UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`__________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`__________________________________________________________________
`
`SONY CORPORATION
`Petitioner
`
`Patent No. 7,477,284
`Issue Date: Jan. 13, 2009
`Title: SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR CAPTURING AND VIEWING
`STEREOSCOPIC PANORAMIC IMAGES
`__________________________________________________________________
`
`SECOND PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`OF U.S. PATENT NO. 7,477,284
`
`No. IPR2013-00327
`
`__________________________________________________________________
`
`

`
`Table of Contents
`
`I.  Mandatory Notices (37 C.F.R. § 42.8) ......................................................... 1 
`II.  Grounds for Standing (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a)) ............................................. 1 
`III.  Identification of Challenge (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(1)-(3)) and Relief
`Requested (37 C.F.R. § 42.22(a)(1)) ............................................................ 2 
`A.  Procedural Background .................................................................................................. 2 
`B.  Background of the ’284 Patent ..................................................................................... 3 
`C.  Patents and Printed Publications Relied On ............................................................... 5 
`D. Statutory Grounds for Challenge................................................................................ 14 
`E.  Claim Construction ....................................................................................................... 15 
`IV.  How the Challenged Claims Are Unpatentable (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(4)-
`(5)) .............................................................................................................. 17 
`A.  Claims 4 and 7 Would Have Been Obvious over Kawakita in view of Chen and
`Allen Under 35 U.S.C. § 103 ....................................................................................... 17 
`B.  Claims 4 and 7 Would Have Been Obvious over Chen in view of Allen Under
`35 U.S.C. § 103 .............................................................................................................. 26 
`C.  Claims 4 and 7 Would Have Been Obvious over Ishiguro in view of Chen and
`Allen Under 35 U.S.C. § 103 ....................................................................................... 31 
`D. Kawakita Anticipates Claim 38 Under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) ...................................... 38 
`E.  Chen Anticipates Claim 38 Under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) ............................................. 40 
`F.  Claim 38 Would Have Been Obvious over Ishiguro Under 35 U.S.C. § 103 ...... 41 
`G. Claim 38 Would Have Been Obvious over Ishiguro in view of Chen Under 35
`U.S.C. § 103 .................................................................................................................... 43 
`H.  Claim 38 Would Have Been Obvious over Ishiguro in view of Berger Under 35
`U.S.C. § 103 .................................................................................................................... 44 
`I.  Asahi Anticipates Claim 38 Under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) ............................................ 45 
`J.  Claim 38 Would Have Been Obvious over Asahi in view of Helava Under 35
`U.S.C. § 103 .................................................................................................................... 48 
`V.  Kawakita is Prior Art to the ’284 Patent Under At Least 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)
` ................................................................................................................... 50 
`VI.  Conclusion ................................................................................................. 53 
`VII. Appendix: Abridged Claim Charts ............................................................ 54 
`,,,
`
`
`
`
`ii
`
`

`
`I. Mandatory Notices (37 C.F.R. § 42.8)
`
`Real Party-in-Interest: Sony Corporation (“Sony” or “Petitioner”), Sony Electronics
`
`Inc., Sony Corporation of America, Sony Mobile Communications AB, and Sony
`
`Mobile Communications (USA) Inc. are the real parties-in-interest.
`
`Related Matters: The following matter would affect or be affected by the decision in
`
`this proceeding: HumanEyes Technologies Ltd. v. Sony Electronics Inc. et al., 1-12-CV-00398
`
`(D. Del.); Sony Corp. v. HumanEyes Technologies Ltd., IPR2013-00219 (P.T.A.B.).
`
`Counsel: Lead Counsel: Walter Hanley (Reg. No. 28,720); Backup Counsel: Michelle
`
`Carniaux (Reg. No. 36,098).
`
`Service Information: Sony-HumanEyes@kenyon.com.
`
`Post and Delivery: Kenyon & Kenyon LLP, One Broadway, New York, NY 10004
`
`Telephone: 212-425-7200
`
`Facsimile: 212-425-5288
`
`II. Grounds for Standing (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a))
`
`Petitioner certifies that the patent for which review is sought, U.S. Patent No.
