DETAILED ACTION
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
Claims 1, 8, and 15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,196,888. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the examined application claim would have been anticipated by the reference claims. Both sets of claims are directed to a method of creating a depth point cloud using modulated light, and one of ordinary skill would see the claims in question as obvious variants of each other.
Claims 2, 4, 5, 7, 9-14, 16, 18 and 19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,196,888 in view of Dorrington et al., US 2015/0253429.
2 and 16. The parent claim is silent on a sine-based pattern. Dorrington teaches a system wherein the continuous pattern is a sine-based pattern [paras. 44, 86, 94].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to incorporate Dorrington, in order to provide a predictable and varying illumination pattern across the objects of a scene, improving resolution and allowing accurate phase-shifting for depth reconstruction.
4 and 18. Dorrington teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the light shaping optic is a diffractive optical element [engineered diffuser diffracts light by spreading and modulating it, Figs. 1, 8-12, paras. 127, 131, 134, 140].
5 and 19. The method of claim 1, wherein the light shaping optic is a refractive optical element [engineered diffuser redirects (refracts) light, Figs. 1, 8-12, paras. 127, 131, 134, 140].
7. Dorrington teaches the method of claim 1, wherein providing the output beam with the non-uniform intensity field comprises:
altering a divergence of the input beam to form the non-uniform intensity field [incoming light is altered, diverging beams to form patterns, Figs. 1, 5c, 8-12].
9. Dorrington teaches the method of claim 8, wherein the input beam is provided with a uniform intensity field to the light shaping optic [laser diode source prior to shaping/diffusing, paras. 118, 134-136].
10. Dorrington teaches the method of claim 8, further comprising:
receiving a set of portions of the output beam reflected off of the object, wherein each portion, of the set of portions, corresponds to an area of concentration of light [sensor receives reflected light, Figs. 1, 6, paras. 118, 128, 132]; and
performing a time-of-flight measurement associated with each area of concentration [amplitude image of all areas of scene is a depth map representing distance, e.g. closer surfaces are lighter, Figs. 1, 3, 4, 5c, 7, paras. 29, 76, 84, 122-124, 129-133].
11. Dorrington teaches the method of claim 8, further comprising:
receiving a reflection of the output beam [Figs. 1, 6, paras. 118, 128, 132];
performing one or more time-of-flight measurements of the reflection [time-of-flight camera, paras. 118, 134, 161]; and
determining a distance of the object based on performing the one or more time-of-flight measurements [Figs. 1, 3, 4, 5c, 7, paras. 29, 76, 84, 122-124, 129-133].
12. Dorrington teaches the method of claim 11, further comprising: generating a three-dimensional measurement of the object based on the distance [amplitude image of all areas of scene is a depth map (mapping depth dimension to horizontal and vertical dimensions) representing distance, e.g. closer surfaces are lighter, Figs. 1, 3, 4, 5c, 7, paras. 29, 76, 84, 122-124, 129-133].
13. Dorrington teaches the method of claim 11, wherein performing the one or more time-of-flight measurements comprises: performing one or more of a direct time-of-flight measurement [time-of-flight camera, paras. 117, 118, 134, 161], a gated time-of-flight measurement, or an indirect time-of-flight measurement.
14. Dorrington teaches the method of claim 8, further comprising: generating a three-dimensional representation of the object based on the one or more distance measurements [Figs. 1, 3, 4, 5c, 7, paras. 29, 76, 84, 122-124, 129-133].
Claims 3, 6, 17, and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,196,888 in view of Hudman, US 2016/0146927.
3 and 17 (from 1). The parent claim is silent on a ring shaped illumination pattern. Hudman teaches a time-of-flight sensing system wherein the continuous pattern is formed by a ring pattern of light [Fig. 14, para. 82, 84, 85].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to incorporate Hudman, using a ring pattern in order to ensure that both light and dark areas alternate in all directions, allowing accurate measurements of all types of scene shapes.
6 and 20 (from 1). Hudman teaches a system wherein the light shaping optic is a set of micro-lenses [light shaping stage includes plurality of lens elements, Fig. 4, para. 44].
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 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 nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7-16, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dorrington et al., US 2015/0253429.
1 and 15. Dorrington teaches a method and system comprising:
providing, by a sensor system, an input beam to a light shaping optic of the sensor system [sensing system includes light transmitter and engineered diffuser, Figs. 1, 12, paras. 127, 131, 134, 140], wherein a total intensity of the input beam does not exceed a threshold [light has a maximum intensity, i.e. it does not exceed an upper threshold, para. 32, 51];
providing, by using the light shaping optic, an output beam with a non-uniform intensity field with a continuous pattern [Figs. 1, 5c, 12, para. 124]; and,
wherein the non-uniform intensity field includes first areas of higher intensity light and second areas of lower intensity light [Fig. 5c shows pattern of dots with partially illuminated (lower intensity) spaces between them, Figs. 1, 5c, 12]; and
generating, by the sensor system, a depth point cloud representing one or more distance measurements for one or more portions of an object illuminated by the output beam [amplitude image is a depth map representing distance, e.g. closer surfaces are lighter, Figs. 1, 3, 4, 5c, 7, paras. 29, 76, 84, 122-124, 129-133].
