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 Objections
Claim 15 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 for omission in numbering, Claim 15 appears to be missing from the claim set. Applicant is required to either include claim 15 or renumber the claims consecutively so that there are no missing or skipped claim numbers. Correction is required in the next communication.
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.
Claim(s) 1-14 and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liang et al WO2020/160666A1, (reference will be made to the equivalent US publication Liang et al US2022/0357151A1 hereinafter D1)
Claim 1, A system for 3D surface imaging of a 3D object, comprising: a light source (D1 discloses a continuous-wave laser as the illumination source for structured-light 3D imaging ([0048], [0057])); a digital micromirror device (D1 teaches the use of a DMD to generate structured patterns ([0049], [0054], [0057])); a band-limited 4f imaging system (D1 describes a 4f imaging system with a pinhole at the Fourier plane for spatial filtering, which constitutes a band-limited 4f system ([0047], [0050], [0057], Claim 15));
a dove prism (D1 does not explicitly disclose a dove prism, but D1 provides for the alignment and optical manipulation of the projection path and notes that the system is adaptable to various fields of view and projection geometries ([0057], [0058], [0062]); it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, motivated by the need to match the projected pattern to the object’s aspect ratio or orientation, to include a dove prism or equivalent optical rotator in the projection path (MPEP 2143; KSR v. Teleflex, 550 U.S. 398 (2007): predictable use of known optical elements for predictable results));
a camera lens (D1 describes a projector lens that projects the structured pattern onto the object ([0047], [0051], [0057], Claim 15)); and a high-speed camera (D1 discloses a high-speed camera with at least 5k frames/second and more than 250k pixels ([0051], [0058], Claim 18)); wherein a light beam generated by the light source is directed to the digital micromirror device, the digital micromirror device displays binary fringe patterns (D1 teaches generating binary patterns on the DMD, which are then converted to grayscale sinusoidal patterns by the 4f system ([0054], [0057], [0060])); the band-limited 4f imaging system converts the binary fringe patterns to grayscale fringe patterns at an intermediate image plane (D1: [0047], [0050], [0057], [0060]); the dove prism rotates the grayscale fringe patterns onto the intermediate image plane to match an aspect ratio of the object (see above regarding obviousness); the camera lens projects the greyscale fringe patterns from the intermediate image plane to the object (D1: [0047], [0057]); and the high-speed camera captures deformed structure images reflected by the object (D1: [0051], [0058], [0061]); the captured images being transferred to a computer connected to a frame grabber (D1: [0058], [0059], [0061], Claim 20).
Claim 2: The system of claim 1, wherein the light source is a pulsed laser (D1 discloses a continuous-wave laser ([0048], [0057]); use of a pulsed laser is a routine design choice for those seeking higher temporal resolution or SNR (MPEP 2144.05)).
Claim 3: The system of claim 1, wherein the light source is a nanosecond pulsed laser (see above; D1 teaches selection of light source based on application; using a nanosecond pulsed laser is an obvious alternative for high-speed imaging (MPEP 2144.05)).
Claim 4:The system of claim 1, wherein the digital micromirror device is selected with a display rate in a range between 500 Hz and 1 kHz (D1 discloses DMD frame rates of at least 5 kHz ([0049], Claim 9); selection of a lower rate within the operational range is an obvious matter of design choice).
Claim 5: The system of claim 1, wherein the band-limited 4f imaging system comprises a first lens, a second lens and a pinhole positioned between the first and the second lenses; and the dove prism is placed between the second lens and the intermediate image plane (D1 discloses the 4f system with two lenses and a pinhole ([0047], [0050], Claim 15); placement of a dove prism for aspect ratio adjustment is, as above, an obvious addition).
Claim 6: The system of claim 1, wherein the camera lens is selected with a focal length of at most 20 mm, a working distance of at most 1.5 m, and a view angle in a range between 70° and 109° (D1 discloses selection of projector lens parameters for appropriate FOV and working distance “focal length between 18 and 55mm” ([0051], [0057]); the recited values are within the skill of the art for similar imaging systems).
Claim 7: The system of claim 1, wherein the high-speed camera is selected with a frame rate of at least 1 kHz with an image resolution of at least 1.1 M pixels (D1 discloses cameras with ≥5k fps and >250k pixels which reads on the claim ([0051], [0058], Claim 18); also selection of specific resolution is routine).
Claim 8: The system of claim 1, wherein the high-speed camera is a CMOS camera (D1 discloses use of high-speed cameras, and CMOS sensors are routine in the art ([0051], [0058], Claim 18)).
Claim 9: The system of claim 1, wherein the captured images are synchronized by a trigger signal of the digital micromirror device (D1 describes synchronization of camera and pattern projection for phase shifting ([0060], Supplementary Note 3)).
