DETAILED ACTION
This office action is responsive to application 19/264,908 filed on July 10, 2025. Claim 1 is pending in the application and has been examined by the Examiner.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statements (IDS) filed on 7/10/2025, 9/30/2025 and 5/20/2026 were received and have been considered by the Examiner.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lapstun (US 2020/0191568) in view of Hori et al. (US 2002/0164157).
Consider claim 1, Lapstun teaches:
An imaging system (see figures 1A-1C) comprising:
a camera (camera, 102, paragraph 0199) configured to capture a set of oblique images (see “oblique” in paragraphs 0215, 0226, 0266-0268 and 0285-0289) along a scan path on an object area (see figures 7A, 7B, 17A-19, 21, 27-29B and 31);
a scanning mirror structure (scanning mirror, 122) including at least one surface for receiving light from the object area (see paragraphs 0199, 0200), the at least one surface having at least one first mirror portion (i.e. the mirror surface which deflects imaging beam 160, paragraph 0208, figures 5A-5F); and
a drive (scanning mirror drive, 120) coupled to the scanning mirror structure (122) and configured to rotate the scanning mirror structure (122) about a rotation axis (spin axis, 126) based on a scan angle (see paragraphs 0199 and 0208, figures 1B and 5A-5F), wherein
the camera (102) includes a lens (lens assembly, 104) to focus an imaging beam (imaging beam, 160) reflected from the at least one surface of the scanning mirror structure (122) to an image sensor (image sensor, 144, figure 3) of the camera (see paragraphs 0203, 0200, 0237 and 0238),
the at least one first mirror portion is configured to reflect light from the object area over a set of scan angles selected to produce the set of oblique images (see “oblique” in paragraphs 0215, 0226, 0266-0268 and 0285-0289, figures 7A, 7B, 17A-19, 21, 27-29B and 31), and
the image sensor (144) of the camera captures the set of oblique images along the scan path by sampling the imaging beam at values of the scan angle (“The scanning camera control process 230 waits (at step 232) for a scan start signal from the aerial survey control process 220, and then controls capture of images at each spin angle within the scan. At each spin angle 128 it captures an image (at step 234) via the image sensor 144 via the camera controller 142, rotates the scanning mirror 122 (at step 236) to the next spin angle via the scanning mirror drive 120, and then repeats.” Paragraph 0232).
However, Lapstun does not explicitly teach that the scanning mirror structure includes at least one second portion comprised of low reflective material arranged around a periphery of the first mirror portion, the low reflective material being less reflective than the first mirror portion, the at least one second portion is configured to block light that would pass around the first mirror portion and be received by the camera at scan angles beyond the set of scan angles.
Hori et al. similarly teaches an image forming apparatus comprising a scanning mirror structure (i.e. micro-scanner, 220, figure 3, including deflecting mirror, 222, paragraphs 0146 and 0147) including at least one first mirror portion configured to reflect light (“flat mirror surface”, paragraph 0147).
However, Hori et al. additionally teaches that the scanning mirror structure (220) includes at least one second portion (peripheral edge, 222E) comprised of low reflective material arranged around a periphery of the first mirror portion, the low reflective material being less reflective than the first mirror portion, the at least one second portion is configured to block light that would pass around the first mirror portion and be received by the camera at scan angles beyond the set of scan angles (The deflecting mirror (222) of the scanning mirror structure (220) includes a black-colored portion (222E) surrounding the first mirror portion (see figures 3, 4 and 11) wherein the black-colored portion (222E) provides antireflection capabilities that prevent flare, paragraphs 0147 and 0261.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the scanning mirror structure taught by Lapstun include at least one second portion comprised of a low reflective material arranged around a periphery of the first mirror portion as taught by Hori et al. for the benefit of preventing flare during imaging (Hori et al., paragraph 0147).
