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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 3/4/25, 3/4/25, 3/4/25, and 3/4/25 are in accordance with provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (U.S. Patent No. 11,004,233) in view of Breisacher et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0387149; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25) and in view of Gratacós Solsona et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0295062; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25; hereinafter referred to as “Gratacós”).
In regard to claim 1, Wang teaches a camera tracking system (Figs. 1-2) for…, the camera tracking system (i.e., intelligent vision-based detection and ranging system 100, 200, 400, 500) (Figs. 1-2, 4-5) comprising:
a processor (i.e., a processor 130) (Fig. 1; col. 3, lines 37-41);
a camera tracking bar (Figs. 1-2) coupled to the processor and configured to be stationary relative to an operating table, the camera bar including:
a first set of stereo tracking cameras (i.e., first stereo vision system 402, second stereo vision system 404, camera 102, 104, 106, 108, 202, 204, 206, 208) (Figs. 1-2, 4-5) having a first resolution (i.e., resolution 1280x800, resolution 2688x1520, resolution 1280x800, 1920x1080) (col. 4, lines 16-39) and a first field of view (FOV) (i.e., field of view 202, 204, 206, 208) (Fig. 2), and spaced apart on the camera tracking bar by a first baseline distance (i.e., baseline 120, 122) (Figs. 1-2);
a second set of stereo tracking cameras (i.e., first stereo vision system 402, second stereo vision system 404, camera 102, 104, 106, 108, 202, 204, 206, 208) (Figs. 1-2, 4-5) having a second resolution (i.e., resolution 1280x800, resolution 2688x1520, resolution 1280x800, 1920x1080) (col. 4, lines 16-39) and a second FOV (i.e., field of view 202, 204, 206, 208) (Fig. 2), and spaced apart on the camera tracking bar by a second baseline distance that is less than the first baseline distance (i.e., baseline 120, 122; a second stereo vision system baseline B2 is greater than a first stereo vision system base line B1) (Figs. 1-2; col. 4, lines 9-15);
wherein the second set of stereo tracking cameras is positioned between the first set of stereo tracking cameras (i.e., the camera 102 and 104…form a first stereo vision system (e.g., “second set of stereo tracking cameras”); the camera 106 and the camera…form a second stereo vision system (e.g., “first set of stereo tracking cameras”) (Fig. 1; col. 3, lines 53-58), and…the FOV of the second set of stereo tracking cameras are different from…the FOV of the first set of stereo tracking cameras (i.e., a first stereo vision system field of view A1 (e.g., “second set of stereo tracking cameras”) is greater than a second stereo vision system field of view A2 (e.g., “first set of stereo tracking cameras”)) (Fig. 2; col. 4, lines 9-15); and
a communication interface (i.e., network interface 130) (Fig. 1; col. 3, lines 37-45) configured to output video streams from the first set of stereo tracking cameras and the second set of stereo tracking cameras to the processor for tracking a plurality of surgical instruments (i.e., the camera 102 and 104 connected to a processor 130 and a memory 140 form a first stereo vision system; the camera 106 and the camera 108 connected to a processor 130 and a memory 140 form a second stereo vision system; all cameras 102, 104, 106, 108 and 110 are synchronized in capture time; thus the same object can be associated and tracked among different cameras) (Fig. 1, 4-5; col. 3, lines 53-58; col. 6, lines 12-27).
However, Wang does not explicitly teach computer assisted navigation during surgery, nor does it teach a near-infrared (NIR) illuminator positioned near the first or second set of stereo tracking cameras, and configured to generate NIR light for illuminating a surgical field, and does not teach the resolution…of the second set resolution of stereo tracking cameras are different from the resolution…of the first set of stereo tracking cameras.
In the same field of endeavor, Breisacher teaches computer assisted navigation during surgery (i.e., surgical navigation system 20 includes a computer cart assembly 24 that houses a navigation computer 26) (Fig. 1; para[0031]), and teaches the resolution…of the second set of stereo tracking cameras are different from the resolution…of the first set of stereo tracking cameras (i.e., the machine vision system 12 may provide relatively low resolution tracking of the objects within the operating room based on the machine vision information; the navigation system 20…may provide relatively high resolution tracking of the objects within the operating room using the optical sensors 140) (para[0099]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to combine the teachings of Wang and Breisacher because Breisacher teaches that the navigation system 20 may be configured to selectively size and position the region of interest 76 within the optical sensors' 40 field of view 74 in order for the navigation system 20 to limit the volume of data to be processed and improve tracking speed (See, for example, para[0085] of Breisacher). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Wang with those of Breisacher.
However, while Breisacher teaches the use of infrared light sources, it does not explicitly teach a near-infrared (NIR) illuminator positioned near the first or second set of stereo tracking cameras, and configured to generate NIR light for illuminating a surgical field.
In the same field of endeavor, Gratacós teaches a near-infrared (NIR) illuminator positioned near the first or second set of stereo tracking cameras (i.e., the infrared light source (4) is preferably a source belonging to the NIR (ranging from 750 nm to 1600 nm)) (para[0058]-[0059], and configured to generate NIR light for illuminating a surgical field (i.e., the video channel or channels that are available on the endoscope are coupled to an infrared light source (4) and a white light source (5) or a light source that contain at least three wavelengths within the blue, green and red) (para[0057]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to combine the teachings of Wang and Breisacher with those of Gratacós because Gratacós teaches the use of infrared-enhancing imaging of anatomical structures applied to skin and open surgical procedures which has the advantage that it does not need contrast agents to carry out the task of representing the vascular map and avoids the use of substances potentially dangerous for the fetus (in foetal surgery) when administered in a considerable amount or during a long period of time and reducing, in general, the invasiveness of the rest of the surgical procedures (See, for example, para[0042]-[0044] of Gratacós). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Wang and Breisacher with those of Gratacós.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (U.S. Patent No. 11,004,233) in view of Breisacher et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0387149; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25) and in view of Gratacós Solsona et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0295062; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25; hereinafter referred to as “Gratacós”), further in view of Lee (U.S. Pub. No. 2014/0240469).
In regard to claim 2, Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós teach all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. However, Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós do not explicitly teach wherein the processor is configured to turn on the NIR illuminator when an ambient light level is below an ambient light threshold.
In the same field of endeavor, Lee teaches wherein the processor is configured to turn on the NIR illuminator when an ambient light level is below an ambient light threshold (i.e., processor 802 samples the ambient light sensor 826…compares the current ambient light read to a specified threshold; if the current ambient light reading is less than the threshold, at block 1108 the 2D processor 802…enables the modulated light projector 119; near-infrared light from the modulated light projector 119) (Fig. 11; para[0098]-[0099], [0043]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to combine the teachings of Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós with those of Lee because Lee teaches various techniques for the selective enablement and control of the depth sensor so as to reduce power consumption, where the depth sensor 120 uses a modulated light project 119 to project modulated light patterns (See, for example, para[0019], [0025] of Lee). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós with those of Lee.
In regard to claim 3, Wang, Breisacher, Gratacós, and Lee teach all of the limitations of claims 1 and 2 as discussed above. However, Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós do not explicitly teach wherein responsive to turning on the NIR illuminator, the processor stops processing video from the first set of stereo tracking cameras based on a visible light camera calibration file and starts processing the video using an NIR light camera calibration file.
In the same field of endeavor, Lee teaches wherein responsive to turning on the NIR illuminator, the processor stops processing video from the first set of stereo tracking cameras based on a visible light camera calibration file and starts processing the video using an NIR light camera calibration file (i.e., if the current ambient light reading is less than the threshold, at block 1108 the 2D processor 802 enters a modulated-light depth sensing mode (or stays in this mode if it is already in this mode) and enables the modulated light projector 119; further, if the 2D processor 802 switches to this mode from the modulated light depth sending mode, the 2D processor 802 sets the activation configuration to a default non-zero frequency, intensity, and duration) (para[0099]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to combine the teachings of Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós with those of Lee for the same reasons as those discussed above for claim 2.
Claims 4, 11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (U.S. Patent No. 11,004,233) in view of Breisacher et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0387149; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25) and in view of Gratacós Solsona et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0295062; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25; hereinafter referred to as “Gratacós”), further in view of Darty et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0281204).
In regard to claim 4, Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós teach all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. However, Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós do not explicitly teach further comprising a dual pass filter that passes a first band of selected range of visible light and a second band of selected range of NIR light.
In the same field of endeavor, Darty teaches further comprising a dual pass filter (i.e., a subset of the plurality of multi-bandpass filters are dual bandpass filters) (para[0019]) that passes a first band of selected range of visible light and a second band of selected range of NIR light (i.e., one of the double-bandpass filters 216-4 of prior disclosed detectors is replaced with a filter 217-1 that allows three bands to pass through the filter 217-1, one of which is in the near infrared region (e.g., greater than 800 nm)) (para[0119]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to combine the teachings of Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós with those of Darty because Darty teaches collecting each image in the image series at a different spectral band in order to allow for a faster overall exposure time because each of the images in the series of images is only allocated an amount of time needed for full exposure, rather than a “one size fits all” exposure time (See, for example, para[0217] of Darty). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós with those of Darty.
In regard to claim 11, Wang teaches a camera tracking system (Figs. 1-2) for…, the camera tracking system (i.e., intelligent vision-based detection and ranging system 100, 200, 400, 500) (Figs. 1-2, 4-5) comprising:
a processor (i.e., a processor 130) (Fig. 1; col. 3, lines 37-41);
a camera tracking bar (Figs. 1-2) coupled to the processor and configured to be stationary relative to an operating table, the camera bar including:
a first set of stereo tracking cameras (i.e., first stereo vision system 402, second stereo vision system 404, camera 102, 104, 106, 108, 202, 204, 206, 208) (Figs. 1-2, 4-5) having a first resolution (i.e., resolution 1280x800, resolution 2688x1520, resolution 1280x800, 1920x1080) (col. 4, lines 16-39) and a first field of view (FOV) (i.e., field of view 202, 204, 206, 208) (Fig. 2), and spaced apart on the camera tracking bar by a first baseline distance (i.e., baseline 120, 122) (Figs. 1-2);
a second set of stereo tracking cameras (i.e., first stereo vision system 402, second stereo vision system 404, camera 102, 104, 106, 108, 202, 204, 206, 208) (Figs. 1-2, 4-5) having a second resolution (i.e., resolution 1280x800, resolution 2688x1520, resolution 1280x800, 1920x1080) (col. 4, lines 16-39) and a second FOV (i.e., field of view 202, 204, 206, 208) (Fig. 2), and spaced apart on the camera tracking bar by a second baseline distance that is less than the first baseline distance (i.e., baseline 120, 122; a second stereo vision system baseline B2 is greater than a first stereo vision system base line B1) (Figs. 1-2; col. 4, lines 9-15);
wherein the second set of stereo tracking cameras is positioned between the first set of stereo tracking cameras (i.e., the camera 102 and 104…form a first stereo vision system (e.g., “second set of stereo tracking cameras”); the camera 106 and the camera…form a second stereo vision system (e.g., “first set of stereo tracking cameras”) (Fig. 1; col. 3, lines 53-58), and…and the FOV of the second set of stereo tracking cameras are different from…and the FOV of the first set of stereo tracking cameras (i.e., a first stereo vision system field of view A1 (e.g., “second set of stereo tracking cameras”) is greater than a second stereo vision system field of view A2 (e.g., “first set of stereo tracking cameras”)) (Fig. 2; col. 4, lines 9-15);
a communication interface (i.e., network interface 130) (Fig. 1; col. 3, lines 37-45) configured to output video streams from the first set of stereo tracking cameras and the second set of stereo tracking cameras to the processor for tracking a plurality of surgical instruments including an optical array affixed to a patient (i.e., the camera 102 and 104 connected to a processor 130 and a memory 140 form a first stereo vision system; the camera 106 and the camera 108 connected to a processor 130 and a memory 140 form a second stereo vision system; all cameras 102, 104, 106, 108 and 110 are synchronized in capture time; thus the same object can be associated and tracked among different cameras) (Fig. 1, 4-5; col. 3, lines 53-58; col. 6, lines 12-27).
