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
Applicant’s arguments filed September 3, 2026, with respect to how the newly amended claim features of claim 1 differ from the prior art cited in the last office action have been fully considered. These arguments are found to be persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in this office action using an additional reference Pub No. US 20200272894 A1 (Dan).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-24 are allowed.
Claims 6 and 13 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 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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-2 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dan (Pub No. US 20200272894 A1) and Couture (Pub No. US 20080011941 A1), in further view of NPL Video Titled “How To Edit Images and Create & Share an Infrared Camera Report from the Fluke Connect™ App”, available for viewing at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Hih-9qJ6pI; published 2018, herein referred to as “Fluke_Video”
As per claim 1, Dan teaches the claimed:
A system for providing multispectral vision, the system comprising:
a transmitting device configured to capture multispectral information across a plurality of spectral bands including visible light and at least one non-visible spectral band (Dan [0020] “According to the illustrated example, data server 110 receives a request for information relating to multi-spectral reflectance data from client system 120. In response, data server 110 retrieves multi-spectral reflectance data from data provider server 130. The retrieved reflectance data may include data representing several independent frequency bands, e.g., Red, Green, Blue, near-infrared, shortwave, infrared.”), and wirelessly distribute the multispectral information over a specific area to a plurality of receiving devices separate from the transmitting device (Dan [0046] “As shown, data server 710 may be implemented as a.cloud service providing agricultural data. Data server 710 may access services of other cloud-based or on-premise data servers 740, 750 and 760. In particular, data servers 740 and 750 may provide multi-spectral reflectance data and data server 760 may provide weather data, each of which may be used as described above to generate multi-spectral reflectance data. Data server 710 may store data associated with each of data providers 740, 750 and 760 which specifies the type, granularity, and coverage of data provided by each data provider.”
In this passage, the data server 710 corresponds to the transmitting device. In figure 7, the client devices 730, 732, and 734 correspond to the plurality of receiving devices, which are separate from the data server 710 (transmitting device).
This is further explained in Dan [0047] and in reference to figure 8: “FIG. 8 illustrates process 800 which may be executed by data server 710 in response to such a request. Initially, a request for multi-spectral reflectance data is received at S810. The request may be received from one of client devices 730, 732 and 734.”
Please further see Dan [0045] in reference to figure 7: “FIG. 7 illustrates distributed system 700 according to some embodiments. System 700 may be cloud-based and the various components thereof may be implemented using on-demand virtual machines, virtual servers and cloud storage instances”
In this passage, as well as the previously mentioned paragraph [0046], Dan teaches that the server 710 wirelessly distributes and transmits the multi-spectral data over a specific area to the client devices 730, 732, 734
a receiving device of a plurality of receiving devices, the receiving device comprising (Dan [0047] “The request may be received from one of client devices 730, 732 and 734. In one example, a user operates device 730 to request agricultural data from an agricultural data service executing on data server 710. The request may comprise a Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) request issued from a Web Browser executing on client device 730 and specifying an Internet Protocol address of a Web Server associated with data server 710”)
a sensor configured to receive the distributed multispectral information (Since the server 710 is wireless, each of the receivers 730, 732 and 734 requires a sensor to be able to receive data from the server 710.
Dan in paragraph [0048] teaches an example of this: “The request may comprise a request for specific reflectance data associated with a specific location, specific time period and a particular sensor (e.g., satellite) network”);
Dan alone does not explicitly teach the remaining claim limitations.
However, Dan in combination with Couture teaches the claimed:
a processor configured to process the received multispectral information in accordance with at least one user-provided configuration setting (Couture [0024] “As used herein, the term "detector" refers to any one or more elements that receives an image in the visible, infrared or other part of optical spectrum and manipulates and/or transforms this image by amplifying its intensity or converting it to the visible spectrum. ” ); and
a display configured to present the translated visible spectral band information in combination with received visible light information by overlaying the translated information on the visible light information (Couture claim 21 “A method of displaying images, comprising acquiring a multi-spectral image through a common aperture; converting a short wave infrared (SWIR) portion of the acquired image into the visible waveband, thereby generating a converted image; displaying the converted image on a first display; fusing the converted image with at least one additional portion of the acquired image; and displaying the fused image on a second display”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to translate a spectral band as taught by Couture with the system of Dan in order to convert and display a non-visible spectral band into information in a visible spectral band.
Dan and Couture alone do not explicitly teach the remaining claim limitations.
However, Dan and Couture in combination with Fluke_Video teaches the claimed:
received via a user interface of the receiving device (Please see in Fluke_Video from 0:16 to 0:38. In particular, the video shows that a user interface is used to select a color palette (e.g. grayscale 1 or 2, blue red, high contrast, hot metal, etc.) for displaying the infrared wavelengths in different spectrums; the video shows that the blue red color palette includes red/green hues as well as the shifting of colors when different palettes are selected).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the interface as taught by Fluke_Video with the system of Dan as modified by Couture in order to include a user interface in the receiving device. Doing so allows for an improved user experience and provides potentially new features where the user may customize the user interface as discussed later on.
