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
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).
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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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.
Claims 20-40 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory obviousness-type double patenting as being un-patentable over claims 1-16 of the U.S Patent No. 12190615. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they claiming the same subject matter. Furthermore claims 1-16 of the US Patent 12190615 include all the limitation recited in the claims of 20-40 of the instant application.
Regarding independent claims 20 and 33, claim 1 of the US Patent 12190615 recite the following limitations (representative claim 20):
A system/method for transmitting color and depth information (US Patent 12190615, claim 1, line1), comprising:
a camera configured to capture a color image frame of a scene (US Patent 12190615, claim 1 lines 3-4);
at least one computing device comprising a processor and memory, the at least one computing device programmed to: retrieve a depth dimension of the scene (US Patent 12190615, claim 1 lines 7-9);
retrieve a depth dimension of the scene (US Patent 12190615, claim 1, lines 5-6 disclose depth camera and US Patent 12190615, claim 1, lines 12-13 disclose generate a bounding box encapsulating the target, the bounding box having a depth dimension therefore it is obvious that claim 1 of the US Patent 12190616 include retrieve depth dimension)
identify a target in the scene (US Patent 12190615, claim 1 lines 10-11);
generate a bounding box encapsulating the target, the bounding box having a depth dimension (US Patent 12190615, claim 1 lines 12-13);
apply the bounding box to the color image frame to create a bound color image (US Patent 12190615, claim 1 lines 14-17);
generate a bound color depth image by linking and normalizing the depth dimension of the bounding box to a transferred color gamut by implementing a transfer function (US Patent 12190615, claim 1 lines 18-25 recites “converting the bound grayscale depth image into a bound color depth image by linking and normalizing the depth dimension of the bounding box to a transferred color gamut by implementing a transfer function” which obviously corresponds to generate a bound color depth image by linking and normalizing the depth dimension of the bounding box to a transferred color gamut by implementing a transfer function);
merge the bound color image and the bound color depth image together into a bound merged color image (US Patent 12190615, claim 1 lines 27-30 ); and
encode the bound merged color image into an image bitstring (US Patent 12190615, claim 1 lines 31-32).
The only difference between claims 20 and 33 is that claims 20 and 33 recite “wherein the transfer function applies the color gamut at identified points of the target within the bounding box”. However claim 1 of the US Patent 12190615 as stated above recites lines 18-25 “converting the bound grayscale depth image into a bound color depth image by linking and normalizing the depth dimension of the bounding box to a transferred color gamut by implementing a transfer function” and claim 1 of the US Patent 12190615 recites “comprising” i.e. claim 1 of the US Patent 12190615 is “open ended” claim, therefore it is obvious that claim 1 of the US Patent include “wherein the transfer function applies the color gamut at identified points of the target within the bounding box”. Therefore claims 20 and 33 are obvious in view of claim 1 of the US Patent 12190615.
Regarding dependent claims 21-32 and 34-40 of the instant application are also obvious in view of claims of 1-16 of the US Patent 12190615 and dependent claims
2-10 and 12-16 limitations of the US Patent 12190615 recite similar limitations as claims 21-32 and 34-40 of the instant application, therefore claims 21-32 and 34-40 are also obvious in view of claims 1-16 of the US Patent 12190615.
The above rejection can be overcome by filing terminal disclaimer.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 20-40 would be allowable over the prior art of record provided that claims 20-40 overcome the obviousness double patenting over claims 1-16 of the US 12190615 by filing the terminal disclaimer.
Communication
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ISHRAT I SHERALI whose telephone number is (571)272-7398. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00AM -5:00 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, 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.
ISHRAT I. SHERALI
Examiner
Art Unit 2667
/ISHRAT I SHERALI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2667
Prosecution Insights