However, Wang does not explicitly teach computer assisted navigation during surgery nor does it teach a near-infrared (NIR) illuminator positioned near the first or second set of stereo tracking cameras, and configured to generate NIR light for illuminating a surgical field, nor does it teach wherein a sensor exposure speed for the first set of stereo tracking cameras is different from the second set of stereo tracking cameras.
In the same field of endeavor, Breisacher teaches computer assisted navigation during surgery (i.e., surgical navigation system 20 includes a computer cart assembly 24 that houses a navigation computer 26) (Fig. 1; para[0031]), and teaches the resolution…of the second set of stereo tracking cameras are different from the resolution…of the first set of stereo tracking cameras (i.e., the machine vision system 12 may provide relatively low resolution tracking of the objects within the operating room based on the machine vision information; the navigation system 20…may provide relatively high resolution tracking of the objects within the operating room using the optical sensors 140) (para[0099]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to combine the teachings of Wang and Breisacher because Breisacher teaches that the navigation system 20 may be configured to selectively size and position the region of interest 76 within the optical sensors' 40 field of view 74 in order for the navigation system 20 to limit the volume of data to be processed and improve tracking speed (See, for example, para[0085] of Breisacher). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Wang with those of Breisacher.
However, while Breisacher teaches the use of infrared light sources, it does not explicitly teach a near-infrared (NIR) illuminator positioned near the first or second set of stereo tracking cameras, and configured to generate NIR light for illuminating a surgical field, nor does it teach wherein a sensor exposure speed for the first set of stereo tracking cameras is different from the second set of stereo tracking cameras.
In the same field of endeavor, Gratacós teaches a near-infrared (NIR) illuminator positioned near the first or second set of stereo tracking cameras (i.e., the infrared light source (4) is preferably a source belonging to the NIR (ranging from 750 nm to 1600 nm)) (para[0058]-[0059], and configured to generate NIR light for illuminating a surgical field (i.e., the video channel or channels that are available on the endoscope are coupled to an infrared light source (4) and a white light source (5) or a light source that contain at least three wavelengths within the blue, green and red) (para[0057]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to combine the teachings of Wang and Breisacher with those of Gratacós because Gratacós teaches the use of infrared-enhancing imaging of anatomical structures applied to skin and open surgical procedures which has the advantage that it does not need contrast agents to carry out the task of representing the vascular map and avoids the use of substances potentially dangerous for the fetus (in foetal surgery) when administered in a considerable amount or during a long period of time and reducing, in general, the invasiveness of the rest of the surgical procedures (See, for example, para[0042]-[0044] of Gratacós). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Wang and Breisacher with those of Gratacós.
However, Gratacós does not explicitly teach wherein a sensor exposure speed for the first set of stereo tracking cameras is different from the second set of stereo tracking cameras.
In the same field of endeavor, Darty teaches wherein a sensor exposure speed for the first set of stereo tracking cameras is different from the second set of stereo tracking cameras (i.e., the methods and systems described herein include executable instructions for identifying a plurality of baseline exposure times, each respective baseline exposure time in the plurality of baseline exposure times representing an exposure time for resolving a respective image, in the series of images of the tissue being collected; a first baseline exposure time for a first image is different than a second baseline exposure time of a second image in the plurality of images) (para[0218]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to combine the teachings of Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós with those of Darty because Darty teaches collecting each image in the image series at a different spectral band in order to allow for a faster overall exposure time because each of the images in the series of images is only allocated an amount of time needed for full exposure, rather than a “one size fits all” exposure time (See, for example, para[0217] of Darty). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós with those of Darty.
