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 .
Obviousness 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 1–4, 6, 15 and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4, 8, 10, 12–13 and 16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,236,624. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims in the instant application are broader than their corresponding version in U.S. Patent No. 12,236,624, as shown below.
U.S. Patent 12,236,624
Application 19/027,835
A system for an endoscope, comprising:
a camera head coupled to an optical channel;
a light port coupled to the endoscope and configured to receive a first light ray, wherein the first light ray travels through a first optical path along an optical axis of the optical channel;
a depth measurement module coupled to the endoscope, wherein the depth measurement module is configured to
transmit a second light ray through a second optical path along the optical axis and
includes a light source configured to transmit the second light ray and a microcontroller coupled to a Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) configured to generate a grating through which the second light ray passes to project a grid pattern on a surface;
an objective lens configured to collimate the second light ray;
an image sensor coupled to the camera head and configured to receive a first set of images pertaining to the first light ray and a second set of images pertaining to the second light ray; and
a processing device configured to receive the first and second sets of images from the image sensor and use the first and second sets of images to generate one or more three-dimensional (3-D) images of the surface, wherein the processing device adjusts a density of the grid pattern using the LCD to displace a focal point of the objective lens and varies a distance between self-images of the grating and the focal point of the objective lens to obtain depth information of the surface.
A system for measuring a distance between two points on a curved surface of an object using an endoscope, comprising:
a camera head coupled to an optical channel of the endoscope;
a light port coupled to the endoscope and configured to receive a first light ray, wherein the first light ray travels through a first optical path along an optical axis of the optical channel;
a depth measurement module coupled to the endoscope, wherein the depth measurement module comprises:
a light source configured to transmit a second light ray;
an objective lens configured to collimate the second light ray;
a microcontroller coupled to a liquid crystal display (LCD), the microcontroller and the LCD configured to generate a first diffraction grating and a grid pattern;
a beam splitter configured to direct at least a portion of the second light ray and the grid pattern through the optical channel; and
an image sensor coupled to the camera head and configured to receive a first set of images pertaining to the first light ray and a second set of images pertaining to the second light ray and the grid pattern; and
a processing device configured to receive the first and second sets of images from the image sensor and use the first and second sets of images to generate a three- dimensional (3-D) image of the curved surface, identify a first point and a second point on the curved surface, and calculate a displacement of a self-image plane of the first diffraction grating relative to a focal plane of the endoscope, wherein the displacement corresponds to the distance between the first point and the second point.
Claim 15 is rejected in the same manner as claim 13 of the reference patent.
In re claim 2,
Reference patent
Instant Application
Claim 4: the system, wherein the microcontroller is configured to adjust a rotation of the grid pattern using the LCD.
Claim 2: the system, wherein the microcontroller is configured to adjust a density or a rotation of the first diffraction grating.
In re claim 3,
Reference patent
Instant Application
Claim 8: the system, wherein the first and second light rays comprise different portions of an electromagnetic spectrum.
Claim 3: the system, wherein the second light ray has a different wavelength or a different portion of an electromagnetic spectrum than the first light ray.
In re claim 4,
Reference patent
Instant Application
Claim 10: the system, further comprising a second sensor configured to receive the second light ray.
Claim 4: the system, further comprising a tunable laser configured to vary a wavelength of the second light ray.
In re claim 6,
Reference patent
Instant Application
Claim 12: the system, wherein the processing device is configured to generate, via an artificial intelligence engine, a machine learning model trained to adjust at least one of the density of the grid pattern or a rotation of the grid pattern displayed on the LCD.
Claim 6: the system, wherein the curved surface has a symmetry of revolution, and wherein the system is configured to rotate the first diffraction grating around the optical axis to obtain different measurements of the curved surface.
In re claim 20,
Reference patent
Instant Application
Claim 16: the method, generating, via an artificial intelligence engine, a machine learning model trained to generate image data based on at least one of the first and second sets of images and the grid pattern.
Claim 20: the method, wherein the curved surface has an irregular shape, and wherein the method further comprises using an artificial intelligence engine or a machine learning engine to analyze the second set of images and the grid pattern to generate the 3-D image.
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.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) 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.
The term “near real time” (emphasis added) in claim 17 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Applicant does not specify whether there is distinction between “real time” and “near real time” to process diffraction grating. (emphasis added)
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 1, 3–4, 6, 11–13, 15, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Harris (U.S. 9,885,859 B2) in view of Gharib et al. (U.S. 8,576,381 B2).
