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 submitted on September 3, 2025 have been considered by the examiner and made of record in the application file.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially createddoctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent theunjustified or improper timewise extension of the "right to exclude" granted by a patentand to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutoryobviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claimsare not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinctfrom the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipatedby, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir.1985); In re Van Omum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
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 a nonstatutorydouble patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown tobe commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result ofactivities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign aterminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 1, 5, 6, 9-12, and 18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory anticipation-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3, 5, 7-10, and 19 of U.S. Patent 11,386,707. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. More specifically, the present application is a broader version of 11,386,707.
Please see the following table for the claim 1 analysis (and similarly applied to claims 12 and 18):
18/924,537
11,386,707
Claim Interpretation
1.A system for detecting three-dimensional features in validating a face for facial recognition, comprising:
at least one processor configured to:
process a first image captured
at a first time to determine a first set of multiple key points of a face in the first image; process a second image captured
at a second time
to determine a second set of the multiple key points on the face in the second image; determine, based on a first location of each of a portion of the multiple key points in the first image and a second location of each of the portion of the multiple key points in the second image, a three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points in a three-dimensional space; and detect whether the face is a valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition at least in part on the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points.
1.A system for detecting three-dimensional features in validating a face for facial recognition, comprising: a first camera deployed at a first camera location and configured to capture images at a first position; a second camera deployed at a second camera location and configured to capture images at a second position;
at least one processor configured to:
process a first image captured by the first camera
at a first time to determine a first set of multiple key points of a face in the first image; process a second image captured by the second camera
at a second time, that is equal to or within a threshold time of the first time,
to determine a second set of the multiple key points on the face in the second image;
determine, based on a first location of each of a portion of the multiple key points in the first image and a second location of each of the portion of the multiple key points in the second image, a three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points in a three-dimensional space; and detect whether the face is a valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition at least in part by comparing the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points to three-dimensional locations of similar key points of a classifier.
As can be seen with the side-by-side comparison, the present application is a broader, but variant of 11,386,707. The main difference is that the present application recites does not recite cameras and 11,386,707 recites two cameras. In addition, the last limitation of detecting includes a comparing part in 11,386707 whereas the present application does not.
Please see the following table for the dependent claims:
18/447,991
11,386,707
Claim Interpretation
5. The system of claim 3, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to apply, before comparing at least the portion of the multiple key points to similar key points of the known face, at least one of an alignment or a scaling to the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points in the three-dimensional space.
3. The system of claim 2, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to apply, before comparing at least the portion of the multiple key points to similar key points of the classifier, at least one of an alignment or a scaling to the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points in the three-dimensional space.
No difference. This analysis is similarly applied to claim 16 (and 12 of 11/386,707).
6. The system of claim 1, further comprising an infrared pass filter for applying to at least one of the first image or the second image to filter infrared light for detecting whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition.
5. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to detect whether the face is a valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition at least in part by applying, to at least one of the first image or the second image, an infrared pass filter to filter out infrared light.
There is no substantial difference, the wording is rearranged. This analysis is similarly applied to claim 17 (and 14 of 11/386,707).
9. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to perform facial recognition based on detecting that the face is the valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition.
7. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to perform facial recognition based on detecting that the face is a valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition.
No difference.
10. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to detect whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition at least in part by determining a confidence level associated with the detecting.
8. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to detect whether the face is a valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition at least in part by determining a confidence level associated with the detecting.
No difference.
11. The system of claim 10, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to provide the confidence level to an access control system for restricting, based at least in part on the confidence level, access to an area.
9. The system of claim 8, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to provide the confidence level to an access control system for restricting, based at least in part on the confidence level, access to an area.
No difference.
Claims 1-6 and 9-18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory anticipation-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-6 and 9-18 of U.S. Patent 11,763,601. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. More specifically, the present application is a broader version of 11,763,601.
Please see the following table for the claim 1 analysis (and similarly applied to claims 12 and 18):
18/924,537
11,763,601
Claim Interpretation
1.A system for detecting three-dimensional features in validating a face for facial recognition, comprising:
at least one processor configured to: process a first image captured
at a first time to determine a first set of multiple key points of a face in the first image; process a second image captured at a second time to
determine a second set of the multiple key points on the face in the second image; determine, based on a first location of each of a portion of the multiple key points in the first image and a second location of each of the portion of the multiple key points in the second image, a three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points in a three-dimensional space; and detect whether the face is a valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition at least in part on the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points.
1.A system for detecting three-dimensional features in validating a face for facial recognition, comprising:
a first camera deployed at a first camera location and configured to capture images at a first position; a second camera deployed at a second camera location and configured to capture images at a second position; and
at least one processor configured to: process a first image captured by the first camera
at a first time to determine a first set of multiple key points of a face in the first image; process a second image captured by the second camera at a second time, that is equal to or within a threshold time of the first time, to
determine a second set of the multiple key points on the face in the second image; determine, based on a first location of each of a portion of the multiple key points in the first image and a second location of each of the portion of the multiple key points in the second image, a three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points in a three-dimensional space; and detect whether the face is a valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition at least in part on the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points.