Double Patenting
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 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,382,181. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 is anticipated by claim 1 of US 12,382,181 as follows:
Consider claim 1, claim 1 of US 12,382,181 teaches (in parentheses):
An imaging system comprising: (An imaging system comprising:)
a camera configured to capture a set of oblique images along a scan path on an object area; (a camera configured to capture a set of oblique images along a scan path on an object area;)
a scanning mirror structure including at least one surface for receiving light from the object area, the at least one surface having at least one first mirror portion at least one second portion comprised of low reflective material arranged around a periphery of the first mirror portion, the low reflective material being less reflective than the first mirror portion; (a scanning mirror structure including at least one surface for receiving light from the object area, the at least one surface having at least one first mirror portion and at least one second non-mirrored portion comprised of material having a lower reflectivity than the first mirror portion and arranged around a periphery of the first mirror portion;) and
a drive coupled to the scanning mirror structure and configured to rotate the scanning mirror structure about a rotation axis based on a scan angle (a drive coupled to the scanning mirror structure and configured to rotate the scanning mirror structure about a rotation axis based on a scan angle), wherein
the camera includes a lens to focus an imaging beam reflected from the at least one surface of the scanning mirror structure to an image sensor of the camera, (the camera includes a lens to focus an imaging beam reflected from the at least one surface of the scanning mirror structure to an image sensor of the camera to capture the set of oblique images according to a set of scan angles)
the at least one first mirror portion is configured to reflect light from the object area over a set of scan angles selected to produce the set of oblique images, (the at least one first mirror portion is configured to reflect light from the object area over the set of scan angles selected to produce the set of oblique images)
the at least one second portion is configured to block light that would pass around the first mirror portion and be received by the camera at scan angles beyond the set of scan angles (the at least one second non-mirrored portion is configured to block light that would pass around the first mirror portion and be received by the camera at scan angles beyond the set of scan angles), and
the image sensor of the camera captures the set of oblique images along the scan path by sampling the imaging beam at values of the scan angle (the camera includes a lens to focus an imaging beam reflected from the at least one surface of the scanning mirror structure to an image sensor of the camera to capture the set of oblique images according to a set of scan angles).
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,015,853. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 is anticipated by claim 1 of US 12,015,853 as follows:
Consider claim 1, claim 1 of US 12,015,853 teaches (in parentheses):
An imaging system comprising: (An imaging system comprising:)
a camera configured to capture a set of oblique images along a scan path on an object area; (a camera configured to capture a set of oblique images along a scan path on an object area;)
a scanning mirror structure including at least one surface for receiving light from the object area, the at least one surface having at least one first mirror portion at least one second portion comprised of low reflective material arranged around a periphery of the first mirror portion, the low reflective material being less reflective than the first mirror portion; (a scanning mirror structure including at least one surface for receiving light from the object area, the at least one surface having at least one first mirror portion at least one second portion comprised of low reflective material arranged around a periphery of the first mirror portion, the low reflective material being less reflective than the first mirror portion;) and
a drive coupled to the scanning mirror structure and configured to rotate the scanning mirror structure about a rotation axis based on a scan angle (a drive coupled to the scanning mirror structure and configured to rotate the scanning mirror structure about a rotation axis based on a scan angle), wherein
the camera includes a lens to focus an imaging beam reflected from the at least one surface of the scanning mirror structure to an image sensor of the camera, (the camera includes a lens to focus an imaging beam reflected from the at least one surface of the scanning mirror structure to an image sensor of the camera)
the at least one first mirror portion is configured to reflect light from the object area over a set of scan angles selected to produce the set of oblique images, (the at least one first mirror portion is configured to reflect light from the object area over a set of scan angles selected to produce the set of oblique images)
the at least one second portion is configured to block light that would pass around the first mirror portion and be received by the camera at scan angles beyond the set of scan angles (the at least one second portion is configured to block light that would pass around the first mirror portion and be received by the camera at scan angles beyond the set of scan angles), and
the image sensor of the camera captures the set of oblique images along the scan path by sampling the imaging beam at values of the scan angle (the image sensor of the camera captures the set of oblique images along the scan path by sampling the imaging beam at values of the scan angle).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALBERT H CUTLER whose telephone number is (571)270-1460. The examiner can normally be reached approximately Mon - Fri 8:00-4:30.
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, Sinh Tran can be reached at (571)272-7564. 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.
/ALBERT H CUTLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2637
Prosecution Insights