`
`7,477,284 (the “’284 Patent,” Sony-1101) is available for inter partes review and that the
`
`Petitioner is not estopped from requesting an inter partes review challenging the patent
`
`claims on the grounds identified in this petition. Although Petitioner was served
`
`more than one year ago with a complaint asserting infringement of the ’284 Patent,
`
`Petitioner submits that, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 315(b), it is not barred from filing this
`
`petition because Petitioner timely filed a prior petition (IPR2013-00219) for inter partes
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`
`review of the ’284 Patent and has accompanied the present petition with a request for
`
`joinder under 35 U.S.C. § 315(c).
`
`III. Identification of Challenge (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(1)-(3)) and Relief
`Requested (37 C.F.R. § 42.22(a)(1))
`
` Petitioner challenges claims 4, 7, and 38 of the ’284 Patent, and cancellation of
`
`those claims is requested.
`
`A. Procedural Background
`
` HumanEyes Technologies Ltd. (“HumanEyes”) has alleged that Sony has
`
`infringed the ’284 Patent in the civil action in the District of Delaware identified as a
`
`related matter in Section I above (the “Delaware action”), which was filed on March
`
`29, 2012. At about the same time that HumanEyes initiated the Delaware action,
`
`HumanEyes also filed a Complaint against Sony in the International Trade
`
`Commission (“ITC”), in which it asserted specifically that Sony was infringing claims
`
`1, 2, 3, 10, 20, 27, 28, 29, 36, and 37 of the ’284 Patent. On March 29, 2013, Sony
`
`filed a petition for inter partes review requesting cancellation of those asserted claims.
`
`IPR2013-00219.
`
` On April 19, 2013, Sony filed a motion in the Delaware action for a stay pending
`
`IPR2013-00219. On May 6, 2013, in response to the stay motion, HumanEyes
`
`contended that Sony was infringing additional claims of the ’284 Patent that were not
`
`asserted in the ITC Complaint nor otherwise previously asserted against Sony, namely
`
`claims 4, 7, and 38. See Answering Brief in Opposition to Sony’s Motion to Stay
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`
`Pending the Outcome of Inter Partes Review of the Patents-In-Suit, HumanEyes
`
`Technologies Ltd. v. Sony Electronics Inc. et al., 1-12-CV-00398, D.I. 34 (D. Del. May 6,
`
`2013) (Sony-1102).
`
`Accordingly, Sony is filing its second petition for inter partes review of the ’284
`
`Patent, IPR2013-00327, requesting cancellation of the additional claims HumanEyes
`
`asserted for the first time on May 6, 2013. Concurrently, Sony is filing a motion
`
`seeking joinder of this petition with IPR2013-000219.
`
`B. Background of the ’284 Patent
`
`The ’284 Patent states that “the invention provides an arrangement for recording
`
`images for use in generating and utilizing images comprising a stereoscopic image
`
`set.” ’284 Patent, 2:22-24. A “stereoscopic image set” comprises at least two images
`
`of a scene recorded from slightly displaced positions. Id. 1:47-53. A “stereoscopic
`
`data source records images from which a stereoscopic image set can be generated.”
`
`Id. 2:26-28. The stereoscopic image set can consist of either panoramic or non-
`
`panoramic images generated from the images recorded by the stereoscopic data
`
`source. Id. 12:48-53.
`
`The Detailed Description in the ’284 Patent is directed to a “stereoscopic
`
`panoramic image arrangement” in particular. The specification describes the
`
`generation of a set of stereoscopic panoramic images using strips from each of a series
`
`of images recorded by a stereoscopic data source. Id. 8:21-28. Figure 5 of the ’284
`
`Patent (below) depicts a series of successive images 50(1), 50(2), . . . 50(3) that are
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`
`recorded by the stereoscopic data source as it is translated and/or rotated. Id. 8:30-33.
`
`A plurality of mosaic images 51a, 51b, . . . comprising a stereoscopic panoramic image
`
`set are generated by using respective strips a1, a2, . . . a3, b1, b2, . . . b3 from the
`
`respective images 50(i). Id. 8:34-37. Strips a1, a2, . . . a3 are used in the image 51a, and
`
`are respective strips of the images 50(1), 50(2) . . . 50(3), each having the same
`
`horizontal displacement from the center of the respective images 50(i). Id. 8:37-41.
`
`Similarly, strips b1, b2, . . . b3 are used in image 51b, and are strips with the same
`
`horizontal displacement from the center of respective images 50(i), and so forth. Id.
`
`8:37-41. If the images 51(i) are viewed in pairs, they provide stereoscopic depth since
`
`they will effectively have different viewing directions. Id. 8:41-44.
`
`’284 Patent, Fig. 5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`
`For stereoscopic viewing of the stereoscopic panoramic image set, a unit “may
`
`display the panoramic images such that, when viewed using any of a number of kinds
`
`of appliances used [sic: to] facilitate stereoscopic viewing, including, for example, a
`
`lenticular lens, glasses with polarized lenses or lenses of different color, or other
`
`appliances as will be appreciated by those skilled in the art, the images will be viewed
`
`stereoscopically.” Id. 8:14-20. The ’284 Patent also incorporates by reference U.S.
`
`patent application Ser. No. 09/396,248, filed Sept. 16, 1999 and issued as U.S. Patent
`
`No. 6,665,003 (the “’003 Patent,” Sony-1103), which similarly states that those skilled
`
`in the art appreciated that “stereo viewing can be done using any other method of
`
`stereo separation,” including “the use of ‘Anaglyph Stereo’ with green-red glasses.”
`
`’003 Patent, 12:65 – 13:7.
`
`C. Patents and Printed Publications Relied On
`
` Petitioner relies on the following patents and publications:
`
`1. Sony-1104 & Sony-1105: VRSJ Research Report including Yasuhiro
`Kawakita, Yoshitaka Hamaguchi, Akitoshi Tsukamoto, Toshihiko
`Miyazaki, Generation of Panoramic Stereo Images from Movie Using
`Single Video Camera, Kansai Laboratory Research & Development
`Group, OKI Electric Industry Co., Ltd. (Nov. 27, 1997) (“Kawakita”).
`
` Kawakita was published on Nov. 27, 1997, and as described in Section V, is prior
`
`art under at least 35 U.S.C. § 102(a). A reference related to Kawakita, JP Pat. Pub.
`
`No. 11-164326, was cited but not discussed during the prosecution of the ’284 Patent.
`
` Kawakita first describes a preexisting technique for generating a single panoramic
`
`image by capturing images using a rotating camera, excising a vertical slit from the
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`
`center of each image, and sequentially combining the vertical slit images together.
`
`Kawakita, Sec. 1. Then, Kawakita describes an arrangement that generates a
`
`stereoscopic image set using the same technique as described in the ’284 Patent. Two
`
`strips (called “slit images”) are taken from each frame of a video camera (i.e.,
`
`stereoscopic data source) that follows a circular path about a center of rotation. Id.
`
`Fig. 1, Fig. 3, Fig. 5. Each strip is displaced from the center of the frame, one to the
`
`right and the other to the left, resulting in a series of left and right strips. Id. Sec. 4
`
`(“The slit image that is ultimate[ly] excised is a slit image of width sw from the
`
`position w/2+x for the left eye and w/2-x-sw for the right eye.”). The series of left
`
`and right strips are then respectively “composited” (i.e., mosaiced) to create right and
`
`left panoramas, respectively, of the scene (an elevator hallway) viewed from slightly
`
`displaced positions. Id. Sec. 5 (“All of the slit images excised from the frame images
`
`are continuously composited in sequence.”); Fig. 5 (below). “[S]tereoscopic viewing”
`
`of the left and right panoramic images was performed for ten researchers, and the
`
`results showed that a “sense of depth was faithfully reproduced.” Id. Sec.