In regard to claim 14, the claim recites analogous limitations to claim 4 above, and is therefore rejected on the same premise.
Claims 5-7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (U.S. Patent No. 11,004,233) in view of Breisacher et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0387149; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25) in view of Gratacós Solsona et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0295062; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25; hereinafter referred to as “Gratacós”), further in view of Nash et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0038362; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25).
In regard to claim 5, Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós teach all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. However, Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós do not explicitly teach wherein the first set of stereo tracking cameras are attached to a surface of the camera tracking bar and are angled inwardly toward each other at a first angle.
In the same field of endeavor, Nash teaches wherein the first set of stereo tracking cameras are attached to a surface of the camera tracking bar and are angled inwardly toward each other at a first angle (i.e., camera mesh 155, 120, 140, first camera device 150 and second camera device 155 may be mechanized with the ability to rotate and adjust the angulation up and down) (Figs. 1-2; para[0025]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to combine the teachings of Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós with those of Nash because Nash teaches a surgical field camera system to assist surgeons during surgery by providing various unobstructed camera views and accurate positioning of surgical tools/robotics to improve surgical outcomes (See, for example, para[0041] of Nash). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós with those of Nash.
In regard to claim 6, Wang, Breisacher, Gratacós, and Nash teach all of the limitations of claims 1 and 5 as discussed above. However, Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós do not explicitly teach wherein the second set of stereo tracking cameras are attached to a surface of the camera tracking bar and are angled inwardly toward each other at a second angle that is different from the first angle.
In the same field of endeavor, Nash teaches wherein the second set of stereo tracking cameras are attached to a surface of the camera tracking bar and are angled inwardly toward each other at a second angle that is different from the first angle (i.e., camera mesh 155, 120, 140, first camera device 150 and second camera device 155 may be mechanized with the ability to rotate and adjust the angulation up and down) (Figs. 1-2; para[0025]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to combine the teachings of Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós with those of Nash for the same reasons as those discussed above for claim 5.
In regard to claim 7, Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós teach all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. In addition, Wang teaches wherein the camera bar further comprises an inertial motion sensor (IMU) for sensing movement of the camera bar (i.e., inertial sensors) (Figs. 1-2; para[0025], [0060]).
However, Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós do not explicitly teach the processor is configured to determine whether a movement sensed by the IMU is from the camera bar or a tracked optical array.
In the same field of endeavor, Nash teaches the processor is configured to determine whether a movement sensed by the IMU is from the camera bar or a tracked optical array (i.e., inertial sensors to report the positioning of the user and thus the camera) (para[0049]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to combine the teachings of Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós with those of Nash for the same reasons as those discussed above for claim 5.
In regard to claim 10, Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós teach all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. However, Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós do not explicitly teach wherein the processor is further configured to track the surgical instruments through both the first and second sets of stereo tracking cameras simultaneously to reduce a point triangulation ambiguity.
In the same field of endeavor, Nash teaches wherein the processor is further configured to track the surgical instruments through both the first and second sets of stereo tracking cameras simultaneously to reduce a point triangulation ambiguity (i.e., the surgical field camera system 200 may utilize a camera mesh of multiple camera devices to triangulate the position of an object in space and track its location; each camera device, such as the first camera device 150, may include multiple cameras mounted a fixed distance from each other providing triangulation capabilities within each camera device) (para[0034]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to combine the teachings of Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós with those of Nash for the same reasons as those discussed above for claim 5.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (U.S. Patent No. 11,004,233) in view of Breisacher et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0387149; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25) in view of Gratacós Solsona et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0295062; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25; hereinafter referred to as “Gratacós”) and in view of Nash et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0038362; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25), further in view of Sadi et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0088280).
