with respect to a ground plane on which the measuring columns are mounted (pg 10, lines 20-30).
Claim 11: Berlin teaches the measuring station according to claim 1, wherein each range finding sensor comprises a lidar emitter and a lidar receiver (pg 14, lines 13-18).
Claim 12: Claim 12 is a method claim corresponding to Claim 1. Thus, see rejection above.
Claim 13: Claim 13 is a computer implemented method claim corresponding to Claim 1. Thus, see rejection above.
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 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berlin (WO 2010/010379 A1), as applied to Claim 1 above, further in view of Kawakami (JP 2011186526 A).
Claim 5: Berlin teaches the measuring station according to Claim 2, but not wherein the first and third range finding sensors are non-adjacent and mounted at a respective first mounting heights which are the same or distinct from one another but each of which is greater than a second mounting height or heights at which the non- adjacent second and forth range finding sensors are mounted.
Kawakami teaches a system which has sensor devices (Fig. 1, 110a-110f positioned at different heights).
Although Kawakami teaches adjacent sensor devices at the same height, it would be obvious that this configuration could be rearranged to meet the claim limitations, and this new configuration would yield predictable results (See MPEP 2144.04).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the arrangement as taught by Kawakami in the measuring station as taught by Berlin, because having sensors at different heights would allow for a broader total field of view, as different sensors are now imaging different elevations.
Claim 6: Berlin, as modified, teaches the measuring station according to Claim 5, wherein first height is greater than 5 meters (Berlin, pg 5, 5m height). Berlin, as modified, does not teach, but Kawakami does teach, and the second height is less than five meters (pg 13).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the height, as taught by Kawakami, in the station as taught by Berlin, as modified, because this is simply a rearrangement of parts (See MPEP 2144.04).
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berlin (WO 2010/010379 A1), as applied to Claim 1 above, further in view of Thompson (US 7528613 B1).
Claim 7: Berlin teaches the measurement station according to Claim 1. Berlin does not teach, but Thompson does teach, wherein the first scanning angle is between 60 and 180 degrees and wherein the first scanning angle is centered on the center of the measurement space (Fig. 5, lines 41-61).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the scan angle, as taught by Thompson, in the station as taught by Berlin, as the impact of different scan angles would be well known in the art to yield predictable results (such as changing the field of view).
Claim 8: Berlin teaches the measurement station according to Claim 1. Berlin does not teach, but Thompson does teach, wherein the second scanning angle is between 60 and 180 degrees and wherein the second scanning angle is centered on the center of the measurement space (Fig. 5, lines 41-61).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the scan angle, as taught by Thompson, in the station as taught by Berlin, as the impact of different scan angles would be well known in the art to yield predictable results (such as changing the field of view).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berlin (WO 2010/010379 A1), as applied to Claim 1 above, further in view of Partynski (WO 0219030 A1).
Claim 9: Berlin teaches the measuring station according to claim 1. Berlin does not teach, but Partynski does teach wherein the servo rotation rate of each servo motor is between 3 and 18 degrees per second (pg 17, lines 24-26).
It would have been prima facie obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the rotation rate, as taught by Partynski, in the measurement station as taught by Berlin because different rotation rates would have predictable results (i.e.: shift between each image).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLARA CHILTON whose telephone number is (703)756-1080. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6-2 MT.
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, Helal Algahaim can be reached at 571-270-5227. 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.
/CLARA G CHILTON/ Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/JAMES R HULKA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights