PTAB

IPR2013-00219

Sony Corp v. Yissum ReSearch DEvelopMent Co Of Hebrew University Of JerUSAlem

Title: System and Method for Capturing and Viewing Stereoscopic Panoramic Images
Brief Description: The ’284 patent discloses a system for generating stereoscopic panoramic images. The method involves acquiring a plurality of optical images from different viewpoints, processing the image data to divide each image into segments (strips), and generating a plurality of mosaic images by combining corresponding strips from the different optical images to create, for example, separate left-eye and right-eye panoramic views.

Prior Art Relied Upon: Kawakita (a 1997 VRSJ Research Report on generating panoramic stereo images).
Core Argument for this Ground:
- Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Kawakita taught every element of the independent claims. Kawakita’s system, which uses a single rotating video camera to capture frames, was mapped to the claimed "imaging apparatus" with a moving "imager." Petitioner asserted that Kawakita’s process of excising two "vertical slit images" (segments) from each frame—one left of center and one right—and "compositing" them into two separate panoramic images satisfied the limitation of a processor dividing images and generating mosaics. The processor was argued to be inherently disclosed because the system involved digital processing steps, and a display was argued to be inherent from Kawakita’s report of a successful "field test" where researchers viewed the images and confirmed a "sense of depth was faithfully reproduced."

Prior Art Relied Upon: Chen (Application # 2001/0010546).
Core Argument for this Ground:
- Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner contended that Chen’s disclosure of a hand-held "virtual reality camera" anticipated the claims. The user panning the camera satisfied the "imager that moves" limitation. Chen’s camera projected left and right images onto opposing halves of an image sensor, and its disclosed "processor 19" sampled these halves and combined the respective images into left and right "composite" (mosaic) images. This process was argued to meet the limitations for dividing and mosaicing. Chen also explicitly disclosed a "stereo display 127," satisfying the display element. The arguments for dependent claims 2 and 28, which require a portable hand-held device, were based on Chen's explicit disclosure of such a device.

Prior Art Relied Upon: Kawakita (a 1997 VRSJ Research Report) and Chen (Application # 2001/0010546).
Core Argument for this Ground:
- Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that, to the extent the Board might find that a processor and display are not inherently disclosed in Kawakita, Chen explicitly teaches these elements. Chen discloses a portable, hand-held device with an integrated processor and stereo display.
- Motivation to Combine: A person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) would combine the teachings of Kawakita and Chen because both are directed to generating stereoscopic images to provide a sense of depth. A POSITA would have been motivated to apply the teachings of Chen—specifically its integrated, portable design—to the image generation technique of Kawakita.
- Expectation of Success: This combination would predictably result in making Kawakita's system portable and easier to carry, use, and store, which is a commonsense, technology-independent improvement.
Additional Grounds: Petitioner asserted numerous additional obviousness challenges, including combinations based on Ishiguro (a 1992 journal article on omnidirectional stereo), Asahi (a 1996 Japanese patent publication on aerial stereo imaging), Kodak (a 1996 camera user guide), Berger (Patent 1,422,527 for anaglyph stereo), and Helava (a 1991 journal on photogrammetric workstations).

"a display" (claims 1, 27): Petitioner argued this term means one or more elements presenting an image for viewing and is not limited to an electronic screen. It can encompass a physical print, such as the anaglyph prints described in the Berger reference, which provides a sense of depth when viewed with appropriate glasses.
"strips of a series of images" (claims 20, 37): Petitioner proposed this term encompasses strips that are themselves the images recorded by the camera, not necessarily requiring that the strips be extracted from a larger recorded image. This construction was based on the patent’s specification and prosecution history.
"communications apparatus" (claims 3, 29): Petitioner argued this term should be construed broadly as "any arrangement that facilitates transfer of digital data between two devices," explicitly including a direct wire connection or a removable memory card, as disclosed in references like Kodak.

Petitioner requests institution of an inter partes review and cancellation of claims 1-3, 10, 20, 27-29, 36, and 37 of the ’284 patent as unpatentable.