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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1-2, 5, 7, 9-12, 15, 17 and 19-20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yang et al. (US 2019/0213402 A1).
Claim 1: A method comprising:
obtaining an image of a user, the image including an image of an eye of the user; Yang teaches capturing images of a user’s eyes using a camera positioned opposite the user. See FIG. 2B and 4B; [0069 and 0082].
estimating a position of a corneal reflection in the image; Yang teaches detecting and determining the geometric relationships between the positions of the corneal reflections of the two light sources in the camera. See FIG. 3 and 4B; [0069 and 0082].
determining a positional information for the user’s head based on the image; Yang teaches determining head pose with six DOF, including the angular positioning pitch, yaw, and roll. See [0027 and 0064]; FIG. 1; FIG. 4B.
estimating a position of a cornea center for the user’s eye based on the position of the corneal reflection in the image and the positional information, Yang teaches to estimate the 3D coordinates of the center of corneal curvatures of the eyes. See [0033-0055, 0069, 0082, and 0089].
Claim 2: The method of claim 1, wherein the image of a user is obtained by using an IR camera and at least one IR LED, wherein estimating the position of the cornea center for the user's eye comprises: Yang teaches the camera 250 can be a near infrared (NIR) camera. The light sources 252 and 254 can be LED or other types of light sources, including NIR LED light sources. See [0068].
determining a distance between the user’s eye and the IR camera based on the positional information; and Yang teaches calculating 3D positions (x, y, z coordinates) of the eye features in the camera coordinate system, which provides the eye-to-camera distance. See [0050, 0069, 0082, and 0090].
estimating the position of the cornea center based on the distance, corneal radius, camera location, LED location, and corneal reflection position. Yang teaches the camera and light source calibration to determine their locations, an eye model that includes corneal geometry and radius parameters, and calculated eye-to-camera distance to estimate the 3D coordinates of the cornea center. See FIG. 2A, 4A; and [0033-0055, 0069, 0082, 0087].
Claim 5: The method of claim 1, wherein the positional information for the user's head includes a head pose of the user. Yang teaches head pose angles including position and orientation with six degrees of freedom. See Abstract; [0027 and 0064].
Claim 7: The method of claim 2, wherein the IR camera is positioned at a distance from the user and the image is a face image. Yang teaches capturing face images that include the eyes. See FIG. 4A, [0073 and 0082]
Claim 9: The method of claim 2, wherein the image of a user includes a bright pupil. Yang teaches the image of the pupil. The scope of a “bright” pupil is unkown. See [0065-0066]
Claim 10: The method of claim 1, wherein the estimated gaze vector is a 3D gaze vector. Yang teaches gaze in a three-dimensional coordinate system See FIG. 8 and [0064-0067].
Claim 11 is rejected for similar reasons as to those described in claim 1.
Claim 12 is rejected for similar reasons as to those described in claim 2.
Claim 15 is rejected for similar reasons as to those described in claim 5.
Claim 17 is rejected for similar reasons as to those described in claim 7.
Claim 19 is rejected for similar reasons as to those described in claim 9.
Claim 20 is rejected for similar reasons as to those described in claim 1.
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.
Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 2019/0213402 A1) in view of Drozdov et al. (US 2022/0050521 A1).
Claim 8. The method of claim 2, wherein the image is an eye image and the positional information for a user's head is a distance of a user's eye from the IR camera, the distance of the user's eye from the IR camera being obtained from a head mounted device. Yang does not explicitly teach a head-mounted device configuration. Drozdov teaches head-mounted video displays such as those that have been developed for virtual. See Drozdov, [0004]. It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date, to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement Yang’s provided in claim 1 above in a head-mounted device configuration as taught by Drozdov. One would be motivated to provide gaze tracking functionality in virtual reality and other head-mounted display applications.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 4, 6, 13, 14, and 16 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 Amandeep Saini whose telephone number is (571)272-3382. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (8AM-4PM).
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.
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.
/AMANDEEP SAINI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2662
Prosecution Insights