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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Moule, et al. (US 20170039756 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Moule discloses A three-dimensional scanning system, configured to obtain three-dimensional data of a scanned object, wherein the three-dimensional scanning system comprises:
a scanner, comprising a projection module (spec [0062]; “control the projector 207 to sequentially project one or more structured light patterns configured to uniquely illuminate different portions of three-dimensional environment 215;”) and a collecting module, (spec [0062]; “acquire one or more respective images from each of the at least two cameras 214”) wherein the projection module is configured to project scanning light to the scanned object, (spec [0062]; “control the projector 207 to sequentially project one or more structured light patterns configured to uniquely illuminate different portions of three-dimensional environment 215;”) and the collecting module comprises a first collecting apparatus and a second collecting apparatus, (spec [0062]; “acquire one or more respective images from each of the at least two cameras 214”) the first collecting apparatus is configured to obtain three-dimensional data of features of a surface of the scanned object, (spec [0062]; “generate a cloud of points representing the three-dimensional environment 215 using the two-dimensional mapping and given positions of the at least two cameras 214 relative to the three-dimensional environment 215.”) the second collecting apparatus is configured to obtain three-dimensional point cloud data of the surface of the scanned object, (spec [0062]; “generate a cloud of points representing the three-dimensional environment 215 using the two-dimensional mapping and given positions of the at least two cameras 214 relative to the three-dimensional environment 215.”) and the three-dimensional data of the features comprises: three-dimensional data of mark points and three-dimensional data of key features, or three-dimensional data of mark points, or three-dimensional data of key features. (specs [0059] and [0122]; “provided that cameras 214 have sufficient stereo separation to generate accurate stereo data. In general, a substantial portion of least object 216 (and/or other three-dimensional features of environment 215) is in a field of view of each of cameras,” and “Alternatively, projector pose can be determined by manually by dragging points manually onto an object, back calculation is used to determine where projector is located.”)
Regarding claim 16, Moule discloses A three-dimensional scanning method, configured to obtain three-dimensional data of a scanned object and applied to the three-dimensional scanning system as claimed in claim 1, the three-dimensional scanning method comprising:
projecting a reconstruction pattern to the scanned object; (spec [0062]; “to sequentially project one or more structured light patterns configured to uniquely illuminate different portions of three-dimensional environment 215;”)
collecting image information reflected by the scanned object, wherein the image information is obtained based on the reconstruction pattern, (spec [0062]; “each of the one or more respective images correlated with a given respective structured light pattern;”) the image information is used for obtaining the three-dimensional point cloud data of the scanned object. (spec [0062]; “generate a cloud of points representing the three-dimensional environment 215 using the two-dimensional mapping and given positions of the at least two cameras 214 relative to the three-dimensional environment 215.”)
Regarding claim 18, Moule discloses The dimensional scanning method as claimed in claim 16, wherein collecting the image information based on the reconstruction pattern, which is reflected by the scanned object, and the image information is configured to obtain the three-dimensional point cloud data of the scanned object comprises:
collecting the feature image projected to the scanned object, (spec [0062]; “acquire one or more respective images from each of the at least two cameras 214”) and obtain the three-dimensional data of key features projected to the surface of the scanned object; (spec [0062]; “generate a cloud of points representing the three-dimensional environment 215 using the two-dimensional mapping and given positions of the at least two cameras 214 relative to the three-dimensional environment 215.”)
collecting the scanning light of the second waveband reflected by the scanned object, (spec [0062]; “each of the one or more respective images correlated with a given respective structured light pattern;”) and obtaining dense three-dimensional point cloud data of the surface of the scanned object. (specs [0062] and [0099]; “generate a cloud of points representing the three-dimensional environment 215 using the two-dimensional mapping and given positions of the at least two cameras 214 relative to the three-dimensional environment 215.” and “Furthermore, interpolation, and filtering techniques can be used to respectively increase the density of cloud of points M.sub.xyz,”)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moule, et al. (US 20170039756 A1) in view of Komeichi, et al. (US 20180087901 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Moule teaches The three-dimensional scanning system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first collecting apparatus is arranged for collecting rough image information of the surface of the scanned object within a first scanning range, (spec [0099]; “when the structured light patterns of FIG. 8 are used, the cloud of points M.sub.xyz will be less dense than as depicted in FIG. 12.”) the second collecting apparatus is arranged for collecting precise image information based on a reconstructed pattern reflected by the scanned object within a second scanning range, (spec [0099]; “Furthermore, interpolation, and filtering techniques can be used to respectively increase the density of cloud of points M.sub.xyz, and filter out points that are outside the boundaries of object 216.”) the rough image information is configured to determine three-dimensional data of mark points, (spec [0099]; “when the structured light patterns of FIG. 8 are used, the cloud of points M.sub.xyz will be less dense than as depicted in FIG. 12.”) the precise image information is configured to determine point cloud data, (spec [0099]; “Furthermore, interpolation, and filtering techniques can be used to respectively increase the density of cloud of points M.sub.xyz, and filter out points that are outside the boundaries of object 216.”)
However, Moule fails to teach and a plurality of pieces of the point cloud data are spliced based on the three-dimensional data of the mark points to obtain complete three-dimensional data of the scanned object.
Komeichi teaches and a plurality of pieces of the point cloud data are spliced based on the three-dimensional data of the mark points to obtain complete three-dimensional data of the scanned object. (spec [0077]; “Finally, a registration program is performed by the control arithmetic unit 15, and a combination (a registration) processing of the point cloud data A and the point cloud data B is performed. It is to be noted that the combination processing of the point cloud data A and the point cloud data B may be performed by a PC provided additionally.”)
It would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine Moule’s apparatus with Komeichi’s splicing in order to increase the accuracy of the appearance of virtual object.
Regarding claim 4, Moule in view of Komeichi teaches The three-dimensional scanning system as claimed in claim 2, wherein the second scanning range is smaller than the first scanning range. (spec [0099]; “Furthermore, interpolation, and filtering techniques can be used to respectively increase the density of cloud of points M.sub.xyz, and filter out points that are outside the boundaries of object 216.”)
Claims 3 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moule, et al. (US 20170039756 A1) in view of Zuta, et al. (US 20200184663 A1) and Gordon (US 20160050401 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Moule teaches The three-dimensional scanning system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the scanner is configured to be movable relative to the scanned object, (spec [0101]; “device 201 determines a location, an orientation and lens characteristics of projector 207 relative to three-dimensional environment 215,”) the projection module is configured to emit scanning light of a second waveband to the surface of the scanned object, (spec [0062]; “control the projector 207 to sequentially project one or more structured light patterns configured to uniquely illuminate different portions of three-dimensional environment 215;”) the feature image comprises a plurality of key features, (spec [0059]; “and further a projection area of projector 207 includes a substantial portion of at least object 216 (and/or the other three-dimensional features of environment 215).”) the first collecting apparatus is configured to collect the feature image projected to the scanned object, (spec [0062]; “each of the one or more respective images correlated with a given respective structured light pattern;”) and obtain the three-dimensional data of the key features projected to the surface of the scanned object, (spec [0062]; “generate a cloud of points representing the three-dimensional environment 215 using the two-dimensional mapping and given positions of the at least two cameras 214 relative to the three-dimensional environment 215.”) and the second collecting apparatus is configured to collect the scanning light of the second waveband reflected by the scanned object, (spec [0062]; “each of the one or more respective images correlated with a given respective structured light pattern;”) and obtain dense three-dimensional point cloud data of the surface of the scanned object, (specs [0062] and [0099]; “generate a cloud of points representing the three-dimensional environment 215 using the two-dimensional mapping and given positions of the at least two cameras 214 relative to the three-dimensional environment 215.” and “Furthermore, interpolation, and filtering techniques can be used to respectively increase the density of cloud of points M.sub.xyz,”)
However, Moule fails to teach further comprising at least one fixed projector, configured to be fixed to a preset position relative to the scanned object, the fixed projector is configured to project a feature image of a first waveband to the scanned object, and obtain the three-dimensional data of the key features projected to the surface of the scanned object, and the second collecting apparatus is configured to collect the scanning light of the second waveband reflected by the scanned object, and obtain dense three-dimensional point cloud data of the surface of the scanned object, wherein the first waveband does not interfere with the second waveband.
Zuta teaches further comprising at least one fixed projector, configured to be fixed to a preset position relative to the scanned object, (spec [0084]; “The position and orientation of DOE 12 may be preset and fixed or it may be varied by mounting DOE 12 on a movable platform (which may be motorized).”, a projector can be used in place of a diffractive optical element)
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine Moule’s apparatus with Zuta’s projector fixed to a preset in order to have an easier user experience.
