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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/23/24 was considered by the examiner.
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 9-11, 14-17 and 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 claims 9-11 and 15, the phrase "for example" (claim 9, line 3; claim 10, line 2; claim 15, line 12) renders the respective claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 11 is rejected based on its dependency from claim 10, claims 16-17 are rejected based on their dependency from claim 15.
Regarding claim 14, the phrase “preferably” (claim 14, line 3) renders the claim indefinite because it includes both narrow and broader ranges in the same claim (See MPEP 2173.05(c)).
Regarding claim 19, the phrase "such as" (Claim 19, lines 3 and 5) renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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, 12-14, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Unuchek et al. (WO 2022/064412, hereinafter “Unuchek”, cited by Applicant). Regarding claim 1, Unuchek discloses an optical system for a position determination device, in particular an optical stylus (Fig. 1, [0037], optical stylus 10), for determination of the position of said device relative to a position-encoded surface having different position-encoded patterns (Figs. 2, 2a, [0037-0038], position encoded surface 50 having position encoded patterns 52), the optical system comprising an image sensor for capturing at least one image of any position-encoded pattern of the position-encoded surface (Fig. 1, [0043], image sensor 20), one or more light sources for illuminating any of said position-encoded patterns (Fig. 1, [0059], light emitting unit 22), a stop aperture (Fig. 1, [0038], aperture of optical components 18), an object lens with a side positioned away from the stop aperture by a first distance (Fig. 1, [0038], objective lens of optical components 18; see also Fig. 5) and an image lens with a side positioned away from the stop aperture by a second distance (Fig. 1, [0038], objective lens of optical components 18), the optical system further comprising a dynamic optical element positioned in contact with the stop aperture or within a distance of 5mm away from the stop aperture along the optical axis of the optical system (Fig. 1, dynamic optical element 16 along the central columnar axis as an optical axis of optical stylus 10), the dynamic optical element being configured to be electrically actuated in order to form onto the image sensor in-focus images of any position-encoded pattern of the position-encoded surface within working distances of the position determination device comprising said optical system (Fig 4b, [0042, 0044-0046], the dynamic optical element 16 being configured to be electrically actuated (e.g., optically tunable liquid lens or shifted by an actuator) in order to form onto the image sensor 20 in-focus images of any position-encoded pattern 52 of the position-encoded surface 50 within working distances D (Fig. 4a) of the position determination device 10 comprising said optical system). Regarding claim 12, Unuchek discloses the optical system according to claim 1, wherein the one or more light sources is/are arranged such that the central axis of the light cone emitted by the or each light source intersects the optical axis of the object lens for optimal illumination intensity (Unuchek, Fig. 1, [0059], light emitting unit 22 is arranged such that the central axis of the light cone emitted by the light emitting unit 22 intersects the optical axis (central axis of optical stylus 10) of the object lens 18 for optimal illumination intensity). Regarding claim 13, Unuchek discloses an optical stylus comprising the optical system according to claim 1 (Unuchek, Fig. 1, [0037], optical stylus 10).
Regarding claim 14, Unuchek discloses the optical stylus according to claim 1, wherein said one or more light sources is/are mounted between the dynamic optical element and a distal end of the optical stylus, preferably between said dynamic optical element and the object lens (Unuchek, Fig. 1, light emitting unit 22 is mounted between the dynamic optical element 16 and a distal end 13 of the optical stylus 10).