`
`7.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Kawakita, Fig. 1
`
`
`
`6
`
`Kawakita, Fig. 3
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`Kawakita, Fig. 5
`
`
`
`
`
`2. Sony-1106: Hiroshi Ishiguro, Masashi Yamamoto, and Saburo Tsuji,
`Acquiring Omnidirectional Range Information, SYSTEMS AND
`COMPUTERS IN JAPAN, Vol. 23, No. 4, 47-56 (1992) (“Ishiguro”)
`
`Ishiguro published in June, 1992, and is prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). A
`
`related reference, Ishiguro, et al., Correspondence, Omni-Directional Stereo, IEEE TRANS.
`
`ON PATTERN ANA. AND MACH. INTEL., vol. 14, p.257-62 (1992), was cited during the
`
`prosecution of the ’284 Patent, but was not discussed.
`
`Ishiguro discloses an arrangement for generating a stereoscopic image set for
`
`computer vision applications including robotic navigation, using the same technique
`
`as in the ’284 Patent. Ishiguro, Fig. 5 (below). A single camera (i.e., stereoscopic data
`
`source) traverses a circular path at a distance R away from an axis. Id., Fig. 4 (below).
`
`Two vertical slits (i.e., image strips or segments) are set symmetrically from the image
`
`center and images are captured through the two slits via a camera having a 512 x 512
`
`pixel CCD. (Fig. 4 shows an enlargement of the image plane of the camera with the
`
`vertical slits illustrated.) Id. 50, 53. The resulting two series of image strips are then
`
`“arrang[ed]” (i.e., mosaiced) into a set of omnidirectional images of a scene (shown in
`
`Fig. 5 below) recorded from slightly displaced positions for stereo viewing. Id. 48, 50.
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`
`Ishiguro, Fig. 5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Ishiguro, Fig. 4
`Ishiguro, Fig. 6
`3. Sony-1107: U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2001/0010546 A1 (“Chen”)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Chen was filed on September 26, 1997, and is prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e).
`
`Chen was cited during the prosecution of the ’284 Patent, but was not discussed.
`
`Chen discloses a hand-held portable device, i.e., a “virtual reality camera,” for
`
`generating and displaying a stereoscopic image set. Chen ¶ 0019. The camera has left
`
`and right optical channels for receiving a series of “left and right images of the same
`
`subject but from spatially differentiated viewpoints of a subject. Id. ¶ 0048. The left
`
`and right images are projected onto opposing halves of an image sensor as the camera
`
`is panned by the user over a scene. Id. ¶ 0048, claims 14, 15. Chen’s camera differs
`
`from the cameras described by Kawakita and Ishiguro but not in a way that is material
`
`to the challenged ’284 Patent’s claims. Specifically, Chen’s camera has a dual optical
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`
`arrangement that projects the corresponding left eye view and right eye view images
`
`of the same subject (i.e., the same portion of the scene over which the camera is
`
`panned) onto two halves of image sensor in the same exposure rather than different
`
`exposures, as in Kawakita and Ishiguro. See, e.g., Kawakita Sec. 4, Fig. 3; Ishiguro 50,
`
`Fig. 6 (each showing the corresponding left and right eye views of the same object in
`
`the scene being projected onto the camera image plane in exposures taken at different
`
`points in the circular path that the camera traverses).
`
`Chen’s camera also samples the left and right halves of the image sensor, and
`
`mosaics the left images to form a left “composite” (i.e., mosaic) image, and mosaics
`
`the right images to form a right “composite” image, using a processor. Id. ¶ 0048.
`
`The left and right composite images are displayed on a stereo display on the camera,
`
`presenting a selected portion of the left composite image and a selected portion of the
`
`right composite image to the left and right eyes, respectively, of a viewer. Id. ¶ 0049,
`
`claim 16. As shown in Figs. 5 and 7 of Chen, the camera is a portable hand-held
`
`device; which includes a housing for accommodating an imager (Fig. 7, 115/117), a
`
`processor (Fig. 7, 19), and a stereo display (Fig. 7, 127) capable of providing a sense of
`
`depth. Id. Fig. 5, Fig. 7, ¶¶ 0048-50, 0028.
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`
`
`
`
`Chen, Fig. 5
`4. Sony-1108: U.S. PAT. NO. 5,737,491 (“Allen”)
`
`
`
`Chen, Fig. 7
`
`
`
`
`
`Allen was filed on June 28, 1996, was patent on April 7, 1998, and is prior art
`
`under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102(e), 102(a).
`
`Allen discloses a digital camera that can capture images and transmit the images to
`
`a computer using “a wireless communication system such as a cellular telephone or a
`
`digital wireless communication system.” Allen, 3:5.
`
`Allen, Fig. 1
`
`
`
`
`
`5. Sony-1109: U.S. Pat. No. 1,422,527 (“Berger”)
`
`Berger was patented on July 11, 1922 and is prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
`
`Berger discloses a technology for creating prints “of two oppositely colored
`
`superimposed images” (anaglyphs), which, when viewed simultaneously with an
`10
`
`
`
`

`
`anaglyphscope (e.g., red-cyan glasses), provide a sense of depth. Berger, 1:48-53.
`
`Figure 1 depicts an anaglyph of a nail viewed from two positions, with the first
`
`position printed in green (diagonal lines) and the second in red (vertical lines). Id.
`
`2:39-43. When viewed with the anaglyphscope depicted in Figure 2, the left eye only
`
`sees the left view image and the right eye only sees the right view image, providing a
`
`sense of depth to the viewer. Id. 2:48-63.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Berger, Fig. 1
`Berger, Fig. 2
`6. Sony-1110 & Sony-1111: Japanese Patent Laid-Open No. Hei 8-159762
`(June 21, 1996) (“Asahi”)
`
`
`
`
`
`Asahi published on June 21, 1996, and is prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
`
`Asahi discloses an arrangement for generating a stereoscopic image set of a ground
`
`scene using the same principles described by the ’284 Patent. Asahi, Fig. 10 (below).
`
`A moving video camera records images of a ground scene at the standard video frame
`
`rate of 30 frames (60 interlaced fields) per second. Id. ¶¶ 0001, 0034, Fig. 8 (below).
`
`Using an engineering workstation, three scan lines from each of the interlaced fields
`
`are extracted. Id. ¶ 0035 (“line data for the leading line, the middle line, and the final
`
`line of each field are extracted”), Fig. 8 (below), Fig. 9 (below). The three scan lines
`
`are then respectively mosaiced to form three “mosaic images” of the ground scene,
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`
`which makes “stereoscopic viewing [] possible.” Id. Fig. 9, ¶ 0008 (“lines of video
`
`images are extracted, and continuous mosaic images . . . are formed.”), ¶ 0035
`
`(“stereoscopic viewing is possible using this forward view image, this nadir view
`
`image, and this rearward view image.”), claim 24 (“stereo image formation device . . .
`
`comprising: an extraction means that extracts line image data, at two or more different
`
`prescribed line positions in screens, in a video captured image; and a combining
`
`means that combines line image data from the same line positions.”).
`
`
`
`Asahi, Fig. 10 (cropped)
`
`
`
`Asahi, Fig. 8
`
`
`
`Asahi, Fig. 9
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`7. Sony-1112: U.V. Helava, State of the Art in Digital Photogrammetric
`Workstations, THE PHOTOGRAMMETRIC JOURNAL OF FINLAND, VOL. 12,
`NO. 2, 65-76 (1991)
`
`Helava was published in 1991 (or at least as early as 1992, since the copy submitted
`
`as Sony-1112 is date-stamped March 24, 1992). Therefore, Helava is prior art under
`
`35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
`
`Helava describes the state of the art of stereo digital photogrammetric
`
`workstations, a special-purpose computer or processor that is used to display and
`
`manipulate image data of a ground scene collected by an aircraft, and, in this instance,
`
`is ultimately used to assist in generating maps. Helava, 65, Abstract, Introduction.
