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 .
Response to Amendment
This is in response to applicant's amendment/response filed on 07/22/2026, which has been entered and made of record. Claims 1, 3, 5-6, 8-10, 13-14, 16, 18-19 and 21 have been amended. Claims 7 and 20 have been canceled.
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.
Claims 1, 4-6, 8, 13-14 and 17-19 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holzer et al (US 20200236296 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Holzer discloses a method for identifying a target object (Holzer [0059], “the method 300 may be performed at a mobile computing device”; [0067], “component identification” (exemplary target object)), comprising:
obtaining feature point data to be used corresponding to an object to be identified in a display interface in response to an object identification instruction (Holzer [0067], “One or more features of the captured image … are extracted … feature extraction may involve performing one or more operations such as object recognition, component identification (obtaining feature point data to be used corresponding to an object to be identified)”; [0153], “A request to construct a top-down mapping of an object is received at 802 … the request may be received at a user interface (exemplary object identification instruction).”; [0331], “object recognition can be applied to the live image data.”; fig. 34 exemplary object to be identified in a display interface);
determining an object model corresponding to the object identification instruction, wherein the object model is an augmented reality (AR) virtual model reconstructed from a single object image obtained in advance (Holzer [0062], “the object model may be determined based on user input (object model corresponding to the object identification instruction).”; [0063], “the object model (object model used for object identification) may be determined automatically based on data captured … the object model may be determined after the capturing of one … images (single object image obtained in advance) at 306.”; [0302], “”); and
in response to determining that the feature point data to be used matches feature point data of the object model (Holzer [0068], “the extracted features are compared with the object model … comparing the extracted features to the object model may involve making any comparison suitable for determining whether the captured image … are sufficient for performing damage comparison (component panel damage)”),
Holzer does not expressly disclose
adding an effect for the object to be identified to obtain a display image, wherein the effect and the object to be identified are displayed in an overlapping manner to obtain the display image; and
displaying object identification information corresponding to the object model in association with the display image in the display interface.
However, Holzer suggests
adding an effect for the object to be identified to obtain a display image, wherein the effect and the object to be identified are displayed in an overlapping manner to obtain the display image (Holzer [0057], “a visual depiction of the damage may include an abstract rendering of the damage. An abstract rendering may include a heatmap that shows the probability and/or severity of damage using a color scale (adding heatmap/an effect for the panel/object to be identified to obtain a display image; the heatmap enables identification of the damaged panel/object).”; [0058], “The damage representation shown in FIG. 2 includes a top-down view of the vehicle (exemplary effect and the panel/object to be identified are displayed in an overlapping manner to obtain the display image)”); and
displaying object identification information corresponding to the object model in association with the display image in the display interface (Holzer fig. 2; [0057], “a visual depiction of the damage may include an abstract rendering of the damage.”; [0058], “The damage representation shown in FIG. 2 includes a top-down view of the vehicle (displaying object identification information corresponding to the object model in association with the display image in the display interface)”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display an effect to an object. This would have been done to help users easily identify for further action.
Regarding claim 4, Holzer discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the obtaining feature point data to be used corresponding to an object to be identified in a display interface comprises:
upon detecting that the display interface comprises the object to be identified, determining, based on a feature point identification algorithm, a plurality of pieces of feature point data corresponding to the object to be identified as the feature point data to be used (Holzer [0170], “machine learning algorithm may be run on the perspective image for identifying the top-down locations of its points. Then, the point of interest in the top-down image may be mapped to the perspective image.”).
Regarding claim 5, Holzer discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the determining an object model corresponding to the object identification instruction comprises:
sending the object identification instruction to a server such that the server invokes the target object model based on an object identifier in the object identification instruction and gives a feedback (Holzer [0051], “The smart phone may be in communication with a remote server … the method 100 may be performed at a remote computing device such as a server. The method 100 may be used to detect damage to any of various types of objects.”); or
invoking an object model corresponding to a target object to be matched based on an object identifier in the object identification instruction (Holzer [0061], “An object model for damage detection is determined (object model invoked) at 304 … the object model may include reference data for use in evaluating damage … of an object (exemplary identification of an object).”).