Regarding claim 18, Unuchek discloses a method for controlling the voltage to be applied on a dynamic optical element of an optical stylus as a function of the 3D pose of the optical stylus relative to a position-encoded surface comprising different position-encoded patterns, the optical stylus comprising (Figs. 1, 2, 2a, [0037-0038, 0057], optical stylus 10 determines the position and shape, bent, tilt, twist of the stylus relative to a position-encoded surface 50 having different position-encoded patterns 52; [0053], electrical signal is constantly applied to dynamic optical element 16 in 3D mode): - an image sensor for capturing at least one image of any position-encoded pattern of the position-encoded surface (Figs. 1, 2, 2a, [0041-0043], image sensor 20 for capturing at least one image of any position-encoded pattern 52 of the position-encoded surface 50, - a dynamic optical element configured to be electrically actuated in order to form onto the image sensor in-focus images of any position-encoded pattern of the position- encoded surface within a range of working distances of the optical stylus (Fig 4b, [0042, 0044-0046], the dynamic optical element 16 being configured to be electrically actuated (e.g., optically tunable liquid lens or shifted by an actuator) in order to form onto the image sensor 20 in-focus images of any position-encoded pattern 52 of the position-encoded surface 50 within working distances D (Fig. 4a) of the optical stylus 10), - a distance measurement sensor for measuring said working distances (Figs. 1 4a, [0046-0047] distance measurement sensor 32 for measuring working distances D), and - a processing unit to control the dynamic optical element as a function of said working distances (Figs. 1, 4a, [0045-0048], processing unit 24 controls the dynamic optical element 16 as a function of working distances D), wherein the method comprises the steps of: a. performing a measurement of said working distances with the distance measurement sensor (Figs. 1 4a, [0046-0047] distance measurement sensor 32 for measuring working distances D); b. determining the electrical voltage to be applied on the dynamic optical element by means of a distance-to-voltage conversion model using either ([0046], tunable liquid lens is electrically actuated; [0045], optical lens is actuated by piezoelectric element): - an analytical model describing the relation between the voltage to be applied and the measurement distance of said working distance [0049], optimization autofocus algorithm determines electrical voltage applied), or - a look-up table storing the value of the voltage to be applied for any measurement of said working distance.
Regarding claim 19, Unuchek discloses the method according to claim 18, wherein step a. is followed by the additional steps of: c. obtaining at least one measurement performed by another sensor, such as the image sensor or an IMU sensor, including in the optical stylus (Unuchek, [0075], inertial measurement unit IMU provides sensor data for fusion algorithms), and d. running on the processing unit a sensor fusion algorithm, such as a Kalman filter, to obtain a more precise measurement of said working distance as a function of the data obtained by the distance measurement sensor and said another sensor (Unuchek, [0075], inertial measurement unit IMU provides sensor data for fusion algorithms).
Regarding claim 20, Unuchek discloses the method according to claim 18, comprising the additional steps of: - determining by an image analysis algorithm whether the quality of one or more images acquired by the image sensor is/are above a given threshold to ensure that the image of the position-encoded pattern is good enough to be used by the optical stylus (Unuchek, [0073], image thresholding 114), and -adapting the distance-to-voltage conversion model when the quality is below said given threshold to modify the focal length of the dynamic optical element so as to restore the quality of said one or more images above said given threshold (Unuchek, [0073], image thresholding 114 and binarization 116, extraction of the rotation and tilt angles for subsequent perspective correction 118; [0049], voltage is adjusted based on autofocus algorithm when image captured is blurry).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Unuchek.
Regarding claim 2, Unuchek discloses the optical system according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the range of said working distances has a minimum value of 10mm and a maximum value of 100mm. However, Unuchek further teaches that the working distance D can be any range up to 15cm (Fig. 4a, [0053], working distance D can be up to 15cm). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical system of Unuchek to have wherein the range of said working distances has a minimum value of 10mm and a maximum value of 100mm, as taught by Unuchek, because such a modification is simple a design choice selection of a possible optical stylus working distance range that is within the range contemplated by Unuchek for producing a predictable result of capturing an image of the position encoded patterns 52).
Claims 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Unuchek in view of Price et al. (US 3,599,003, hereinafter “Price”). Regarding claim 4, Unuchek discloses the optical system according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the first distance is within a range from 0.5 to 1.2 of the focal length of the object lens. Price teaches wherein the first distance is within a range from 0.5 to 1.2 of the focal length of the object lens (Fig. 1, col. 3, lines 48-69, distance of lens 18 to pinhole aperture 24 as a first distance is set to focal length of lens 18 (i.e., 1.0 value) which is within range of 0.5 to 1.2 of the focal length of the lens 18). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical system of Unuchek to have wherein the first distance is within a range from 0.5 to 1.2 of the focal length of the object lens, such as taught by Price, for the purpose of having light rays parallel to the lens axis entering the optical stylus (Price, col. 3, lines 48-69).
