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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed on September 9, 2024. Claims 1 – 7 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on September 9, 2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: COMPUTER SYSTEM AND METHOD COMPRISING TIME OF FLIGHT SENSOR AND EVENT VISION SENSOR FOR CALCULATING DISTANCE TO OBJECT
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.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter (process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter) because the claim(s) is directed to software per se.
Regarding Claim 7, “A program for calculating a distance to an object, comprising: by operation executed by a processor in accordance with the program….” is recited. However, it appears that one of ordinary skill in the art could interpret the program as software, per se. Such language points to software, per se when there is no language in the claim or specification by which the claim elements can be made functional and statutory. See Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. at 72, 175 USPQ at 676-77. A person of ordinary skill in the art would interpret the limitations to mean merely computer executable functions, rendering the claimed apparatus comprising merely executable functions, which is non-statutory. As such, Claim 7 is drawn to non-statutory subject matter. See MPEP § 2106.01.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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, 3, 4, 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by NODA et al., (US 2022/0128696 A1) referred to as NODA hereinafter.
Regarding Claim 1, NODA discloses a computer system for calculating a distance to an object (Fig. 11, Par. [0117] 3D sensing system, Par. [0124] The distance calculation unit 22 calculates the distance to the measuring object on the basis of the light receiving position in the imaging surface of the image sensor 18 and the time from light emission to light reception (arrival time) (i.e. direct ToF sensor) in accordance with the operation mode (LiDAR operation mode/flash LiDAR operation mode/light-section method operation mode) controlled by the control unit 14), comprising:
a memory for storing a program code; and a processor for executing operation in accordance with the program code (Fig. 21A, Par. [0183] The signal processing unit 400 includes a CPU 408 (i.e. processor) and a 3D image storage unit 410 (i.e. memory), Par. [0119] The control unit 14 executes the operation control (i.e. program code) of each unit on the basis of three operation modes (i.e., a LiDAR operation mode, a flash LiDAR operation mode, and a light-section method operation mode. Par. [0125] FIG. 12 illustrates an example of distance calculation procedure of three operation modes in the 3D sensing system in Steps 0 – 6 (i.e. executing operation)), wherein the operation includes
emitting irradiation light to a direct time-of-flight sensor (Fig. 11, Par. [0117] a TOF image sensor (or an arrayed light-receiving element having a function of TOF measurement, hereinafter simply referred to as an image sensor or an arrayed light-receiving element) 18) configured to receive a scattered reflected light emitted from the PC (photonic crystal) laser array 10) in accordance with a predetermined spatial pattern (Fig. 12, Par. [0127] when the operation mode is the light-section method operation mode, striped pattern light (i.e. predetermined spatial pattern) is projected onto the measuring object),
acquiring a first distance calculated in reference to a time difference between emission of irradiation light and reception, by the direct time-of-flight sensor, of reflected light from the irradiation light reflected by the object (Fig. 12, LiDAR operation mode (M1), Par. [0130] in Step S4, the distance calculation unit 22 separates the reflected light emitted and reflected from the measuring object from each beam, and calculates the distance to the measuring object on the basis of the reflected light arrival time (TOF) (i.e. direct time-of-flight)), and
calculating a second distance by comparing a shape of a reflection image formed from the reflected light captured by a vision sensor (Par. [0122] The light receiving unit including the imaging lens 16 and the image sensor (or arrayed light-receiving element) 18 receives the scattered reflected light emitted from the PC laser array 10 and reflected from the object through the imaging lens 16 by the image sensor (or arrayed light-receiving element) 18. Par. [0185] The 3D image storage unit 410 stores image data captured by the image sensor 18 (i.e. vision sensor)) with the predetermined spatial pattern (Par. [0132] When the operation mode is the light-section method (M3) (emitting optical pattern), in Step S6, the distance calculation unit 22 executes triangular ranging with the stripe-shaped imaging pattern projected (i.e. shape of reflection image) onto the measuring object, and thereby calculates the distance to the measuring object. As a result, the three-dimensional (3D) data of the measuring object can be obtained by moving the distance information and the line along the projected striped pattern light, and the distance calculation unit 22 outputs the obtained information as the distance data DM3 (i.e. second distance), in Step S5).
Regarding Claim 3, NODA discloses claim 1. NODA further discloses wherein the predetermined spatial pattern is a linear pattern or a dotted-line pattern (Fig. 12, Par. [0127] when the operation mode is the light-section method operation mode, striped pattern light (i.e. linear pattern) is projected onto the measuring object. Par. [0152] The light-section method can also be applied to a method of comparing the light receiving pattern of the stripe-shaped light or random dotted pattern light with respect to a reference shape with the actual light receiving pattern and calculating the shape from the deviation thereof).
