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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a communication unit configured to transmit” in claims 1-8, “an image processing unit configured to generate” in claims 1-9, and “a setting unit configured to acquire” in claims 1-9.
Review of the specification indicates the following:
“a communication unit configured to transmit”, ¶21 indicates “a lens control unit (communication unit) 104 that includes a microcomputer that controls the aperture stops”.
“an image processing unit configured to generate”, ¶22 indicates “image processing unit 13 that performs various image processing for the digital signal” included in camera 10 which ¶67 discloses functions that could be realized by a computer which “perform the functions” executed by the processors.
“a setting unit configured to acquire”, ¶21 indicates “a camera control unit (setting unit) 17 in the camera 10” which is an image pickup apparatus, ¶20.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities: The claimed invention refers to “first second images” which appears to be a typographical error. In particular, the limitation appears to intends to refer to multiple/separate images and is not referred to following this instance of the phrasing. In additional support for this, subsequent limitations refer to the individual “images” of this limitation, such as “the first image” set “as a reference image” in claim 1 on line(s) 18-19. For this reason, the limitation is recognized as a typographical error and is objected to. For the purposes of examination, “first second images” is interpreted as “first and second images”.
Claim 7-8 objected to because of the following informalities: In particular, the claims direct to a “formal orientation” of an interchangeable lens, which appears to be a spelling error of “normal orientation” disclosed in the specification. As additional support for this position, review of the specification does not provide an instance of or information for what is referred to by a “formal orientation”. The spelling of the limitation requires attention. At best, the specification at ¶61 discloses a “normal orientation” in relation to an “upside-down orientation”. For the purposes of examination, “formal orientation” will be interpreted as “normal.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1,3,5, and 9 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-3 of U.S. Patent No. 12401906 in view of Kusaka; Hiroya (US 20120147148 A1)
In regard to claim 1, the limitations of claim 1 of the instant application is rendered obvious and/or anticipated by the corresponding limitations within claim 1 of published U.S. Patent No. 12401906 as follows,
An image pickup system comprising:
an image pickup apparatus; (Claim 1, line(s) 2) and
an interchangeable lens attachable to and detachable from the image pickup apparatus,
wherein the interchangeable lens (Claim 1, line(s) 1-3) includes:
first and second lens units (Claim 1, line(s) 4-5) configured to form first and second object images, respectively, and
a communication unit configured to transmit information on the interchangeable lens to the image pickup apparatus, (Claim 1, line(s) 18-19)
wherein the image pickup apparatus (Claim 1, line(s) 2-3) includes:
a single image sensor (Claim 1, line(s) 2-3) having first and second imaging areas configured to photoelectrically convert the first and second object images, respectively,
an image processing unit configured to generate a stereophonic image based on an output from the single image sensor, the stereophonic image including first second images corresponding to the first and second imaging areas, respectively, and
a setting unit configured to set the first image as a reference image for monaurally displaying the stereophonic image based on the information, (claim 1, line(s) 10-12 and 18-21) and set the first imaging area as a photometry area for auto exposure adjustment to the first and second imaging areas in acquiring the stereophonic image. (claim 1, line(s) 10-15)
In general, claim 1 was found to contain no limitation unique or non-obvious when compared to claims of US. Patent No. 12401906, except for,
An image pickup system comprising:
configured to form first and second object images, respectively, and
having first and second imaging areas configured to photoelectrically convert the first and second object images, respectively,
an image processing unit configured to generate a stereophonic image based on an output from the single image sensor, the stereophonic image including first second images corresponding to the first and second imaging areas, respectively,
However, prior art Kusaka discloses,
An image pickup system (Title, “imaging device”) comprising:
first and second lens units (¶35-38 and fig. 1, lens barrel 101 having two imaging lenses “100R (on the right side facing toward the subject) and 100L (on the left side facing toward the subject)”as depicted in fig. 1) configured to form first and second object images, respectively, (¶35-38 and fig. 1, “two images with parallax in the left and right direction” obtained through “two imaging lenses 100R and 100L”) and
a single image sensor (¶35-39 and fig. 2, “imaging element 300”) having first and second imaging areas (¶39 and fig. 2, “two imaging lenses 100R and 100L and the imaging element 300 have been cut along a horizontal plane”) configured to photoelectrically convert the first and second object images, respectively, (¶39 and fig. 2, “two optical images formed via the two imaging lenses 100R and 100L are formed on the imaging element 300” as depicted in fig. 2)
an image processing unit (¶49 and fig. 3, “3D image generator 309” depicted in fig. 3) configured to generate a stereophonic image (¶49 and fig. 3, 3D image generator 309 “generates a final 3D image”) based on an output from the single image sensor, (¶49, “generates a final 3D image on the basis of the subject images obtained from the two imaging lenses 100R and 100L when the lens barrel 101 has been mounted to the camera body 107”) the stereophonic image (¶49, “final 3D image”) including first second images corresponding to the first and second imaging areas, respectively, (¶49, final 3D image based on “the images obtained from the two imaging lenses 100R and 100L when the lens barrel 101 has been mounted to the camera body 107”)
It would have been obvious of one in ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosures of U.S. Patent No. 12401906 with the interchangeable lens camera of Kusaka which can use interchange a lens barrel with parallax in the left and right direction. This allows for 3D imaging.
Regarding claim 3, dependent on claim 1, the limitations of claim 3 of the instant application is rendered obvious and/or anticipated by corresponding limitations within claim 1 of published US. Patent No. 12401906 as follows,
among the first and second lens units, (claim 1, line(s) 4-5) the second lens unit only includes a correction mechanism configured to reduce a difference in focus positions of the first and the second lens units. (claim 1, line(s) 5-8)
Regarding claim 5, dependent on claim 1, the limitations of claim 5 of the instant application is rendered obvious and/or anticipated by corresponding limitations of claim 2-3 of published US. Patent No. 12401906 as follows,
second lens unit includes an aperture unit which performs a correction (claim 3, line(s) 1-4) to reduce a difference of luminance in the first and second imaging areas (claim 2, line(s) 1-4) by changing a luminance in the second imaging area. (claim 3, line(s) 1-4)
Regarding claim 9, the limitations of claim 1 of the instant application is rendered obvious and/or anticipated by the corresponding limitations within claim 1 of published U.S. Patent No. 12401906 as follows,
An image pickup apparatus (Claim 1, line(s) 2) attachable to and detachable from an interchangeable lens (claim 1, line(s) 1-2) including first and second lens units (claim 1, line(s) 3-5) configured to form first and second object images, respectively, the image pickup apparatus (Claim 1, line(s) 2) comprising:
a single image sensor (Claim 1, line(s) 2-3) having first and second imaging areas configured to photoelectrically convert the first and second object images, respectively,
an image processing unit configured to generate a stereophonic image based on an output from the single image sensor, the stereophonic image including first and second images corresponding to the first and second imaging areas, respectively, and
a setting unit configured to set the first image as a reference image for monaurally displaying the stereophonic image based on information (claim 1, line(s) 10-12 and 18-21) on the interchangeable lens transmitted from the interchangeable lens, and the first imaging area as a photometry area for auto exposure adjustment to the first and second imaging areas in acquiring the stereophonic image. (claim 1, line(s) 10-15)
In general, claim 1 was found to contain no limitation unique or non-obvious when compared to claims of US. Patent No. 12401906, except for,
configured to form first and second object images, respectively,
having first and second imaging areas configured to photoelectrically convert the first and second object images, respectively,
an image processing unit configured to generate a stereophonic image based on an output from the single image sensor, the stereophonic image including first and second images corresponding to the first and second imaging areas, respectively, and
information on the interchangeable lens transmitted from the interchangeable lens
However, prior art Kusaka discloses,
first and second lens units (¶35-38 and fig. 1, lens barrel 101 having two imaging lenses “100R (on the right side facing toward the subject) and 100L (on the left side facing toward the subject)”as depicted in fig. 1) configured to form first and second object images, respectively, (¶35-38 and fig. 1, “two images with parallax in the left and right direction” obtained through “two imaging lenses 100R and 100L”)
a single image sensor (¶35-39 and fig. 2, “imaging element 300”) having first and second imaging areas (¶39 and fig. 2, “two imaging lenses 100R and 100L and the imaging element 300 have been cut along a horizontal plane”) configured to photoelectrically convert the first and second object images, respectively, (¶39 and fig. 2, “two optical images formed via the two imaging lenses 100R and 100L are formed on the imaging element 300” as depicted in fig. 2)
an image processing unit (¶49 and fig. 3, “3D image generator 309” depicted in fig. 3) configured to generate a stereophonic image (¶49 and fig. 3, 3D image generator 309 “generates a final 3D image”) based on an output from the single image sensor, (¶49, “generates a final 3D image on the basis of the subject images obtained from the two imaging lenses 100R and 100L when the lens barrel 101 has been mounted to the camera body 107”) the stereophonic image (¶49, “final 3D image”) including first second images corresponding to the first and second imaging areas, respectively, (¶49, final 3D image based on “the images obtained from the two imaging lenses 100R and 100L when the lens barrel 101 has been mounted to the camera body 107”) and
information on the interchangeable lens transmitted from the interchangeable lens (¶53,38, and fig. 1, “system controller 308 recognizes that the mounted lens barrel” for 3D imaging or 2D imaging based on exchanged information between “the camera body 107 and the lens barrel that has been mounted” through lens mount 107 depicted in fig. 1)
It would have been obvious of one in ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the disclosures of U.S. Patent No. 12401906 with the interchangeable lens camera of Kusaka which can use interchange a lens barrel with parallax in the left and right direction. This allows for 3D imaging.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 2 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The claimed invention refers to “the VR 180” which both lacks antecedent basis and is an undefined abbreviation. VR 180 is unclear because the number could refer to a number of things. Namely, VR 180 could refer to a degree of a field of view, a particular virtual reality standard of at least 180 different standards exists, a version number of some virtual reality (VR) standard, a virtual reality (VR) 180 element referred it within the drawings or specification, etc. This uncertainty makes the claimed “VR 180” indefinite. At most, what can be understood of VR 180 is that it refers to a moving image standard. For the purposes of examination, the claimed “the VR 180” will be referred to as “a virtual reality moving image standard”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1,9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kusaka; Hiroya (US 20120147148 A1) in view of Masuda; Tomonori (US 20080106634 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Kusaka teaches,
An image pickup system (Title, “imaging device”) comprising:
an image pickup apparatus; (¶35-39 and fig. 1-2, “interchangeable lens type of camera” including “imaging element 300” as depicted in fig. 1) and
an interchangeable lens (¶35-38 and fig. 1, “lens barrel 101” depicted in fig. 1) attachable to and detachable from the image pickup apparatus, (¶35-38 and fig. 1, lens barrel 101 as part of “an interchangeable lens type of camera” where lens mount 108 is used for “mounting a lens barrel to the camera body 107” in line with the imaging element 300 depicted in fig. 1)
wherein the interchangeable lens (¶35-38 and fig. 1, “lens barrel 101” depicted in fig. 1) includes:
first and second lens units (¶35-38 and fig. 1, lens barrel 101 having two imaging lenses “100R (on the right side facing toward the subject) and 100L (on the left side facing toward the subject)”as depicted in fig. 1) configured to form first and second object images, respectively, (¶35-38 and fig. 1, “two images with parallax in the left and right direction” obtained through “two imaging lenses 100R and 100L”) and
a communication unit (¶38,56, and fig. 1, “lens barrel” communicates information to the “camera body 107” through electrical contact with the “lens mount 108”) configured to transmit information on the interchangeable lens to the image pickup apparatus, (¶38 and fig. 1, lens mount 108 for “exchanging information between the camera body 107 and the lens barrel that has been mounted”)
wherein the image pickup apparatus (¶35-39 and fig. 1-2, “interchangeable lens type of camera” including “imaging element 300” as depicted in fig. 1) includes:
a single image sensor (¶35-39 and fig. 2, “imaging element 300”) having first and second imaging areas (¶39 and fig. 2, “two imaging lenses 100R and 100L and the imaging element 300 have been cut along a horizontal plane”) configured to photoelectrically convert the first and second object images, respectively, (¶39 and fig. 2, “two optical images formed via the two imaging lenses 100R and 100L are formed on the imaging element 300” as depicted in fig. 2)
an image processing unit (¶49 and fig. 3, “3D image generator 309” depicted in fig. 3) configured to generate a stereophonic image (¶49 and fig. 3, 3D image generator 309 “generates a final 3D image”) based on an output from the single image sensor, (¶49, “generates a final 3D image on the basis of the subject images obtained from the two imaging lenses 100R and 100L when the lens barrel 101 has been mounted to the camera body 107”) the stereophonic image (¶49, “final 3D image”) including first second images corresponding to the first and second imaging areas, respectively, (¶49, final 3D image based on “the images obtained from the two imaging lenses 100R and 100L when the lens barrel 101 has been mounted to the camera body 107”) and
a setting unit (¶52-53,56-61, and Fig. 3, “system controller 308” controls switch to recording or displaying a 2D image and a 3D image) configured to set the first image as a reference image (¶59, “rectangular region 400L is a region that is utilized as the image”) for monaurally displaying the stereographic image based on the information, (¶52-53,56-61, and fig. 4, “rectangular region 400L is a region that is utilized as the image that is recorded or displayed by the imaging device out of the image formed by the imaging lens 100L”, of the two images formed by lens 100L and 100R in the overall imaging region 401 depicted in fig. 4, as coordinated by system controller 308 which recognizes “the mounted lens barrel is intended for 3D imaging” has been mounted and the imaging device is set to “2D moving picture imaging mode”)
But does not explicitly teach,
set the first imaging area as a photometry area for auto exposure adjustment to the first and second imaging areas in acquiring the stereophonic image.
However, Masuda teaches additionally,
set the first imaging area (¶76 and 86, “instruct the main imaging unit 2A to obtain the preliminary image, and the main imaging unit 2A obtains the preliminary image”) as a photometry area (¶76, 86, and 78, “preliminary image” used to “determine photography conditions” such that preliminary image is used in calculating “exposure values” based on “measured luminance) for auto exposure adjustment to the first and second imaging areas (¶86 and Fig. 2, “exposure setting unit 27 sets the exposure of the main imaging unit 2A and the sub-imaging unit 2B, based on the calculated exposure value” calculated by “AE/AWB processing unit 21” at ST2 which carries out “AE processing by using the preliminary image, and calculates the exposure value” as depicted in fig. 2) in acquiring the stereophonic image. (¶86,67, and fig. 1, images obtained by the two “main imaging unit 2A and the sub-imaging unit 2B” depicted in fig. 1 used for generating a “stereo image after obtaining two images”)
It would have been obvious of one in ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the interchangeable lens camera of Kusaka with the obtained image setting of Masuda which generates a preliminary image for photometric measurement. This image can be applied for use in determining of photography conditions.