Claim 10: A method for 3D surface imaging of a 3D object, comprising: directing a light beam to a digital micromirror device, the digital micromirror device displaying binary fringe patterns, converting the binary fringe patterns to grayscale fringe patterns at an intermediate image plane; rotating the grayscale fringe patterns onto the intermediate image plane to match an aspect ratio of the object, projecting the greyscale fringe patterns from the intermediate image plane to the object, capturing deformed structure images reflected by the object by a high-speed camera; and transferring the captured images to a computer connected to a frame grabber (As shown above, D1 discloses each recited step, including binary pattern generation, band-limited grayscale conversion, projection, high-speed image capture, and data transfer; the rotation of the fringe pattern (dove prism or equivalent) is, as above, an obvious modification ([0047], [0054], [0057], [0058], [0060], [0061], see rejection of Claims 1, 3–5, 7, 14, 15)).
Claim 11: The method of claim 10, wherein comprising selecting two normalized intensity levels for each fringe pattern and for any camera pixel in the deformed structure images, if a value in a sequence of high-intensity projection is saturated, replacing the value with a corresponding sequence with low intensity (D1 teaches adjusting exposure and pattern intensity for optimal imaging ([0062], also using multiple intensity levels to avoid saturation and extend dynamic range is a known technique).
Claim 12: The method of claim 10, comprising projecting multiple sets of fringe patterns with different periods to the object, and unwrapping a phase value of each pixel independently (D1 discloses phase-shifting with multiple fringe patterns and phase unwrapping algorithms for robust reconstruction ([0053], [0060]).
Claim 13: The method of claim 10, comprising determining distortion coefficients from calibration of the high-speed camera and of a projector comprising a light source generating the light beam directed to the digital micromirror device, the digital micromirror device, a band-limited 4f imaging system converting the binary fringe patterns to grayscale fringe patterns at the intermediate image plane, the intermediate imaging plane and a camera lens projecting the greyscale fringe patterns from the intermediate image plane to the object; and iteratively analyzing undistorted pixels of the high-speed camera and of the projector to recover distortion-compensated 3D information (D1 teaches camera and projector calibration, including intrinsic/extrinsic parameters and image distortion).
Claim 14: The method of claim 10, comprising selecting a pulsed laser as the light beam directed to the digital micromirror device (See response to claims 2 and 3; use of a pulsed laser is a routine design choice (MPEP 2144.05)).
Claim 15: Claim 15 not present in the provided claims; presumed withdrawn or cancelled.) see claim objection above.
Claim 16: The method of claim 10, comprising selecting a digital micromirror device with a display rate of in a range between 500 Hz and 1 kHz (D1 discloses DMD frame rates of at least 5 kHz ([0049], Claim 9); selection of a lower rate within the operational range is an obvious matter of design choice. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to select a frame rate between 500 Hz and 1 kHz to balance imaging speed, signal-to-noise ratio, and data bandwidth, higher rates are possible but may exceed the requirements for certain applications, increase system cost, or overwhelm data transfer and processing capacity. Selecting a frame rate in this range allows for real-time 3D imaging of moderately fast-moving objects while ensuring reliable data handling and reconstruction performance (MPEP 2144.05; KSR v. Teleflex, 550 U.S. 398 (2007): optimization of known parameters for predictable results).
Claim 17: The method of claim 10, comprising using a band-limited 4f imaging system comprising a first lens, a second lens and a pinhole positioned between the first and the second lenses convert the binary fringe patterns to grayscale fringe patterns at intermediate image plane; and a dove prism placed between the second lens and the intermediate image plane to rotate the grayscale fringe patterns onto the intermediate image plane to match the aspect ratio of the object (D1 discloses the 4f system with two lenses and a pinhole ([0047], [0050], Claim 15); placement of a dove prism for aspect ratio adjustment is, as above, an obvious addition).
Claim 18: The method of claim 10, comprising selecting a camera lens with a focal length of at most 20 mm, a working distance of at most 1.5 m, and a view angle in a range between 70° and 109°, and using the camera lens to project the greyscale fringe patterns from the intermediate image plane to the object (D1 discloses selection of projector lens parameters for appropriate FOV and working distance ([0051], [0057]); the recited values are within the skill of the art for similar imaging systems, see rejection of claim 6).
Claim 19: The method of claim 10, comprising selecting the high-speed camera with a frame rate of at least 1 kHz with an image resolution of at least 1.1 M pixels (D1 discloses cameras with ≥5k fps and >250k pixels “resolution of more than 1 Mega pixels” ([0049],[0051], [0058], Claim 18); selection of specific resolution is routine, see rejection of claim 16).
Claim 20: The method of claim 10, comprising selecting at least one of: multiple cameras, a display rate of the digital micromirror device, and a power of the light source generating the light beam directed to the digital micromirror device, according to a target imaging speed (D1 discusses the flexibility of system parameters to achieve desired speed and resolution ([0059], [0061])).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ISAM ALSOMIRI whose telephone number is (571)272-6970. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30 M-F.
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, Joseph Thomas can be reached at 571-272-8004. 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.
/ISAM A ALSOMIRI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights