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 .
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.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/24/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 7 recites “activate a protective measure”. It is not clear what the applicant considers “a protective measure” to be. More specifically, protective with respect to what? Please clarify. For examination purposes, any measure will be considered a protective measure.
Claim 8 recites “wherein the protective measure is complete or partial deactivation of the light source”. It is not clear what the applicant means by “the protective measure is complete”. Please clarify.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Poloniewicz et al. (US 2022/0224823).
With respect to claims 1 and 12, Poloniewicz et al. discloses an electronic device comprising:
an illuminating unit (aimer module/projection module) ([0102]);
an image-capturing unit (image sensor) ([0103]); and
a control unit (controller/processor) ([0065], [0083], [0102], [0109], Figs. 1A, 2),
the illuminating unit comprising:
a light source (light source) ([0102]), and
an optical element (diffractive optical element) [0102]),
wherein the illuminating unit is configured to generate a reference pattern (aiming pattern/pattern 604/visual object) at an exit of said optical element ([0060], [0103]); and
wherein the control unit is configured to analyze an image captured by the image-capturing unit ([0104]),
wherein the control unit is configured to identify the reference pattern generated by the illuminating unit in the image captured by the image-capturing unit ([0104, [0105]).
The method is inherent to the electronic device.
With respect to claims 2 and 3, Poloniewicz et al. discloses the optical element being a diffractive element, thus the reference pattern generated at the exit of said optical element is a diffraction pattern ([0102])
With respect to claims 6 and 13, Poloniewicz et al. discloses the control unit is configured to activate a protective measure (using image disparity to determine distance to the subject and control second image sensor) when the reference pattern is not identified (the examiner notes that “protective” is merely a title with respect to “a protective measure” and as such, activating a measure is considered activating a protective measure) ([0106]-[0108], Fig. 7)
Claim(s) 1-3, 9, 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Choi et al. (US 2014/0132501).
With respect to claims 1 and 12, Choi et al. discloses an electronic device comprising:
an illuminating unit (210, 230) ([0036]);
an image-capturing unit (camera) ([0031], [0032]); and
a control unit (inherent to performing calculation and matching) ([0031] [0055]),
the illuminating unit comprising:
a light source (210) ([0036]), and
an optical element (230) [0036]),
wherein the illuminating unit is configured to generate a reference pattern (240) at an exit of said optical element ([0031], [0036]); and
wherein the control unit is configured to analyze an image captured by the image-capturing unit ([0031], [0055]),
wherein the control unit is configured to identify the reference pattern generated by the illuminating unit in the image captured by the image-capturing unit ([0031]).
The method is inherent to the electronic device.
With respect to claims 2 and 3, Choi et al. discloses the optical element being a diffractive element, thus the reference pattern generated at the exit of said optical element is a diffraction pattern ([0036]).
With respect to claim 9, Choi et al. discloses the optical element is a diffuser ([0036]).
With respect to claim 11, Choi et al. discloses the light source is an infrared source (850 nm) ([0036]).
Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 7 and 10-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yin et al. (US 2022/0090914).
With respect to claims 1 and 12, Yin et al. discloses an electronic device comprising:
an illuminating unit (300) ([0058]);
an image-capturing unit (303) ([0061]); and
a control unit (304) ([0022], [0062]),
the illuminating unit comprising:
a light source (301) ([0058]); and
an optical element (302) [0058]),
wherein the illuminating unit is configured to generate a reference pattern (pattern) at an exit of said optical element ([0060], Fig. 4); and
wherein the control unit is configured to analyze an image captured by the image-capturing unit ([0061]-[0064]),
wherein the control unit is configured to identify the reference pattern generated by the illuminating unit in the image captured by the image-capturing unit ([0061]-[0064]).
The method is inherent to the electronic device.
With respect to claims 2 and 3, Yin et al. discloses the optical element being a diffractive element, thus the reference pattern generated at the exit of said optical element is a diffraction pattern ([0058]).
With respect to claims 6, 7, 13 and 14, Yin et al. discloses the control unit is configured to activate a protective measure when the reference pattern is not identified (abnormal), wherein the protective measure is deactivation of the light source ([0063]).
