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 .
Status of the Claims
Currently, claims 1-30 are pending in the application. Claims 1, 14, 20, and 26 are amended.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 1.
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/01/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments / Amendments
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are rendered moot in view of the new ground of rejection necessitated by amendments initiated by the applicant.
Claim Interpretation under 35 U.S.C. § 112 (f):
Claims 26-30 are still interpreted under 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) as no aments is made.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
In the light of amendment to claims, the examiner withdraws the previously made rejection under 35 USC § 112.
Claim Interpretations - 35 USC § 112 ¶ (f)
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:
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;
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
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.
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 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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US 20210350145, hereinafter Park) in view of MANZARI et al. (US 20220319100, hereinafter MANZARI) and DEVANI et al. (US 20220361744, hereinafter DEVANI)
Regarding Claim 1, Park discloses a method performed by a user device, comprising:
receiving, from a camera, an image of a physical environment of ([0006] recognizing an object includes: obtaining a first RGB image by using a camera arranged in the autonomous driving device; [0048], autonomous driving device 100 obtain a first RGB image by using the camera 101);
determining, using a brightness analysis model, a first brightness associated with a first portion of the image that depicts an object ([0006], predicting at least one first region in which an object is unrecognizable in the first RGB image based on brightness information of the first RGB image; [0051], predict at least one first region in which an object is unrecognizable, from the first RGB image based on brightness information of the first RGB image indicating a brightness level of each pixel in the first RGB image; [0054], FIG. 8, artificial intelligence model);
determining, using the brightness analysis model, a second brightness associated with a second portion of the image that is separate from the first portion ([0006], dynamic vision sensor (DVS) obtaining an enhanced second RGB image by controlling photographic configuration information of the camera in relation to the at least one second region and recognizing the object in the second RGB image;[0051], brightness value of each pixel, information about a region that is darker than a first reference brightness value and information about a region that is brighter than a second reference brightness value; [0055], degree indicating how likely an object is unrecognizable exceeds a threshold value in which the brightness values are out of the threshold range in the first RGB image such as a considerably dark or bright region).
Park does not explicitly disclose the physical environment of a display-side the camera , wherein the second portion comprises an image of a user of the user device and setting, based at least in part on a difference between the first brightness and the second brightness, a brightness level of a display of the user device.
MANZARI wherein the second portion comprises an image of a user of the user device([0245], [0305], the depth map includes information about the relative depth of various features of an object of interest in view of the depth camera (e.g., the relative depth of eyes, nose, mouth, ears of a user's face) and setting, based at least in part on a difference between the first brightness and the second brightness, a brightness level of a display of the user device ([0325], FIGS. 9A-9B , changing (930) the magnitude of change of the appearance of one or more portions of the representation of image data that are associated with light-emitting objects (e.g., 818A, 818B, 818C, 818D) relative to other portions of the representation of image data that are not associated with light-emitting objects (e.g., 820A, 820B) such as gradually increasing a brightness, size, and/or saturation of the objects associated with light-emitting sources relative to other portions of the representation of data).
PNG
media_image1.png
340
546
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of setting brightness level of a display of the user device as taught by MANZARI ([0050]) into the imaging system of Park allowing a user to quickly and easily make precise adjustments to depth-of-field properties of a stored image or photo, thus reducing cognitive burden on a user and producing a more efficient human-machine interface, and hence increasing
Park does not explicitly disclose the physical environment of a display-side the camera.
DEVANI teaches the physical environment of a display-side the camera ([0069], FIG. 1, camera 114 or cameras 114 receives image data of a field of view in front of the camera 114 and automatically initiates image data capture based on detecting certain stimulus (for example, a face of a user, an eye of a user, a pupil of a user, and/or an iris of a user); [0071], FIG. 2, System 200 includes system 100, camera 114, a user's eye 202, a user's head 204, and a camera field of view 206.)
PNG
media_image2.png
308
284
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of the physical environment of a display-side the camera as taught by DEVANI ([0069]) into the imaging system of Park sine the use of a front-facing display and front-facing camera allows the disclosed system to control the ambient lighting conditions during image capture to ensure that a secondary accidental pupil response is not initiated when measuring the first, intentional pupil response (DEVANI, [0004], [0057]).