However, Moule in view of Zuta fails to teach wherein the first waveband does not interfere with the second waveband.
Gordon teaches wherein the first waveband does not interfere with the second waveband. (spec [0139]; “The determining of the range parameter for object 300 is therefore enabled by projector 210 which projects onto one or more objects 300 two or more non-coinciding projections of a single coded light pattern. Optionally, projector 210 may be controlled by projector control unit 220 to project such two or more non-coinciding projections of a single coded light pattern onto the one or more objects 300.”)
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine Moule’s apparatus with Zuta’s projector fixed to a preset and then combine them with Gordon’s projector control unit so that first waveband does not interfere with the second waveband so that no data is to be corrupted or lost.
Regarding claim 14, Moule in view of Zuta and Gordon teaches The three-dimensional scanning system as claimed in claim 3, wherein the three-dimensional data of the key features and the dense three-dimensional point cloud data synchronously collected by the first collecting apparatus and the second collecting apparatus are unified into single data in the same coordinate system. (Gordon; spec [0123]; “It would be appreciated that according to examples of the presently disclosed subject matter, a decoder may be provided, which is configured to decode images of reflected portion of each of the first projection and the second projection, and can be adapted to apply various mathematical operations as described below, to the decoded images. Optionally, the decoder may be synchronized with the projector, or may otherwise be informed of which of the projections is depicted in a given image.”)
Regarding claim 15, Moule in view of Zuta and Gordon teach The three-dimensional scanning system as claimed in claim 3, wherein the three-dimensional scanning system comprises a plurality of fixed projectors, and the plurality (Moule; spec [0004]; “Specifically, at least two cameras are aimed at a three-dimensional environment, respective fields of view of the at least two cameras at least partially overlapping a projection area of at least one projector.”) of fixed projectors (Zuta; spec [0084]; “The position and orientation of DOE 12 may be preset and fixed or it may be varied by mounting DOE 12 on a movable platform (which may be motorized).”, a projector can be used in place of a diffractive optical element) are arranged at intervals in a predetermined manner. (Gordon; )
Claims 5, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moule, et al. (US 20170039756 A1) in view of Gordon (US 20160050401 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Moule teaches The three-dimensional scanning system as claimed in claim 1,
However, Moule fails to teach wherein a collecting range of the first collecting apparatus at least partially overlaps with a collecting range of the second collecting apparatus.
Gordon teaches wherein a collecting range of the first collecting apparatus at least partially overlaps with a collecting range of the second collecting apparatus. (spec [0198]; “Optionally, each first feature element in the second projection at least partly overlaps the corresponding first feature element in the first projection. FIG. 58 illustrates an overlap of first projection 11 and of second projection 22,”)
It would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to take Moule’s apparatus and use Gordon’s teachings of overlapping field of views to find any missed details about the scanned object.
Regarding claim 17, Moule teaches The dimensional scanning method as claimed in claim 16, wherein projecting the reconstruction pattern to the scanned object comprises:
projecting a feature image of a first waveband to the scanned object, wherein the feature image comprises a plurality of key features; (spec [0059]; “and further a projection area of projector 207 includes a substantial portion of at least object 216 (and/or the other three-dimensional features of environment 215).”)
However, Moule fails to teach emitting scanning light of a second waveband to a surface of the scanned object, wherein the second waveband is different from the first waveband.
Gordon teaches emitting scanning light of a second waveband to a surface of the scanned object, wherein the second waveband is different from the first waveband. (spec [0168]; “the two projections may be projected concurrently (e.g. using different wavelength illumination by projector 210, where light of the first projection is projected in a wavelength—or wavelengths—which are different than the wavelength—or wavelengths—in which light of the second projection is projected)”)
It would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to take Moule’s apparatus and use Gordon’s teachings of using different wavebands in order to for the collecting apparatuses to detect different details of the scanned object.
Regarding claim 19, Moule teaches The three-dimensional scanning method as claimed in claim 16,
However, Moule fails to teach wherein the three-dimensional data of the key features and the dense three-dimensional point cloud data are synchronously collected, the three-dimensional data of the key features and the dense three-dimensional point cloud data synchronously collected are unified into single data in the same coordinate system, and a three-dimensional model of the scanned object is established based on pieces of the single data.
Gordon teaches wherein the three-dimensional data of the key features and the dense three-dimensional point cloud data are synchronously collected, the three-dimensional data of the key features and the dense three-dimensional point cloud data synchronously collected are unified into single data in the same coordinate system, and a three-dimensional model of the scanned object is established based on pieces of the single data. (spec [0123]; “It would be appreciated that according to examples of the presently disclosed subject matter, a decoder may be provided, which is configured to decode images of reflected portion of each of the first projection and the second projection, and can be adapted to apply various mathematical operations as described below, to the decoded images. Optionally, the decoder may be synchronized with the projector, or may otherwise be informed of which of the projections is depicted in a given image.”)
It would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine Moule’s apparatus with Gordon’s synchronous collection method in order to improve the scanner’s performance.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moule, et al. (US 20170039756 A1) in view of Benson, et al. (US 20080231719 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Moule teaches The three-dimensional scanning system as claimed in claim 1,
However, Moule fails to teach wherein the scanner comprises a housing, the projection module, the first collecting apparatus and the second collecting apparatus are arranged in the housing, and the scanner further comprises a gripping part arranged on the scanner.
Benson teaches wherein the scanner comprises a housing, the projection module, the first collecting apparatus and the second collecting apparatus are arranged in the housing, (spec [0033]; “Referring to FIG. 1 a camera system 100, according to the present invention, comprises a housing 102”) and the scanner further comprises a gripping part arranged on the scanner. (spec [0044]; “The battery compartment 122 also serves as a user handle and includes a flexible strap 124 attached thereto to provide improved user gripping.”)
It would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to take Moule’s apparatus and add a housing and arrange the projection module and the two collecting apparatuses in the housing to prevent them from being damaged and add a user handle or a flexible strap to reduce the chances of the apparatus from being dropped.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moule, et al. (US 20170039756 A1) in view of Gordon (US 20160050401 A1) and Su, et al. (US 20080165322 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Moule teaches The three-dimensional scanning system as claimed in claim 1,
However, Moule fails to teach an external collecting component, and an internal collecting component,
Gordon teaches the external collecting component, and an internal collecting component, (spec [0137]; “Projector 210 may therefore optionally enable an imaging sensing unit (either an external unit 1230 and/or an internal component of system 200, unit 230, e.g. a camera) to capture a first image in which an object 300 is imaged with the first projection of the coded light pattern projected thereon, and second image in which the object is imaged with the second projection of the coded light pattern projected thereon; to enable a processing unit (either an external unit 1240 and/or an internal component of system 200, unit 240) to process the first image and the second image to determine range parameters (e.g. range parameters for object 300). The range parameters determined for the object may be, for example, depth values (e.g. distance from the camera) for different parts of the imaged object.”)
It would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine Moule’s apparatus with Gordon’s external and internal collecting components in order to make the scanner more accurate.
However, Moule in view of Gordon fails to teach wherein the first collecting apparatus further comprises a first illumination piece and a first optical filter of a first waveband, wherein the first illumination piece is annularly arranged around each external collecting component, and the first illumination piece is configured to project light of the first waveband to illuminate mark points on the surface of the scanned object, and the first optical filter is arranged at a front end of the external collecting component, and the first optical filter is configured to retain incident light of the first waveband and filter out the incident light of other wavebands;
the second collecting apparatus comprises a second optical filter of a second waveband, wherein the second optical filter is arranged at a front end of an internal collecting component, and the second optical filter is configured to retain incident light of the second waveband and filter out the incident light of other wavebands, and the first waveband is different from the second waveband.
Su teaches wherein the first collecting apparatus further comprises a first illumination piece and a first optical filter of a first waveband, wherein the first illumination piece is annularly arranged around each external collecting component, and the first illumination piece is configured to project light of the first waveband to illuminate mark points on the surface of the scanned object, (Su; spec [0003]; “To get rid of these undesirable effects, an annular ring-shaped illumination light with a selected annular width and a numerical aperture can be focused at the cornea region to illuminate a large area of the retina,”) and the first optical filter is arranged at a front end of the external collecting component, and the first optical filter is configured to retain incident light of the first waveband and filter out the incident light of other wavebands; (Su; spec [0066]; “To reduce the cross talk of scattered light from the working distance sensor to the alignment sensor, a bandpass optical filter (for example, with a center wavelength of 760 nm and a FWHM (full width half maximum) of 65 nm) can be placed in front of the alignment sensor near infrared CCD 1046. The filter should block most of the light with wavelengths shorter than 720 nm and longer than 800 nm.”)
the second collecting apparatus comprises a second optical filter of a second waveband, wherein the second optical filter is arranged at a front end of an internal collecting component, and the second optical filter is configured to retain incident light of the second waveband and filter out the incident light of other wavebands, (Su; spec [0066]; “To reduce the cross talk of scattered light from the working distance sensor to the alignment sensor, a bandpass optical filter (for example, with a center wavelength of 760 nm and a FWHM (full width half maximum) of 65 nm) can be placed in front of the alignment sensor near infrared CCD 1046. The filter should block most of the light with wavelengths shorter than 720 nm and longer than 800 nm.”) and the first waveband is different from the second waveband. (spec [0168]; “the two projections may be projected concurrently (e.g. using different wavelength illumination by projector 210, where light of the first projection is projected in a wavelength—or wavelengths—which are different than the wavelength—or wavelengths—in which light of the second projection is projected)”)
It would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to Moule’s apparatus with Gordon’s external and internal collecting components and then combine Su’s annular ring-shaped illumination light and optical filters.
Claims 8-9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moule, et al. (US 20170039756 A1) in view of Gordon (US 20160050401 A1) and Su, et al. (US 20080165322 A1) and Benson, et al. (US 20080231719 A1).
Regarding claim 8-9 and 11, for claim 9, Moule in view of Benson teach The three-dimensional scanning system as claimed in claim 6, wherein the projection module comprises a first projection module and a second projection module, (Moule; spec [0004]; “Specifically, at least two cameras are aimed at a three-dimensional environment, respective fields of view of the at least two cameras at least partially overlapping a projection area of at least one projector.”)
However, Moule in view of Benson fails to teach the first projection module is configured to project a reconstruction pattern of a first waveband to the scanned object in a first time period, the second projection module is configured to project a reconstruction pattern of a second waveband to the scanned object in a second time period,
Gordon teaches the first projection module is configured to project a reconstruction pattern of a first waveband to the scanned object in a first time period, the second projection module is configured to project a reconstruction pattern of a second waveband to the scanned object in a second time period, (spec [0168]; “In some possible implementations of system 200 the two projections do not coincide temporally, but are rather projected at different times.”)
The rest of claim 9 is a recitation of claim 7, but depending claim 6, and is rejected using the same rationale as claim 7.
For claim 11, it recites claim 9, but without the limitation of two projection modules, and is rejected using the same rationale as claim 9.
For claim 8, it recites claim 9, but without the time periods, and is rejected using the same rationale as claim 9.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moule, et al. (US 20170039756 A1) in view of Gordon (US 20160050401 A1) and Su, et al. (US 20080165322 A1) and Lovell, et al. (US 3243594 A).
Regarding claim 10, Moule in view of Komeichi teach The three-dimensional scanning system as claimed in claim 2, wherein the projection module comprises a dual-frequency projector,
However, Moule in view of Komeichi fail to teach wherein the projection module comprises a dual-frequency projector,
Lovell teaches wherein the projection module comprises a dual-frequency projector, (column 4, line 72-74; “The optical system of projectors 34 and 36 are identical and can be any of several known types for producing a dual-frequency light beam.”)
The rest of claim 10 is a recitation of claim 11 but depending on claim 2.
It would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to take the apparatus of claim 11 and add Lovell’s dual-frequency projector for more efficiency.
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moule, et al. (US 20170039756 A1) in view of Sedlák (CZ 35399 U1).
Regarding claim 12, Moule teaches The three-dimensional scanning system as claimed in claim 1,
However, Moule fails to teach wherein the first collecting apparatus comprises a first collecting component and a second collecting component, the second collecting apparatus comprises a third collecting component, the third collecting component is arranged between the first collecting component and the second collecting component; the projection module is arranged between the third collecting component and the first collecting component, or the projection module is arranged between the third collecting component and the second collecting component.
