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 Preliminary Amendment
The Preliminary Amendment filed on 12/04/2024 has been entered.
Response to Preliminary Remarks
Applicant's Preliminary Remarks filed 12/04/2024 concerning the Preliminary Amendment have been considered and the amendment has been entered.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Claims 21-40 have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) to not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) claim interpretation.
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 § 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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 21-27, 29-37, 39, and 40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2, 7, 9, and 10 of U.S. Patent No. US 12,175,644 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are broader versions of the patented claims. Refer to the below table which compares these pending claims with the patented claims.
Claims 21-27, 29-37, 39, and 40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2, 6, 8, and 9 of U.S. Patent No. US 11,200,646 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are broader versions of the patented claims. Refer to the below table which compares these pending claims with the patented claims.
Claims 28 and 38 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9/1 + 1 + 2 of U.S. Patent No. US 12,175,644 B2 in view of Danziger, US Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0208187. Danziger in paragraph [0064] states:
[0064] In FIG. 6, two projectors 54U and 54D are rigidly attached (or may alternatively be implemented as a single projector having a sufficiently large aperture) and project a calibration image, typically collimated at infinity. The image from 54U is received by camera 44L and is “injected” into projector 40L. In this case, camera 56 receives simultaneously through optical element 42L a superposition of the directly viewed image projected by 54D and the image projected by projector 40L. The differences between the two images correspond to the transformation data between projector 40L and camera 44L. Most preferably, an automated alignment process may adjust alignment of the image generated by projector 40L until a sharp (precisely overlaid) image is received by camera 56, although a manually-controlled adjustment process using a suitable graphic user interface (not shown) is also possible. This adjustment need not actually be implemented in the device firmware at this stage, since the final alignment will depend also upon the binocular alignment. To facilitate manual or automated alignment, the alignment image may be an X crosshair or the like, and for clarity of differentiation during the alignment process, the color of the image from 40L may be changed, or the image may be made to blink. The two visually-distinguished X crosshairs then need to be brought into alignment.
Claims 28 and 38 are as follows:
28. (New) The computer-implemented method of claim 27, wherein the first determined transformation and the second determined transformation is determined through use of a binocular transformation algorithm.
38. (New) The non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 37, wherein the first determined transformation and the second determined transformation is determined through use of a binocular transformation algorithm.
The patented claims are silent as to pending claims 28 and 38 claimed “wherein the first determined transformation and the second determined transformation is determined through use of a binocular transformation algorithm”. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of Danziger to claim “wherein the first determined transformation and the second determined transformation is determined through use of a binocular transformation algorithm” because this transformation utilized in the alignment process forms “a sharp (precisely overlaid) image”, refer to Danziger’s paragraph [0064].
Claims 28 and 38 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 8/1 + 1 + 2 of U.S. Patent No. US 11,200,646 B2 in view of Danziger, US Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0208187. Danziger in paragraph [0064] states:
[0064] In FIG. 6, two projectors 54U and 54D are rigidly attached (or may alternatively be implemented as a single projector having a sufficiently large aperture) and project a calibration image, typically collimated at infinity. The image from 54U is received by camera 44L and is “injected” into projector 40L. In this case, camera 56 receives simultaneously through optical element 42L a superposition of the directly viewed image projected by 54D and the image projected by projector 40L. The differences between the two images correspond to the transformation data between projector 40L and camera 44L. Most preferably, an automated alignment process may adjust alignment of the image generated by projector 40L until a sharp (precisely overlaid) image is received by camera 56, although a manually-controlled adjustment process using a suitable graphic user interface (not shown) is also possible. This adjustment need not actually be implemented in the device firmware at this stage, since the final alignment will depend also upon the binocular alignment. To facilitate manual or automated alignment, the alignment image may be an X crosshair or the like, and for clarity of differentiation during the alignment process, the color of the image from 40L may be changed, or the image may be made to blink. The two visually-distinguished X crosshairs then need to be brought into alignment.
Claims 28 and 38 are as follows:
28. (New) The computer-implemented method of claim 27, wherein the first determined transformation and the second determined transformation is determined through use of a binocular transformation algorithm.
38. (New) The non-transitory, computer-readable medium of claim 37, wherein the first determined transformation and the second determined transformation is determined through use of a binocular transformation algorithm.
The patented claims are silent as to pending claims 28 and 38 claimed “wherein the first determined transformation and the second determined transformation is determined through use of a binocular transformation algorithm”. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of Danziger to claim “wherein the first determined transformation and the second determined transformation is determined through use of a binocular transformation algorithm” because this transformation utilized in the alignment process forms “a sharp (precisely overlaid) image”, refer to Danziger’s paragraph [0064].
The following side by side table corresponds this application’s claims to the patented claims.