Regarding claim 1, Harris discloses a system for measuring a distance between two points on a curved surface of an object using an endoscope, comprising:
a camera head coupled to an optical channel of the endoscope; (Fig. 7, 30 a microscope)
a light port coupled to the endoscope and configured to receive a first light ray, wherein the first light ray travels through a first optical path along an optical axis of the optical channel; (Fig. 7, 34a a light source)
a depth measurement module coupled to the endoscope, wherein the depth measurement module comprises: a light source configured to transmit a second light ray; (Fig. 7, 34b a light source)
an objective lens configured to collimate the second light ray; (Fig. 7, 44 a second focusing lens 44)
a microcontroller coupled to a liquid crystal display (LCD), the microcontroller and the LCD configured to generate a first diffraction grating and a grid pattern; (Fig. 11, 228 microlens 228)
a beam splitter configured to direct at least a portion of the second light ray and the grid pattern through the optical channel; and (Per Fig. 15, Harris discloses an apparatus 370 consisting of first and second microlens arrays 376, 383 to generate a pattern. Harris col. 19 lines 12–32. [b]etween the first and second microlens arrays 376, 383, a mask 388 that consists of a pattern defining the features desired to be transferred to the wafer 372.)
an image sensor coupled to the camera head and configured to receive a first set of images (a first set of images construed as differential images) pertaining to the first light ray (Per Fig. 8, Harris’s microscope collects different images generated by a process where a distal tip 76 passes through a tissue sample 62 collimating a light by a lens 66. Ibid. col. 12 lines 38–55. Differential images are generated from pairs of exposures, including effecting relative movement of distal tip 76 and the tissue sample 62 (in the illustrated example, by moving distal tip 76 in the direction shown by arrow 84).) and a second set of images (a second set of images construed as GSD images) pertaining to the second light ray and the grid pattern. (Per Fig. 35, Harris discloses that GSD images are obtained after processing two different lights in a microscope. Ibid. col. 31 line 54 – col. 32 line 4. [i]n which GSD images are obtained from direct contact of the bundle tip with a specimen. An excitation light source 1 is focused by lens 2 as a beam 3 that is reflected from beam splitter cube 4 through lens 5 to focus at the proximal surface 6 of optical fibre bundle 7.)
However, Harris fails to specifically disclose a processing device configured to receive the first and second sets of images from the image sensor and use the first and second sets of images to generate a three- dimensional (3-D) image of the curved surface, identify a first point and a second point on the curved surface, and calculate a displacement of a self-image plane of the first diffraction grating relative to a focal plane of the endoscope, wherein the displacement corresponds to the distance between the first point and the second point.
In related art, Gharib discloses a processing device configured to receive the first and second sets of images from the image sensor and use the first and second sets of images to generate a three- dimensional (3-D) image of the curved surface, (Per Fig. 11 at step 1110, Gharib discloses a 3D image reconstruction collecting multiple images with addressable pattern 1100 with which contours of the object are presented on its surface. Gharib col. 18 lines 12–23. Each of the plurality of images comprising at least a portion of the addressable pattern information and at least one point representing at least one aspect of the target object.) identify a first point and a second point on the curved surface, (Through Figs. 4A–4B, Gharib discloses a first point 414 and a second point 420. Ibid. col. 11 lines 2–29. The first point 414 and first position information and second point 420 and second position information are then used to match the first point 414 from the first exposure with those of the second point 420.) and calculate a displacement of a self-image plane of the first diffraction grating relative to a focal plane of the endoscope, wherein the displacement corresponds to the distance between the first point and the second point. (Per Fig. 5E, Gharib discloses a net displacement when points on a focal plane are detected to calculate depth information of an object. Ibid. col. 12 lines 28–44. As the moving aperture 506 controllably oscillates right to left in the direction of A and B (or in any other suitable direction), the net displacement of the moving aperture 506 from A to B produces a low f-number.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Gharib into the teachings of Harris to illustrate a 3D surface of the object using a single-lens avoiding mismatches of target points. Ibid. col. 3 lines 52–65.