`
`The workstations disclosed in Helava have stereoscopic displays and can scroll and
`
`zoom through wide angle aerial images of a ground scene:
`
`[The] [s]tereo display [is] 512x512 pixels . . . [and operators may] roam up to
`200 pixels per second while maintaining full stereo[.] . . . The stereo model
`may include up to 800 Megapixels. A jump to anywhere in the model or
`photo can be accomplished in less than two seconds.
`
`Id. 68; see also Figs. 2 and 3 (below). The workstation in Figure 2 utilizes a “free-view”
`
`stereo display system in which stereo images are alternatingly displayed on a 512x512
`
`pixel monitor and observed with polarized glasses. Id. 70, Fig. 2.
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`
`
`
`Helava, Fig. 2
`D. Statutory Grounds for Challenge
`
`
`
`Helava, Fig. 3
`
`
`
`Cancellation of claims 4, 7, and 38 is requested on the following grounds:
`
`A. Claims 4 and 7 would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Kawakita in
`
`view of Chen and Allen.
`
`B. Claims 4 and 7 would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Chen in view
`
`of Allen.
`
`C. Claims 4 and 7 would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Ishiguro in
`
`view of Chen and Allen.
`
`D. Kawakita anticipates claim 38 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a).
`
`E. Chen anticipates claim 38 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e).
`
`F. Claim 38 would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Ishiguro.
`
`G. Claim 38 would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Ishiguro in view of
`
`Chen.
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`
`H. Claim 38 would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Ishiguro in view of
`
`Berger.
`
`I. Asahi anticipates claim 38 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
`
`J. Claim 38 would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Asahi in view of
`
`Helava.
`
`E. Claim Construction
`
`The claim terms should be given their broadest reasonable construction in view of
`
`the specification. Generally, the terms should be construed in accordance with their
`
`ordinary meaning. Specific terms are discussed below.
`
`1. “imager” (claim 38 and claim 1, on which claims 4 and 7 indirectly
`depend)
`
`The term “imager” means an image recording device that includes image recording
`
`elements in at least a portion of an image plane. The term “imager” does not appear
`
`in the specification of the ’284 Patent or in the documents that the ’284 Patent states
`
`are incorporated by reference. ’284 Patent, 1:20-40. However, the ’284 Patent
`
`explicitly states that “it will be appreciated that they may comprise cameras in which
`
`image recording elements are provided only in the portions of the respective image
`
`planes from which strips will be obtained for use in generating the respective images
`
`of the stereoscopic image set.” Id., 13:12-17.
`
`
`
`15
`
`

`
`2. “a display” (claim 1, on which claims 4 and 7 indirectly depend)
`
`The term “a display” in the ’284 Patent means one or more elements that present
`
`an image for viewing; “a display” can be a print. For example, claim 21, which
`
`ultimately depends from claim 1, recites “wherein the display is a lenticular print.”
`
`’284 Patent, claim 21, 4:57-61. Other recited embodiments include displays that
`
`incorporate “glasses with lenses of different colors, glasses with lenses of opposite
`
`polarizations, alternatively displaying at least two images of a stereoscopic image set
`
`sufficiently rapidly so that depth can be viewed.” Id. 8:6-20, 13:1-10.
`
`3. “displaying” (claim 38)
`
` The term “displaying” in the ’284 Patent means presenting an image for viewing.
`
`Recited embodiments include displaying an image with “glasses with lenses of
`
`different colors, glasses with lenses of opposite polarizations, [and] alternatively
`
`displaying at least two images of a stereoscopic image set sufficiently rapidly so that
`
`depth can be viewed.” Id. 8:6-20, 13:1-10. Accordingly, presenting an anaglyph print
`
`with lenses of different colors would be displaying the image.
`
`4. “communications apparatus” (claim 3, on which claims 4 and 7
`indirectly depend)
`
`In the ’284 Patent, a communications apparatus is “any arrangement that facilitates
`
`transfer of digital data between two devices, which may be at the same location or
`
`different locations.” See ’284 Patent 4:14-16. A communications apparatus may
`
`
`
`16
`
`

`
`include, “for example, a direct connection, such as a wire[, or] . . . a wireless
`
`connection[.]” Id. 4:17-18.
