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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shotan, US 10,269,141 in view of Johnson et al., US 20220284627
In considering claim 1,
PNG
media_image1.png
545
614
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a-b)The claimed memory/processor is met by computing device 106 (Fig 1b) which includes data storage 114 (full text para 46) and processor 112 (Fig 1c)
c) the claimed perform first calibration…is met where the system performs a first calibration (steps 802, 804, 806, Fig 8), which includes multiple points/locations. As disclosed (full text para 4) the features of mapping of a 3D scene (world coordinates) to a 2D plane using pinhole camera equation is used to calibrate camera by linking 3D points to 2D pixels.
d) the claimed output…is met where the camera captures an unfocused image of the calibration target (step 810).
e) the claimed second image…is met where after the second image is captured (810) where the calibration target is facing the camera, which includes calibration points (812) and then perform calibration (814), where the calibrations in the target include multiple points present in the chart, including corner-detection (Fig 3a/b, full text para 33, 64-67, 69-74, 76, 129).
The examiner notes Shotan disclose the use of calibration targets which are patterns are on a stand (physical) thus not “outputting” the target.
The examiner notes in field of camera calibration the use of a physical target or generated/displayed/projected target are notoriously well known in the art as disclosed by Johnson et al., US 20220284627, which discloses a display 275, which can display a single or multiple patterns Fig 2H).
The motivation to modify the system of Johnson with Shotan would provide the conventional ability to change/modify the calibration target displayed, without requiring any movement of a physical target/medium, thus being an obvious modification to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
In considering claim 8,
The parameter(s) such as focal length, which is adjusted after calibration using the first image (806-808) which is then used to correct for aberrations of the camera from the 2nd image (814).
In considering claim 9,
Refer to claim 1.
In considering claim 10,
Refer to claim 1.
The system can be implemented by non-transitory computer-readable medium (full text para 8, 46, 110 and 145).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The additional features/limitations of the dependent claim combined with the independent limitations are not taught/suggest by the prior art of record and are not considered obvious modifications to one of ordinary skill in the art, thus these claims are objected to.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure—see newly cited references on attached form PTO-892.
The following reference disclose camera calibration using distortion.
US 20110129154 (Fig 13, distortion)
US 20220284627 (para 96, 101)
US 20200342651 (para 21).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Brian Yenke whose telephone number is (571)272-7359. The examiner work schedule is Monday-Thursday, 0730-1830 hrs.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s Supervisor, John Miller, can be reached at (571)272-7353.
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks
Washington, D.C. 20231
or faxed to:
(571)-273-8300
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the Technology Center 2600 Customer Service Office whose telephone number is
(703)305-HELP.
General information about patents, trademarks, products and services offered by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), and other related information is available by contacting the USPTO’s General Information Services Division at:
800-PTO-9199 or 703-308-HELP
(FAX) 703-305-7786
(TDD) 703-305-7785
An automated message system is available 7 days a week, 24 hours a day providing informational responses to frequently asked questions and the ability to order certain documents. Customer service representatives are available to answer questions, send materials or connect customers with other offices of the USPTO from 8:30 a.m. - 8:00p.m. EST/EDT, Monday-Friday excluding federal holidays.
For other technical patent information needs, the Patent Assistance Center can be reached through customer service representatives at the above numbers, Monday through Friday (except federal holidays) from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. EST/EDT.
The Patent Electronic Business Center (EBC) allows USPTO customers to retrieve data, check the status of pending actions, and submit information and applications. The tools currently available in the Patent EBC are Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) and the Electronic Filing System (EFS). PAIR (http://pair.uspto.gov) provides customers direct secure access to their own patent application status information, as well as to general patent information publicly available. EFS allows customers to electronically file patent application documents securely via the Internet. EFS is a system for submitting new utility patent applications and pre-grant publication submissions in electronic publication-ready form. EFS includes software to help customers prepare submissions in extensible Markup Language (XML) format and to assemble the various parts of the application as an electronic submission package. EFS also allows the submission of Computer Readable Format (CRF) sequence listings for pending biotechnology patent applications, which were filed in paper form.
/BRIAN P YENKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2422
Prosecution Insights