DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/14/2025, 05/14/2026, 09/24/2026 and 09/28/2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
3. Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 1 recites “… processing the two-dimensional line segment geometries into at least one contour graph based on three-dimensional data received by the processor; …” That missing a word “generated”, should be “… processing the generated two-dimensional line segment geometries into at least one contour graph based on three-dimensional data received by the processor; …”. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
4. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
5. Claims 1-17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-17 of Patent No. 10,909,757. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant application claims are broader in every aspect than the patent claims and are therefore an obvious variant thereof.
6. Regarding claims 1, the application claim discloses A system for modeling a roof of a structure, comprising: a database; and a processor in communication with the database, the processor: selecting at least one image and metadata of the image from the database based on a geospatial region of interest; generating two-dimensional outputs in pixel space of at least one roof structure present in the selected at least one image; generating two-dimensional line segment geometries in the pixel space based on the generated two-dimensional outputs; processing the two-dimensional line segment geometries into at least one contour graph based on three-dimensional data received by the processor; and generating a three-dimensional representation of the at least one roof structure based on the at least one contour graph and the received three-dimensional data. Claim 1 of Patent No. 10,909,757 discloses A system for modeling a roof of a structure, comprising: a first database; a second database; and a processor in communication with the first database and the second database, the processor: selecting at least one image and metadata of the image from the first database based on a geospatial region of interest; generating two-dimensional outputs in pixel space of at least one roof structure present in the selected at least one image; generating two-dimensional line segment geometries in the pixel space based on the generated two-dimensional outputs; classifying the generated two-dimensional line segment geometries into at least one contour graph based on three-dimensional data received from the second database; generating a three-dimensional representation of the at least one roof structure based on the at least one contour graph and the received three-dimensional data; transforming the classified two-dimensional line segment geometries into three-dimensional line segment geometries in world space based on the at least one contour graph; applying at least one constraint to the three-dimensional line segment geometries, the at least one constraint being indicative of a rectification of at least one of parallel, perpendicular and collinear three-dimensional line segment geometries; generating a plurality of exterior contours based on the rectified three-dimensional line segment geometries, each exterior contour corresponding to a different elevation of the at least one roof structure; determining interior line segments of each exterior contour via a straight skeleton algorithm; and generating the three-dimensional representation of the at least one roof structure based on the determined interior line segments. Regarding claim 1, the only difference is that claim 1 of the instant application recites “a database; processing…. by the processor;” and does not recite “the first database and the second database; classifying the generated … from the second database; transforming the classified two-dimensional line segment geometries into three-dimensional line segment geometries in world space based on the at least one contour graph; applying at least one constraint to the three-dimensional line segment geometries, the at least one constraint being indicative of a rectification of at least one of parallel, perpendicular and collinear three-dimensional line segment geometries; generating a plurality of exterior contours based on the rectified three-dimensional line segment geometries, each exterior contour corresponding to a different elevation of the at least one roof structure; determining interior line segments of each exterior contour via a straight skeleton algorithm; and generating the three-dimensional representation of the at least one roof structure based on the determined interior line segments.”, while claim 1 of Patent No. 10,909,757 recites. Regarding claims 10 and 14, the analysis is similar to that of claim 1, the rationale of claim 1 rejection is applied in rejecting claims 10 and 14. Therefore, the claims in the present application recite a broader scope than the claims in the Patent No. 10,909,757.
7. The following table shows the claims of the current application being examined and the conflicting claims of Patent No. 10,909,757.
Current Application No.
19/239,108
Patent No.
10,909,757
1-9
1-9
10-13
10-13
14-17
14-17
The following table shows an example of the corresponding conflicting claims of the current application and Patent No. 10,909,757.
Current Application No.
19/239,108
Claim 1
Patent No.
10,909,757
Claim 1
A system for modeling a roof of a structure, comprising: a database; and a processor in communication with the database,
A system for modeling a roof of a structure, comprising: a first database; a second database; and a processor in communication with the first database and the second database,
the processor: selecting at least one image and metadata of the image from the database based on a geospatial region of interest;
the processor: selecting at least one image and metadata of the image from the first database based on a geospatial region of interest;
generating two-dimensional outputs in pixel space of at least one roof structure present in the selected at least one image;
generating two-dimensional outputs in pixel space of at least one roof structure present in the selected at least one image;
generating two-dimensional line segment geometries in the pixel space based on the generated two-dimensional outputs;
generating two-dimensional line segment geometries in the pixel space based on the generated two-dimensional outputs;
processing the two-dimensional line segment geometries into at least one contour graph based on three-dimensional data received by the processor;
classifying the generated two-dimensional line segment geometries into at least one contour graph based on three-dimensional data received from the second database;
and generating a three-dimensional representation of the at least one roof structure based on the at least one contour graph and the received three-dimensional data.
generating a three-dimensional representation of the at least one roof structure based on the at least one contour graph and the received three-dimensional data;
transforming the classified two-dimensional line segment geometries into three-dimensional line segment geometries in world space based on the at least one contour graph;
applying at least one constraint to the three-dimensional line segment geometries, the at least one constraint being indicative of a rectification of at least one of parallel, perpendicular and collinear three-dimensional line segment geometries;
generating a plurality of exterior contours based on the rectified three-dimensional line segment geometries, each exterior contour corresponding to a different elevation of the at least one roof structure;
determining interior line segments of each exterior contour via a straight skeleton algorithm;
and generating the three-dimensional representation of the at least one roof structure based on the determined interior line segments.
8. Claims 1-17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-17 of Patent No. 11,922,098. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant application claims are broader in every aspect than the patent claims and are therefore an obvious variant thereof.
9. Regarding claims 1, the application claim discloses A system for modeling a roof of a structure, comprising: a database; and a processor in communication with the database, the processor: selecting at least one image and metadata of the image from the database based on a geospatial region of interest; generating two-dimensional outputs in pixel space of at least one roof structure present in the selected at least one image; generating two-dimensional line segment geometries in the pixel space based on the generated two-dimensional outputs; processing the two-dimensional line segment geometries into at least one contour graph based on three-dimensional data received by the processor; and generating a three-dimensional representation of the at least one roof structure based on the at least one contour graph and the received three-dimensional data. Claim 1 of Patent No. 11,922,098 discloses A system for modeling a roof of a structure, comprising: a first database; a second database; and a processor in communication with the first database and the second database, the processor; selecting at least one image and metadata of the image from the first database based on a geospatial region of interest; generating two-dimensional outputs in pixel space of at least one roof structure present in the selected at least one image; generating two-dimensional line segment geometries in the pixel space based on the generated two-dimensional outputs; classifying the generated two-dimensional line segment geometries into at least one contour graph based on three-dimensional data received from the second database; generating a plurality of exterior contours and a plurality of interior line segments inferred from the plurality of exterior contours; and generating a three-dimensional representation of the at least one roof structure based on the at least one contour graph, the received three-dimensional data, the plurality of exterior contours, and the plurality of interior line segments. Regarding claim 1, the only difference is that claim 1 of the instant application recites “a database; processing…. by the processor;” and does not recite “the first database and the second database; classifying the generated … from the second database; generating a plurality of exterior contours and a plurality of interior line segments inferred from the plurality of exterior contours; and based on the plurality of exterior contours, and the plurality of interior line segments.”, while claim 1 of Patent No. 11,922,098 recites. Regarding claims 10 and 14, the analysis is similar to that of claim 1, the rationale of claim 1 rejection is applied in rejecting claims 10 and 14. Therefore, the claims in the present application recite a broader scope than the claims in the Patent No. 11,922,098.
10. The following table shows the claims of the current application being examined and the conflicting claims of Patent No. 11,922,098.
Current Application No.
19/239,108
Patent No.
11,922,098
1-9
1-9
10-13
10-13
14-17
14-17
The following table shows an example of the corresponding conflicting claims of the current application and Patent No. 11,922,098.
Current Application No.
19/239,108
Claim 1
Patent No.
11,922,098
Claim 1
A system for modeling a roof of a structure, comprising: a database; and a processor in communication with the database,
A system for modeling a roof of a structure, comprising: a first database; a second database; and a processor in communication with the first database and the second database,
the processor: selecting at least one image and metadata of the image from the database based on a geospatial region of interest;
the processor: selecting at least one image and metadata of the image from the first database based on a geospatial region of interest;
generating two-dimensional outputs in pixel space of at least one roof structure present in the selected at least one image;
generating two-dimensional outputs in pixel space of at least one roof structure present in the selected at least one image;
generating two-dimensional line segment geometries in the pixel space based on the generated two-dimensional outputs;
generating two-dimensional line segment geometries in the pixel space based on the generated two-dimensional outputs;
processing the two-dimensional line segment geometries into at least one contour graph based on three-dimensional data received by the processor;
classifying the generated two-dimensional line segment geometries into at least one contour graph based on three-dimensional data received from the second database;
generating a plurality of exterior contours and a plurality of interior line segments inferred from the plurality of exterior contours;
and generating a three-dimensional representation of the at least one roof structure based on the at least one contour graph and the received three-dimensional data.
and generating a three-dimensional representation of the at least one roof structure based on the at least one contour graph, the received three-dimensional data, the plurality of exterior contours, and the plurality of interior line segments.
11. Claims 1-17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-17 of Patent No. 12,333,218. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant application claims are broader in every aspect than the patent claims and are therefore an obvious variant thereof.
12. Regarding claims 1, the application claim discloses A system for modeling a roof of a structure, comprising: a database; and a processor in communication with the database, the processor: selecting at least one image and metadata of the image from the database based on a geospatial region of interest; generating two-dimensional outputs in pixel space of at least one roof structure present in the selected at least one image; generating two-dimensional line segment geometries in the pixel space based on the generated two-dimensional outputs; processing the two-dimensional line segment geometries into at least one contour graph based on three-dimensional data received by the processor; and generating a three-dimensional representation of the at least one roof structure based on the at least one contour graph and the received three-dimensional data. Claim 1 of Patent No. 12,333,218 discloses A system for modeling a roof of a structure, comprising: a first database; a second database; and a processor in communication with the first database and the second database, the processor: selecting at least one image and metadata of the image from the first database based on a geospatial region of interest; generating two-dimensional outputs in pixel space of at least one roof structure present in the selected at least one image; generating two-dimensional line segment geometries in the pixel space based on the generated two-dimensional outputs; classifying the generated two-dimensional line segment geometries into at least one contour graph based on three-dimensional data received from the second database; and generating a three-dimensional representation of the at least one roof structure based on the at least one contour graph and the received three-dimensional data. Regarding claim 1, the only difference is that claim 1 of the instant application recites “a database, processing…. by the processor;” and does not recite “the first database and the second database; classifying the generated … from the second database;”, while claim 1 of Patent No. 12,333,218 recites. Regarding claims 10 and 14, the analysis is similar to that of claim 1, the rationale of claim 1 rejection is applied in rejecting claims 10 and 14. Therefore, the claims in the present application recite a broader scope than the claims in the Patent No. 12,333,218.
13. The following table shows the claims of the current application being examined and the conflicting claims of Patent No. 12,333,218.
Current Application No.
19/239,108
Patent No.
12,333,218
1-9
1-9
10-13
10-13
14-17
14-17
The following table shows an example of the corresponding conflicting claims of the current application and Patent No. 12,333,218.
Current Application No.
19/239,108
Claim 1
Patent No.
12,333,218
Claim 1
A system for modeling a roof of a structure, comprising: a database; and a processor in communication with the database,
A system for modeling a roof of a structure, comprising: a first database; a second database; and a processor in communication with the first database and the second database,
the processor: selecting at least one image and metadata of the image from the database based on a geospatial region of interest;
the processor: selecting at least one image and metadata of the image from the first database based on a geospatial region of interest;
generating two-dimensional outputs in pixel space of at least one roof structure present in the selected at least one image;
generating two-dimensional outputs in pixel space of at least one roof structure present in the selected at least one image;
generating two-dimensional line segment geometries in the pixel space based on the generated two-dimensional outputs;
generating two-dimensional line segment geometries in the pixel space based on the generated two-dimensional outputs;
processing the two-dimensional line segment geometries into at least one contour graph based on three-dimensional data received by the processor;
classifying the generated two-dimensional line segment geometries into at least one contour graph based on three-dimensional data received from the second database;
and generating a three-dimensional representation of the at least one roof structure based on the at least one contour graph and the received three-dimensional data.
and generating a three-dimensional representation of the at least one roof structure based on the at least one contour graph and the received three-dimensional data.
Conclusion
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michelle Chin whose telephone number is (571)270-3697. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00 AM-4:30 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:/Awww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Kent Chang can be reached on (571)272-7667. 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:/Awww.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent- center for more information about Patent Center and https:/Awww.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.
/MICHELLE CHIN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2614