`
`IV. How the Challenged Claims Are Unpatentable (37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(4)-
`(5))
`
`The challenged claims are invalid for the reasons discussed below. An abridged set
`
`of claim charts is provided for the Board’s convenience in Section VII, infra.
`
`A. Claims 4 and 7 Would Have Been Obvious over Kawakita in view of Chen
`and Allen Under 35 U.S.C. § 103
`
`Claims 4 and 7 each depend from, and therefore incorporate all of the limitations
`
`of, claims 1 and 3. All of the incorporated limitations of claim 1 are disclosed by
`
`Kawakita or would have been obvious over Kawakita alone or over Kawakita in view
`
`of Chen. Allen discloses the incorporated limitation of claim 3. Allen also discloses
`
`the incorporated limitations of claims 4 and 7. We first present an element by
`
`element comparison of claims 4 and 7 (including the limitations incorporated from
`
`claims 1 and 3) with the references relied upon, followed by discussion of the reasons
`
`a person of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine the pertinent
`
`teachings of the references.
`
`1. Kawakita Discloses the Limitations of Claims 4 and 7 Incorporated from
`Claim 1.
`
`Kawakita discloses every element of claim 1, and discloses the same stereoscopic
`
`image generation technique as the technique described in the ’284 Patent.
`
`
`
`17
`
`

`
`i. Imaging apparatus comprising: at least one imager that moves relative
`to a scene so as to acquire a plurality of optical images of at least
`portions of the scene, each of at least two of said optical images being
`viewed from a different respective viewing position;
`
`Kawakita discloses an arrangement in which frame images (i.e., a plurality of
`
`optical images) are recorded by a video “camera [that] is rotated counterclockwise
`
`smoothly” over a respective series of positions relative to a scene; thus, at least two of
`
`the recorded frame images are captured from different respective viewing positions.
`
`Kawakita, Sec. 2 and 4.
`
`ii. a processor that receives image data representative of said at least two
`of the optical images and processes the data to divide each image into a
`plurality of segments and to generate a plurality of mosaics of the
`scene, such that:
`
` Kawakita discloses excising (i.e., dividing) “vertical slit images” (i.e., segments)
`
`from the frame images (i.e., optical images). Id. Secs. 1, 3, 4 (“The slit image that is
`
`ultimate[ly] excised is a slit image of width sw from the position w/2+x for the left
`
`eye and w/2-x-sw for the right eye.”), 5. “All of the slit images excised from the
`
`frame images are continuously composited [(i.e., mosaiced)] in sequence.” Id., Sec. 5;
`
`Sec. 6; see also id. English Abstract (“this technique cuts and connects vertical slit
`
`images”). Mosaicing the slit images results in two mosaics of the scene, as depicted in
`
`Fig. 5 (the elevator hallway). Kawakita’s system necessarily uses, and, therefore,
`
`inherently discloses, a processor to generate the mosaics, because, among other
`
`things, digital image data corresponding to each video frame is captured by a 320x240
`
`pixel imager and digital processing steps including “template matching” is performed
`
`
`
`18
`
`

`
`on the image data as part of the procedure for determining slit widths. Id. Sec. 3; see
`
`also Expert Declaration of Trevor Darrell, Sony-1014 (“Darrell Decl.”) ¶ 10.b,c.
`
`iii. each mosaic contains segments taken from different ones of said
`optical images;
`
`The mosaics are constructed from vertical slit images (i.e., segments), which are
`
`taken from different frame images (i.e., optical images). Id. Sec. 4. The left eye
`
`mosaic image is formed by compositing the left eye slits that are excised (i.e., taken)
`
`from each of the frame images (i.e., different ones of said optical images), and the
`
`right eye mosaic is formed by compositing the right eye slits excised from each of the
`
`frame images (i.e., different ones of said optical images). Id., Sec. 5.
`
`iv. segments relating to at least one part of the scene are derived from at
`least two optical images and appear in at least two mosaics; and
`
` Two vertical slits (i.e., segments) are excised (i.e., divided) for each part of the
`
`scene. Id. Sec. 6 (“object A is recorded for the right eye and the left eye, respectively,
`
`at positions C and D”). The two vertical slits images appear in two mosaics. Id. Sec.