As per claim 2, Dan teaches the claimed:
The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one non-visible spectral band comprises infrared, ultraviolet, X-ray, or microwave radiation (Dan [0020] “According to the illustrated example, data server 110 receives a request for information relating to multi-spectral reflectance data from client system 120. In response, data server 110 retrieves multi-spectral reflectance data from data provider server 130. The retrieved reflectance data may include data representing several independent frequency bands, e.g., Red, Green, Blue, near-infrared, shortwave, infrared.”) and the transmitting device is configured to modulate and encode the captured multispectral information prior to distribution (Dan shows a cloud based architecture where the captured multispectral information is stored on the server 710 prior to distribution. Dan in figure 2 shows that the data is modulated and encoded using trained network prior to distribution. The modulation and encoding includes applying a smoothing algorithm at step S230 and training the network at step S250. Also, please see Dan in [0047] “FIG. 8 illustrates process 800 which may be executed by data server 710 in response to such a request. Initially, a request for multi-spectral reflectance data is received at S810. The request may be received from one of client devices 730, 732 and 734” and Dan in [0050] “At S830, multi-spectral reflectance data needed to fulfill the request is acquired from the determined reflectance data provider … Data server 710 may execute program code implementing the trained network to generate the processed multi-spectral reflectance data at S860. The code may implement convolution kernels or other data structures exported by system 600 after training of network 610. “)
As per claim 8, this claim is similar in scope to limitations recited in claim 1, and thus are rejected under the same rationale.
As per claim 9, this claim is similar in scope to limitations recited in claim 2, and thus are rejected under the same rationale.
Claims 3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dan in view of Couture and Fluke_Video in further view of Smeets (Pub No. US 20140233082 A1).
As per claim 3, Dan, Couture, and Fluke_Video alone do not explicitly teach the claimed limitations.
However, Dan, Couture, and Fluke_Video in combination with Smeets teaches the claimed:
The system of claim 1, wherein the receiving device, processor, and display are integrated into an augmented reality headset worn by a user (Smeets [0076] “In an example the present invention relates to a multi spectrum vision aid further comprising one or more suspension means, such as a frame. Preferably the frame is of low weight and fits on a human head, such as glasses do”
In this passage, Smeets teaches the multi-spectrum vision aid being able to fit on a human head, which corresponds to the claimed headset).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the interface as taught by Smeets with the system of Dan as modified by Couture and Fluke_Video in order to incorporate a headset as the receiving device and display. Doing so allows for an improved user experience design where the user may have a smooth and fully immersed experience.
As per claim 10, this claim is similar in scope to limitations recited in claim 3, and thus are rejected under the same rationale.
Claims 4 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dan, Couture, and Fluke_Video, in further view of Yao (Pub No. US 20180153408 A1).
As per claim 4, Dan, Couture, and Fluke_Video alone do not explicitly teach the claimed limitations.
However, Dan, Couture, and Fluke_Video in combination with Yao teaches the claimed:
The system of claim 1, wherein the user-provided configuration settings comprise controls for adjusting color, brightness, saturation, contrast, or flickering rate of the translated visible spectral band information presented on the display (Yao [0011 – 0012] “The sequence can comprise: one or more of a user-configured sequence; and simultaneous emission of light from two or more of the at least one blue LED, the at least one green LED, the at least one red LED. Respective relative intensity of each of the at least one blue LED, the at least one green LED, the at least one red LED can be adjusted to change one or more of: color temperature of the visible white light; and color rendering of the respective images at the display device”
In this passage, adjusting the color temperature of the visible white light and color rendering are settings that the user can configure via the sequence. These adjustments to the respective images corresponds to the claimed “adjusting color, brightness, saturation, contrast, or flickering rate” of the image shown on the display).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention of allowing the user to create a sequence as taught by Yao with the system of Dan as modified by Couture and Fluke_Video in order to allow the user to create a setting to adjust the visible spectral band information presented on the display. Doing so allows a streamlined filtering process for multiple images using the same setting.
As per claim 11, this claim is similar in scope to limitations recited in claim 4, and thus are rejected under the same rationale.
Claims 5, 7, 12, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dan in view of Couture, and Fluke_Video and in further view of Guha et al. (Pub No. US 20200396379 A1).
As per claim 5, Dan, Couture, and Fluke_Video alone do not explicitly teach the claimed limitations.
However, Dan, Couture, in combination with Fluke_Video teaches the claimed:
receiving via a user interface of the receiving device a user-provided configuration setting specifying mapping of infrared wavelengths to hues in a red/green visible spectrum; and processing infrared data from the received multispectral information by shifting different infrared wavelengths into corresponding hues in the red/green visible spectrum according to the user-provided configuration setting (Please see in Fluke_Video from 0:16 to 0:38. In particular, the video shows that a user interface is used to select a color palette (e.g. grayscale 1 or 2, blue red, high contrast, hot metal, etc.) for displaying the infrared wavelengths in different spectrums; the video shows that the blue red color palette includes red/green hues as well as the shifting of colors when different palettes are selected).
However, Dan, Couture, and Fluke_Video in combination with Guha and teaches the claimed:
wherein the display is configured to present the infrared data translated into the red/green hues overlaid on imagery derived from the received visible light information.
(The Fluke_Video from 0:16 to 0:38 shows the infrared data being displayed with red/green hues, however, they are not 100% clear whether the hues themselves are overlaid. Guha teaches of overlaying the IR data per se in [0017]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the interface as taught by Fluke_Video with the system of Dan as modified by Couture in order to allow the user to better customize the display of the infrared data.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the overlay taught by Guha with the system of Dan as modified by Couture and Fluke_Video because image overlay is a common and effective technique to combine image pixel data together for display.
As per claim 7, the reasons and rationale for the rejection of claim 5 is incorporated herein. In particular, the Fluke_Video from 0:16 to 0:38 maps and shifts non-visible bands (bands of infrared light) into different colors in the visible spectrum for display using the interface (to different visible color palettes. Thus, claim 7 is rejected for similar reasons as claim 5.
As per claims 12 and 14, these claims are similar in scope to limitations recited in claims 5 and 7, respectively, and thus are rejected under the same rationale.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 SARAH Y. LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-8374. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-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, Daniel F. Hajnik can be reached at (571) 272-7642. 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.
SARAH Y. LEE
Examiner
Art Unit 2616
/DANIEL F HAJNIK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2616
Prosecution Insights