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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 5 and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
“the set of calibration data” should read “the set of calibration parameters”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 3-8, 11, 13-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being unpatentable by Drumheller (US 20230099417 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, representative of Claim 11, Drumheller teaches a method for three-dimensional (3D) field calibration of a machine vision system comprising:
receiving a set of calibration parameters and an identification of at least one imaging device of the machine vision system ([0050] During the estimate phase, the user inputs specific information about the application which is then used by the system to generate estimated calibration parameters for each camera…Certain parameters such as the camera mounting angle, mirror mounting angle, and/or camera position may be selected by a user, [0051]: The user can calibrate all the cameras at the same time by selecting which the camera(s) are desired for calibration (e.g., all, some, or one));
determining a camera acquisition parameter for calibration based on the set of calibration parameters ([0050] During the estimate phase, the user inputs specific information about the application which is then used by the system to generate estimated calibration parameters for each camera…estimated calibration parameters may include determining a far working distance for each camera based on one or more of a camera mounting angle (or mirror mounting angle), camera position, minimum camera range, maximum camera range, lens focal plane adjustment, lens size…. Certain parameters such as the camera mounting angle, mirror mounting angle, and/or camera position may be selected by a user);
validating the set of calibration parameters and the camera acquisition parameter ([0081] The user may initiate the start of calibration by hitting a start dynamic calibration button to generate the default calibration parameters which may then be written to each camera. FIGS. 9-15 show various examples of user interfaces 900-1500 that show different situations or examples of default parameters that have been calculated and may be accepted by the user before continuing to the calibration refinement process);
controlling the at least one imaging device to collect image data of a calibration target, wherein the image data is collected using the determined camera acquisition parameter ([0082]: packages may have calibration targets 410 (e.g., four per package), [0083] The purpose of the calibration refinement process is for each camera to view a package in the near and far of its working range, [0085]: each camera may initiate a Capture Event… The captured image data is processed to find the calibration target for each package);
generating a set of calibration data for the at least one imaging device using the collected image data ([0086] The following information is calculated when the calibration target is found in the image data… [0102] The following camera calibration parameters are set using the data collected above), wherein the set of calibration data includes a maximum error ([0137] calibration refinements continue to be made until measured differences are within predetermined limits); and
generating a report including the set of calibration data for the at least one imaging device ([0053]: the system may refine the default calibration parameters to generate a completed set of calibration parameters (also referred to herein as “refined calibration parameters”) through a dynamic calibration process, [0082] FIG. 16 shows a user interface 1600 showing the initiation of the calibration refinement process) and an indication of whether the maximum error for the at least one imaging device is within an acceptable tolerance ([0137] Calibration refinements continue to be made until measured differences are within predetermined limits. Once calibration is complete, updated parameters will be written to each camera, and dynamic calibration will be stopped. Examiner interpreting the stopping of dynamic calibration to be the indication).
Regarding Claim 3, representative of Claim 17, Drumheller teaches the method according to claim 1. In addition, Drumheller teaches wherein the machine vision system is configured as a tunnel comprising one imaging device ([0004]: system comprises at least one camera having a field-of-view directed toward the transport mechanism, see Fig. 1, camera 106 mounted over conveyor).
Regarding Claim 4, representative of Claim 18, Drumheller teaches the method according to claim 1. In addition, Drumheller teaches wherein the machine vision system is configured as a tunnel comprising a plurality of imaging devices ([0024] As shown in FIG. 2, the dynamic dimensioning system 100 may include a plurality of cameras 106, 108 and 110 operably coupled with each other).
Regarding Claim 5, representative of Claim 13, Drumheller teaches the method according to claim 1. In addition, Drumheller teaches wherein the set of calibration data includes one or more of a runtime conveyor speed, a calibration conveyor speed, a connection address associated with the at least one imaging device, a type of calibration target, or a dimension for the calibration target ([0081] user may initiate… default calibration parameters which may then be written to each camera. FIGS. 9-15 show various examples of user interfaces 900-1500 that show different situations or examples of default parameters that have been calculated and may be accepted by the user… FIG. 10 describes a situation in which a dimensioner is used as a position sensor having a transmit delay (e.g., 163 mm), and which is used for calculating a conveyor width (e.g., 1116 mm), [0054]: the field-of-view may be determined by the conveyor width for Top and Bottom cameras…this enables the cameras to capture the images during the calibration estimate process to be in focus so that the calibration target can be identified).