Regarding claim 6, Holzer discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the displaying object identification information corresponding to the object model in association with the object to be identified in the display interface in response to determining that the feature point data to be used matches feature point data of the object model comprises:
determining that the object to be identified is consistent with the target object model in response to a value of a matching degree of the feature point data to be used and the feature point data of the object model reaching a preset matching degree threshold (Holzer [0213], “determining an aggregated coverage estimate may involve combining coverage areas determined at 1110 for different images … for each grid portion a determination may be made as to whether any image captures the grid portion with a probability that exceeds a designated threshold.”); and
displaying the object identification information and the object to be identified on the display interface according to a preset relative display position (Holzer [0313], “A real object 3302, which is a person, is selected in the field of view 3300 of the camera. A virtual object, which is a target (not shown), may have been used to help select the real object. For example, the target on a touch screen display of the mobile device 3314 may have been placed over the object 3302 and then selected.”).
Regarding claim 8, The method according to claim 1, wherein the adding the effect for the object to be identified to obtain the display image comprises:
fetching an effect consistent with an object type of the object to be identified or obtaining a pre-triggered effect (Holzer [0057], “a visual depiction of the damage may include an abstract rendering of the damage. An abstract rendering may include a heatmap that shows the probability and/or severity of damage using a color scale (a pre-triggered effect); and
Regarding claim 9, Holzer discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising:
obtaining an image to be uploaded corresponding to an object to be matched (Holzer [0238], “an AR system can be used. The AR system can receive and augment live image data (obtaining an image to be uploaded) with virtual data”);
uploading the image to be uploaded to a server such that the server generates a three-dimensional model or an augmented reality (AR) virtual model based on the image to be uploaded (Holzer [0238], “an AR system (exemplary server) can be used. The AR system can receive and augment live image data (uploading the image to be uploaded to a server) with virtual data (generating an augmented reality (AR) virtual model based on the image)”); and
taking the three-dimensional model or the AR virtual model as an object model to be matched to invoke a corresponding object model from a plurality of object models to be matched in response to the object identification instruction (Holzer [0260], “the plurality of images is fused into content and context models at 2504 … the subject matter featured in the images can be separated into content and context. The content can be delineated as the object of interest and the context can be delineated as the scenery surrounding the object of interest.”).
Regarding claim 10, The method according to claim 9, after the obtaining an image to be uploaded corresponding to an object to be matched, further comprising:
obtaining object identification information corresponding to the object to be matched in an edit control to display the object identification information corresponding to the object model in association with the object to be identified in the display interface upon determining that the object to be identified matches the object model (Holzer fig. 33A-B; an edit control to display the object identification information corresponding to the object model in association with the object to be identified in the display interface upon determining that the object to be identified matches the object model).
Claim 13 recites an electronic device which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 1. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 1 above is considered applicable to the electronic device of claim 13.
Additionally, Holzer discloses an electronic device (Holzer [0051]), comprising:
at least one processor (Holzer [0328], “CPU”); and
a storage unit configured to store at least one program (Holzer [0359], “the system 3600 uses memory 3603 to store data and program instructions”),
wherein the at least one program, when executed by the at least one processor, causes the at least one processor (Holzer [0359], “the system 3600 uses memory 3603 to store data and program instructions and maintained a local side cache. The program instructions may control the operation of an operating system and/or one or more applications”).
Claim 14 recites a non-transitory storage medium which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 1. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 1 above is considered applicable to the non-transitory storage medium of claim 14.
Additionally, Holzer discloses a non-transitory storage medium comprising computer-executable instructions, wherein the computer-executable instructions are, when executed by a computer processor (Holzer [0328], “CPU”; Holzer [0359], “the system 3600 uses memory 3603 to store data and program instructions and maintained a local side cache. The program instructions may control the operation of an operating system and/or one or more applications”).
Claim 17 recites an electronic device which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 4. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 4 above is considered applicable to the electronic device of claim 17.
Claim 18 recites an electronic device which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 5. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 5 above is considered applicable to the electronic device of claim 18.
Claim 19 recites an electronic device which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 6. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 6 above is considered applicable to the electronic device of claim 19.
Claim 21 recites an electronic device which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 8. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 8 above is considered applicable to the electronic device of claim 21.
Claims 2-3, 11 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holzer in view of Rhoads et al (US 20150016712 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Holzer discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein a way of generating the object identification instruction includes at least one of:
detecting that an object identification control is triggered (Holzer [0081], “A skeleton component is selected for damage detection at 406.”);
detecting that the display interface includes the object to be identified (Holzer figs. 26-27; [0242], “if a dominant object is detected in a series of images”);
detecting that a capturing control is triggered (Holzer [0242], “if a dominant object is detected in a series of images, this object can be selected (capturing control is triggered) as the content”); and
Holzer does not disclose
detecting that an object view to be matched in an object identification list is triggered, wherein the object identification list is generated based on a plurality of object views to be matched that are captured in advance.