In regard to claim 8, Wang, Breisacher, Gratacós, and Nash teach all of the limitations of claims 1 and 7 as discussed above. However, Wang, Breisacher, Gratacós, and Nash do not explicitly teach wherein the processor is further configured to align orientation of motion data measurements from the IMU to a gravity reference.
In the same field of endeavor, Sadi teaches wherein the processor is further configured to align orientation of motion data measurements from the IMU to a gravity reference (i.e., stereoscopic 3-D video; in particular embodiments, an accelerometer may be used to ascertain a gravity vector and align 360° stereoscopic 3-D environment 240 to a global vertical access of the user) (para[0167]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to combine the teachings of Wang, Breisacher, Gratacós, and Nash with those of Sadi because Sadi teaches the alignment of 3-D video based on the user’s relative position so that the user can use the stereoscopic 3-D environment in an interactive way (See, for example, Sadi para[0167]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Wang, Breisacher, Gratacós, and Nash with those of Sadi.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (U.S. Patent No. 11,004,233) in view of Breisacher et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0387149; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25) in view of Gratacós Solsona et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0295062; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25; hereinafter referred to as “Gratacós”), further in view of Sadi et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0088280).
In regard to claim 9, Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós teach all of the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above. However, Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós wherein the processor is further configured to align orientation of the video streams to a gravity reference.
In the same field of endeavor, Sadi teaches wherein the processor is further configured to align orientation of the video streams to a gravity reference (i.e., stereoscopic 3-D video; in particular embodiments, an accelerometer may be used to ascertain a gravity vector and align 360° stereoscopic 3-D environment 240 to a global vertical access of the user) (para[0167]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to combine the teachings of Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós with those of Sadi because Sadi teaches the alignment of 3-D video based on the user’s relative position so that the user can use the stereoscopic 3-D environment in an interactive way (See, for example, Sadi para[0167]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Wang, Breisacher, and Gratacós with those of Sadi.
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (U.S. Patent No. 11,004,233) in view of Breisacher et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0387149; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25) in view of Gratacós Solsona et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0295062; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25; hereinafter referred to as “Gratacós”) and in view of Darty et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0281204), further in view of Lee (U.S. Pub. No. 2014/0240469).
In regard to claims 12-13, the claims recite analogous limitations to claims 2-3 above, and are therefore rejected on the same premise.
Claims 15-17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (U.S. Patent No. 11,004,233) in view of Breisacher et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0387149; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25) in view of Gratacós Solsona et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0295062; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25; hereinafter referred to as “Gratacós”) and in view of Darty et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0281204), further in view of Nash et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0038362; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25).
In regard to claims 15-17 and 20, the claims recite analogous limitations to claims 5-7 and 10 above, and are therefore rejected on the same premise.
Claim 18 is are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (U.S. Patent No. 11,004,233) in view of Breisacher et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0387149; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25) in view of Gratacós Solsona et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0295062; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25; hereinafter referred to as “Gratacós”) in view of Darty et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0281204) and in view of Nash et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0038362; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25), further in view of Sadi et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0088280).
In regard to claim 18, the claim recites analogous limitations to claim 8 above, and is therefore rejected on the same premise.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (U.S. Patent No. 11,004,233) in view of Breisacher et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0387149; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25) in view of Gratacós Solsona et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0295062; cited in the IDS filed 3/4/25; hereinafter referred to as “Gratacós”) and in view of Darty et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0281204), further in view of Sadi et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0088280).
In regard to claim 19, the claim recites analogous limitations to claim 9 above, and is therefore rejected on the same premise.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kristin Dobbs whose telephone number is (571)270-7936. The examiner can normally be reached Monday and Thursday 9:30am-5:30pm 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, Sathyanarayanan Perungavoor can be reached at (571)272-7455. 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.
KRISTIN DOBBS
Examiner
Art Unit 2488
/KRISTIN DOBBS/Examiner, Art Unit 2488
Prosecution Insights