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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) was/were submitted on 26 February 2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1-15 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-4 and 6 of copending Application No. 18/575694 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference application anticipated claims 1-15 of the instant application.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
For similar reasons the independent claims of the instant application are also rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over the independent claims of at least each of U.S. Patent Nos. 11765387, 11895341, 11979607, 12010341, 12010350, 12034979, 12069316, 12143648, 12159435, 12165368, 12236646, 12244866, 12299943, 12307726, 12307729, 12322144, 12361598, 12380605, 12400369, 12423877, and 12464138 and provisionally over U.S. Patent Application Nos. 17/727358, 18/406405, and 18/945720. Examiner notes that the language of the independent claims are extremely broad and may, in fact, present a double-patenting issue with many other applications and issued patents. However, because of the extreme breadth of the claims, a fully comprehensive list could not be obtained in reasonable time.
With respect to the filing of such extremely broad independent claims, Applicant is cautioned and is respectfully reminded that it filed an Oath stating that it believes itself to be the original inventor or joint inventor of the claimed inventions. Examiner encourages Applicant to amend the claim set to be directed to its particular inventive contribution to the art.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-12, and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Mammou et al. (US 2021/0103780 A1).
Regarding Claims 1 and 9, Mammou discloses a device for performing a method of transmitting point cloud data, the method comprising: encoding geometry data of the point cloud data [Mammou: ¶ [0048]: a system may include an encoder that compresses attribute information and/or spatial information (also referred to herein as geometry information) of a point cloud file]; encoding attribute data of the point cloud data based on the geometry data [Mammou: ¶ [0048]: a system may include a sensor that captures spatial information and/or attribute information about points in an environment where the sensor is located, wherein the captured points and corresponding attributes make up a point cloud. The system may also include an encoder that compresses the captured point cloud attribute information]; and transmitting the encoded geometry data, the encoded attribute data, and signaling information [Mammou: ¶ [0048]: The compressed attribute information of the point cloud may be sent over a network in real-time or near real-time to a decoder that decompresses the compressed attribute information of the point cloud].
Regarding Claims 2 and 10, Mammou discloses all the limitations of Claims 1 and 9, respectively, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Furthermore, Mammou discloses wherein the encoding of the attribute data comprises: segmenting the attribute data into one or more subgroups having a tree structure and generating one or more levels of detail (LoDs) from the subgroup-based tree structure [Mammou: ¶ [0229]: FIG. 11B illustrates an example compressed point cloud file comprising LODs, according to some embodiments. Level of detail attribute information file 1150 includes configuration information 1152, point cloud data 1154, and level of detail point attribute correction values 1156. In some embodiments, level of detail attribute information file 1150 may be communicated in parts via multiple packets. In some embodiments, not all of the sections shown in the level of detail attribute information file 1150 may be included in each packet transmitting compressed attribute information. In some embodiments, a level of detail attribute information file, such as level of detail attribute information file 1150, may be stored in a storage device, such as a server that implements an encoder or decoder, or other computing device]; searching for and selecting, based on at least one of the one or more LoDs, one or more nearest neighbors of a neighbor search target node [Mammou: Title: Trimming Search Space For Nearest Neighbor Determinations In Point Cloud Compression; and ¶ [0486]: In some embodiments, a k-nearest neighbor graph G could be pre-computed for the points belonging to subsequent LODs. This graph could be then used to accelerate the search process. For example, for each point P, a quick search with a limited search range would be applied first to find an approximate nearest neighbor n0. The neighbors of the node in graph G are then evaluated to find the k-nearest neighbors of P in graph G. The process to generate the graph G could then accelerated by looking for nearest neighbors that have a lower space filling curve value (e.g., lower Morton order) only and symmetrizing the graph G (e.g., if P is a neighbor of Q then make Q a neighbor of P). In order, to reduce the memory requirements for G, the number of nearest neighbor searches of graph G could be adaptively varied based on the point cloud characteristics]; and compressing attribute information based on the selected one or more nearest neighbors of the neighbor search target node [Mammou: Title].
Regarding Claims 3 and 11, Mammou discloses all the limitations of Claims 2 and 10, respectively, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Furthermore, Mammou discloses wherein the subgroup-based tree structure comprises at least one parent subgroup and one or more child subgroups of the at least one parent subgroup [Mammou: ¶ [0156]: At 712, the number of points included in the child cell is encoded according the selected encoding context, selected at 710. At 714, it is determined if there are additional lower-level child cells to encode in the K-D tree. If so, the process reverts to 710. If not, at 716, the encoded number of points in the parent cell and the child cells are included in a compressed spatial information file, such as a compressed point cloud].