Regarding claim 9, Kusaka teaches,
An image pickup apparatus (¶35-39 and fig. 1-2, “interchangeable lens type of camera” including “imaging element 300” of the imaging device depicted in fig. 1) attachable to and detachable from an interchangeable lens including first and second lens units (¶35-38 and fig. 1, “lens barrel 101” as part of “an interchangeable lens type of camera” where lens mount 108 is used for “mounting a lens barrel to the camera body 107” in line with the imaging element 300 depicted in fig. 1) configured to form first and second object images, respectively, (¶35-38 and fig. 1, “two images with parallax in the left and right direction” obtained through “two imaging lenses 100R and 100L”) the image pickup apparatus (¶35-39 and fig. 1-2, “interchangeable lens type of camera” including “imaging element 300” as depicted in fig. 1) comprising:
a single image sensor (¶35-39 and fig. 2, “imaging element 300”) having first and second imaging areas (¶39 and fig. 2, “two imaging lenses 100R and 100L and the imaging element 300 have been cut along a horizontal plane”) configured to photoelectrically convert the first and second object images, respectively, (¶39 and fig. 2, “two optical images formed via the two imaging lenses 100R and 100L are formed on the imaging element 300” as depicted in fig. 2)
an image processing unit (¶49 and fig. 3, “3D image generator 309” depicted in fig. 3) configured to generate a stereophonic image (¶49 and fig. 3, 3D image generator 309 “generates a final 3D image”) based on an output from the single image sensor, (¶49, “generates a final 3D image on the basis of the subject images obtained from the two imaging lenses 100R and 100L when the lens barrel 101 has been mounted to the camera body 107”) the stereophonic image (¶49, “final 3D image”) including first and second images corresponding to the first and second imaging areas, respectively, (¶49, final 3D image based on “the images obtained from the two imaging lenses 100R and 100L when the lens barrel 101 has been mounted to the camera body 107”) and
a setting unit (¶52-53,56-61, and Fig. 3, “system controller 308” controls switch to recording or displaying a 2D image and a 3D image) configured to set the first image as a reference image (¶59, “rectangular region 400L is a region that is utilized as the image”) for monaurally displaying the stereophonic image based on information (¶52-53,56-61, and fig. 4, “rectangular region 400L is a region that is utilized as the image that is recorded or displayed by the imaging device out of the image formed by the imaging lens 100L”, of the two images formed by lens 100L and 100R in the overall imaging region 401 depicted in fig. 4, as coordinated by system controller 308 which recognizes “the mounted lens barrel is intended for 3D imaging” has been mounted and the imaging device is set to “2D moving picture imaging mode”) on the interchangeable lens transmitted from the interchangeable lens, (¶53,38, and fig. 1, “system controller 308 recognizes that the mounted lens barrel” for 3D imaging or 2D imaging based on exchanged information between “the camera body 107 and the lens barrel that has been mounted” through lens mount 107 depicted in fig. 1)
But does not explicitly teach,
set the first imaging area as a photometry area for auto exposure adjustment to the first and second imaging areas in acquiring the stereophonic image.
However, Masuda teaches additionally,
set the first imaging area (¶76 and 86, “instruct the main imaging unit 2A to obtain the preliminary image, and the main imaging unit 2A obtains the preliminary image”) as a photometry area (¶76, 86, and 78, “preliminary image” used to “determine photography conditions” such that preliminary image is used in calculating “exposure values” based on “measured luminance) for auto exposure adjustment to the first and second imaging areas (¶86 and Fig. 2, “exposure setting unit 27 sets the exposure of the main imaging unit 2A and the sub-imaging unit 2B, based on the calculated exposure value” calculated by “AE/AWB processing unit 21” at ST2 which carries out “AE processing by using the preliminary image, and calculates the exposure value” as depicted in fig. 2) in acquiring the stereophonic image. (¶86,67, and fig. 1, images obtained by the two “main imaging unit 2A and the sub-imaging unit 2B” depicted in fig. 1 used for generating a “stereo image after obtaining two images”)
It would have been obvious of one in ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the interchangeable lens camera of Kusaka with the obtained image setting of Masuda which generates a preliminary image for photometric measurement. This image can be applied for use in determining of photography conditions.
Claim(s) 2,5-6 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kusaka; Hiroya (US 20120147148 A1) in view of Masuda; Tomonori (US 20080106634 A1) in view of MORIOKA; Yoshihiro et al. (US 20140002612 A1)
Regarding claim 2, Kusaka with Masuda teaches the limitations of claim 1,
Kusaka teaches additionally,
information indicating that the interchangeable lens supports the VR180. (¶53 and 38, “the system controller 308 recognizes that the mounted lens barrel is intended for 3D imaging” based on exchanged information “between the camera body 107 and the lens barrel that has been mounted”)
But does not explicitly teach,
VR180.
