DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-7 and 9-19 are currently pending.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/26/2024 has not been considered by the Examiner. Applicant has included a foreign reference and several non-patent literatures, and has not provided copies of the references.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
The search unit
The inference unit
The densification unit
The learning unit
The update unit
The neighboring point cloud feature extraction unit
The all point cloud feature extraction unit
The classification unit
in claims 1-6, 7 and 14.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-7 and 9-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites “a search unit that searches for neighboring point clouds for points included in a first three-dimensional point cloud, the points each having three-dimensional coordinates, from a second three dimensional point cloud…” It is unclear if the searching unit is search for a new point cloud in addition to the second point cloud or is searching within the second point cloud for points which correspond to points in the first point cloud. For the purposes of examination, Examiner is interpreting the claim as searching for points in the second point cloud that correspond to points in the first point cloud. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-6 depend from claim 1 and are therefore also rejected.
Independent claims 7 and 14 recite similar language as claim 1 and are rejected for the same reasons as set forth above. Corresponding dependent claims 9-13 and 15-19 are also rejected.
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 1-2, 7, 9, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tamama (US 2020/0027236).
Regarding claim 1, Tamama teaches:
A three-dimensional point cloud segmentation device comprising:
a search unit that searches for neighboring point clouds for points included in a first three-dimensional point cloud, the points each having three-dimensional coordinates, from a second three-dimensional point cloud in which a density of points included is higher than that of the first three-dimensional point cloud, the points each having three-dimensional coordinates and information derived from an image; (Tamama [0074-75] If at decision block 708 the processor determines that a sparse map was used in generating the 3D point cloud at block 704, the process moves from decision block 708 to decision block 716…. If at decision block 716 the processor determines that SLAM is available, the process 700 moves to block 720. At block 720 the processor generates a dense map of 3D feature points inside the bounded area and keep this dense map for the bounded area in the 3D point cloud (Examiner notes inside the bounded area would be corresponding points)) and
an inference unit that infers an object corresponding to each point included in the first three-dimensional point cloud on the basis of features extracted from the neighboring point clouds found by the search unit. (Tamama [0075] The process 700 moves from block 720 to block 710, where the processor determines if any feature points from the dense map generated at block 720 are not located on a surface of the detected object, removes such feature points at block 712 and stores the 3D position of the detected object at block 714)
Regarding claim 2, Tamama teaches:
The three-dimensional point cloud segmentation device according to claim 1, further comprising a densification unit that generates the second three-dimensional point cloud by densifying the first three-dimensional point cloud on the basis of a correspondence between the first three-dimensional point cloud and an image obtained by imaging a space including the first three-dimensional point cloud. (Tamama [0074-75] If at decision block 708 the processor determines that a sparse map was used in generating the 3D point cloud at block 704, the process moves from decision block 708 to decision block 716…. If at decision block 716 the processor determines that SLAM is available, the process 700 moves to block 720. At block 720 the processor generates a dense map of 3D feature points inside the bounded area and keep this dense map for the bounded area in the 3D point cloud (Examiner notes inside the bounded area would be corresponding points))
Regarding claim 7, Tamama teaches:
A three-dimensional point cloud segmentation method comprising:
searching for, by a search unit, neighboring point clouds for points included in a first three-dimensional point cloud, the points each having three-dimensional coordinates, from a second three-dimensional point cloud in which a density of points included is higher than that of the first three-dimensional point cloud, the points each having three-dimensional coordinates and information derived from an image; (Tamama [0074-75] If at decision block 708 the processor determines that a sparse map was used in generating the 3D point cloud at block 704, the process moves from decision block 708 to decision block 716…. If at decision block 716 the processor determines that SLAM is available, the process 700 moves to block 720. At block 720 the processor generates a dense map of 3D feature points inside the bounded area and keep this dense map for the bounded area in the 3D point cloud (Examiner notes inside the bounded area would be corresponding points)) and
inferring, by an inference unit, an object corresponding to each point included in the first three-dimensional point cloud on the basis of features extracted from the neighboring point clouds found by the search unit. (Tamama [0075] The process 700 moves from block 720 to block 710, where the processor determines if any feature points from the dense map generated at block 720 are not located on a surface of the detected object, removes such feature points at block 712 and stores the 3D position of the detected object at block 714)
Regarding claim 9, Tamama teaches:
The three-dimensional point cloud segmentation method according to claim 7, further comprising:
generating the second three-dimensional point cloud by densifying the first three- dimensional point cloud on the basis of a correspondence between the first three-dimensional point cloud and an image obtained by imaging a space including the first three-dimensional point cloud. (Tamama [0074-75] If at decision block 708 the processor determines that a sparse map was used in generating the 3D point cloud at block 704, the process moves from decision block 708 to decision block 716…. If at decision block 716 the processor determines that SLAM is available, the process 700 moves to block 720. At block 720 the processor generates a dense map of 3D feature points inside the bounded area and keep this dense map for the bounded area in the 3D point cloud (Examiner notes inside the bounded area would be corresponding points))
Regarding claim 14, Tamama teaches:
A computer-readable non-transitory recording medium storing computer- executable program instructions that when executed by a processor cause a computer to execute a three-dimensional point cloud segmentation method comprising: (Tamama [0037] CPU)
searching for, by a search unit, neighboring point clouds for points included in a first three-dimensional point cloud, the points each having three-dimensional coordinates, from a second three-dimensional point cloud in which a density of points included is higher than that of the first three-dimensional point cloud, the points each having three-dimensional coordinates and information derived from an image; (Tamama [0074-75] If at decision block 708 the processor determines that a sparse map was used in generating the 3D point cloud at block 704, the process moves from decision block 708 to decision block 716…. If at decision block 716 the processor determines that SLAM is available, the process 700 moves to block 720. At block 720 the processor generates a dense map of 3D feature points inside the bounded area and keep this dense map for the bounded area in the 3D point cloud (Examiner notes inside the bounded area would be corresponding points)) and
inferring, by an inference unit, an object corresponding to each point included in the first three-dimensional point cloud on the basis of features extracted from the neighboring point clouds found by the search unit. (Tamama [0075] The process 700 moves from block 720 to block 710, where the processor determines if any feature points from the dense map generated at block 720 are not located on a surface of the detected object, removes such feature points at block 712 and stores the 3D position of the detected object at block 714)
Regarding claim 15, Tamama teaches:
The computer-readable non-transitory recording medium according to claim 14 wherein the three-dimensional point cloud segmentation method further comprising:
generating the second three-dimensional point cloud by densifying the first three- dimensional point cloud on the basis of a correspondence between the first three-dimensional point cloud and an image obtained by imaging a space including the first three-dimensional point cloud. (Tamama [0074-75] If at decision block 708 the processor determines that a sparse map was used in generating the 3D point cloud at block 704, the process moves from decision block 708 to decision block 716…. If at decision block 716 the processor determines that SLAM is available, the process 700 moves to block 720. At block 720 the processor generates a dense map of 3D feature points inside the bounded area and keep this dense map for the bounded area in the 3D point cloud (Examiner notes inside the bounded area would be corresponding points))
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6, 10-13, and 16-19 are not rejected under the prior art and would be in condition for allowance if rewritten in independent form and the above rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) were overcome.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Refer to PTO-892, Notice of References Cited for a listing of analogous art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Molly K Wilburn whose telephone number is (571)272-3589. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-4pm.
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, Emily Terrell can be reached at (571) 270-3717. 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.
/Molly Wilburn/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2666
Prosecution Insights