Sedlák teaches wherein the first collecting apparatus comprises a first collecting component and a second collecting component, the second collecting apparatus comprises a third collecting component, the third collecting component is arranged between the first collecting component and the second collecting component; the projection module is arranged between the third collecting component and the first collecting component, or the projection module is arranged between the third collecting component and the second collecting component. (page 2, lines 3-5; “The principle of the repressive module consists in supplementing this technical solution with a third camera unit, which is located on the road section between the first and second speedometer.”)
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to take Moule’s projector and arrange between Sedlák’s camera units where the first and second camera units are linked to the first collecting apparatus and the third camera unit is linked to the second collecting apparatus and the projector is between either the first or second camera unit and the third camera unit in order to create a more accurate scanner.
Regarding claim 13, Moule teaches The three-dimensional scanning system as claimed in claim 1,
However, Moule fails to teach wherein the first collecting apparatus comprises a first collecting component and a second collecting component, and the second collecting apparatus comprises a third collecting component and a fourth collecting component, the third collecting component and the fourth collecting component are both arranged between the first collecting component and the second collecting component, and the projection module is arranged between the third collecting component and fourth collecting component.
Sedlák teaches wherein the first collecting apparatus comprises a first collecting component and a second collecting component, and the second collecting apparatus comprises a third collecting component and a fourth collecting component, the third collecting component and the fourth collecting component are both arranged between the first collecting component and the second collecting component, and the projection module is arranged between the third collecting component and fourth collecting component. (page 2, lines 11-15; “The intelligent vehicle speed detection system can further be advantageously supplemented by a fourth camera unit located in the measured section area, which will measure and document the section speed based on the calculation of the time the measured vehicle spends in the measured section and validates it with speeds measured by camera units installed. on the first and second speed indicators.”)
It would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to take Moule’s projector and arrange between Sedlák’s camera units where the first and second camera units are linked to the first collecting apparatus and the third and fourth camera units is linked to the second collecting apparatus and the projector is between third camera unit and the fourth camera unit in order to create a more accurate scanner.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moule, et al. (US 20170039756 A1) in view of Gordon (US 20160050401 A1), Komeichi, et al. (US 20180087901 A1) and Madsen, et al. (Madsen, K., et al. "METHODS FOR NON-LINEAR LEAST SQUARES PROBLEMS" 2nd Edition, April 2004. Informatics and Mathematical Modelling Technical University of Denmark, 2004.).
Regarding claim 20, Moule in view of Gordon teaches The three-dimensional scanning method as claimed in claim 19, comprising:
However, Moule in view of Gordon fails to teach performing rigid body transformation on common key features among the pieces of the single data, and splicing residuals
Komeichi teaches performing rigid body transformation on common key features among the pieces of the single data, and splicing residuals (spec [0078]; “In the registration processing, a shape matching between the point cloud data A and the point cloud data B is performed. For instance, in a state where the point cloud data B is rotated by 1° around a vertical axis as a center, the point cloud data A is rotated one round around the vertical axis as the center. Alternatively, in a state where the point cloud data A is rotated by 1° around the vertical axis as the center, the point cloud data B is rotated one round around the vertical axis as the center.”, a rotation is a rigid body transformation)
It would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to create the three-dimensional scanning method in claim 19 combining Moule’s apparatus and Gordan’s synchronous collection method and then use Komeichi’s rotation method in order to put together a virtual object properly.
However, Moule in view of Gordon and Komeichi fails to teach and performing non-linear least square method iterative optimization to complete a high accuracy of global optimization and reduce an accumulated error of the pieces of the single data.
Madsen teaches and performing non-linear least square method iterative optimization to complete a high accuracy of global optimization and reduce an accumulated error of the pieces of the single data. (3.1. The Gauss–Newton Method, pages 20-24; describes the Gauss–Newton Method, a non-linear least square method iterative optimization)
It would be obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to create the three-dimensional scanning method in claim 19 combining Moule’s apparatus, Gordan’s synchronous collection method and Komeichi’s rotation method and Madsen’s Gauss–Newton Method to more accurately and quickly produce virtual objects.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IRVING SHI whose telephone number is (571)272-9613. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Tammy Goddard can be reached at (571) 272-7773. 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.
/IRVING NMN SHI/Examiner, Art Unit 2611
/TAMMY GODDARD/
Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2611
Prosecution Insights