However, Morioka teaches additionally,
VR180. (¶280 and 299, “camcorder” that generates “left and right video streams that will form 3D video” where “both of the left and right video streams have been generated based on the basic video stream that has been shot” by the camcorder can be “synthesized together in virtual reality (VR)”)
It would have been obvious of one in ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the interchangeable lens camera of Kusaka with the lens unit of Masuda with the luminance control of Morioka which can utilize the captured video for generating a virtual reality given included 3D information. This can extend the use of captured video to being able to be used in computer graphics processing.
Regarding claim 5, Kusaka with Masuda teaches the limitations of claim 1,
Masuda teaches additionally,
second lens unit (¶68 and Fig. 1-2B, imaging unit “2B” as depicted in Fig. 1) includes an aperture unit (¶68 and Fig. 1, iris “12B” driven by iris driving unit “17B” as depicted in Fig. 1) which performs a correction by changing a luminance in the second imaging area. (¶70 and 78, iris driving unit “17B adjusts an iris diameter based on iris value data outputted from the AE/AWB processing unit 21” which “carries out measurement of luminance of the subject” that is used to determining “an iris value” as an exposure value)
But does not explicitly teach,
performs a correction to reduce a difference of luminance in the first and second imaging areas
However, Morioka teaches additionally,
performs a correction to reduce a difference of luminance in the first and second imaging areas by changing (¶95, stereo matching section 320 performs the process of “matching the luminance” signal levels of “left- and right-eye video frames” to at least “reduce their difference” when “luminance signal levels” of the left- and right-eye video frames are “significantly different from each other”) a luminance (¶95, “luminance signal levels”) in the second imaging area. (¶95, luminance signal level of “right-eye video frame”)
It would have been obvious of one in ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the interchangeable lens camera of Kusaka with the lens unit of Morita with the obtained image setting of Masuda with the luminance control of Morioka which reduces the luminance difference between a left- and right-eye frames. This processing can help improve the video quality of a 3D view to be viewed.
Regarding claim 6, Kusaka with Masuda with Morioka teaches the limitations of claim 5,
Masuda teaches additionally,
information is information indicating that the correction is performed by the aperture unit. (¶78, AE/AWB processing unit 21 “calculates the iris value data” as an exposure value (AE processing)” such that “iris driving units 17A and 17B adjusts an iris diameter based on iris value data” a outputted from the AE/AWB processing unit 21)
Claim(s) 3 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kusaka; Hiroya (US 20120147148 A1) in view of Masuda; Tomonori (US 20080106634 A1) in view of Morita; Tetsuya et al. (US 20130170029 A1)
Regarding claim 3, Kusaka with Masuda teaches the limitations of claim 1,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 3,
However, Morita teaches additionally,
among the first and second lens units, the second lens unit (¶367, “right-eye optical system OR” of the two “left-eye optical system OL and the right-eye optical system OR“) only includes a correction mechanism (¶367, “focus adjusting optical system” disclosed specifically for the right-eye optical system OR) configured to reduce a difference in focus positions (¶367, “effect that individual differences between products have on the stereo image can be reduce” through focus adjusting right-eye optical system OR) of the first and the second lens units. (¶367, “right-eye optical system OR” with “right-eye negative lens group G1R that functions as a focus adjusting optical system, the focal state of the right-eye optical image QR1 can be matched to the focal state of the left-eye optical image QL1”), the first lens unit (¶341, “left-eye optical system OL”)
It would have been obvious of one in ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the interchangeable lens camera of Kusaka with the lens unit of Masuda with the lens unit of Morita which only adjusts the focal state of a second optical system to match a first optical system. This allows for a lens unit which can be made more easily a compact size while still reducing the difference effects on stereo images.
Claim(s) 4 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kusaka; Hiroya (US 20120147148 A1) in view of Masuda; Tomonori (US 20080106634 A1) in view of Morita; Tetsuya et al. (US 20130170029 A1) in view of KAWAI; Akihiko (US 20200029015 A1)
Regarding claim 4, Kusaka with Masuda with Morita teaches the limitations of claim 3,
But does not explicitly teach the additional information of claim 4,
However, Kawai teaches additionally,
information indicating that the correction mechanism is set in the second lens unit. (¶27, controls drive “aperture stop 32 via the lens drive unit 33 and the aperture drive unit 35 based upon control signals input thereto from a body control unit 27 in the camera body 2 via the body-side connection unit 202 and the lens-side connection unit 302”)
It would have been obvious of one in ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the interchangeable lens camera of Kusaka with the lens unit of Masuda with the lens control of Morita with the drive controls of Kawai which allows a camera to manage an aperture drive and lens drive in an interchangeable lens. This allows for optimal communication between the lens and camera.
Claim(s) 7 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kusaka; Hiroya (US 20120147148 A1) in view of Masuda; Tomonori (US 20080106634 A1) in view of An; Wenge (David) (US 20120154549 A1)
Regarding claim 7, Kusaka with Masuda teaches the limitations of claim 1,
But does not explicitly teach the additional information of claim 7,
However, An teaches additionally,
first lens unit (¶55-58 and fig. 11, “3D optical adapter 10” of the 2D digital camera depicted in fig. 11) includes a first aperture unit (¶33 and fig. 1, “the left view mirror 12a then is reflected by the minor 12a to the minor surface 14a” depicted in fig. 1) corresponding to a formal orientation (¶55-58,33, and fig. 13, locating the left image 30a/122a “on the top half of the 3D digital image” as depicted in fig. 13) of the interchangeable lens (¶55-58,33 and fig. 1, optical adapter 10 where “left image 30a is received by the left view mirror 12a then is reflected by the minor 12a to the minor surface 14a, there, it is reflected again to the left area of the output mirror 16” as depicted in fig. 1) and a second aperture unit (¶33 and fig. 1, “right view mirror 12b then is reflected by the minor 12b to the minor surface 14b” depicted in fig. 1) corresponding to an upside-down orientation (¶55-58,33, and fig. 13, locating the right image 30b/122b “on the top half of the 3D digital image” as depicted in fig. 13) of the interchangeable lens. (¶55,33, and fig. 1, optical adapter 10 where “right image 30b is also received by the right view mirror 12b then is reflected by the minor 12b to the minor surface 14b, there, it is reflected again to the right area of the output mirror 16 as well” as depicted in fig. 1)
It would have been obvious of one in ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the interchangeable lens camera of Kusaka with the lens unit of Masuda with the image orientation of An which symmetrically flips images captured by an optical adapter. This allows for a format that merges images in a way so that compression rates will be significantly increased.
Claim(s) 8 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kusaka; Hiroya (US 20120147148 A1) in view of Masuda; Tomonori (US 20080106634 A1) in view of An; Wenge (David) (US 20120154549 A1) in view of Cotoros; Ingrid et al. (US 20200133095 A1)
Regarding claim 8, Kusaka with Masuda with An teaches the limitations of claim 7,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 8,
However, Cotoros teaches additionally,
information indicating that the interchangeable lens is in the formal orientation. (¶93, “image capture device 300 may maintain information indicating the location and orientation of the lenses 330, 332 and the image sensors 340, 342”)
It would have been obvious of one in ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the interchangeable lens camera of Kusaka with the lens unit of Masuda with the image orientation of An with the maintained information of Cortoros which indicates location and orientation of lenses. This allows for can improve accuracy, efficiency, or both when generating a combined image.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY S LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7322. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 10AM-8PM 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, Joseph G. Ustaris can be reached at (571) 272-7383. 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.
/JOSEPH G USTARIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2483
/JIMMY S LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2483
Prosecution Insights