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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on May 26, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-19 and 21 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on newly discover art of Sharma et al. applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-7, 9-19 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moore et al. US 2003/0146285 further in view of Sharma et al. US 2024/0364982.
In regarding to claim 1 Moore teaches:
1. A method of controlling a capture of one or more digital image frames of a product on a conveyor line, the method performed by a manufacturing control device,
Moore, Fig. 1
the manufacturing control device being in communication with at least one camera, the method comprising: receiving, by the manufacturing control device, a product position trigger signal indicating that the product has entered an imaging zone of the conveyor line;
[0023] In one embodiment, the triggering device 107 may comprise an optical sensor which transmits and detects a reflected beam (not shown) for example, and which identifies the presence of an object (e.g., the component 109) at a location on the conveyor belt 103 via an interference with the reflected beam. In response to the trigger signal communicated from the triggering device 107, the image system 113 may capture multiple images of at least a portion of a surface 119 of the component 109. The multiple images may then be stored and processed to identify and read any symbol codes (e.g., symbol codes 111a and 111b) affixed to the surface 119 of the component 109 to enable tracking or identification of the component 109, and to ensure that acceptable identifying information has been affixed to the component 109 via a matrix code or the like, as desired by the user.
Moore, 0005, 0023 and fig. 1, emphasis added
receiving, by the manufacturing control device, a conveyor line speed signal from the conveyor line;
[0042] FIG. 13 shows a pair of captured images 1301 and 1303 that may represent completely distinct portions of the surface 119 of the component 109 moving through the automated identification system 101 (see, e.g., FIG. 1). The captured images 1301 and 1303 may be completely distinct either because of the duration of the user-specified interval implemented between the successive images 1301 and 1303, as discussed above, or based on the speed of the conveyor belt 103 (see, e.g., FIG. 1), or the like, or a combination of such factors. In any event, consideration of the speed at which components are moving through the automated identification system 101 (FIG. 1) and/or the user-specified interval between successive image captures, enables the user to capture slightly overlapping images, such as those illustrated in FIG. 14. Overlapping the image captures increases image-processing quality by helping to ensure that any symbol codes (e.g., the symbol codes 111a and 111b, FIG. 1) affixed to the surface 119 of the component 109 (FIG. 1) will be captured in an image to permit processing and accurate identification and reading thereof. This enables the user of the automated identification system 101 (FIG. 1) to rely less on the setup of the image system in relation to the position of the triggering device, and/or timing issues related to the speed of the components (e.g., the component 109) to accurately identify and read symbol codes (e.g., the symbol codes 111a and 11b, FIG. 1).
however, Moore fails to explicitly teach, but Sharma teaches: determining, by the manufacturing control device, a shutter trigger sequence for the at least one camera, the shutter trigger sequence comprising a plurality of shutter trigger times calculated for successive digital image frames based at least in part on the conveyor line speed signal and at least one image frame rate of the at least one camera,
[0128] In one particular implementation, such lighting variation is a design parameter of the lens on a single light source. For example, a linear array of LEDs may be equipped with a linear lens that projects a pattern of varying intensity—with the high intensity zone in the center, bordered by normal intensity zones on either side. As the conveyor moves items through the projected light, each point on the item first passes through the normal intensity zone, and then passes through the high intensity zone, and then passes through another normal intensity zone. Depending on the conveyor speed, frame rate, and illumination area, each point on the item may be imaged once, twice or more as it passes through each of these zones.
Sharma, 0128, 0209, emphasis added
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Sharma with the system of Moore in order determining, by the manufacturing control device, a shutter trigger sequence for the at least one camera, the shutter trigger sequence comprising a plurality of shutter trigger times calculated for successive digital image frames based at least in part on the conveyor line speed signal and at least one image frame rate of the at least one camera, as such, work improves on the foregoing technology, and provides many additional features and advantages, including increasing the fraction of items that are correctly identified..—0006 and Abstract.
Furthermore, Moore teaches: wherein the shutter trigger sequence causes at least a predetermined number of the digital image frames to be captured while the product is within the imaging zone of the conveyor line;
[0023] In one embodiment, the triggering device 107 may comprise an optical sensor which transmits and detects a reflected beam (not shown) for example, and which identifies the presence of an object (e.g., the component 109) at a location on the conveyor belt 103 via an interference with the reflected beam. In response to the trigger signal communicated from the triggering device 107, the image system 113 may capture multiple images of at least a portion of a surface 119 of the component 109. The multiple images may then be stored and processed to identify and read any symbol codes (e.g., symbol codes 111a and 111b) affixed to the surface 119 of the component 109 to enable tracking or identification of the component 109, and to ensure that acceptable identifying information has been affixed to the component 109 via a matrix code or the like, as desired by the user.