Regarding claim 15, Harris discloses a method of measuring a distance between two points on a curved surface of an object using an endoscope, comprising:
transmitting a first light ray through a first optical path along an optical axis of an optical channel of the endoscope; (Per Fig. 15, Harris discloses an apparatus 370 consisting of first and second microlens arrays 376, 383 to generate a pattern. Harris col. 19 lines 12–32. [b]etween the first and second microlens arrays 376, 383, a mask 388 that consists of a pattern defining the features desired to be transferred to the wafer 372.)
transmitting a second light ray through a second optical path along the optical axis, wherein the second light ray passes through a diffraction grating to generate a grid pattern; (Per Fig. 15, Harris discloses an apparatus 370 consisting of first and second microlens arrays 376, 383 to generate a pattern. Harris col. 19 lines 12–32. [b]etween the first and second microlens arrays 376, 383, a mask 388 that consists of a pattern defining the features desired to be transferred to the wafer 372.)
receiving a first set of images captured by an image sensor, wherein the first set of images pertain to the first light ray; (Per Fig. 8, Harris’s microscope collects different images generated by a process where a distal tip 76 passes through a tissue sample 62 collimating a light by a lens 66. Ibid. col. 12 lines 38–55. Differential images are generated from pairs of exposures, including effecting relative movement of distal tip 76 and the tissue sample 62 (in the illustrated example, by moving distal tip 76 in the direction shown by arrow 84).)
receiving a second set of images captured by the image sensor, wherein the second set of images pertain to the second light ray and the grid pattern. (Per Fig. 35, Harris discloses that GSD images are obtained after processing two different lights in a microscope. Ibid. col. 31 line 54 – col. 32 line 4. [i]n which GSD images are obtained from direct contact of the bundle tip with a specimen. An excitation light source 1 is focused by lens 2 as a beam 3 that is reflected from beam splitter cube 4 through lens 5 to focus at the proximal surface 6 of optical fibre bundle 7.)
However, Harris fails to specifically disclose generating, using the first and second sets of images, a 3D image of the curved surface; identifying, in the 3D image, a first point and a second point on the curved surface; and calculating, using the grid pattern, a displacement of a self-image plane of the diffraction grating relative to a focal plane of the endoscope, wherein the displacement corresponds to the distance between the first point and the second point.
In related art, Gharib discloses generating, using the first and second sets of images, a three-dimensional (3-D) image of the curved surface; (Per Fig. 11 at step 1110, Gharib discloses a 3D image reconstruction collecting multiple images with addressable pattern 1100 with which contours of the object are presented on its surface. Gharib col. 18 lines 12–23. Each of the plurality of images comprising at least a portion of the addressable pattern information and at least one point representing at least one aspect of the target object.)
identifying, in the 3-D image, a first point and a second point on the curved surface; and (Through Figs. 4A–4B, Gharib discloses a first point 414 and a second point 420. Ibid. col. 11 lines 2–29. The first point 414 and first position information and second point 420 and second position information are then used to match the first point 414 from the first exposure with those of the second point 420.)
calculating, using the grid pattern, a displacement of a self-image plane of the diffraction grating relative to a focal plane of the endoscope, wherein the displacement corresponds to the distance between the first point and the second point. (Per Fig. 5E, Gharib discloses a net displacement when points on a focal plane are detected to calculate depth information of an object. Ibid. col. 12 lines 28–44. As the moving aperture 506 controllably oscillates right to left in the direction of A and B (or in any other suitable direction), the net displacement of the moving aperture 506 from A to B produces a low f-number.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Gharib into the teachings of Harris to illustrate a 3D surface of the object using a single-lens avoiding mismatches of target points. Ibid. col. 3 lines 52–65.
Regarding claim 3, Harris as modified by Gharib, discloses the system, wherein the second light ray has a different wavelength or a different portion of an electromagnetic spectrum than the first ray. (Per Fig. 23, Harris discloses different wavelengths to reach defined areas of a specimen. Harris col. 26 lines 32–45. The activating light pulse rays from light source 580 of wavelength λ.sub.2 is collimated by lens 582 and coupled directly into the cores of the bundle 586 at the proximal tip 588 and travels through the optical system to produce spatially defined areas in the specimen in which single fluorescent entities may be activated,)
Regarding claim 4, Harris as modified by Gharib, discloses the system, further comprising a tunable laser configured to vary a wavelength of the second light ray. (Per Fig. 15, Harris’s apparatus 370 comprises a laser 374 outputting a wavelength which transfers a desired pattern of a light. Harris col. 19 lines 12–32. Photolithography apparatus 370 includes a TEMoo laser 374 with an output wavelength that can activate the photoresist material on silicon wafer 372,)
Regarding claim 6, Harris as modified by Gharib, discloses the system, wherein the curved surface has an irregular shape, and wherein the system comprises an artificial intelligence engine or a machine learning engine configured to analyze the second set of images and the grid pattern to generate the 3D image. (Gharib discloses a matching algorithm to analyze points in terms of pattern image. Gharib col. 17 lines 44–51. The matching algorithm is configured to determine the distance between each point on the addressable-pattern surface image and its corresponding point on the addressable-pattern template image.)