Regarding Claims 4 and 12, Mammou discloses all the limitations of Claims 3 and 11, respectively, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Furthermore, Mammou discloses wherein each of the subgroups is mapped to one or more LoDs [Mammou: ¶ [0067]: In order to determine various refinement levels, sampling rates, etc. the ordered index of the points may be used. For example, to divide a point cloud into four levels of detail, an index that maps a Morton value to a corresponding point may be sampled].
Regarding Claims 6 and 14, Mammou discloses all the limitations of Claims 4 and 12, respectively, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Furthermore, Mammou discloses wherein the searching for and selecting the nearest neighbors comprises: when the neighbor search target node belongs to one of the one or more child subgroups, searching for the nearest neighbors by reference to nodes included in a child subgroup to which the neighbor search target node belongs among the one or more child subgroups [Mammou: ¶ [0151]: A K-D tree may include a sequence of number of points included in cells resulting from sequential divisions of a space comprising points of a point cloud. In some embodiments, building a K-D tree may comprise continuing to subdivide a space until only a single point is included in each lowest level child cell. A K-D tree may be communicated as a sequence of number of points in sequential cells resulting from sequential divisions. A decoder may be configured with information indicating the subdivision sequence followed by an encoder. For example, an encoder may follow a pre-defined division sequence until only a single point remains in each lowest level child cell. Because the decoder may know the division sequence that was followed to build the K-D tree and the number of points that resulted from each subdivision (which is communicated to the decoder as compressed spatial information) the decoder may be able to reconstruct the point cloud].
Regarding Claims 7 and 15, Mammou discloses all the limitations of Claims 6 and 14, respectively, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Furthermore, Mammou discloses wherein the searching for and selecting the nearest neighbors further comprises: searching for the nearest neighbors by reference to nodes included in a parent subgroup of the child subgroup to which the neighbor search target node belongs [Mammou: ¶ [0155]: At 710, an encoding context for encoding a child cell is selected based on a number of points included in a parent cell. The encoding context for the child cell may be selected in a similar manner as for the parent cell at 706].
Regarding Claim 8, Mammou discloses all the limitations of Claim 4 and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Mammou discloses wherein the signaling information comprises at least subgroup identification information for identifying each of the subgroups or bounding box information related to each of the subgroups [Mammou: ¶ [0033]; and ¶ [0474]: in some embodiments, the search space for nearest neighbor search may be trimmed (or otherwise reduced) by implementing bounding shapes. Consider an example embodiment where the points of a point cloud are clustered, grouped, or otherwise assigned into point buckets of a fixed size, as illustrated in FIG. 14. Each bucket, such as buckets 1420a, 1420b, 1420c, and so on, may be assigned a range of space filling curve values 1400 determined points in a point cloud, such as space filling curve ranges 1410a, 1410b, and 1410c respectively assigned to buckets 1420a, 1420b, and 1420c. Consider an example embodiment where each 8, 16 or 32 consecutive points in a Morton order could be grouped in a point bucket 1420. Bounding shapes, such as an axis aligned bounding box 1430 may then be determined and associated with each bucket (as bounding box 1430 may be associated with the points included in bucket 1420a. In various embodiments, bounding boxes could be computed incrementally or pre-computed before the starting the sub-sampling process. Although a bounding box is illustrated and discussed with regard to FIG. 14, other bounding shapes, such as bounding spheres, bounding capsules, and so on, may be implemented in other embodiments].
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(s) 5 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mammou as applied to claims 4 and 12 above, and further in view of Oh (US 2021/0005006 A1).
Regarding Claims 5 and 13, Mammou disclose(s) all the limitations of Claims 4 and 12, respectively, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Furthermore, Mammou discloses wherein the generating of the one or more LoDs comprises: comparing the at least one parent subgroup with a corresponding subgroup of the geometry data [Mammou: ¶ [0155]]; detecting at least one missing node [Mammou: Abstract: neighboring voxels may be searched to identify any neighboring points missed during the trimmed search based on the ranges of the space filling curve].
Mammou may not explicitly disclose wherein the generating of the one or more LoDs comprises: detecting at least one missing node included in the at least one parent subgroup; and appending the detected node to the corresponding one of the LoDs.
However, Oh discloses wherein the generating of the one or more LoDs comprises: comparing the at least one parent subgroup with a corresponding subgroup of the geometry data; detecting at least one missing node included in the at least one parent subgroup; and appending the detected node to the corresponding one of the LoDs [Oh: ¶ [0230] In the encoding method using the depth values of the two layers, d0 and d1 as described above, if there is another point between the two depths, the geometry information about the point is missing in the encoding process, and therefore an enhanced-delta-depth (EDD) code may be used for lossless coding].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the missing node correction of Oh with the processing of Mammou in order to provide finer error correction.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN R MESSMORE whose telephone number is (571)272-2773. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5 EST/EDT.
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, Chris Kelley can be reached at 571-272-7331. 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.
/JONATHAN R MESSMORE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482