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 (IDS) submitted on 09/17/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being 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 1-13 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.
As per claim 1, the claim calls for “acquire coordinate positions inside images of light sources included in an image captured with an imaging device”. The claim language is unclear and indefinite. For the purpose of examination, the examiner interprets the feature as to acquire the light source coordinate positions from the captured image.
Claims 2-11 are rejected for their dependency upon a rejected claim.
Claims 12-13 are rejected for the similar reason as of claim 1.
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 1-4, 7 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Iizuka (U.S. Publication No. 2022/0092815 A1).
As per claim 1, Iizuka discloses an information processing apparatus (abstract: “a moving body position determination device”) comprising one or more processors (abstract: “processor”) configured to: acquire coordinate positions inside images of light sources (paragraph [0029]: markers/light sources 102a-102c attached to the ceilings) included in an image captured with an imaging device (paragraph [0029]: camera 101) among a plurality of light sources whose coordinate positions in a three-dimensional space are known (paragraph [0030]: “the three-dimensional positions of the markers 102 in the space 500 are known.”), and acquire at least either of a coordinate position and an orientation of the information processing apparatus in the three-dimensional space based on the acquired coordinate positions of the light sources in the three-dimensional space included in the image and the coordinate positions inside the images of the light sources (paragraph [0031]: “calculates the three-dimensional position of the camera 101a in the space 500 as the three-dimensional position of the forklift 100. Here, the light images are obtained by the camera 101a performing chronological continuous imaging”; paragraph [0033]: “ the server 200 calculates the unknown three-dimensional position of the camera 101a on the basis of the known three-dimensional positions of the markers 102 in the space 500”; paragraph [0046]: “The marker 102c is located in the disabled region 603a and, as such, the marker 102c is not used to acquire the three-dimensional position of the camera 101a, and only the markers 102a and 102b are used to acquire the three-dimensional position of the camera 101a”), wherein the one or more processors further are configured to: acquire at least either of the coordinate position and the orientation of the information processing apparatus based on information on light sources in which an angle of a light source from the imaging device to a predetermined direction or a prospective angle between light sources in a horizontal direction satisfies a predetermined condition (paragraph [0047]: “the three-dimensional position of the marker 102a and the three-dimensional position of the marker 102b obtained by referencing the marker three-dimensional position table, and the camera orientation matrix Rz (θ) and the camera placement matrix Rc that express the attitude data and that are stored in the memory 205”).
As per claim 2, Iizuka discloses wherein the one or more processors use information on the plurality of light sources as a combination of two or more light sources including a light source which angle from the imaging device to the predetermined direction is a first threshold value or more, or as a combination of two or more light sources in which a prospective angle therebetween in the horizontal direction satisfies a predetermined condition to derive at least either of the coordinate position and the orientation of the own device (see figures 7-9 for a prospective angles between two markers 102a and 102b is greater than zero).
As per claim 3, Iizuka discloses wherein the one or more processors use information included in the image on a first light source whose elevation/depression angle from the imaging device is the first threshold value or more, and information on a second light source to derive at least either of the coordinate position and the orientation of the own device (as shown in figures 1 and 6, the markers 102a and 102b are placed at different elevations).
As per claim 4, Iizuka discloses wherein the one or more processors use information included in the image on a first light source whose elevation/depression angle from the imaging device is the first threshold value or more, and a second light source whose prospective angle with the first light source in the horizontal direction is a second threshold value or more to derive at least either of the coordinate position and the orientation of the own device (see paragraph [0047]: using 102a and 102b positional information in the captured image to calculate camera position and orientation).
As per claim 7, Iizuka discloses wherein the one or more processors use information on three light sources different in horizontal direction position inside the image from one another to derive at least either of the coordinate position and the orientation of the own device (as shown in figures 1 and 6, markers 102a, 102b and 102c are placed at different horizonal direction positions).
As per claim 11, Iizuka discloses wherein each of the plurality of light sources is to modulate light and transmit identification information on the light source concerned, and the one or more processors detects identification information and a coordinate position of the light source included in an image from the image captured with the imaging device, and acquires a known coordinate position corresponding to the detected identification information in the three-dimensional space (paragraph [0030]: “The markers 102 perform color modulation on the basis of various types of information to be sent, and send that information by chronologically changing the light emission color and emitting”).
As per claim 12, see explanation in claim 1.
As per claim 13, see explanation in claim 1, and the examiner notes Iizuka’s system is a computer-like system, which inherently includes a non-transitory computer-readable medium.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6 and 8-10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TOM Y LU whose telephone number is (571)272-7393. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9AM - 5PM.
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.
/TOM Y LU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2667
Prosecution Insights