Regarding claim 11, Harris as modified by Gharib, discloses the system, wherein the processing device is configured to use phase information from the second set of images to enhance a resolution of the 3-D image. (Gharib discloses high-resolution data set conducting matching algorithm where matched points are merged processing pattern information. Gharib col. 17 lines 44–51. Each of the matched points is then merged from the plurality of inner hulls according to their solid-body translations and rotations to form a high-resolution data set.)
Regarding claim 12, Harris as modified by Gharib, discloses the system, further comprising a micro-mirror array configured to dynamically adjust the grid pattern. (Per Fig. 15, Harris’s apparatus 370 comprises a laser 374 outputting a wavelength which transfers a desired pattern of a light. Harris col. 19 lines 12–32. Photolithography apparatus 370 includes a TEMoo laser 374 with an output wavelength that can activate the photoresist material on silicon wafer 372,)
Regarding claim 13, Harris as modified by Gharib, discloses the system, wherein the processing device is configured to autofocus the endoscope based on depth information from the second set of images. (Through Figs. 4A–4B, Gharib discloses a first point 414 and a second point 420. Gharib col. 11 lines 2–29. The first point 414 and first position information and second point 420 and second position information are then used to match the first point 414 from the first exposure with those of the second point 420.)
Regarding claim 18, it has been rejected in the same manner as claim 3.
Regarding claim 20, it has been rejected in the same manner as claim 6.
Claims 2, 5, 16–17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Harris in view of Gharib and further in view of Minato (U.S. 10,876,887 B2).
Regarding claim 2, Harris as modified by Gharib, discloses the claimed invention, but fails to specifically disclose the system, wherein the microcontroller is configured to adjust a density or a rotation of the first diffraction grating.
In related art, Minato discloses the system, wherein the microcontroller is configured to adjust a density or a rotation of the first diffraction grating. (Per Fig. 1, Minato discloses a rotation of a diffraction grating 6. Minato col. 4 line 59 – col. 5 line 8. The diffraction grating 6 is rotationally driven by the diffraction grating drive unit 18 composed of a stepping motor or the like so that the wavelength region of the light passing through the slit 14 is adjusted by the rotation position of the diffraction grating 6.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Minato into the teachings of Harris and Gharib to selectively apply high intensity diffracted light and low intensity diffracted light. Ibid. col. 4 lines 16–23.
Regarding claim 5, Harris as modified by Gharib, discloses the claimed invention, but fails to specifically disclose the system, wherein the curved surface has a symmetry of revolution, and wherein the system is configured to rotate the first diffraction grating around the optical axis to obtain different measurements of the curved surface.
In related art, Minato discloses the system, wherein the curved surface has a symmetry of revolution, and wherein the system is configured to rotate the first diffraction grating around the optical axis to obtain different measurements of the curved surface. (Per Fig. 1, Minato’s diffraction grating position adjustment unit 22 discloses a correlation between a rotation position of his grating 6 and a related region. Minato col. 5 lines 41–63. [t]he information on the correlation between the rotation position of the diffraction grating 6 and the wavelength region of the light guided to the flow cell 4 through the slit 14 for each of the plus side region and the minus side region of the diffracted light caused by the diffraction grating 6 is held as calibration information.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Minato into the teachings of Harris and Gharib to selectively apply high intensity diffracted light and low intensity diffracted light. Ibid. col. 4 lines 16–23.
Regarding claim 16, it has been rejected in the same manner as claim 2.
Regarding claim 17, Harris as modified by Gharib and Minato, discloses the method, wherein, using the LCD, the period of the diffraction grating is varied in real time or near real time. (Per Fig. 1, Minato’s optical sensor 16 discloses various arithmetic processes to process signals from his sensor 16. Minato col. 5 lines 20–28. The arithmetic control unit 20 is configured to perform the operation control of the spectroscopic detector and perform various arithmetic processing based on the detection signal from the optical sensor 16.)
Regarding claim 19, it has been rejected in the same manner as claim 5.
Claims 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Harris in view of Gharib and further in view of Lee (U.S. 9,151,962 B2).
Regarding claim 7, Harris as modified by Gharib, discloses the claimed invention, but fails to specifically disclose the system, wherein the processing device is configured to detect, at a focal point along the focal plane, a variation in the curved surface of the object in a first zone, and wherein, if the variation is a low variation in a curvature of the object, the processing device is configured to adjust the focal point to a second zone.