Moore, 0005, 0023-0024, 0042 and fig. 1, emphasis added
and controlling, by the manufacturing control device, the capture of at least the predetermined number of the digital image frames via the at least one camera using the determined shutter trigger sequence upon receipt of the product position trigger signal.
[0024] In various embodiments in accordance with the teachings of the present invention, the multiple images of the surface 119 of the component 109 may be captured via any one of a number of sources, such as an internal image sensor of the image system 113, as will be discussed in greater detail below, via the external camera 115, or via other sources coupled to the image system 113. In addition, a user may define one or more parameters to cause the image system 113 to switch between the various sources to capture images of different portions of the surface 119 of the component 109, in an embodiment. The one or more parameters may include for example, an image-capture-quantity parameter, which may be defined and activated by a user to cause the image system 113 to switch between sources following the capture of a defined number of images by any one source. Another of the one or more parameters may comprise a time parameter, which also may be defined and activated by the user to cause the image system 113 to switch between sources after a defined period of time has elapsed.
Moore, 0005, 0023-0024, 0042 and fig. 1, emphasis added
In regarding to claim 2 Moore and Sharma teaches:
2. The method of claim 1, furthermore, Moore teaches: wherein the determining the shutter trigger sequence for the at least one camera further comprises: determining, by the manufacturing control device, an image frame duration for each of the predetermined number of the digital image frames.
[0025] In other embodiments, the user may define an interval of time to elapse between each image capture, regardless of source, to adjust the effective field of view of the image system 113 in the automated identification system 101. In embodiments in accordance with the teachings of the present invention, the interval may comprise an identical period of time between pairs of successive image captures, or may vary with each successive pair of image captures. In one embodiment, the interval may be defined as zero to cause a continuous image capture limited only by the capture rate of the source.
Moore, 0005, 0025, emphasis added
In regarding to claim 3 Moore and Sharma teaches:
3. The method of claim 1, furthermore, Sharma teaches: wherein the plurality of shutter trigger times define respective intervals between adjacent shutter trigger times, and the respective intervals are calculated based at least in part on the conveyor line speed signal.
[0128] In one particular implementation, such lighting variation is a design parameter of the lens on a single light source. For example, a linear array of LEDs may be equipped with a linear lens that projects a pattern of varying intensity—with the high intensity zone in the center, bordered by normal intensity zones on either side. As the conveyor moves items through the projected light, each point on the item first passes through the normal intensity zone, and then passes through the high intensity zone, and then passes through another normal intensity zone. Depending on the conveyor speed, frame rate, and illumination area, each point on the item may be imaged once, twice or more as it passes through each of these zones.
Sharma, 0128, 0209, emphasis added
In regarding to claim 4 Moore and Sharma teaches:
4. The method of claim 1, furthermore, Moore teaches: wherein the at least one camera comprises a fixed focus lens.
[0027] With reference now primarily to FIG. 2, a block diagram illustrating one embodiment of an apparatus 201 that may be used for the image system 113 is shown in accordance with the teachings of the present invention. In the illustrated embodiment, the apparatus 201 includes an illumination element 203, which may comprise a plurality of light emitting diodes ("LED"), or the like, to illuminate the surface 119 of the component 109 (see, e.g., FIG. 1) to enable images to be captured. The apparatus 201 also includes a lens 205 for collecting and focusing light onto an internal image sensor 207, which may comprise a CCD, a CMOS image sensor, or other suitable device, in various embodiments.
Moore, 0006, 0027, emphasis added.
In regarding to claim 5 Moore and Sharma teaches:
5. The method of claim 4, furthermore, Moore teaches: wherein the product is disposed on the conveyor line in at least one of: a vertical orientation, a horizontal orientation, or an intermediate orientation, and wherein movement of the product through the imaging zone relative to the fixed focus lens provides a kinetic image focus mechanism for capturing the predetermined number of digital image frames.
