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 .
Response to Arguments
The applicant argues that Jeong does not teach “ “ (Remarks of October 8, 2025, page(s) 8 and 9). The examiner respectfully disagrees. First, the examiner argues that applicant’s claim limitation does not provide the meaning the applicant suggests. The claim limitation form states “wherein the display control device determines the display size and a display position of the 3D image to be displayed on the monitor, on the basis of viewing angle of the 3D monitor configured to display the 3D image”. The examiner points that there is a comma (,) after determining the display size and a display position … the monitor and thus determining is not on the basis of the viewing angle. Further, the viewing angle of the 3D monitor still relates to the observer’s position and distance to the 3D monitor and thus Jeong does relate to the determination step (¶ 83). The applicant merely states on the basis of viewing angle of the 3D monitor and the paragraph (¶ 31) that applicant’s point to only describes that the viewing angle describes characteristics of the 3D monitor which is disclosed in Jeong (¶ 71 and 72).
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.
Claim(s) 1 – 5 and 7 - 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jeong et al (US 2021/0201722, hereafter Jeong).
As per claim 1, Jeong discloses an image display system comprising:
a monitor configured to be able to display a 3D image (Figure 1 element 110; ¶ 66; a third-dimensional (3D) display);
a detection device (Figure 1 element 120) configured to detect a position of an observer or a position of monitor observation glasses with respect to the monitor as an observation position (¶ 67; The sensor 120 may be implemented as a sensor capable of sensing at least one of the presence or absence of the user, the proximity of the user, or a motion of the user.); and
a display control device configured to determine a display size of the 3D image to be displayed on the monitor such that the observation position is included in a 3D observable area of the monitor on the basis of the observation position detected by the detection device (¶ 72, 73, and 95 ), wherein the display control device determines the display size and a display position of the 3D image to be displayed on the monitor, on the basis of viewing angle of the 3D monitor configured to display the 3D image, and the display control device determines the display position of the 3D image on the basis of the relationship between both a vertical position and a horizontal position of the observer with respect to the monitor (¶ 71, 72, and 83).
As per claim 2, Jeong discloses the image display system according to claim 1, wherein the display control device determines display size of the 3D image to be displayed on the monitor such that the observation position is disposed in a 3D observable area of the monitor on the basis of viewing angle of the monitor and viewing distance between the monitor and the observation position (¶ 83; The processor 140 may identify a viewing angle of the image content based on the type information of the image content and the viewing distance of the user, and identify a size of a portion of the display 110 and a display size of the image content based on the viewing angle information and the ratio information of the image content.).
As per claim 3, the image display system according to claim 1, wherein the display control device determines the display size of the 3D image to be displayed on the monitor on the basis of an observation distance from the monitor to the observation position (¶ 83; The processor 140 may identify a viewing angle of the image content based on the type information of the image content and the viewing distance of the user, and identify a size of a portion of the display 110 and a display size of the image content based on the viewing angle information and the ratio information of the image content.).
As per claim 4, Jeong discloses the image display system according to claim 1, wherein the detection device is disposed on the monitor and is a sensor detecting the position of the observer or the position of the monitor observation glasses with respect to the monitor (¶ 67; According to an example, at least a portion of the sensor 120 may be provided within the housing 10, may be provided on one side of the housing 10, or may be provided in a speaker provided at the front surface of the housing 10.).
As per claim 5, Jeong discloses the image display system according to claim 1, further comprising an imaging device used by the observer, wherein the detection device detects the observation position on the basis of an image acquired by the imaging device imaging the monitor (¶ 67; According to an example, the sensor 120 may be implemented as a camera, a proximity sensor, a motion sensor, a touch sensor, or the like.).
As per claim 7, Jeong discloses the image display system according to claim 1, wherein, when at least a part of an area displaying the 3D image determined on the basis of the observation position is outside a displayable area of the monitor, the display control device changes the area displaying the 3D image to inside the displayable area of the monitor (¶ 71 - 75).
As per claim 8, Jeong discloses the image display system according to claim 1, wherein the display control device determines at least one of the display size and the display position of the 3D image to be displayed on the monitor on the basis of an observation area to which the observation position detected by the detection device belongs (¶ 71 - 75).
As per claim 9, Jeong discloses the image display system according to claim 1, wherein the display control device determines at least one of the display size and the display position of the 3D image to be displayed on the monitor on the basis of the observation position detected by the detection device at each predetermined time interval (¶ 100).
As per claim 10, Jeong discloses the image display system according to claim 1, wherein the number of the observation positions is two or more, and wherein the 3D image is independently displayed for each of the observation positions (¶ 78).
Regarding claim 11, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 1 are applicable for the claim 11.
Regarding claim 12, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 2 are applicable for the claim 12.
Regarding claim 13, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 3 are applicable for the claim 13.
Regarding claim 14, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 7 are applicable for the claim 14.
Regarding claim 15, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 8 are applicable for the claim 15.
Regarding claim 16, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 9 are applicable for the claim 16.
Regarding claim 17, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 10 are applicable for the claim 17.
Regarding claim 18, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 1 are applicable for the claim 18.
Regarding claim 19, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 2 are applicable for the claim 19.
Regarding claim 20, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 3 are applicable for the claim 20.
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.
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) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong in view of Tesar (US 2016/0220324).
As per claim 6, Jeong discloses the image display system according to claim 5.
However, the Jeong does not explicitly teach wherein the imaging device is a part of an endoscope that is able to capture the 3D image.
In the same field of endeavor, Tesar teaches wherein the imaging device is a part of an endoscope that is able to capture the 3D image (¶ 119).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the invention of Jeong in view of Tesar. The advantage is an improved virtualized system.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHIKAODILI E ANYIKIRE whose telephone number is (571)270-1445. The examiner can normally be reached 8 am - 4:30 pm.
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, David Czekaj can be reached at 571-272-7327. 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.
/CHIKAODILI E ANYIKIRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
Prosecution Insights