With respect to claim 10, Yin et al. discloses the light source comprises at least one vertical-cavity surface emitting laser ([0048]).
With respect to claim 11, Yin et al. discloses the light source is an infrared source (940 nm) ([0041]).
Claim(s) 1, 6, 8, 12, 13 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen et al. (US 2019/0318141) (hereinafter referred to as Chen et al. ‘141).
With respect to claims 1 and 12, Chen et al. ‘141 discloses in Fig. 2, an electronic device comprising:
an illuminating unit (123) ([0015]);
an image-capturing unit (118, 112) ([0015]); and
a control unit (126) ([0015]),
the illuminating unit comprising:
a light source (125) ([0015]); and
an optical element (127) [0015]),
wherein the illuminating unit is configured to generate a reference pattern (aiming mark) at an exit of said optical element ([0020], Fig. 3); and
wherein the control unit is configured to analyze an image captured by the image-capturing unit ([0020]),
wherein the control unit is configured to identify the reference pattern generated by the illuminating unit in the image captured by the image-capturing unit ([0020], Fig. 4).
The method is inherent to the electronic device.
With respect to claims 6, 8, 13 and 15, Chen et al. ‘141 discloses the control unit is configured to activate a protective measure when the reference pattern is not identified (aiming mark not detectable), wherein the protective measure is activation of a degraded mode in which a brightness of the light source is reduced (capture a decode frame in which the aiming light source is dimmed) ([0019], [0020], Fig. 4).
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.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poloniewicz et al. as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Chen et al. (US 2015/0339506) (hereinafter referred to as Chen et al. ‘506).
With respect to claim 4, Poloniewicz et al. addresses all the limitations of claim 3.
However, Poloniewicz et al. fails to expressly disclose the diffractive element of the optical element is a circular or rectangular hole.
Poloniewicz et al. discloses the projection module (of an aimer module for forming the light beam from the light source module into an aiming pattern) may include a lens (or lenses), an aperture, and/or a diffractive optical element to help form the pattern ([0102]). Chen et al. ‘506 teaches it is well known in the art for an aiming pattern generator (80) to include a circular aperture stop (83) and an aim lens (84) ([0016], [0022], Figs. 2-4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the diffractive element of the optical element to be a circular or rectangular hole, in order to provide an aiming pattern at different distances for indicating the image field of view.
Claim(s) 1 and 5 /are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mazzone et al. (US 2014/0374482).
With respect to claims 1 and 5, Mazzone et al. discloses in Fig. 2, an electronic device comprising:
an illuminating unit (17, 49) ([0076], [0120]);
an image-capturing unit (13) ([0073], [0074], [0109]); and
a control unit (18) ([0077], [0109]),
the illuminating unit comprising:
a light source (17) ([0120]); and
an optical element (49) ([0036], [0120]),
wherein the illuminating unit is configured to generate a reference pattern (aiming pattern 50) at an exit of said optical element ([0036], [0048], [0120], Fig. 5); and
wherein the control unit is configured to analyze an image captured by the image-capturing unit ([0104], [0105], [0109], [0113]).
Mazzone et al. further discloses the reference pattern generated at the exit of the optical element is a hologram (light entering the hologram to form the three-dimensional aiming pattern is considered to form a hologram) ([0036], [0048], [0120]).
Mazzone et al. fails to expressly disclose the control unit is configured to identify the reference pattern generated by the illuminating unit in the image captured by the image-capturing unit.
Nevertheless, Mazzone et al. teaches that through analysis by the processor o the reader of the preliminarily captured image, the apparatus is able to guide ethe user in the positioning of the object/document ([0051]), and additionally teaches that the aimer is turned on during the preliminarily captured image0 ([0113]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to try to modify the control unit to be configured to identify the reference pattern generated by the illuminating unit in the image captured by the image-capturing unit, in order to be used to guide ethe user in the positioning of the object/document.
Telephone/Fax Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUEZU ELLIS whose telephone number is (571)272-2868. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10:30 am - 6:30 pm EST.
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, Thomas Pham can be reached at (571) 272-3689. 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.
/SUEZU ELLIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876
Prosecution Insights