[0042] FIG. 13 shows a pair of captured images 1301 and 1303 that may represent completely distinct portions of the surface 119 of the component 109 moving through the automated identification system 101 (see, e.g., FIG. 1). The captured images 1301 and 1303 may be completely distinct either because of the duration of the user-specified interval implemented between the successive images 1301 and 1303, as discussed above, or based on the speed of the conveyor belt 103 (see, e.g., FIG. 1), or the like, or a combination of such factors. In any event, consideration of the speed at which components are moving through the automated identification system 101 (FIG. 1) and/or the user-specified interval between successive image captures, enables the user to capture slightly overlapping images, such as those illustrated in FIG. 14. Overlapping the image captures increases image-processing quality by helping to ensure that any symbol codes (e.g., the symbol codes 111a and 111b, FIG. 1) affixed to the surface 119 of the component 109 (FIG. 1) will be captured in an image to permit processing and accurate identification and reading thereof. This enables the user of the automated identification system 101 (FIG. 1) to rely less on the setup of the image system in relation to the position of the triggering device, and/or timing issues related to the speed of the components (e.g., the component 109) to accurately identify and read symbol codes (e.g., the symbol codes 111a and 11b, FIG. 1).
Moore, 0005-0006, 0042 and Fig. 1, emphasis added.
In regarding to claim 6 Moore and Sharma teaches:
6. The method of claim 1, furthermore, Sharma teaches: wherein the at least one camera comprises a liquid lens, the liquid lens having a focus rise time, the method further comprising: determining, by the manufacturing control device, a focus trigger sequence for the liquid lens to establish a plurality of focus points for the at least one camera, while the product is within the imaging zone of the conveyor line, wherein the shutter trigger sequence is calculated based, at least in part, on the focus rise time and the focus trigger sequence such that the predetermined number of digital image frames are captured at respective focus points of the plurality of focus points.
Sharma, 0128, 0209
In regarding to claim 7 Moore and Sharma teaches:
7. The method of claim 1, furthermore, Sharma teaches: wherein the product is disposed on the conveyor line in at least one of: a vertical orientation, a horizontal orientation, or an intermediate orientation, and the conveyor line speed signal indicates that the conveyor line is stopped during the capture of at least the predetermined number of the digital image frames via the at least one camera.
Sharma, 0128, 0209
In regarding to claim 9 Moore and Sharma teaches:
9. The method of claim 1, furthermore, Moore teaches: wherein the captured digital image frames are at least one of: one or more digital still images, or one or more digital image frames of a digital video stream.
Moore, 0044
In regarding to claim 10 Moore and Sharma teaches:
10. The method of claim 1, furthermore, Moore teaches: wherein the determined shutter trigger sequence controls the at least one camera such that at least some of the captured digital image frames each represent: a respectively different focused depth profile of the product, or a respectively different focused region of the product.
Moore, 0007
Claims 11-18 list all similar elements of claims 1-7 and 10, but in device form rather than method form. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claims 1-7 and 10 applies equally as well to claims 11-18.
Claims 19 and 21 list all similar elements of claims 1, 6 and 10, but in system form rather than method form. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claims 1, 6 and 10 applies equally as well to claims 19 and 21.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moore et al. US 2003/0146285 and Sharma et al. US 2024/0364982 as applied to claims 1-7 above, and further in view of Boucherie US 6,315,103.
In regarding to claim 8 Moore teaches:
8. The method of claim 1, however, Moore and Sharma fails to explicitly teach, but Boucheric teaches: wherein the product is at least one of: a toothbrush, a hairbrush, or a non-round hairbrush.
(18) By means of this camera 18, it is determined in which manner the toothbrush bodies 3 are situated on the transport conveyor 8. The toothbrush bodies 3 with a position fulfilling certain criteria are taken up by the manipulator 5 and presented to the supply means 2. Hereby, the transport conveyor 8 preferably is brought to a standstill each time when a toothbrush body 3 to be removed has arrived under the manipulator 5.
Boucheric, col. 5, lines 8-45, emphasis added.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Boucheric with the system of Moore and Sharma in order wherein the product is at least one of: a toothbrush, a hairbrush, or a non-round hairbrush, as such, detecting the position of the supplied toothbrush bodies by a visual recognition system; controlling a sorting element in function of the detections performed by the recognition system; and separating, by this sorting element, at least a number of the toothbrush bodies, as well as arranging them at least partially ordered in discharge means..—Abstract.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL T TEKLE whose telephone number is (571)270-1117. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:30 ET.
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, William Vaughn can be reached at 571-272-3922. 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.
/DANIEL T TEKLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2481
Prosecution Insights