Regarding claim 6, Unuchek discloses the optical system according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose of the type of an object-space telecentric system, wherein said first distance is equal to the focal lens of the object lens. Price teaches of the type of an object-space telecentric system, wherein said first distance is equal to the focal lens of the object lens (Fig. 1, col. 3, lines 48-69, distance of lens 18 to pinhole aperture 24 as a first distance is set to focal length of lens 18 (i.e., 1.0 value) which is within range of 0.5 to 1.2 of the focal length of the lens 18). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical system of Unuchek to have a type of an object-space telecentric system, wherein said first distance is equal to the focal lens of the object lens, such as taught by Price, for the purpose of having light rays parallel to the lens axis entering the optical stylus (Price, col. 3, lines 48-69).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Unuchek in view of Kang et al. (US 2020/0124828, hereinafter “Kang”).
Regarding claim 9, Unuchek discloses the optical system according to claim 1, wherein the dynamic optical element is an electrotuneable lens, for example liquid or polymer lens ([0044], claim 7, element 16 is electrically tunable liquid lens, such as liquid or polymer lens).
Unuchek does explicitly disclose further comprising a circuit board, wherein the electrotuneable lens, which is mounted on a side of the circuit board, said circuit board comprising the stop aperture.
Kang teaches a circuit board with a liquid lens unit mounted on a side of the circuit board with a stop aperture (Figs. 2A-B, liquid lens unit 320 formed on upper side of printed circuit board 360 with aperture 312 to control light to image sensor 350). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical system of Unuchek to have a circuit board, wherein the electrotuneable lens, which is mounted on a side of the circuit board, said circuit board comprising the stop aperture, such as taught by Kang, for the purpose of dynamically control light transmitted to the image sensor.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5, 7-8, are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claim 15 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the §112 rejection.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 3, Unuchek discloses the optical system according to claim 2, but neither Unuchek nor other cited prior art teaches alone or in combination wherein the ratio of magnification of the optical system between in-focus image form onto the image sensor, when the position determination device is at the minimum and maximum values of said range, is below 3.
Regarding claim 5, Unuchek discloses the optical system according to claim 1, but neither Unuchek nor other cited prior art teaches alone or in combination the optical system of the type of a double telecentric system, wherein said first distance is equal to the focal distance of the object lens whereas said second distance is equal to the focal distance of the image lens. Regarding claim 7, Unuchek discloses the optical system according to claim 1, but neither Unuchek nor other cited prior art teaches alone or in combination wherein said first distance is shorter than the focal length of the object lens, and wherein said second distance is shorter than the focal length of the image lens.
Regarding claim 15, Unuchek discloses a method for determining a working distance of an optical stylus as a function of the 3D pose of the optical stylus relative to a position-encoded surface comprising position-encoded patterns, the optical stylus comprising: - an image sensor for capturing at least one image of any position-encoded pattern of the position-encoded surface, - an object lens and an image lens arranged on both sides of a stop aperture, - a dynamic optical element mounted between the object lens and the image lens and configured to be electrically actuated in order to form onto the image sensor in-focus image of any position-encoded pattern of the position-encoded surface within a range of working distances along the optical axis of the stylus; - a distance measurement sensor, for example an optical Time-of-Flight sensor, for measuring said working distance , - a processing unit to control the dynamic optical element as a function of said working distance, wherein the processing unit corrects in real time the signal acquired by the distance measurement sensor as a function of the tilt angle and the roll angle of the 3D pose of the optical stylus relative to the position-encoded surface to compute the working distance.
Claim 8 is objected to as being dependent from claim 7; claims 16-17 depend from claim 15 and would be allowable if claim 15 is amended to overcome the §112 rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Gao et al. (US 8,416,191) teaches using a double telecentric system (claim 1).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH PATRICK FOX whose telephone number is (571)270-3877. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:30 EST.
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, Patrick Edouard can be reached at 571-272-7603. 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.
JOSEPH PATRICK FOX
Examiner
Art Unit 2622
/JOSEPH P FOX/Examiner, Art Unit 2622 /PATRICK N EDOUARD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2622