As can be seen with the side-by-side comparison, the present application is a broader, but variant of 11,763,601. The main difference is that the present application does not recite cameras and 11,763,601 recites two cameras in addition to 11,763,601 reciting the additional element of process a second image captured by the second camera at a second time, that is equal to or within a threshold time of the first time. Therefore, 11,763,601 anticipates the present claim.
Please see the following table for the dependent claims:
18/924,537
11,763,601
Claim Interpretation
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to detect whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face based on using a classifier on the three-dimensional locations.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to detect whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face based on using a classifier on the three-dimensional locations.
No difference.
3. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to detect whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face based on comparing the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points to similar key points of a known face to determine a difference.
3. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to detect whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face based on comparing the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points to similar key points of a known face to determine a difference.
No difference.
4. The system of claim 3, wherein the at least one processor is configured to detect whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face based on providing the difference to a classifier that indicates, based on the difference, whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face.
4. The system of claim 3, wherein the at least one processor is configured to detect whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face based on providing the difference to a classifier that indicates, based on the difference, whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face.
No difference.
5. The system of claim 3, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to apply, before comparing at least the portion of the multiple key points to similar key points of the known face, at least one of an alignment or a scaling to the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points in the three-dimensional space.
5. The system of claim 3, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to apply, before comparing at least the portion of the multiple key points to similar key points of the known face, at least one of an alignment or a scaling to the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points in the three-dimensional space.
No difference.
6. The system of claim 1, further comprising an infrared pass filter for applying to at least one of the first image or the second image to filter infrared light for detecting whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition.
6. The system of claim 1, further comprising an infrared pass filter for applying to at least one of the first image or the second image to filter infrared light for detecting whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition.
No difference.
9. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to perform facial recognition based on detecting that the face is the valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition.
9. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to perform facial recognition based on detecting that the face is the valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition.
No difference.
10. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to detect whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition at least in part by determining a confidence level associated with the detecting.
10. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to detect whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition at least in part by determining a confidence level associated with the detecting.
No difference.
11. The system of claim 10, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to provide the confidence level to an access control system for restricting, based at least in part on the confidence level, access to an area.
11. The system of claim 10, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to provide the confidence level to an access control system for restricting, based at least in part on the confidence level, access to an area.
No difference.
13. The computer-implemented method of claim 12, wherein detecting whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face is based on using a classifier on the three-dimensional locations.
13. The computer-implemented method of claim 12, wherein detecting whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face is based on using a classifier on the three-dimensional locations.
No difference.
14. The computer-implemented method of claim 12, wherein detecting whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face is based on comparing the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points to similar key points of a known face to determine a difference.
14. The computer-implemented method of claim 12, wherein detecting whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face is based on comparing the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points to similar key points of a known face to determine a difference.
No difference.
15. The computer-implemented method of claim 14, wherein detecting whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face is based on providing the difference to a classifier that indicates, based on the difference, whether the face is the valid three- dimensional face.
15. The computer-implemented method of claim 14, wherein detecting whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face is based on providing the difference to a classifier that indicates, based on the difference, whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face.
No difference.
16. The computer-implemented method of claim 14, further comprising applying, before comparing at least the portion of the multiple key points to similar key points of the known face, at least one of an alignment or a scaling to the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points in the three-dimensional space.
16. The computer-implemented method of claim 14, further comprising applying, before comparing at least the portion of the multiple key points to similar key points of the known face, at least one of an alignment or a scaling to the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points in the three-dimensional space.
No difference.
17. The computer-implemented method of claim 12, further comprising applying, to at least one of the first image or the second image, an infrared pass filter to filter infrared light for detecting whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition.
17. The computer-implemented method of claim 12, further comprising applying, to at least one of the first image or the second image, an infrared pass filter to filter infrared light for detecting whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition.
No difference.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory anticipation-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent 12,154,378. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. More specifically, the present application is a broader version of 12,154,378.
Please see the following table for the claim 1 analysis (and similarly applied to claims 12 and 18):
18/447,991
12,154,378
Claim Interpretation
1.A system for detecting three-dimensional features in
validating a face for facial recognition, comprising:
at least one processor configured to: process a first image captured
at a first time to determine a first set of multiple key points of a face in the first image; process a second image captured at a second time
to determine a second set of the multiple key points on the face in the second image; determine, based on a first location of each of a portion of the multiple key points in the first image and a second location of each of the portion of the multiple key points in the second image, a three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points in a three-dimensional space; and detect whether the face is a valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition at least in part on the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points.