In related art, Lee discloses the system, wherein the processing device is configured to detect, at a focal point along the focal plane, a variation in the curved surface of the object in a first zone, and wherein, if the variation is a low variation in a curvature of the object, the processing device is configured to adjust the focal point to a second zone. (Per Fig. 1, Lee discloses a high intensity and a low intensity in terms of a light receiving plane as a laser beam adjusts a focal plane. Lee col. 7 line 63 – col. 8 line 4. The laser beam having a focal point located at the light receiving plane (in the beam spot image sensed by the image sensor 15) has a high intensity, whereas the laser beam having a focal point which is not located (e.g., which is in front of or behind) in the light receiving plane has a low intensity.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Lee into the teachings of Harris and Gharib to compare brightness position with a reference position such that a position of a beam spot image is determined. Ibid. col. 8 lines 5–13.
Claims 8–9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Harris in view of Gharib and Lee and further in view of Saari et al. (U.S. 2019/0257987 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Harris as modified by Gharib and Lee, discloses the claimed invention, but fails to specifically disclose the system, wherein the processing device is configured to measure a period of the first diffraction grating and/or a second diffraction grating and a contrast to obtain additional depth information.
In related art, Saari discloses the system, wherein the processing device is configured to measure a period of the first diffraction grating and/or a second diffraction grating and a contrast to obtain additional depth information. (Per Fig. 1, Saari’s light field imaging device discloses a grating period 34 to generate a diffracted wavefront 36. Saari Spec. ¶64. The diffraction grating assembly 24 can include at least one diffraction grating 28, each of which having a grating axis 30 and a refractive index modulation pattern 32 having a grating period 34 along the grating axis 30.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Saari into the teachings of Harris, Gharib and Lee such that the imaging device is sensitive to an intensity of wavefront of light providing a color filter array. Ibid. ¶65.
Regarding claim 9, Harris as modified by Gharib, Lee and Saari, discloses the system, further comprising a second diffraction grating, wherein the processing device uses the second diffraction grating to detect the focal point in the second zone. (Per Fig. 11, Saari discloses a second set 80b of diffraction grating 28. Saari Spec. ¶103. [t]he multiple sets 80a, 80b consist of a first set 80a of diffraction gratings 28 and a second set 80b of diffraction gratings 28,)
Claims 10 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Harris in view of Gharib and further in view of Saari.
Regarding claim 10, Harris as modified by Gharib, discloses the claimed invention, but fails to specifically disclose the system, further comprising a second diffraction grating having a second grid pattern different from the grid pattern of the first diffraction grating, wherein the processing device is configured to use the first and second diffraction gratings to generate at least two types of detectable patterns.
In related art, Saari discloses the system, further comprising a second diffraction grating having a second grid pattern different from the grid pattern of the first diffraction grating, wherein the processing device is configured to use the first and second diffraction gratings to generate at least two types of detectable patterns. (Through Figs. 12A–12C, Saari discloses two sets 80a and 80b of diffraction gratings along one pixel axis 58 and the other pixel axis 60. Saari Spec. ¶105. [t]he diffraction grating assembly 24 includes two sets 80a, 80b of orthogonally oriented diffraction gratings 28 that alternate only in columns. The grating axis orientation of one set 80a is along one pixel axis 58, and the grating axis orientation of the other set 80b is along the other pixel axis 60.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Saari into the teachings of Harris and Gharib to increase periodicity of circular diffraction gratings in more grating orientations. Ibid. ¶104.
Regarding claim 14, Harris as modified by Gharib, discloses the claimed invention, but fails to specifically disclose the system, wherein the processing device is configured to generate a Talbot carpet using the first diffraction grating and/or a second diffraction grating.
In related art, Saari discloses the system, wherein the processing device is configured to generate a Talbot carpet using the first diffraction grating and/or a second diffraction grating. (Per Fig. 7, Saari disclose higher order-diffractive orders to calculate a diffraction pattern of waves through a diffraction grating. Saari Spec. ¶87. [w]hen detecting the diffracted irradiance pattern within a few integer multiples of the wavelength with a photosensor or another imaging device of the same dimensional order as the grating, higher order-diffractive effects tend to be limited simply by spatial sampling.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Saari into the teachings of Harris and Gharib to increase periodicity of circular diffraction gratings in more grating orientations. Ibid. ¶104.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENEDICT LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-0390. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00-17:00 (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, Stephen R. Koziol can be reached at (408) 918-7630. 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.
/BENEDICT E LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2665
/Stephen R Koziol/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2665
Prosecution Insights