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 § 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, 7-9, 11-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over St. Pierre et al (US 10930072 B1, hereinafter St. Pierre) and Kishikawa et al (US 20160012632 A1, hereinafter Kishikawa).
Regarding claim 1, St. Pierre teaches a computer-implemented method (Col 3 Line 31-33 “that includes a computer aided design (CAD) environment and a SfM photogrammetry application.”),
comprising: receiving a request to display a first viewpoint of a first terrain mesh of at least a portion of a three-dimensional map (Col 5 Line 1-4 “At step 310, a user request is received (e.g., as input in a GUI) to display a region of the multi-resolution mesh at a given resolution with contour lines”) including a set of three-dimensional contour lines (Col 5 Line 1-4 “At step 310, a user request is received (e.g., as input in a GUI) to display a region of the multi-resolution mesh at a given resolution with contour lines”, Col 4 Line 45-47 “Each tile represents a region (e.g., in the case of a 3D mesh depicted here, a cubic region) in multi-dimensional space (e.g., in the case here, a 3D space)”);
and displaying the first viewpoint of the first terrain mesh and the set of three-dimensional contour lines (Col 4 Line 45-47 “Each tile represents a region (e.g., in the case of a 3D mesh depicted here, a cubic region) in multi-dimensional space (e.g., in the case here, a 3D space)”, Col 5 Line 9-13 “As discussed in more detail below, the mesh and contour lines from lower resolution tiles may be displayed as temporary (i.e. “overview”) data while the mesh and contour lines for higher resolution tiles are obtained or computed, to enable substantially real-time update”, Col 5 Line 17-19 “In some cases, a user may desire a different view of the mesh while tiles and contour lines are still being obtained or computed”).
St. Pierre fails to explicitly teach determining whether one or more segments of the set of three-dimensional contour lines are obscured by the first terrain mesh when viewed from the first viewpoint; and in accordance with a determination that the one or more segments of the set of three-dimensional contour lines are obscured by the first terrain mesh:
applying a depth bias towards the first viewpoint to the one or more segments of the set of three-dimensional contour lines, but in related field of endeavor Kishikawa teaches determining whether one or more segments of the set of three-dimensional contour lines are obscured by the first terrain mesh when viewed from the first viewpoint (Kishikawa Claim 1 “an offset setting section that performs an offset process in an overlapping area of a first polygon and a second polygon representing substantially horizontal planes”, [0068] “In the map data at the level selected for the area B, meshes overlapping with the area B, i.e., nine meshes illustrated by the broken lines, are the reading object of map data for the area B. Similarly, with regard to the area A, meshes overlapping with the area A, i.e., two meshes illustrated by the solid lines, are the reading object of map data for the area A”); and in accordance with a determination that the one or more segments of the set of three-dimensional contour lines are obscured by the first terrain mesh (Kishikawa Claim 1 “an offset setting section that performs an offset process in an overlapping area of a first polygon and a second polygon”):
applying a depth bias towards the first viewpoint to the one or more segments of the set of three-dimensional contour lines (Kishikawa Claim 1 “wherein the offset setting section shifts the first polygon and the second polygon to increase the height difference at a distant point from the viewpoint in the perspective projection than a close point to the viewpoint”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to have modified St. Pierre to include determining whether one or more segments of the set of three-dimensional contour lines are obscured by the first terrain mesh when viewed from the first viewpoint; and in accordance with a determination that the one or more segments of the set of three-dimensional contour lines are obscured by the first terrain mesh: applying a depth bias towards the first viewpoint to the one or more segments of the set of three-dimensional contour lines as taught by Kishikawa. Doing so would reduce the time required for reading map data and suppress the occurrence of z-fighting ([0071] “This advantageously reduces the time required for reading the map data.”, [0075] “The values of the respective offsets are determined to suppress the occurrence of Z-fighting in perspective projection.”)
Regarding claim 7, St. Pierre as modified by Kishikawa teaches the method of claim 1, and Kishikawa further teaches wherein the depth bias is selected from a predetermined set of values ([0076] “There is accordingly no need to calculate the offset each time at step S20, but the value provided in advance for each drawing area may be used as the offset”, [0091] “In order to avoid Z-fighting in a closer area to the viewpoint, a predetermined offset OST0 is set even at the viewpoint position”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have further modified St. Pierre and Kishikawa to include wherein the depth bias is selected from a predetermined set of values as taught by Kishikawa. Doing so would avoid Z-fighting in areas close to the viewpoint ([0091] “In order to avoid Z-fighting in a closer area to the viewpoint, a predetermined offset OST0 is set even at the viewpoint position”)
Regarding claim 8, the non-transitory computer-readable media claim 8 (St. Pierre claim 16 “A non-transitory electronic-device readable medium”) is similar in scope to the method claim 1, and is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 9, St. Pierre as modified by Kishikawa teaches the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 8, and Kishikawa further teaches wherein the depth bias comprises a set of depth biases, wherein each individual depth bias of the set of depth biases corresponds to a particular segment of the one or more segments ([0075] “Offsets OSTa, OSTb and OSTc are respectively assigned to areas A, B and C in the order of decreasing the distance from the viewpoint.”)
Regarding claim 11, St. Pierre as modified by Kishikawa teaches the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 8. St. Pierre further teaches comprising further computer-executable instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising (St. Pierre Claim 16 “the instructions when executed by one or more electronic devices operable to:”): receiving a second request to display a second viewpoint of a second terrain mesh of at least a second portion of the three-dimensional map with three-dimensional contour lines, wherein the second terrain mesh is different from the first terrain mesh (Col 5 Line 14-17 “While the query is executing, at step 330, the tile and contouring process 132 checks whether a request for a different (i.e. changed) region of the multi-resolution mesh has been received.”); and displaying the second viewpoint of the second terrain mesh and the set of three-dimensional contour lines (Col 5 Line 36-39 “where the display subprocess 136 of the tile and contouring process 132 displays the region of the multi-resolution mesh using the subset of tiles and contours yielded by the query and overview data for those that are not yet available”).
In related field of endeavor, Kishikawa further teaches determining that a second set of one or more segments of the set of three-dimensional contour lines are obscured by the second terrain mesh when viewed from the second viewpoint (Kishikawa Claim 1 “an offset setting section that performs an offset process in an overlapping area of a first polygon and a second polygon”, [0068] “In the map data at the level selected for the area B, meshes overlapping with the area B, i.e., nine meshes illustrated by the broken lines, are the reading object of map data for the area B. Similarly, with regard to the area A, meshes overlapping with the area A, i.e., two meshes illustrated by the solid lines, are the reading object of map data for the area A”); and applying a second depth bias towards the second viewpoint to the second set of one or more segments of the set of three-dimensional contour lines (Kishikawa claim 1 “to shift the first polygon and the second polygon relative to each other in a height direction, so as to make a height difference between the first polygon and the second polygon”, [0075] “Offsets OSTa, OSTb and OSTc are respectively assigned to areas A, B and C in the order of decreasing the distance from the viewpoint. According to the embodiment, the larger offset is assigned to the area having the greater distance from the viewpoint.”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to have further modified St. Pierre and Kishikawa to include determining that a second set of one or more segments of the set of three-dimensional contour lines are obscured by the second terrain mesh when viewed from the second viewpoint and applying a second depth bias towards the second viewpoint to the second set of one or more segments of the set of three-dimensional contour lines as taught by Kishikawa. Doing so would reduce the time required for reading map data and suppress the occurrence of z-fighting ([0071] “This advantageously reduces the time required for reading the map data.”, [0075] “The values of the respective offsets are determined to suppress the occurrence of Z-fighting in perspective projection.”)
Regarding claim 12, St. Pierre and Kishikawa teach the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 11, and St. Pierre further teaches wherein the second viewpoint has a different pitch or a different zoom level than the first viewpoint (Col 5 Line 55-57 “A view change from the view 400 in FIG. 4 the view 600 of FIG. 6 is an example of a change that may be detected as part of step 330 of FIG. 3”, Figure 6 is shown from a different angle and zoom than figure 4, corresponding to a change in pitch and zoom)
PNG
media_image1.png
338
485
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
305
485
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, St. Pierre and Kishikawa teach the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 8, and St. Pierre further teaches wherein the first terrain mesh corresponds to a subsection of the three-dimensional map (Col 3 Line 39-42 “generate a multi-resolution textured mesh based on a set of images (e.g., photographs) of the real-world captured by a camera or cameras (not shown) that represents a portion of the physical environment”, Col 4 Line 33-35 “a tile computation engine 164 that computes, addresses and updates tiles that store portions of mesh data”).
Regarding claim 14, St. Pierre and Kishikawa teach the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 13, and St. Pierre further teaches wherein the first terrain mesh is a higher fidelity representation of the subsection than a corresponding portion of a second terrain mesh used to generate the set of three-dimensional contour lines (Col 4 Line 50-54 “At each level below the highest level, tiles may be smaller (e.g., half the size in each dimension) than the tile immediately above, but represent the mesh at a higher resolution”, Col 5 Line 8-13 “The query obtains tiles for the region and computes contour lines for those tiles. As discussed in more detail below, the mesh and contour lines from lower resolution tiles may be displayed as temporary (i.e. “overview”) data while the mesh and contour lines for higher resolution tiles are obtained or computed, to enable substantially real-time update”).
Regarding claim 15, St. Pierre and Kishikawa teach the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of Claim 13, and St. Pierre further teaches wherein the first terrain mesh is a higher density three-dimensional mesh of the subsection than a corresponding three-dimensional mesh of a second terrain mesh used to generate the set of three-dimensional contour lines (Col 4 Line 50-56 “At each level below the highest level, tiles may be smaller (e.g., half the size in each dimension) than the tile immediately above, but represent the mesh at a higher resolution. For example, a tile 210 may have a level 1. A tile 220 at level 2 may be half the size in each dimension as tile 210, but represent space at a higher resolution.”, Col 5 Line 10-13 “ the mesh and contour lines from lower resolution tiles may be displayed as temporary (i.e. “overview”) data while the mesh and contour lines for higher resolution tiles are obtained or computed”).
Regarding claim 16, the computer system (St. Pierre Col 3 Line 31-33 “that includes a computer aided design (CAD) environment and a SfM photogrammetry application”) claim 16 is similar in scope to the method claim 1, and is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 17, St. Pierre and Kishikawa teach the computer system of claim 16, and St. Pierre further teaches wherein the first terrain mesh corresponds to a different zoom level than a second terrain mesh used to generate the set of three-dimensional contour lines (Col 5 Line 45-55 “FIG. 4 is a view 400 of an example 2.5-D mesh representing terrain that includes contour lines at every 5 meters in elevation, that may be displayed as part of step 360 of FIG. 3 … FIG. 6 is an enlarged (i.e. zoomed in) view of the same example 2.5-D mesh representing terrain that includes contour lines at every 5 meters in elevation as FIG. 4, that alternatively may be displayed as part of step 360”).
Regarding claim 18, St. Pierre and Kishikawa teach the computer system of claim 16, and Kishikawa further teaches wherein determining that the one or more segments of the set of three-dimensional contour lines are obscured by the first terrain mesh when viewed from the first viewpoint includes determining the one or more segments of the set of three-dimensional contour lines intersect the first terrain mesh (Claim 1 “an offset setting section that performs an offset process in an overlapping area of a first polygon and a second polygon representing substantially horizontal planes”, [0071] “The CPU identifies cells overlapping with a map display range V”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to have further modified St. Pierre and Kishikawa to further include wherein determining that the one or more segments of the set of three-dimensional contour lines are obscured by the first terrain mesh when viewed from the first viewpoint includes determining the one or more segments of the set of three-dimensional contour lines intersect the first terrain mesh as taught by Kishikawa. Doing so would reduce the time required for reading map data and suppress the occurrence of z-fighting ([0071] “This advantageously reduces the time required for reading the map data.”, [0075] “The values of the respective offsets are determined to suppress the occurrence of Z-fighting in perspective projection.”)
Regarding claim 20, St. Pierre and Kishikawa teach the computer system of claim 16, and St. Pierre further teaches wherein at least one three-dimensional contour line of the set of three-dimensional contour lines includes segments with more than one z-axis value (Col 5 Line 45-51 “FIG. 4 is a view 400 of an example 2.5-D mesh representing terrain that includes contour lines at every 5 meters in elevation, that may be displayed as part of step 360 of FIG. 3. FIG. 5 is a view 500 of the same example 2.5-D mesh representing terrain as FIG. 4 with contour lines at every 100 meters in elevation, that alternatively may be displayed as part of step 360 of FIG. 3”, where each different view has a different set of contour lines with segments at different elevation values).
Claims 2-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over St. Pierre and Kishikawa as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Youngblood et al (US 20220207815 A1, hereinafter Youngblood).
Regarding claim 2, St. Pierre as modified by Kishikawa teaches the method of claim 1, and St. Pierre further teaches further comprising generating the set of three-dimensional contour lines based at least in part on a second terrain mesh of at least a second portion of the three-dimensional map (Col 7 Line 14-18 “for computing contour lines for a tile that may be performed as part of step 950 of FIG. 9. At step 1210, the computation subprocess 138 of the tile and contouring process 132 determines a first height or elevation for the tile.”), but fails to explicitly teach further comprising generating the set of three-dimensional contour lines based at least in part on a set of two-dimensional contour lines corresponding to the three-dimensional map.
In related field of endeavor Youngblood teaches generating the set of three-dimensional contour lines based at least in part on a set of two-dimensional contour lines corresponding to the three-dimensional map ([0057] “Contour lines are located (step 142) within the 3D map and the altitude values are determined (step 143) based on the contour lines”, [0060] “Once the contour lines are identified and altitude values are determined, a height map of the input 2D visualization is generated (block 144). Specifically, height values of the tiles between the contour lines are interpolated to make a base layer for the 3D map”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to have further modified St. Pierre and Kishikawa to include generating the set of three-dimensional contour lines based at least in part on a set of two-dimensional contour lines corresponding to the three-dimensional map as taught by Youngblood. Doing so would provide a user with information to help them better understand the map ([0051] “Together, the color, terrain type, contour lines, and shading provide a viewer with information to not typically provided by a 2D map that can be used to help the user better understand the area represented by the map.”)
Regarding claim 3, St. Pierre as modified by Kishikawa and Youngblood teaches the method of claim 2, and Youngblood further teaches further comprising generating the set of two-dimensional contour lines based on a third terrain mesh of the three-dimensional map (Claim 11 “and adding contour lines to the 2D image based on changes in altitude represented by the 3D image”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to have further modified St. Pierre, Kishikawa, and Youngblood to include further comprising generating the set of two-dimensional contour lines based on a third terrain mesh of the three-dimensional map as taught by Youngblood. Doing so would provide a user with information to help them better understand the map ([0051] “Together, the color, terrain type, contour lines, and shading provide a viewer with information to not typically provided by a 2D map that can be used to help the user better understand the area represented by the map.”)
Regarding claim 4, St. Pierre as modified by Kishikawa and Youngblood teaches the method of claim 3, and St. Pierre further teaches wherein the third terrain mesh is different from the first terrain mesh and the second terrain mesh (Col 4 Line 45-49 “Each tile represents a region (e.g., in the case of a 3D mesh depicted here, a cubic region) in multi-dimensional space (e.g., in the case here, a 3D space) and is addressed by coordinates that represent an address of the tile”, Col 6 Line 6-9 “the mesh and computed contour lines from lower resolution tiles may be displayed as temporary (“overview”) data while the mesh and contour lines for higher resolution tiles are obtained or computed”)
Regarding claim 5, St. Pierre as modified by Kishikawa and Youngblood teaches the method of claim 2, and St. Pierre further teaches wherein the first terrain mesh is different from the second terrain mesh (Col 4 Line 45-49 “Each tile represents a region (e.g., in the case of a 3D mesh depicted here, a cubic region) in multi-dimensional space (e.g., in the case here, a 3D space) and is addressed by coordinates that represent an address of the tile”, Col 6 Line 6-9 “the mesh and computed contour lines from lower resolution tiles may be displayed as temporary (“overview”) data while the mesh and contour lines for higher resolution tiles are obtained or computed”)
Regarding claim 6, St. Pierre as modified by Kishikawa teaches the method of claim 1, and St. Pierre further teaches further comprising receiving, from a server (Col 7 Line 28-31 “the computation subprocess 136 fetches the data for the tile from the local cache 139 or from persistent storage (e.g., a local storage device, cloud-based storage, etc.)”), but fails to explicitly teach the set of three-dimensional contour lines, wherein the set of three-dimensional contour lines is generated from a set of two-dimensional contour lines corresponding to the three-dimensional map and a second terrain mesh of at least a second portion of the three-dimensional map. In related field of endeavor, Youngblood teaches from a server ([0025] “The server 14 includes a 3D modeler 19 and a 2D modeler 20, which each translate a map from one dimension to a different dimension. The database 15 stores layer expansion templates 21 that instruct the 3D modeler 19 how to scale a 2D map to 3D and the 2D modeler 20 to determine a type of terrain and color of terrain for display based on a 3D map”), the set of three-dimensional contour lines, wherein the set of three-dimensional contour lines is generated from a set of two-dimensional contour lines corresponding to the three-dimensional map and a second terrain mesh of at least a second portion of the three-dimensional map ([0057] “Contour lines are located (step 142) within the 3D map and the altitude values are determined (step 143) based on the contour lines”, [0060] “Once the contour lines are identified and altitude values are determined, a height map of the input 2D visualization is generated (block 144). Specifically, height values of the tiles between the contour lines are interpolated to make a base layer for the 3D map”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to have further modified St. Pierre and Kishikawa to include from a server, the set of three-dimensional contour lines, wherein the set of three-dimensional contour lines is generated from a set of two-dimensional contour lines corresponding to the three-dimensional map and a second terrain mesh of at least a second portion of the three-dimensional map as taught by Youngblood. Doing so would provide a user with information to help them better understand the map ([0051] “Together, the color, terrain type, contour lines, and shading provide a viewer with information to not typically provided by a 2D map that can be used to help the user better understand the area represented by the map.”)
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over St. Pierre and Kishikawa as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Poiesz et al (US 20110054778 A1, hereinafter Poiesz).
Regarding claim 10, St. Pierre and Kishikawa teaches the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of Claim 9, and Kishikawa further teaches wherein applying the depth bias towards the first viewpoint to the one or more segments of the set of three-dimensional contour lines includes: for each particular segment of the one or more segments, applying the individual depth bias towards the first viewpoint ([0075] “The specific value of the offset for each area is determined, for example, according to the distance of the area from the viewpoint, the viewpoint position, the gaze direction and the resolution of a perspective projection image”), but St. Pierre and Kishikawa fail to explicitly teach for each particular segment of the one or more segments, determining the individual depth bias based at least in part on a terrain slope for a section of the first terrain mesh corresponding to the one or more segments. In related field of endeavor, Poiesz teaches for each particular segment of the one or more segments, determining the individual depth bias based at least in part on a terrain slope for a section of the first terrain mesh corresponding to the one or more segments ([0039] “which is configured to dynamically increase or decrease the height or "3D-ness" of the terrain based on the angle and height of the viewing, providing proper road rendering at all height and angle combinations. For example, as can be seen in FIG. 4, if the user's current position is 404 and traveling on a route 401 to a destination 405, his or her view of the entire road may be blocked by hilly terrains 402 and 403. The terrain scaling unit 3101 can dynamically decrease the height of the terrains 402 and 403”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to have further modified St. Pierre and Kishikawa to include for each particular segment of the one or more segments, determining the individual depth bias based at least in part on a terrain slope for a section of the first terrain mesh corresponding to the one or more segments as taught by Poiesz. Doing so would provide the user a clear overview of the road they are traveling ([0039] “such that the user can have a clear overview of the road on which he or she is traveling”)
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over St. Pierre and Kishikawa as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Watanabe et al (US 20150335996 A1, hereinafter Watanabe).
Regarding claim 19, St. Pierre as modified by Kishikawa teaches the computer system of claim 16, and St. Pierre further teaches wherein the first viewpoint is associated with a first pitch value (Col 5 Line 55-57 “A view change from the view 400 in FIG. 4 the view 600 of FIG. 6 is an example of a change that may be detected as part of step 330 of FIG. 3”), and wherein the one or more processors in communication with the memory is further configured to access the memory and execute the computer-executable instructions to: receive a request to generate a second viewpoint of the three-dimensional map (Col 5 Line 14-17 “While the query is executing, at step 330, the tile and contouring process 132 checks whether a request for a different (i.e. changed) region of the multi-resolution mesh has been received.”), wherein the second viewpoint is associated with a second pitch value, and wherein the second pitch value is different than the first pitch value (Col 5 Line 55-57 “A view change from the view 400 in FIG. 4 the view 600 of FIG. 6 is an example of a change that may be detected as part of step 330 of FIG. 3”, Figure 6 is shown from a different angle than figure 4, corresponding to a change in pitch); display the second viewpoint of the three-dimensional map (Col 5 Line 36-39 “where the display subprocess 136 of the tile and contouring process 132 displays the region of the multi-resolution mesh using the subset of tiles and contours yielded by the query and overview data for those that are not yet available”);
St Pierre and Kishikawa fail to explicitly teach in response to displaying the second viewpoint, adjust one or more opacity values associated with the set of three-dimensional contour lines based at least in part on the second pitch value, but in related field of endeavor Watanabe teaches in response to displaying the second viewpoint, adjust one or more opacity values associated with the set of three-dimensional contour lines based at least in part on the second pitch value ([0046] “When there is a transmittance variable object within a viewing field of a virtual camera, the transmittance calculation section 151 changes a transmittance of the transmittance variable object according to an imaging direction of the virtual camera … The transmittance of a transmittance variable object may be set to be variable within 0% to 100%. When the transmittance is 0%, the transmittance variable object is displayed in a similar manner to other objects, without being made transparent. When the transmittance is 100%, any transmittance variable object is not displayed at all. Alternatively, the transmittance of a transmittance variable object may be set to be variable within an arbitrary range (for example, 0-80%) within 0-100%.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to have further modified St. Pierre and Kishikawa to include in response to displaying the second viewpoint, adjust one or more opacity values associated with the set of three-dimensional contour lines based at least in part on the second pitch value as taught by Watanabe. Doing so would allow objects behind other objects to be visible (Watanabe [0006] “With this configuration, a captured image in which an object located behind the predetermined object is also visible can be obtained.”)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lauenstein et al (US 20140032479 A1, hereinafter Lauenstein) teaches generating contour maps to provide a topographical representation of the bottom of a water body ([0034] "Specifically, depth data is being output in automated contour map generation 200 that creates a topographical representation of the bottom of water body 36") and further generates vegetation and substrate maps to a monitoring system ([0039] "The steps of automated contour map generation 200, automated vegetation map generation 300, automated substrate map generation 400, automated sonar imagery generation 500, and automated report generation 600").
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN PATRICK GOCO whose telephone number is (571)272-5872. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, 7:00 am - 5:00 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.
/J.P.G./Examiner, Art Unit 2611
/KEE M TUNG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2611
Prosecution Insights