Regarding Claim 4, NODA discloses claim 3. NODA further discloses wherein the emitting the irradiation light includes scanning inside of an angle of view (Fig. 17, Par. [0032] an operation of detecting the reflected light RST corresponding to the rotating stripe-shaped emitted light ST by the image sensor. Fig. 4A, Par. [0098] Two beams A and B exist in the same plane PS. The direction of the beams A and B can be arbitrarily changed respectively within an inclined angle −θ and +θ from the 90° direction. Par. [0123] the resolution in the flash LiDAR operation mode depends on the number of pixels with respect to a certain angle of view. Par. [0156] A positional relationship between the PC laser array 10, the measuring object 24T, the imaging lens 16, and the image sensor 18, θ.sub.a and θ.sub.b) by parallelly moving the predetermined spatial pattern (Fig. 37, Par. [0250] by switching the different period region 66 where the light causes resonance, i.e., by switching the individual electrodes of the strip-shaped electrodes E1 to E19 (i.e. predetermined spatial pattern) where the current is injected, the laser oscillation position can be gradually changed (i.e. parallelly moving) and the beam inclined angle can be continuously changed).
Regarding method claim 6, it is drawn to the method of using the corresponding apparatus claimed in claims 1. Therefore method claim 6 corresponds to apparatus claim 1 and is rejected for the same reason of anticipation as used above.
Regarding claim 7, it is drawn to a program of using the corresponding apparatus claimed in claims 1. Therefore claim 7 corresponds to apparatus claim 1 and is rejected for the same reason of anticipation as used 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 of this title, 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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NODA (US 2022/0128696 A1) in view of Chan et al., (US 2021/0185284 A1) referred to as Chan hereinafter.
Regarding Claim 2, NODA discloses claim 1. NODA teaches a vision sensor (Par. [0185] The 3D image storage unit 410 stores image data captured by the image sensor 18 (i.e. vision sensor). NODA does not specifically teach an event-based vision sensor.
However, Chan teaches the vision sensor is an event-based vision sensor (Fig. 5, Par. [0071] the sensor system 100 includes a non-synchronization-type solid-state imaging device that detects the address event (i.e. event based) for every pixel is referred to as an event based sensor (i.e. vision sensor) (EBS) 504).
References NODA and Chan are considered to be analogous art because they relate to imaging systems. Therefore, it would be obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specifying an event based vision sensor as taught by Chan in the invention of NODA. This modification would allow the detection of an event and the detection of an object within a selected range of the camera (See Chan, Par. [0008]).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NODA (US 2022/0128696 A1) in view of WANG (US 2020/0057148 A1) referred to as WANG hereinafter.
Regarding Claim 5, NODA discloses claim 1. NODA further teaches wherein the operation further includes integrating the first distance and the second distance (Fig. 38 - Fig. 40 Par. [0253] combination operation mode), and the integrating the first distance and the second distance includes outputting (Fig. 12, Par. [0124] The distance calculation unit 22 calculates the distance to the measuring object on the basis of the light receiving position in the imaging surface of the image sensor 18 and the time from light emission to light reception (arrival time) in accordance with the operation mode (LiDAR operation mode/flash LiDAR operation mode/light-section method operation mode), and outputs the calculation result as the distance data DM). NODA does not specifically teach outputting distances based on a smaller or larger than threshold values.
However, WANG teaches in a case where the first distance is smaller than a first threshold value the second distance in place of the first distance or outputting (Fig. 8A, Par. [0104] In step 813, if a pixel cell 301 in the pixel array 201 concerns a near object (i.e. first threshold value), the range Z to the near object (i.e. second distance) is determined by triangulation according to Equation (2) (i.e. second distance), where Par. [0037] Distant objects are objects in the range of 30 meters (30 m) to 250 m, and near objects are within 30 m), in a case where the second distance is larger than a second threshold value, the first distance in place of the second distance (Par. [0103] In step 811, if a pixel cell 301 in the pixel array 201 concerns a distant object (i.e. second threshold value), the range Z to the distant object (i.e. first distance) is determined by direct TOF according to Equation (1)) (i.e. first distance)).
References NODA and WANG are considered to be analogous art because they relate to multiple distance measurement devices. Therefore, it would be obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specifying distance threshold values as taught by WANG in the invention of NODA. This modification would allow combining direct TOF with triangulation in one image sensor, where TOF is used for distant objects and triangulation is user for near objects (See WANG, Par. [0011]).
Conclusion
The prior art references made of record are not relied upon but are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. YE et al. (US 2019/0273909 A1) teaches multi-sensor sensing methods and systems for selecting either the first imaging device or the second imaging device to acquire image data.
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to SUSAN E HODGES whose telephone number is (571)270-0498. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday from 8:00 am (EST) to 4:00 pm (EST).
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner's supervisor, Brian T. Pendleton, can be reached on (571) . The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Susan E. Hodges/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425
Prosecution Insights