DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 18, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 6, 8, 11, 12, 16, 18, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Holocreators (https://holocreators.com/blog/fusion-of-photogrammetry-and-3d-ct/, 06 October 2020).
Regarding independent claim 1, Holocreators teaches a method comprising:
generating a computer data structure representing three-dimensional surfaces of a physical object (04:50 – 3D model of the shoe from CT scan) from (i) segmentation of volumetric data reconstructed from two-dimensional radiographs of the physical object acquired using an X-ray source (4:05 - the shoe is x-ray at different rotational perspective that creates 2D slices) in a computed tomography scanner when the physical object is proximate to a location within the computed tomography scanner (01:57 – CT room with the shoe in proximity in CT scanning device on the left), (ii) position information and orientation information of the physical object, with respect to the location, as determined from the two-dimensional radiographs (04:05 – x-ray images of the shoe showing density voxel taken by the CT scanner at location relative to the shoe and rotation of the shoe for each x-ray image; 4:00 - x, y, delta x, delta y; 4:07 – set position; 4:03: height, width), and (iii) size information of the physical object determined from a predetermined distance between the location and the X-ray source (04:50 – 3D model of the shoe from CT scan having size and dimensions in a 3-D coordinate space);
adding texture data to the three-dimensional surfaces represented in the computer data structure (4:55 - color information is projected onto 3D model of the CT scans) using images captured by at least one optical camera (2:35 – cameras are setup relative to the shoe), the images being of the physical object at different rotational orientations (2:48 – images captured at different rotational angle of the shoe using the turntable), by projecting data of the images onto the three-dimensional surfaces using the size information, the position information, and the orientation information of the physical object and predetermined position, location, and parameters of the at least one optical camera (3:05 - pictures piped into software to make 3D model with color; 4:55 - color information is projected onto 3D model of the CT scans); and
providing the computer data structure for processing of the three-dimensional surfaces (4:55 - color information is projected onto 3D model of the CT scans with rotational of the fused 3D model with color).
Regarding dependent claim 2, Holocreators teaches wherein the adding comprises combining, at a single location on at least one of the three-dimensional surfaces, data from at least two of the images of the physical object at the different rotational orientations (3:05 - pictures piped into software to make 3D model with color; 4:55 - color information is projected onto 3D model of the CT scans).
Regarding dependent claim 6, Holocreators teaches comprising: acquiring the two-dimensional radiographs (4:05 - the shoe is x-ray at different rotational perspective that creates 2D slices); reconstructing the volumetric data (04:50 – 3D model of the shoe from CT scan having size and dimensions in a 3-D coordinate space); segmenting the volumetric data (4:08 – voxels/pixels are used that are part of the shoe versus background or noise); and capturing the images (2:48 – images captured at different rotational angle of the shoe using the turntable).
Regarding dependent claim 8, Holocreators teaches wherein the computed tomography scanner comprises a turntable, the location is a center of the turntable, and the different rotational orientations correspond to different rotational positions of the turntable (2:48 – images captured at different rotational angle of the shoe using the turntable).
Regarding claims 11, 12, 16, 18, and 21, claims 11, 12, 16, 18, and 21 are similar in scope as to claims 1, 2, 6, and 8, thus the rejections for claims 1, 2, 6, and 8 hereinabove are applicable to claims 11, 12, 16, 18, and 21. Holocreators teaches a system comprising: a data processing apparatus including at least one hardware processor; and a non-transitory computer-readable medium encoding instructions configured to cause the data processing apparatus to perform operations (3:55 – computer comprising processor and memory running 2D scanning and 3D modeling software). A non-transitory computer-readable medium encoding instructions operable to cause data processing apparatus to perform operations (3:55 – computer comprising processor and memory running 2D scanning and 3D modeling software).
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, 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 3 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holocreators (https://holocreators.com/blog/fusion-of-photogrammetry-and-3d-ct/, 06 October 2020) in view of Official Notice.
Regarding dependent claim 3, Holocreators does not expressly disclose wherein the computer data structure comprises a three-dimensional surface mesh. Examiner takes Official Notice that the concept of representing a 3D model using a 3D mesh is well known and expected in the art. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the time of the effective filing date of the application (AIA ) to achieve a predictable result of producing a 3D mesh of the 3D model by modifying Holocreators's system that takes 3D voxels/points of the shoe from known location of the CT scanner and replace the 3D model with a 3D mesh, and the result would have been predictable.
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 is similar in scope as to claim 3, thus the rejection for claim 3 hereinabove is applicable to claim 13.
Claim(s) 7 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holocreators (https://holocreators.com/blog/fusion-of-photogrammetry-and-3d-ct/, 06 October 2020) in view of Butani et al. (US 2020/0372644).
Regarding dependent claim 7, Holocreators does not expressly disclose wherein the acquiring and the capturing are performed concurrently. Butani discloses x-ray scanners and optical camera both operating at the same time (paragraph 37). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention (pre-AIA ) or at the time of the effective filing date of the application (AIA ) to achieve a predictable result to perform CT scanning and image capturing at the same time by modify Holocreators's system that takes CT scans and image capturing and try to perform these operations at the same time, and the result would have been predictable.
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 is similar in scope as to claim 7, thus the rejection for claim 7 hereinabove is applicable to claim 17.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 5, 9, 10, 14, 15, 19, and 20 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFREY J CHOW whose telephone number is (571)272-8078. The examiner can normally be reached 11AM-7PM.
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, Devona Faulk can be reached at 571-272-7515. 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.
/JEFFREY J CHOW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2618
Prosecution Insights