1.A system for detecting three-dimensional features in
validating a face for facial recognition, comprising: a camera; and
at least one processor configured to: process a first image captured by the camera
at a first time to determine a first set of multiple key points of a face in the first image; process a second image captured by the camera at a second time,
that is within a threshold time of the first time,
to determine a second set of the multiple key points on the face in the second image; determine, based on a first location of each of a portion of the multiple key points in the first image and a second location of each of the portion of the multiple key points in the second image, a three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points in a three-dimensional space; and detect whether the face is a valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition at least in part on the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points.
As can be seen with the side-by-side comparison, the present application is a broader, but variant of 12,154,378. The main difference is that the present application does not explicitly recite a camera. As a result, 12,154,378 anticipates the present application.
Please see the following table for the dependent claims:
18/447,991
12,154,378
Claim Interpretation
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to detect whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face based on using a classifier on the three-dimensional locations.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to detect whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face based on using a classifier on the three-dimensional locations.
No difference. This analysis is similarly applied to claims 13 and 19.
3. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to detect whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face based on comparing the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points to similar key points of a known face to determine a difference.
3. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to detect whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face based on comparing the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points to similar key points of a known face to determine a difference.
No difference. This analysis is similarly applied to claims 14 and 20.
4. The system of claim 3, wherein the at least one processor is configured to detect whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face based on providing the difference to a classifier that indicates, based on the difference, whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face.
4. The system of claim 3, wherein the at least one processor is configured to detect whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face based on providing the difference to a classifier that indicates, based on the difference, whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face.
No difference. This analysis is similarly applied to claim 15.
5. The system of claim 3, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to apply, before comparing at least the portion of the multiple key points to similar key points of the known face, at least one of an alignment or a scaling to the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points in the three-dimensional space.
5. The system of claim 3, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to apply, before comparing at least the portion of the multiple key points to similar key points of the known face, at least one of an alignment or a scaling to the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points in the three-dimensional space.
No difference. This analysis is similarly applied to claim 16.
6. The system of claim 1, further comprising an infrared pass filter for applying to at least one of the first image or the second image to filter infrared light for detecting whether the face is the valid three- dimensional face for facial recognition.
6. The system of claim 1, further comprising an infrared pass filter for applying to at least one of the first image or the second image to filter infrared light for detecting whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition.
No difference. This analysis is similarly applied to claim 17.
7. The system of claim 1,
wherein the first image and the second image are captured in a stream of images in a video.
7. The system of claim 1, wherein the camera is a video camera configured to capture the first image and the second image in a stream of images in a video.
The only difference is the recitation of “the camera is a video camera” in 12,154,378. Therefore, 12,154,378 is a broader version and thus anticipates the claim.
8. The system of claim 1, wherein the second image is captured
based on detecting movement after capturing the first image.
8. The system of claim 1, wherein the second image is captured by the camera
based on detecting movement after capturing the first image.
The only difference is the recitation of the camera in 12,154,378. Therefore, 12,154,378 is a broader version and thus anticipates the claim.
9. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to perform facial recognition based on detecting that the face is the valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition.
9. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to perform facial recognition based on detecting that the face is the valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition.
No difference.
10. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to detect whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition at least in part by determining a confidence level associated with the detecting.
10. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to detect whether the face is the valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition at least in part by determining a confidence level associated with the detecting.
No difference.
11. The system of claim 10, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to provide the confidence level to an access control system for restricting, based at least in part on the confidence level, access to an area.
11. The system of claim 10, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to provide the confidence level to an access control system for restricting, based at least in part on the confidence level, access to an area.
No difference.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are allowed over the prior art (applicants are reminded of the Double Patenting Rejection above). More specifically, Baldwin, Castleman, the other cited references, and a thorough search in the art fail to disclose or suggest process a first image captured at a first time to determine a first set of multiple key points of a face in the first image; process a second image captured at a second time to determine a second set of the multiple key points on the face in the second image; determine, based on a first location of each of a portion of the multiple key points in the first image and a second location of each of the portion of the multiple key points in the second image, a three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points in a three-dimensional space; and detect whether the face is a valid three-dimensional face for facial recognition at least in part on the three-dimensional location of at least the portion of the multiple key points.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
References Cited But Not Relied Upon
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Venkataraman (US PGPUB 2019/0164341 A1) – Is directed to a 3D facial modeling system includes a plurality of cameras configured to capture images from different viewpoints, a processor, and a memory containing a 3D facial modeling application and parameters defining a face detector, wherein the 3D facial modeling application directs the processor to obtain a plurality of images of a face captured from different viewpoints using the plurality of cameras, locate a face within each of the plurality of images using the face detector, wherein the face detector labels key feature points on the located face within each of the plurality of images, determine disparity between corresponding key feature points of located faces within the plurality of images, and generate a 3D model of the face using the depth of the key feature points.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER M BRANDT whose telephone number is (571)270-1098. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00-5:00.
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, Anthony Addy can be reached at 571-272-7795. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER M BRANDT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645 July 10, 2026
Prosecution Insights