Ex Parte Posa et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Mar 17, 2016

13095569 (P.T.A.B. Mar. 17, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
13/095,569 04/27/2011
25006 7590 03/21/2016
DINSMORE & SHOHL LLP
POBOX7021
TROY, MI 48007-7021
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
John G. Posa
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
VID-02802/29 2888
EXAMINER
GILL, ANDREW J
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2618
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
03/21/2016 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address( es):
docket@patlaw.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte JOHN G. POSA and BARRY H. SCHWAB
Appeal2014-007179
Application 13/095,569
Technology Center 2600
Before JEFFREYS. SMITH, JON M. JURGOV AN, and
NABEEL U. KHAN, Administrative Patent Judges.
SMITH, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appeal2014-007179
Application 13/095,596
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner's final
rejection of claims 1-14 and 16-23, which are all the claims pending in the
application. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We affirm.
Illustrative Claim
1. Projected image correction apparatus, comprising:
a device including a display processor and a projector operative
to project an image onto a surface;
a sensor operative to view the projected image on the surface;
a display buffer storing a raw image to be seen by a viewer;
a projection buffer storing a version of the raw image to be
projected onto the surface;
a sensor buffer storing an image of the projected image as
viewed by the sensor; and wherein the display processor is operative
to compare the image stored in the sensor buff er to the image stored in
the display buffer and adjust the image stored in the projection buffer
so that the projected image seen by the sensor corresponds to the
image stored in the display buffer to correct for one or more of the
following defects in the projected image:
keystone effects or incorrect aspect-ratio;
brightness or contrast variations;
incorrect color rendition, saturation or hue;
poor focus or sharpness; or
motion artifacts caused by movement of the device.
Chen
Kumar
Prior Art
us 5,041,965
US 6,624,833 B 1
2
Aug.20, 1991
Sep.23,2003
Appeal2014-007179
Application 13/095,596
Li
Allen
Kondo
Wilson
Matsuda
Smoot
Longe
Vaganov
Furui
US 7,125,122 B2
US 2006/0279477 Al
US 2008/0068285 Al
US 7 ,432,917 B2
US 7,517,089 B2
US 7,775,883 B2
US 2010/0257478 Al
US 2011/0298709 Al
US 8,272,748 B2
Oct. 24, 2006
Dec. 14, 2006
Mar. 20, 2008
Oct. 7, 2008
Apr. 14, 2009
Aug. 17, 2010
Oct. 7, 2010
Dec. 8, 2011
Sep.25,2012
Baoxin Lin and Ibrahim Sezan, Automatic Keystone Correction for Smart
Projectors with Embedded Camera, 2004 International Conference on Image
Processing (ICIP).
Examiner's Rejections
Claims 1, 2, 6, 9, 10, and 16 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
as unpatentable over Li, Allen, and Furui.
Claims 3, 4, and 7 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Li, Allen, Furui, and Longe.
Claim 5 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over
Li, Allen, Furui, and Wilson.
Claim 8 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over
Li, Allen, Furui, and Kondo.
Claims 11 and 12 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Li, Allen, Furui, and Baoxin.
Claim 13 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable
over Li, Allen, Furui, and Chen.
Claim 14 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable
over Li, Allen, Furui, Chen, and Matsuda.
3
Appeal2014-007179
Application 13/095,596
Claims 17 and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as
unpatentable over Li, Allen, Furui, and Kumar.
Claim 19 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable
over Li, Allen, Furui, and Smoot.
Claims 20-23 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable
over Li, Allen, Furui, Smoot, and Vaganov.
ANALYSIS
We adopt the findings of fact made by the Examiner in the Final
Action and Examiner's Answer as our own. We concur with the conclusions
reached by the Examiner for the reasons given in the Examiner's Answer.
We highlight the following for emphasis.
Appellants contend the combination of Li, Allen, and Furui does not
teach "a sensor buffer storing an image of the projected image as viewed by
the sensor." App. Br. 3. Appellants also contend the "display buffer,"
"projection buffer," and "sensor buffer" are not taught by the combination of
Li, Allen, and Furui. Reply Br. 1-2. The Examiner finds the "display
buffer" and the "sensor buffer" are taught by the combination of Li and
Allen (Final Act. 7), and the "projection buffer" is taught by the combination
of Li, Allen, and Furui (Final Act. 9). We agree with the Examiner.
Cumulative to the Examiner's findings, we highlight Figure 17 of Li
shows a source image, a projected image, and a sensed image. Figure 3
shows the self-adjusting projection system that processes and displays the
source, projected, and sensed images.
For example, Figure 3 of Li shows an image to be projected received
by an image preprocessing device 12. Although Li does not explicitly teach
4
Appeal2014-007179
Application 13/095,596
the image to be projected is stored in "a display buffer," we find one of
ordinary skill in the art would understand the image to be projected, or "raw
image," shown in Figure 3, is stored in a memory, or "display buffer,"
within the meaning of claim 1.
Similarly, although Li does not explicitly teach the image pre-
processing device 12 include a "projection buffer storing a version of the
raw image to be projected onto the surface," we find one of ordinary skill
would understand device 12 includes a buffer that stores a version of the raw
image, as suggested by the input arrow labeled "image to be projected" and
the output arrow labeled "output image."
Li also shows projection screen detection device 14, which one of
skill would understand includes a buffer to store the projected image as
viewed by the sensor 10.
The teachings of Allen and Furui make explicit what is implicitly
understood by one of ordinary skill when reading Li, that image data for the
raw, projected, and sensed images of Figure 3 of Li are stored in
corresponding buffers.
We sustain the rejection of claim 1under35 U.S.C. § 103. We also
sustain the rejections of claims 2-14 and 16-23 for the reasons given by the
Examiner in the Examiner's Answer.
DECISION
The rejections of claims 1-14 and 16-23 are affirmed.
5
Appeal2014-007179
Application 13/095,596
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). See 37 C.F.R.
§ 41.50(±).
AFFIRMED
6