This app’s method claims filed on 12/04/2024 claim numbers
This app’s non-transitory, computer-readable medium claims filed on 12/04/2024 claim numbers
US 12,175,644 B2 claim numbers
US 11,200,646 B2 claim numbers
21
31
9/1 + 1
8/1 + 1
22
32
7
6
23
33
10
9
24
34
10
9
25
35
2
2
26
36
2
2
27
37
9/1 + 1
8/1 + 1
28
38
9/1 + 1 + 2
8/1 + 1 + 2
29
39
2 + 10
1 + 8
30
40
2
2
Pending method claims 21-30 correspond to non-transitory, computer-readable medium claims 31-40 and claim the same identical steps. It would have been obvious to draft method claims 21-30 as non-transitory computer-readable medium claims 31-40 to broaden the claimed scope.
The following side by side table corresponds this application’s method claims to the patented claims.
This app’s method claims filed on 12/04/2024
21. (New) A computer-implemented method comprising:
receiving data of a first target image associated with an undeformed state of a first eyepiece of a head-mounted display device;
receiving data of a second target image associated with an undeformed state of a second eyepiece of the head-mounted display device;
receiving data of a first captured image that is associated with a deformed state of the first eyepiece;
receiving data of a second captured image that is associated with a deformed state of the second eyepiece;
determining, as a first determined transformation, a first transformation, wherein the first transformation maps the first captured image to the first target image; and
determining, as a second determined transformation, a second transformation, wherein the second transformation maps the second captured image to the second target image.
22. (New) The computer-implemented method of claim 21, comprising:
receiving, by the first eyepiece and the second eyepiece, a trigger signal, wherein determining the first transformation and the second transformation is responsive to receiving the trigger signal.
23. (New) The computer-implemented method of claim 21, wherein:
the first target image and the second target image are identical; or
the first target image and the second target image are different.
24. (New) The computer-implemented method of claim 23, wherein:
the first target image and the second target image are dependent upon each other.
25. (New) The computer-implemented method of claim 21, wherein:
the first eyepiece comprises a first projector that is optically coupled to the first eyepiece and
the second eyepiece comprises a second projector that is optically coupled to the second eyepiece.
26. (New) The computer-implemented method of claim 25, comprising:
transmitting the data of the first target image to the first projector; and
transmitting the data of the second target image to the second projector.
27. (New) The computer-implemented method of claim 26, wherein:
the first captured image is received by a first imaging sensor that is optically coupled to the first projector; and
the second captured image is received by a second imaging sensor that is optically coupled to the second projector.
28. (New) The computer-implemented method of claim 27, wherein the first determined transformation and the second determined transformation is determined through use of a binocular transformation algorithm.
29. (New) The computer-implemented method of claim 27, comprising:
applying the first transformation to a first subsequent image, as a first transformed subsequent image, for viewing on the first eyepiece; and
applying the second transformation to a second subsequent image, as a second transformed subsequent image, for viewing on the second eyepiece.
30. (New) The computer-implemented method of claim 29, comprising:
transmitting the first transformed subsequent image to the first projector; and
transmitting the second transformed subsequent image to the second projector.
US 12,175,644 B2 claims
1. A computer-implemented method comprising:
receiving data of a first target image associated with an undeformed state of a first eyepiece of a head-mounted display device, the first eyepiece comprising a first projector that is optically coupled to the first eyepiece;
transmitting the data of the first target image to the first projector;
receiving data of a first captured image that is associated with a deformed state of the first eyepiece, wherein the first captured image is received by a first imaging sensor that is optically coupled to the first projector; and
determining a first transformation, wherein the first transformation maps the first captured image to the first target image.
9. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving data of a second target image associated with an undeformed state of a second eyepiece of the head-mounted display device, the second eyepiece comprising a second projector that is optically coupled to the second eyepiece;
Claimed in claim 1 above as:
“receiving data of a first captured image that is associated with a deformed state of the first eyepiece, wherein the first captured image is received by a first imaging sensor that is optically coupled to the first projector; and”.
receiving data of a second captured image associated with deformed state of the second eyepiece, wherein the second captured image is received by a second imaging sensor optically coupled to a second projector of the second eyepiece, the second imaging sensor being part of the head-mounted display device; and
Claimed above in claim 1 as:
“determining a first transformation, wherein the first transformation maps the first captured image to the first target image.”.
Claim 9 continued.
determining a second transformation, wherein the second transformation maps the second captured image to the second target image.
7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving a trigger signal, wherein determining the first transformation is responsive to receiving the trigger signal.
Obvious to claim “second transformation is responsive to receiving the trigger signal” in view of above claimed first eyepiece and second eyepiece.
10. The computer-implemented method of claim 9, wherein the first transformation is dependent on the second transformation and wherein the second transformation aligns subsequent images for viewing on the second eyepiece with subsequent images for viewing on the first eyepiece.
2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising:
transmitting the transformed subsequent image to
the first projector optically coupled to the first eyepiece.
Obvious to claim in view of above claimed first eyepiece and second eyepiece.
2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising:
transmitting the transformed subsequent image to the first projector optically coupled to the first eyepiece.
Obvious to claim in view of above claimed first eyepiece and second eyepiece.
Claimed above in claim 1 as:
“wherein the first captured image is received by a first imaging sensor that is optically coupled to the first projector;”.
Claimed above in claim 9 as:
“wherein the second captured image is received by a second imaging sensor optically coupled to a second projector of the second eyepiece,”.
