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 .
Double Patenting
Claim(s) 1-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim(s) 1-23 of U.S. Patent No. 11,593,996
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).
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because ‘325 is broader in scope than ‘996, but all limitations are present in a corresponding claim.
Table 1 below shows an example claim mapping between the present application and U.S. Patent No. 11,593,996
Table 2 below lists corresponding claims between the present application and U.S. Patent No. 11,593,996
Table 1. Example Claim Mapping
18/921,325
US Patent 11,593,996
1. (new) A method comprising:
identifying, by one or more processors, a virtual camera model for a camera of a vehicle;
generating, by the one or more processors using the virtual camera model, a view matrix and a projection matrix;
applying, by the one or more processors, the view matrix and the projection matrix to three- dimensional (3D) content for a scene captured by the camera of the vehicle to create a 3D world view; and
generating, by the one or more processors, a visualization using the 3D world view, wherein the visualization provides a real-world image from a perspective of the camera of the vehicle with one or more graphical overlays of the 3D content.
1. A method of generating a visualization of a three-dimensional (3D) world view from a perspective of a camera of a vehicle, the method comprising:
receiving, by one or more processors, images of a scene captured by the camera of the vehicle and 3D content for the scene;
identifying, by the one or more processors, a virtual camera model for the camera of the vehicle based on parameters associated with the camera of the vehicle;
generating, by the one or more processors, a set of matrices using the identified virtual camera model;
applying, by the one or more processors, the set of matrices to the 3D content to create the 3D world view; and
generating the visualization, by the one or more processors, using the 3D world view as an overlay with an image of the images, wherein the visualization provides a real-world image from the perspective of the camera of the vehicle with one or more graphical overlays of the 3D content.
Table 2. Corresponding Claims
18/921,325
US Patent 11,593,996
1
1
2
5
3
(corresponds to 3d space coordinate)
4
12
5
7
6
8
7
9
8
13
9
14
10
15
11
1
12
5
13
(corresponds to 3d space coordinate)
14
12
15
7
16
8
17
9
18
13
19
14
20
15
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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claim 3-4, 13-14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The claim term cubic space is not defined in the parent application and not defined in the present application, but could correspond to a 3D coordinate space, voxel space, or cube shaped space. The use of the term does not have a consistent meaning in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 1-20 would be allowable upon filing of an approved terminal disclaimer.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Cui’s Disclosure:
Cui considers reprojection of a captured image from a vehicle:
PNG
media_image1.png
427
668
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Cui does not suggest the vehicle perspective (“visualization using the 3D world view, wherein the visualization provides a real-world image from a perspective of the camera of the vehicle with one or more graphical overlays of the 3D content”)
Amelot’s Disclosure:
Amelot teaches away from the above limitation: “A virtual camera can be positioned within a three-dimensional (3D) representation of the environment. A change in the pose of the virtual camera can be received at a triggering device, resulting in a new pose being selected for the virtual camera (e.g., to change from a top-down view to a side view when turning). The pose of the virtual camera can be separated or offset from the vehicle, e.g., pointing at the vehicle. In this manner, a display, such as an in-cab display, can provide a dynamic display of the environment at various angles that are not possible with a camera.”
No Teaching or Suggestion in the Art to combine:
The combination of references do not teach or suggest the above limitation in the context of the independent claims.
Prior Art
Additional prior art relevant to Applicant’s disclosure but not relied upon:
Sung (US 2020/0195839) considers camera conversion:
PNG
media_image2.png
747
445
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN M GRAY whose telephone number is (571)272-4582. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday, 9:00am-5:30pm (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, Kee Tung can be reached on (571)272-7794. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RYAN M GRAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2611
Prosecution Insights