However, Wang discloses
detecting that an object view to be matched in an object identification list is triggered, wherein the object identification list is generated based on a plurality of object views to be matched that are captured in advance (Rhoads [0094], “an image to be treated as a "view image" (a trigger) is an image of an object, captured by a camera that is present at some viewpoint relative to the object … Within the database (object identification list that is generated based on a plurality of object views to be matched that are captured in advance), each view image may be indexed by a view image identifier. Viewpoint coordinates associated with each view image,”; [0099], “For example, if one views a Wheaties box from some query viewpoint, many similar Wheaties boxes, other cereal brands, and perhaps rice boxes and whatnot, will all pass through stage 1 detection where the matched views have viewpoints that are similar to the query viewpoint.”)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Holzer with Rhoads to utilize a database of objects with different viewpoints to detect and match captured objects. This would have been done to quickly and accurately identify objects in a variety scene settings.
Regarding claim 3, Holzer discloses the method according to claim 1, after responding to the object identification instruction and before the obtaining feature point data to be used corresponding to an object to be identified in a display interface (Holzer [0142], “guidance may be used to align the live camera view at the mobile computing device with the 3D representation”; [0150], “damage to the object may be detected at 710 after mapping an image to a standard view at 712.”; guidance is provided in response to an instruction to detect an object but before obtaining feature points), further comprising:
generating a guidance graph corresponding to the object view to be matched, or
fetching a pre-stored guidance graph corresponding to the object view to be matched (Holzer [0007], “An instruction may be transmitted to a display screen at the mobile computing device to provide image capture guidance (fetching a pre-stored guidance graph corresponding to a target object view).”; [0009], “the image capture guidance may be configured to as to align the camera with a designated perspective view within a three-dimensional model of the object (target object view to be matched).”); and
displaying the guidance graph in the display interface for a user to identify the corresponding object to be identified based on the guidance graph, wherein the guidance graph is a semitransparent view corresponding to the object view to be matched (Holzer [0141], “the user may be guided to position the camera to align with one or more perspective view images in a pre-recorded multi-view capture of a similar object.”; fig. 33 exemplary, guidance graph is a semitransparent view corresponding to the object view to be matched ).
But does not disclose
obtaining an object view to be matched triggered in the object identification list;
However Rhoads discloses
obtaining a target object view to be matched triggered in the object identification list (Rhoads [0094], “an image to be treated as a "view image" (a trigger) is an image of an object, captured by a camera that is present at some viewpoint relative to the object (an object view to be matched) … Within the database (object identification list), each view image may be indexed by a view image identifier. Viewpoint coordinates associated with each view image,”; [0099], “For example, if one views a Wheaties box from some query viewpoint, many similar Wheaties boxes, other cereal brands, and perhaps rice boxes and whatnot, will all pass through stage 1 detection where the matched views have viewpoints that are similar to the query viewpoint.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Holzer with Rhoads to utilize a database of objects with different viewpoints to detect and match captured objects. This would have been done to quickly and accurately identify objects in a variety scene settings.
Regarding claim 11, Holzer discloses the method according to claim 10, further comprising:
updating the corresponding object identification information, and taking the image to be uploaded as the object view to be matched (Holzer [0072], “the image collection guidance may include any suitable instructions for capturing an additional image that may assist in changing the determination made at 312. Such guidance may include an indication to capture an additional image from a targeted viewpoint, to capture an additional image of a designated portion of the object”; [0075], “the images may be transmitted to a remote location via a network interface.”)
But does not disclose updating an object identification list based on the image to be uploaded.
However, Rhoads discloses
updating an object identification list based on the image to be uploaded (Rhoads [0122], “a user might also have programmed this wave to mean "please register this specific wave, add it to the archive of this object's thingerprint (updating archive/object identification list), update its quick recognition feature set and image-set to this one”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Holzer with Rhoads to update an object archive for an object. This would have been done to maintain a contemporary record of the object based on relevant updated data for the object.
Claim 15 recites an electronic device which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 2. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 2 above is considered applicable to the electronic device of claim 15.
Claim 16 recites an electronic device which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 3. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 3 above is considered applicable to the electronic device of claim 16.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the amendments to the claims. For example, the amendments to claim 1 include, “an augmented reality (AR) virtual model reconstructed from a single object image obtained in advance”. The amendments change the scope of the claims, which necessitated further consideration, search and new ground of rejections of the claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JITESH PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-3313. The examiner can normally be reached 8am - 5pm.
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, Said A. Broome can be reached at (571) 272-2931. 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.
/JITESH PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2612
Prosecution Insights