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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Objections
Claims 4, 7-8, 15, and 18-19 are objected to because of the following informalities: they recite “the first converted image,” and there are no clear antecedent basis. Claims 4, 7-8 should have depended at least on Claim 2, which introduces “a first converted image.” Claims 15, 18-19 should have depended at least on Claim 13, which introduces “a first converted image.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 6, 8, 17, and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities: they recite “the second converted image,” and there are no clear antecedent basis. Claims 6, 8 should have depended at least on Claim 3, which introduces “a second converted image.” Claims 17, 19 should have depended on at least on Claim 14, which introduces “a second converted image.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 3-4, 7, 15, 18 are objected to because of the following informalities: they recite “the outline,” and there are no clear antecedent basis. Claims 3-4, 7 should have depended at least on Claim 2, which introduces “an outline.” Claims 15, 18 should have depended at least on Claim 13, which introduces “an outline.” Appropriate correction is required.
It appears, due to an oversight, Applicant created incorrect dependences among the claims.
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 1, 3-6, 10, 12, and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atlas et al. (US 12327323 B2) in view of Lee et al. (KR 20200010952 A)1 and Linden et al. (DE 102016122064 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Atlas teaches A wearable electronic device (HMD 100), comprising: at least one lens (optical elements between the waveguide 115 and the eye 120); Projector 112) (
PNG
media_image1.png
502
644
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Atlas teaches “optical elements” could be at least one lens, stating “. . . the display device 110 may include one or more optical elements between the waveguide 115 and the eye 120. The optical elements may act to, for example, correct aberrations in the image light 160, magnify the image light 160, make some other optical adjustment of the image light 160, or perform a combination thereof. Examples of optical elements may include an aperture, a Fresnel lens, a refractive (e.g., convex and/or concave) lens, a reflective surface, a filter, or any other suitable optical element that affects image light.” Atlas, col. 6 lines 13-28.);
a waveguide (Waveguide 115) configured to receive an image (image based on projected light 155; “an HMD 100 may comprise a light source such as a projector 112 that emits projected light 155 depicting one or more images.” Atlas, col. 7 lines 4-6.) from the display (projector 112) and output the received image (output as image light 160) through the at least one lens (optical elements between the waveguide 115 and the eye 120 (Atlas, col. 6 lines 13-28));
an illuminance sensor (ambient light sensor) configured to detect external illuminance of the wearable electronic device (“At step 1230, the computing device may detect, using one or more sensors, characteristics of the scene of the real-world environment. A sensor, for example, may be couplers 150, 152, a camera, an ambient light sensor, a depth sensor, motion sensor, or any other type of sensor.” Atlas col. 14 lines 56-60.); and
at least one processor, comprising processing circuitry, wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to (Atlas col. 23 line 5- col. 25 line 3; Fig. 14):
“. . . obtaining a measurement of ambient light associated with a scene of a real-world environment; applying a virtual lighting effect to virtual content based at least in part on the measurement of the ambient light; . . .. ” Atlas Claim 1.), and
dynamically adjust, based on the detected illuminance, luminance (“virtual lighting”) of the image output through the display and a displaying form (“outline having an increased brightness”) of at least one object (“virtual content”) included in the image (
(1) Atlas teaches luminance adjustment through the use of “virtual lighting,” stating “Virtual lighting may be used as a dynamic user interface element that may change light color or direction to reflect state or to match ambient light. The direction from which virtual lighting originates may vary as a function of relative viewer/subject position to improve the illusion of presence (e.g., to make the virtual lighting on the AR virtual content match the lighting in the viewer's environment, adapting it dynamically as the viewer walks around or changes lighting conditions).” Atlas col. 19 lines 32-40.
(2) Atlas teaches displaying form adjustment through the use of outlining, stating “applying a virtual lighting effect to virtual content based at least in part on the measurement of the ambient light; . . . wherein the applied virtual lighting effect comprises an outline around the virtual content, the outline having an increased brightness that contrasts with the scene. ” Atlas Claim 1. “. . . dynamically adapting the virtual lighting effect [, referring to Claim 1’s outlining] to match the ambient light” Atlas Claim 3.
Atlas teaches combining of (1) and (2), stating “FIG. 11 illustrates an example in which AR virtual content rendered with a high-pass filter, gamma and saturation adjustments, an outline, and virtual lighting using a directional light effect has been overlaid on a scene. The combination of these rendering changes results in a rendered AR virtual content object that is clearly perceptible against the background scene, as both the outline and area of the AR virtual content object appear substantially brighter than and different in color from the background scene.” Atlas col. 13 line 66 – col. 14 line 9.).
Atlas does not explicitly disclose; however, Lee teaches the wearable electronic device, comprising: a battery (Lee Fig. 3 310
PNG
media_image2.png
462
390
media_image2.png
Greyscale
).
Lee also teaches, in addition to Atlas, dynamically adjust, based on the detected illuminance (Lee Fig. 4 420, 430), luminance of the image output through the display (Lee Fig. 4 450)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lee’s battery and other features with Atlas. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to provide a user with more convenience when a HMD could be freely move without power wires.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lee’s adaptive illuminance with Atlas. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to enhance visibility of virtual objects when environmental lightings impact on visibility.
Atlas in view of Lee does not explicitly disclose; however, Linden teaches in response to a specified event, activate a visibility enhancement mode, and in response to the activation of the visibility enhancement mode, enhance visibility (“Alternatively, the user could select an operating mode in which the enhanced visibility mode of operation is actuated, ….” Linden p. 5. “As non-limiting examples, switches or other dedicated actuators could be provided to allow the user to choose between the above-described modes or other modes of operation, such as the standard mode of operation, the enhanced visibility mode of operation, ….” Linden p. 5.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Linden’s user selection of an operation mode with Atlas in view of Lee. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to allow a user to have more control/influence of a computing system, which sometimes better fits the user’s needs and preference. “For example, other user-selected or automatic modes of operation could be used for the illuminable signal described 206 be provided to provide increased or decreased intensity, pattern and / or color of the emitted light.” Linden p. 5.
Regarding Claim 3, Atlas in view of Lee and Linden teaches The wearable electronic device of claim 1,
wherein based on the detected illuminance being within a designated second range, less than the first range (When the remaining capacity falls within the second predetermined range in which the remaining capacity is less than or equal to the threshold value, the processor 330 may adjust the output luminance of the projector and the transmittance based on the illuminance of the brightness by using Table 2 provided below.” Lee ¶ 65.
PNG
media_image3.png
156
324
media_image3.png
Greyscale
, where different ranges of luminance in lux are disclosed.), at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to:
set overall luminance (luminance levels based on display current in mA) of the image to a second luminance level, less than the first luminance level (Lee ¶ 65; Table 2),
identify the outline of at least one object included in the image (Atlas teaches displaying form adjustment through the use of outlining, stating “applying a virtual lighting effect to virtual content based at least in part on the measurement of the ambient light; . . . wherein the applied virtual lighting effect comprises an outline around the virtual content, the outline having an increased brightness that contrasts with the scene. ” Atlas Claim 1. “. . . dynamically adapting the virtual lighting effect [, referring to Claim 1’s outlining] to match the ambient light” Atlas Claim 3.);
divide, based on the identified outline, the image into an outline area corresponding to the outline and a non-outline area excluding the outline area (
PNG
media_image4.png
374
340
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
582
546
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Atlas FIG. 4B shows virtual object (duck) without visibility enhancement, Atlas states, “Fig. 4B illustrates an example in which baseline rendered virtual content has been overlaid on a scene.”
Atlas Fig. 11 shows the same virtual object with visibility enhancement. Atlas states, “FIG. 11 illustrates an example in which content rendered with a high-pass filter, gamma and saturation adjustments, an outline, and virtual lighting using a directional light effect has been overlaid on a scene.”
Here, Atlas Fig. 11 shows an outline area and non-outline area.);
generate a second converted image by setting luminance of the outline area higher than luminance of the non-outline area (The luminance of the outline area is higher than that of the non-outline area as shown in Atlas Figs. 4B, 11.); and
control the display to display the second converted image based on the second luminance level (Atlas Figs. 4B, 11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lee’s adaptive illuminance with Atlas. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to enhance visibility of virtual objects when environmental lightings impact on visibility.
Regarding Claim 4, Atlas in view of Lee and Linden teaches The wearable electronic device of claim 1, wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to set a color of the outline included in the first converted image to white or green (“FIG. 8A illustrates an example in which AR virtual content has been rendered with an outline. The outline may be generated by running an edge detection pass on the object (e.g., either on the visible pixels or on the depth map) to identify the object's edges, and then using the edges to trace glowing outlines around the object. The outline is a blue-green color in this example.” Altas col. 13 lines 12-18. “Example effects that could be rendered around the AR virtual content (e.g., AR virtual content may include stickers, text, avatars, images, videos, or objects) to create this effect include a white outline, a white gaussian blur, ….” Atlas col. 19 lines 55-58.).
Regarding Claim 5, Atlas in view of Lee and Linden teaches The wearable electronic device of claim 1, wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to:
based on the detected illuminance being within a designated third range, less than the second range, set overall luminance of the image to a third luminance level, less than the second luminance level, and control the display to display the image based on the third luminance level (“When the remaining capacity falls within the second predetermined range in which the remaining capacity is less than or equal to the threshold value, the processor 330 may adjust the output luminance of the projector and the transmittance based on the illuminance of the brightness by using Table 2 provided below.” Lee ¶ 65.
PNG
media_image3.png
156
324
media_image3.png
Greyscale
, where more than three ranges of luminance in lux are disclosed).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lee’s adaptive illuminance with Atlas. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to enhance visibility of virtual objects when environmental lightings impact on visibility.
Regarding Claim 6, Atlas in view of Lee and Linden teaches The wearable electronic device of claim 1, wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to set saturation of the second converted image to be lower than saturation of the image (“In some embodiments, a combination of image processing techniques, as well as additional virtual lighting may markedly improve the perceptibility of the AR virtual content. Certain processing techniques may include, for example, (1) brightening the rendering by tuning the gamma (brightening has the effect of desaturating the content, making them look washed out; saturation can be increased to compensate), …” Atlas col. 20 lines 21-28.).
Regarding Claim 10, Atlas in view of Lee and Linden teaches The wearable electronic device of claim 1, wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to:
identify a battery level as remaining capacity of the battery, and wherein the specified event that activates the visibility enhancement mode includes a state in which the battery level is less than a designated threshold (
Lee:
PNG
media_image6.png
336
366
media_image6.png
Greyscale
“. . . when the remaining capacity of the battery falls within the first predetermined range. For example, the first object 501 may be an object indicating the remaining capacity of the battery. When the remaining capacity of the battery falls within the first predetermined range, the processor 330 may display a second object 502 based on the detected illuminance using Table 1. For example, referring to Table 1, when the remaining capacity of the battery falls within the first predetermined range and the illuminance is 500 Lux, the processor 330 may adjust the display current to 150 mA and the transmittance of the transparent member to 50% to display objects.” Lee ¶ 64.
“When the remaining capacity falls within the second predetermined range in which the remaining capacity is less than or equal to the threshold value, the processor 330 may adjust the output luminance of the projector and the transmittance based on the illuminance of the brightness by using Table 2 provided below.” Lee ¶ 65.
PNG
media_image3.png
156
324
media_image3.png
Greyscale
).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lee’s adaptive illuminance with Atlas. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to enhance visibility of virtual objects when environmental lightings impact on visibility.
Claims 12 and 15-17 are substantially similar to Claim 1 and 4-6. The rejection analyses of Claims 1 and 4-6 based on Atlas in view of Lee and Linden are applied to Claims 12 and 15-17. In addition, Claim 12 recites, “A method of operating a wearable electronic device . . ., the method comprising: . . .” (Atlas Fig. 12)
Claims 2 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atlas in view of Lee and Linden as applied to Claim 1, in further view of ESPARZA et al. (US 20200267364 A1).
Regarding Claim 2, Atlas in view of Lee and Linden teaches The wearable electronic device of claim 1, wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to:
based on the detected illuminance being within a designated first range, set overall luminance of the image to a first luminance level (Lee Fig. 4 420, 430, 450; Table 2),
identify an outline of at least one object included in the image (Atlas teaches displaying form adjustment through the use of outlining, stating “applying a virtual lighting effect to virtual content based at least in part on the measurement of the ambient light; . . . wherein the applied virtual lighting effect comprises an outline around the virtual content, the outline having an increased brightness that contrasts with the scene. ” Atlas Claim 1. “. . . dynamically adapting the virtual lighting effect [, referring to Claim 1’s outlining] to match the ambient light” Atlas Claim 3.),
generate a first converted image including Atlas Claim 1.), and
control the display to display the first converted image based on the first luminance level (“. . . causing display of the virtual content with the applied virtual lighting effect on a display of a computing device for displaying augmented reality, wherein the scene of the real-world environment is visible through the display, wherein the applied virtual lighting effect comprises an outline around the virtual content, the outline having an increased brightness that contrasts with the scene.” Atlas Claim 1.).
Atlas in view of Lee and Linden does not explicitly disclose; however, ESPARZA teaches only the identified outline is displayed (“This means that only outlines and/or the shape of the virtual three-dimensional objects are visible on the display device. No texture is therefore shown, which significantly reduces the computational effort required to generate the representation on the display device.” ESPARZA ¶ 9.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine ESPARZA’s outline processing technique with Atlas in view of Lee and Linden. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to conserve computation resources, to simplify images, and/or to make images visually pleasing for some viewers. “This means that only outlines and/or the shape of the virtual three-dimensional objects are visible on the display device. No texture is therefore shown, which significantly reduces the computational effort required to generate the representation on the display device.” ESPARZA ¶ 9.
Claim 13 is substantially similar to Claim 2. The rejection analyses of Claim 2 based on Atlas in view of Lee, Linden, and ESPARZA are applied to Claim 13.
Regarding Claim 14, Atlas in view of Lee, Linden, and ESPARZA teaches The method of claim 13,
setting, based on the detected illuminance being within a designated second range, less than the first range, overall luminance of the image to a second luminance level, less than the first luminance level (
When the remaining capacity falls within the second predetermined range in which the remaining capacity is less than or equal to the threshold value, the processor 330 may adjust the output luminance of the projector and the transmittance based on the illuminance of the brightness by using Table 2 provided below.” Lee ¶ 65.
PNG
media_image3.png
156
324
media_image3.png
Greyscale
, where multiple ranges of luminance in lux are disclosed);
identifying the outline of at least one object included in the image (Atlas teaches displaying form adjustment through the use of outlining, stating “applying a virtual lighting effect to virtual content based at least in part on the measurement of the ambient light; . . . wherein the applied virtual lighting effect comprises an outline around the virtual content, the outline having an increased brightness that contrasts with the scene. ” Atlas Claim 1. “. . . dynamically adapting the virtual lighting effect [, referring to Claim 1’s outlining] to match the ambient light” Atlas Claim 3.);
dividing, based on the identified outline, the image into an outline area corresponding to the outline and a non-outline area excluding the outline area (
PNG
media_image4.png
374
340
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
582
546
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Atlas FIG. 4B shows virtual object (duck) without visibility enhancement, Atlas states, “Fig. 4B illustrates an example in which baseline rendered virtual content has been overlaid on a scene.”
Atlas Fig. 11 shows the same virtual object with visibility enhancement. Atlas states, “FIG. 11 illustrates an example in which content rendered with a high-pass filter, gamma and saturation adjustments, an outline, and virtual lighting using a directional light effect has been overlaid on a scene.”
Here, Atlas Fig. 11 shows an outline area and non-outline area.);
generating a second converted image by setting luminance of the outline area higher than luminance of the non-outline area (The luminance of the outline area is higher than that of the non-outline area as shown in Atlas Figs. 4B, 11.); and
controlling the display to display the second converted image based on the second luminance level (Atlas Figs. 4B, 11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lee’s adaptive illuminance with Atlas. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to enhance visibility of virtual objects when environmental lightings impact on visibility.
Claims 7 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atlas in view of Lee and Linden as applied to Claim 1, in further view of Yoshida et al. (WO 2015111197 A1).
Regarding Claim 7, Atlas in view of Lee and Linden teaches The wearable electronic device of claim 1, wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to enhance visibility of the outline included in the first converted image in proportion to magnitude of the detected illuminance (“The outline is distinctly perceptible and appears to be as bright as or brighter than the scene. The outline has a substantial amount of contrast with the scene because of its brightness, color, and/or pixel intensity, which is different from the scene's colors in the area of the AR virtual content.” Atlas col. 13 lines 20-25.).
However, Atlas in view of Lee and Linden does not explicitly disclose; however, Yoshida teaches enhancing visibility of an outline by an operation to increase a width of the outline (“Here, the highlighting means that the visibility of the subject is improved by making the edge of the subject appear thicker, the contrast is increased, or the edge is enlarged by partial scaling.” Yoshida p. 21.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Yoshida’s outline displaying technique with Atlas in view of Lee and Linden. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to enhance visibility of an outline. “Here, the highlighting means that the visibility of the subject is improved by making the edge of the subject appear thicker, the contrast is increased, or the edge is enlarged by partial scaling.” Yoshida p. 21.
Claim 18 is substantially similar to Claim 7. The rejection analyses of Claim 7 based on Atlas in view of Lee, Linden, and Yoshida are applied to Claim 18.
Claims 8 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atlas in view of Lee and Linden as applied to Claim 1, in further view of Kuroda (US 20220383632 A1) and Ritschel et al. (US 20210225049 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, Atlas in view of Lee and Linden teaches The wearable electronic device of claim 1, further comprising:
at least one front camera configured to capture a front of the wearable electronic device (“Example effects that could be rendered around the AR virtual content (e.g., AR virtual content may include stickers, text, avatars, images, videos, or objects) to create this effect include a white outline, a white gaussian blur, a brighter natural background (which may be achieved by taking the video feed from a camera on the device, brightening it, and then re-rendering it where the AR virtual content will be located, and then rendering the AR virtual content on top of that), or global offset and compression of the signal.” Atlas col. 19 lines 55-64.).
Atlas in view of Lee and Linden does not explicitly disclose; however, Kuroda teaches
generate a brightness map (
PNG
media_image7.png
194
136
media_image7.png
Greyscale
) corresponding to a front environment of the wearable electronic device using the illuminance sensor, the brightness map including brightness information mapped for each area of the front environment of the wearable electronic device (
PNG
media_image8.png
572
782
media_image8.png
Greyscale
The map shown after thresholding is a brightness map, because the thresholds are used to determine black or close-to-black areas. Kuroda ¶ 128 (“Threshold Value for Detecting Black Area”); Kuroda ¶ 128 (“Threshold Value for Detecting Transparent Area Having a Color Close to Black”).
The “0” and “1” are brightness information.
Kuroda teaches the threshold could be determined based on a illumination sensor, stating “Threshold Value Based on Sensing Result” (137).
[0138] Subsequently, a case where the threshold value setting unit 231 sets the threshold value on the basis of the sensing result of the sensor unit 220 will be described with reference to FIGS. 9 and 10.
[0103] , , , Furthermore, the sensor unit 220 includes an illuminance sensor, and detects an illuminance value of the real space.);
determine the brightness for each area of a field of area
Kuroda teaches determining “0” areas as dark area, stating “As described above, the AR glasses 20 may detect not only a black pixel, namely, a pixel having a pixel value of ‘0’, but also an area of a color through which the background is seen by the blackish transmissive display and that is difficult for the user to visually recognize (transparent area).” Kuroda ¶ 71. );
divide the field of area into a sunny area and a shaded area based on a brightness for each area of the field of area (
Fig. 3 shows differently labeled, e.g., “0” and “1”, areas for dark and not-dark areas. Fig. 24 shows an example of the application of technique in a scene with sunny areas and shaded areas.
PNG
media_image9.png
254
534
media_image9.png
Greyscale
); and
control the display to display the first converted image through the sunny area, and display the second converted image through the shaded area (“As illustrated in FIG. 24, in the corrected object Oc03, the areas at both ends [, shaded areas,] displayed overlapping with the building are corrected to be darker than the center area[, sunny area,] not overlapping therewith.” Kuroda ¶ 201.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Kuroda’s illuminance adjusting technique with Atlas in view of Lee and Linden. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to enhance visibility of virtual objects as shown in Kuroda Fig. 24.
Atlas in view of Lee, Linden, and Kuroda does not explicitly disclose; however, Ritschel teaches
the wearable electronic device comprises at least one eyeball-tracking camera configured to track a user's eyeball (“The computing device 20 further comprises, or is associated with an eye tracking device 24.” Ritschel ¶ 48.); and the wearable electronic device is configured to “The eye tracking device is a known device configured to determine the point of gaze of a user, such devices are commercially available.” Ritschel ¶ 48.);
determine image process corresponding to the user's gaze direction ( “The projected light space position then defines a new gaze position for foveated rendering of the rasterized shadow map. As described with reference to the process described in FIG. 2 the shadow map may then subsequently rendered to produce a foveated image using the light space position as determined at step S506 as the gaze position.” Ritschel ¶ 179.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ritschel’s foveated processing with Atlas in view of Lee, Linden, and Kuroda. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to tailor virtual images for a head mounted display, so that the rendered images appear correctly for the HMD.
Claim 19 is substantially similar to Claim 8. The rejection analyses of Claim 8 based on Atlas in view of Lee, Linden, Kuroda, and Ritschel are applied to Claim 19.
Claims 9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atlas in view of Lee and Linden as applied to Claim 1, in further view of Kuroda and Niclass et al. (US 20060192086 A1).
Regarding Claim 9, Atlas in view of Lee and Linden teaches The wearable electronic device of claim 1 wherein based on the visibility enhancement mode being activated, at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to: . . . (“Alternatively, the user could select an operating mode in which the enhanced visibility mode of operation is actuated, ….” “As non-limiting examples, switches or other dedicated actuators could be provided to allow the user to choose between the above-described modes or other modes of operation, such as the standard mode of operation, the enhanced visibility mode of operation, ….” Linden p. .).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Linden’s user selection of an operation mode with Atlas in view of Lee. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to allow a user to have more control/influence of a computing system, which sometimes better fits the user’s needs and preference.
Atlas in view of Lee and Linden does not explicitly disclose; however, Kuroda teaches
divide a plurality of pixels of the display into an on-pixel group and an off-pixel group Kuroda Fig. 3:
PNG
media_image7.png
194
136
media_image7.png
Greyscale
, where “0” pixels correspond to off-pixel and “1” pixels correspond to on-pixel); and
apply designated power and offset power to the on-pixel group so that luminance of the on-pixel group is enhanced while displaying the
“When the remaining capacity falls within the second predetermined range in which the remaining capacity is less than or equal to the threshold value, the processor 330 may adjust the output luminance of the projector and the transmittance based on the illuminance of the brightness by using Table 2 provided below.” Lee ¶ 65.
PNG
media_image3.png
156
324
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Here, the display power corresponds to “Display Current.” Lee Table 2 shows many levels of power. After the combination of Atlas, Lee, Linden, and Kuroda, the number of levels are reduced to 2.
For example, the off-pixel could be run with 30 mA and on-pixel could be run with 100 mA after the combination of the references.
The designated power [Wingdings font/0xE0] 30 mA
The offset power [Wingdings font/0xE0] 100-30=70 mA).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lee’s adaptive illuminance with Atlas. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to enhance visibility of virtual objects when environmental lightings impact on visibility.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Kuroda’s illuminance adjusting technique with Atlas in view of Lee and Linden. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to enhance visibility of virtual objects as shown in Kuroda Fig. 24.
Atlas in view of Lee, Linden, and Kuroda does not explicitly disclose; however, Niclass teaches generate a low-resolution image by reducing resolution of the image; generate an attribute map in relation to the low-resolution image (
“This circuit may thus be used to produce a depth map with a first resolution and a brightness map with a second, lower resolution. Brightness data can be used to prevent saturation of the 3D pixels when ambient light is too bright, for example by controlling a diaphragm, and/or for improving and completing a 3D representation of a scene.” Niclass ¶ 63.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Niclass’ lower resolution technique with Atlas in view of Lee, Linden, and Kuroda. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to reduce computation and/or to improve image processing. “This circuit may thus be used to produce a depth map with a first resolution and a brightness map with a second, lower resolution. Brightness data can be used to prevent saturation of the 3D pixels when ambient light is too bright, for example by controlling a diaphragm, and/or for improving and completing a 3D representation of a scene.” Niclass ¶ 63.
Claim 20 is substantially similar to Claim 9. The rejection analyses of Claim 9 based on Atlas in view of Lee, Linden, Kuroda, and Niclass are applied to Claim 20.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Atlas in view of Lee and Linden as applied to Claim 1, in further view of FUJIMAKI (JP 2017003856 A).
Regarding Claim 11, Atlas in view of Lee and Linden teaches The wearable electronic device of claim 1.
Atlas in view of Lee and Linden does not explicitly disclose; however, FUJIMAKI teaches wherein the specified event that activates the visibility enhancement mode includes an input through an external device (FUJIMAKI Fig. 1:
PNG
media_image10.png
476
270
media_image10.png
Greyscale
“The display switching key 13 outputs, for example, a signal instructing switching of the image display mode in response to the pressing operation.” FUJIMAKI p. 5. It would also have been obvious to implement display switching key 13 as a software key.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine FUJIMAKI’s external control with Atlas in view of Lee and Linden. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to help a user to interact mediated reality application. Some may prefer traditional device interfaces.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Border (US 10877270 B2): teaching a device that is similar to Applicant’s claimed invention:
“determine whether a brightness of the first ambient light exceeds a threshold value, adjust the display data to increase a brightness of the image light in accordance with the determination that the brightness of the first ambient light exceeds the threshold value, determine whether a brightness of the second ambient light exceeds a threshold value, and adjust the display data to increase a brightness of the image light in accordance with the determination that the brightness of the second ambient light exceeds the threshold value.” Claim 15.
Border’s teaching is not as close as the primary reference Atlas is to the claimed invention. For example, Border does not disclose emphasizing an outline to enhance of visibility.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHENGXI LIU whose telephone number is (571)270-7509. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 AM - 5 PM.
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, Kee Tung can be reached at 571-272-7794. 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.
/ZHENGXI LIU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2611
1 US 20210295751 A1 is used as the English translation of Lee et al., because US 20210295751 A1 is Lee’s corresponding US application. The publication date of Lee et al. is outside of the one-year-window before the effective filing date of the instant application.
Prosecution Insights