`
`4 (“the respective right eye and left eye slit images are excised from the frame
`
`images”; “In Fig. 3, the left and right camera positions correspond to the left and right
`
`eye positions”); Fig. 3 (depicting the positions of the right and left eye vertical slit
`
`images).
`
`
`
`19
`
`

`
`v. the different segments of the two optical images in a given mosaic
`represent different parts of the scene; and
`
`Kawakita discloses that the frame images (i.e., optical images) are recorded by a
`
`rotating video camera. Id. Sec. 2. Left eye and right eyes slit images are extracted
`
`from each of the frame images. Id. Sec. 4 (“The slit image is ultimate[ly] excised is a
`
`slit image . . . from a position w/2+x for the left eye and w/2-x-sw for the right eye”).
`
`Since the frame images are recorded as the camera is rotated, each of the left eye slits
`
`taken from the frame images relates to a different part of the scene relative to the
`
`other left slit images and all (i.e., at least two) of the left slit images are composited
`
`(i.e., mosaiced) to form a left eye image. Similarly, each of the right eye slit images
`
`relates to a different part of the scene relative to the other right slit images and all (at
`
`least two) of the right slit images are composited (i.e., mosaiced) to form a right eye
`
`image. See also id. Fig. 5.
`
`vi. a display that receives a plurality of the mosaics and displays them so
`as to provide a sense of depth of the scene.
`
`Kawakita discloses conducting a “field test” by displaying the mosaic images to
`
`“10 research personal,” and concluding that “the sense of depth was faithfully
`
`reproduced.” Id. Sec. 7. Therefore, “a display” that displays the mosaics to provide a
`
`sense of depth was necessarily used, and, therefore, is inherently disclosed. Darrell
`
`Decl., ¶ 10.d.
`
`
`
`20
`
`

`
`2. Assuming for the Sake of Argument that Kawakita Does Not Inherently
`Disclose a “Processor” or “Display,” Inclusion of Those Elements
`Would Have Been Obvious Over Kawakita Alone or Kawakita in View of
`Chen.
`
`If the Board finds that Kawakita does not inherently disclose a processor
`
`(IV.A.1.ii), it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to employ a
`
`processor to generate the mosaics for the left and right eyes because of the digital
`
`imaging processing steps performed. See IV.A.1.ii, supra; see also Darrell Decl., ¶ 10.b,c.
`
`A person of ordinary skill would understand that implementing Kawakita’s technique
`
`without a processor would be at the very least impractical, and accordingly, it would
`
`have been obvious to use one. See id.
`
`Moreover, if the Board finds that disclosure of a “display” (IV.A.1.vi) is not
`
`inherent in Kawakita’s report of a “field test” in which the mosaic images were
`
`displayed to “10 research personal,” and that “the sense of depth was faithfully
`
`reproduced” (Kawakita Sec. 7), it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art to employ a display to produce the result that Kawakita reports. Darrell
`
`Decl., ¶ 10.d.
`
`Moreover, assuming the Board finds that “a processor” in claim 1 is not inherently
`
`disclosed by or obvious in view of Kawakita alone, Chen explicitly discloses a stereo
`
`VR camera with a processor. In Kawakita’s arrangement, left and right image strips
`
`are extracted from each captured frame image and composited to generate left and
`
`right panoramic mosaics. Chen’s processor performs similar functions. Processor 19
`
`
`
`21
`
`

`
`divides each left/right image pair recorded by the sensor on each exposure and
`
`composites (i.e., mosaics) the left images together to create a left mosaic image and
`
`the right images together to form a right mosaic image. Id. ¶ 0047 (“the left and right
`
`images 108 and 107 are projected onto opposing halves of an image sensor . . . where
`
`they are sampled by the processor 19 . . ., the processor may . . . combine the left
`
`images into a left composite image and the right images into a right composite
`
`image.”), Figs. 7.
`
`Second, if the Board finds that “