Regarding Claim 6, representative of Claim 14, Drumheller teaches the method according to claim 1. In addition, Drumheller teaches further comprising before controlling the at least one imaging device to collect image data of a calibration target, storing, a set of customer system settings for the at least one imaging device ([0081] user may initiate the start of calibration by hitting a start dynamic calibration button to generate the default calibration parameters, [0138]: a camera's starting parameters may be reloaded if calibration is stopped before calibration is complete. Examiner notes the indication that starting parameters are stored, [0085] captured image data is processed to find the calibration target for each package).
Regarding Claim 7, Drumheller teaches the method according to claim 1. In addition, Drumheller teaches further comprising loading the set of calibration data on the at least one imaging device ([0137] Calibration refinements continue to be made until measured differences are within predetermined limits. Once calibration is complete, updated parameters will be written to each camera).
Regarding Claim 8, representative of Claim 16, Drumheller teaches the method according to claim 1. In addition, Drumheller teaches wherein generating an indication of whether the maximum error is within an acceptable tolerance includes comparing the maximum error to a predetermined error threshold ([0137] Calibration refinements continue to be made until measured differences are within predetermined limits. Once calibration is complete, updated parameters will be written to each camera, and dynamic calibration will be stopped).
Regarding Claim 15, Drumheller teaches the system according to claim 11. In addition, Drumheller teaches wherein the at least one processor device is further configured to generate a graphical user interface ([0080]: FIG. 7 is an example of a user interface 700 generated by the system).
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.
Claim(s) 2, 9, 12, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Drumheller (US 20230099417 A1) in view of Jain (US 11127130 B1).
Regarding Claim 2, representative of Claim 12, Drumheller teaches the method according to claim 1. Although Drumheller teaches a user interface showing the initiation of the calibration refinement process in at least Fig. 16, Drumheller does not explicitly teach displaying the report using a display.
Jain teaches further comprising displaying the report using a display ([0012]: such image and analysis data may be useable by the management server for providing further analyses, insights, alerts, summaries, etc. to users via interactive graphical user interfaces. The machine vision devices may provide remote access to live image data.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have modified the teachings of Drumheller to include the teachings of Jain. Doing so would improve the accuracy of calibration refinement by providing the calibration results to a display for a user to review.
Regarding Claim 9, representative of Claim 19, Drumheller teaches the method according to claim 1. Drumheller does not explicitly teach the remaining limitations of Claim 9. Jain teaches wherein the report further includes an image generated based on the collected image data ([0018]: advantages described herein, including more efficient interaction with, and presentation and analysis of, various types of electronic image data, machine vision device operation and configuration, and the like).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have modified the teachings of Drumheller to include the teachings of Jain. Doing so would improve the accuracy of calibration refinement by providing the calibration results including an image captured to a user to review.
Claim(s) 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Drumheller (US 20230099417 A1) in view of Ye (US 9734419 B1).
Regarding Claim 10, representative of Claim 20, Drumheller teaches the method according to claim 1. However, Drumheller does not explicitly teach the remaining limitations of Claim 10.
Ye teaches wherein the calibration target comprises a symbol and the maximum error is a difference between an actual symbol center location and a calculated symbol center location ([abstract]: acquires images of the first calibration object or a second calibration object having a known pattern and dimensions; (b) extracts features of the images of the first calibration object or the second calibration object; (c) predicts positions expected of features of the first calibration object or the second calibration object using the camera calibration parameters; and (d) computes a set of discrepancies between positions of the extracted features and the predicted positions of the features. The validation process then uses the computed set of discrepancies in a decision process that determines whether at least one of the discrepancies exceeds a predetermined threshold value. If so, recalibration is required, [0016]: herein an illustrative checkerboard of known size and shape, which can also include a central fiducial 172, [0034]: In the case of the illustrative checkerboard calibration object/plate, a fiducial (172) on the plate helps identify correspondence between features in the two images).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have modified the teachings of Drumheller to include the teachings of Ye by including an error estimate involving a difference between the location of features of a calibration object. Doing so would improve the accuracy of determining final calibration parameters.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANICE VAZ whose telephone number is (703)756-4685. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:00pm.
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, Matthew Bella can be reached at (571) 272-7778. 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.
/JANICE E. VAZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2667
/MATTHEW C BELLA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2667
Prosecution Insights