2 and 16. Dorrington teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the continuous pattern is a sine-based pattern [paras. 44, 86, 94].
4 and 18. Dorrington teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the light shaping optic is a diffractive optical element [engineered diffuser diffracts light by spreading and modulating it, Figs. 1, 8-12, paras. 127, 131, 134, 140].
5 and 19. The method of claim 1, wherein the light shaping optic is a refractive optical element [engineered diffuser redirects (refracts) light, Figs. 1, 8-12, paras. 127, 131, 134, 140].
7. Dorrington teaches the method of claim 1, wherein providing the output beam with the non-uniform intensity field comprises:
altering a divergence of the input beam to form the non-uniform intensity field [incoming light is altered, diverging beams to form patterns, Figs. 1, 5c, 8-12].
8. Dorrington teaches a method, comprising:
providing, by a sensor system, an input beam to a light shaping optic of the sensor system [sensing system includes light transmitter and engineered diffuser, Figs. 1, 12, paras. 127, 131, 134, 140], wherein a total intensity of the input beam does not exceed a threshold [light has a maximum intensity, i.e. it does not exceed an upper threshold, para. 32, 51];
providing, by using the light shaping optic, an output beam with a non-uniform intensity field [Figs. 1, 5c, 12, para. 124], wherein the non-uniform intensity field includes:
first discrete areas with a first density of intensity dots, and second discrete areas with a second density of intensity dots, wherein the first density is higher than the second density [e.g. in Fig. 12, shaded (more illuminated) diagonal regions have a higher density of overlapping dots; unshaded regions have a lower dot density; Figs. 11, 12, paras. 135, 136]; and
generating, by the sensor system, a depth point cloud representing one or more distance measurements for one or more portions of an object illuminated by the output beam [amplitude image is a depth map representing distance, e.g. closer surfaces are lighter, Figs. 1, 3, 4, 5c, 7, paras. 29, 76, 84, 122-124, 129-133].
9. Dorrington teaches the method of claim 8, wherein the input beam is provided with a uniform intensity field to the light shaping optic [laser diode source prior to shaping/diffusing, paras. 118, 134-136].
10. Dorrington teaches the method of claim 8, further comprising:
receiving a set of portions of the output beam reflected off of the object, wherein each portion, of the set of portions, corresponds to an area of concentration of light [sensor receives reflected light, Figs. 1, 6, paras. 118, 128, 132]; and
performing a time-of-flight measurement associated with each area of concentration [amplitude image of all areas of scene is a depth map representing distance, e.g. closer surfaces are lighter, Figs. 1, 3, 4, 5c, 7, paras. 29, 76, 84, 122-124, 129-133].
11. Dorrington teaches the method of claim 8, further comprising:
receiving a reflection of the output beam [Figs. 1, 6, paras. 118, 128, 132];
performing one or more time-of-flight measurements of the reflection [time-of-flight camera, paras. 118, 134, 161]; and
determining a distance of the object based on performing the one or more time-of-flight measurements [Figs. 1, 3, 4, 5c, 7, paras. 29, 76, 84, 122-124, 129-133].
12. Dorrington teaches the method of claim 11, further comprising: generating a three-dimensional measurement of the object based on the distance [amplitude image of all areas of scene is a depth map (mapping depth dimension to horizontal and vertical dimensions) representing distance, e.g. closer surfaces are lighter, Figs. 1, 3, 4, 5c, 7, paras. 29, 76, 84, 122-124, 129-133].
13. Dorrington teaches the method of claim 11, wherein performing the one or more time-of-flight measurements comprises: performing one or more of a direct time-of-flight measurement [time-of-flight camera, paras. 117, 118, 134, 161], a gated time-of-flight measurement, or an indirect time-of-flight measurement.
14. Dorrington teaches the method of claim 8, further comprising: generating a three-dimensional representation of the object based on the one or more distance measurements [Figs. 1, 3, 4, 5c, 7, paras. 29, 76, 84, 122-124, 129-133].
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.
Claims 3, 6, 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dorrington as cited above in view of Hudman, US 2016/0146927.
3 and 17 (from 1). Dorrington is silent on a ring-shaped illumination pattern. Hudman teaches a time-of-flight sensing system wherein the continuous pattern is formed by a ring pattern of light [Fig. 14, para. 82, 84, 85].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to incorporate Hudman, using a ring pattern in order to ensure that both light and dark areas alternate in all directions, allowing accurate measurements of all types of scene shapes.
6 and 20 (from 1). Hudman teaches a system wherein the light shaping optic is a set of micro-lenses [light shaping stage includes plurality of lens elements, Fig. 4, para. 44].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Timothy R Newlin whose telephone number is (571)270-3015. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 Mountain Time.
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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at 571-272-3982. 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.
/TIMOTHY R NEWLIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2424