Obvious to claim in view of Danzinger, refer to above obvious double patenting rejection.
2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising:
transmitting the transformed subsequent image to the first projector optically coupled to the first eyepiece.
10. The computer-implemented method of claim 9, wherein the first transformation is dependent on the second transformation and wherein the second transformation aligns subsequent images for viewing on the second eyepiece with subsequent images for viewing on the first eyepiece.
2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising:
transmitting the transformed subsequent image to the first projector optically coupled to the first eyepiece.
Obvious to claim in view of above claimed first eyepiece and second eyepiece.
US 11,200,646 B2 claims
1. A computer-implemented method comprising:
transmitting data of a first target image that is associated with an undeformed state of a first eyepiece of a head-mounted display device to a first projector that is optically coupled to the first eyepiece;
capturing the data of the first target image that is associated with the undeformed state of the first eyepiece of the head-mounted display device by a first imaging sensor that is optically coupled to the first projector and that is part of the head-mounted display device;
receiving data of a first captured image that is associated with deformed state of the first eyepiece of the head-mounted display device, the first captured image representing a transformed state of the first target image and being received by the first imaging sensor that is optically coupled to the first projector of the first eyepiece;
determining a first transformation that maps the first captured image to the first target image; and
applying the first transformation to a subsequent image for viewing on the first eyepiece of the head-mounted display device.
8. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving data of a second target image associated with an undeformed state of a second eyepiece of the head-mounted display device, the second eyepiece comprising a second projector that is optically coupled to the second eyepiece;
Claimed in claim 1 above as:
“receiving data of a first captured image that is associated with deformed state of the first eyepiece of the head-mounted display device, the first captured image representing a transformed state of the first target image and being received by the first imaging sensor that is optically coupled to the first projector of the first eyepiece;”.
receiving data of a second captured image associated with deformed state of the second eyepiece, the second captured image representing a transformed state of the second target image and is received by a second imaging sensor optically coupled to a second projector of the second eyepiece, the second imaging sensor being part of the head-mounted display device;
Claimed above in claim 1 as:
“determining a first transformation that maps the first captured image to the first target image; and”.
Claim 8 continued.
determining a second transformation that maps the second captured image to the second target image; and
applying the second transformation to a subsequent image for viewing on the second eyepiece of the head-mounted display device.
6. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving a trigger signal, wherein determining the first transformation is responsive to receiving the trigger signal.
Obvious to claim “second transformation is responsive to receiving the trigger signal” in view of above claimed first eyepiece and second eyepiece.
9. The computer-implemented method of claim 8, wherein the first transformation is dependent on the second transformation and wherein the second transformation aligns subsequent images for viewing on the second eyepiece with subsequent images for viewing on the first eyepiece.
2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising:
transmitting the transformed subsequent image to
the first projector optically coupled to the first eyepiece.
Obvious to claim in view of above claimed first eyepiece and second eyepiece.
2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising:
transmitting the transformed subsequent image to the first projector optically coupled to the first eyepiece.
Obvious to claim in view of above claimed first eyepiece and second eyepiece.
Claimed above in claim 1 as:
“being received by the first imaging sensor that is optically coupled to the first projector of the first eyepiece;”
Claimed above in claim 8 as:
“is received by a second imaging sensor optically coupled to a second projector of the second eyepiece,”.
Obvious to claim in view of Danzinger, refer to above obvious double patenting rejection.
Claimed above in claim 1 as:
“applying the first transformation to a subsequent image for viewing on the first eyepiece of the head-mounted display device.”.
Claimed above in claim 8 as:
“applying the second transformation to a subsequent image for viewing on the second eyepiece of the head-mounted display device.”.
2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising:
transmitting the transformed subsequent image to the first projector optically coupled to the first eyepiece.
Obvious to claim in view of above claimed first eyepiece and second eyepiece.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 21-40 would be allowable if a proper terminal disclaimer is filed addressing the nonstatutory double patenting rejection rejection(s) set forth in this Office action.
Refer to the Reasons For Allowance in the Notice of Allowability in parent US Patent Application No. 18/454,912 mailed on 09/11/2024 which became the above discussed US 12,175,644 B2 which Reasons For Allowance is hereby incorporated by reference. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record fails to teach or suggest in the context of each of independent claims 21 and 31:
receiving data of a first target image associated with an undeformed state of a first eyepiece of a head-mounted display device;
receiving data of a second target image associated with an undeformed state of a second eyepiece of the head-mounted display device;
receiving data of a first captured image that is associated with a deformed state of the first eyepiece;
receiving data of a second captured image that is associated with a deformed state of the second eyepiece;
determining, as a first determined transformation, a first transformation, wherein the first transformation maps the first captured image to the first target image; and
determining, as a second determined transformation, a second transformation, wherein the second transformation maps the second captured image to the second target image.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFERY A BRIER whose telephone number is (571)272-7656. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri from 8:30am-3:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Xiao M Wu, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-7761. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
JEFFERY A. BRIER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2613
/JEFFERY A BRIER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2613
Prosecution Insights