Regarding Claim 2, Park in view of MANZARI and DEVANI discloses the method of claim 1. MANZARI discloses further comprising: detecting, prior to receiving the image, a user interaction associated with unlocking a lock screen of the user device, wherein the image is received from the camera based at least in part on detecting the user interaction ([0325], in response to detecting the one or more inputs (e.g., 803, 805) changing the value of the image distortion parameter, (e.g., gradually increasing a brightness, size, and/or saturation of the objects associated with light-emitting sources relative to other portions of the representation of data as the distortion parameter gradually increases (and the blurriness of regions of time image outside of the simulated focal plane gradually increases), and gradually decreasing a brightness, size, and/or saturation of the objects associated with light-emitting sources relative to other portions of the representation of data as the distortion parameter gradually decreases (and the blurriness of regions of time image outside of the simulated focal plane gradually decreases)). The same reason or rational of obviousness motivation applied as used above in claim 1.
Park also discloses display and output information processed in the autonomous a map including a driving route, display positions of external vehicles, with user interface (UI) or a graphic user interface (GUI) associated with a call in a call mode ([0202]).
Regarding Claim 3, Park in view of MANZARI and DEVANI discloses the method of claim 1. MANZARI discloses further comprising: receiving, prior to receiving the image, an indication that the camera has been activated according to at least one of: a user input associated with capturing video and/or one or more images, or an application activating the camera ([0215], FIG. 6H &FIG. 6G, degree of change in the blurriness, the size, the degree of brightness, the degree of saturation, and/or the degree of shape-distortion of the objects from the previous f-number (4.5) to the lower f-number (3.9) is more drastic for light-emitting objects as compared to non-light-emitting objects). The same reason or rational of obviousness motivation applied as used above in claim 1.
Regarding Claim 4, Park in view of MANZARI and DEVANI discloses the method of claim 1. Park discloses wherein the object is identified using an object detection model that is configured to indicate, to the brightness analysis model, features of identified objects in an image stream received from the camera, wherein the image is a frame of the image stream ([0051], predict at least one first region in which an object is unrecognizable, from the first RGB image based on brightness information of the first RGB image. Here, the brightness information may be information indicating a brightness level of each pixel in the first RGB image. The brightness information may include a brightness value of each pixel, information about a region that is darker than a first reference brightness value, and information about a region that is brighter than a second reference brightness value).
Regarding Claim 5, Park in view of MANZARI and DEVANI discloses the method of claim 1. Park discloses further comprising, prior to determining the first brightness: identifying, using an object detection model, the object and another object; and selecting, according to a priority scheme and based at least in part on a comparison of corresponding features of the object and the other object as depicted in the image, the object for the brightness analysis model to determine the first brightness ([0051], [0056] determine at least one second region in which an object exists, from among the at least one first region, based on object information obtained through the dynamic vision sensor 102 arranged in the autonomous driving device 100. Hereinafter, for convenience of description, the at least one second region may be expressed as a region of interest.
Regarding Claim 6, Park in view of MANZARI and DEVANI discloses the method of claim 5. Park discloses wherein the corresponding features comprise at least one of: respective sizes of the object and the other object as depicted in the image, respective distances from the camera of the object and the other object as depicted in the image, respective surface characteristics of the object and the other object as depicted in the image, or respective types of the object and the other object ([0064],FIG. 4, the aperture 410 refers to a hole of a lens through which light passes. As the aperture 410 is closed (right) to increase a depth, an image where a near region and a far region are focused is output, whereas, as the aperture 410 is opened (left) to reduce the depth, an image where a subject and a background are separated from each other, referred to as out of focus, is output. As a shutter speed 420 increases (left), an image where a fast moving object appears frozen is output, whereas, as the shutter speed 420 decreases (right), a blurred image is output. As an ISO sensitivity 430 decreases (left), an image with small noise is output. As the ISO sensitivity 430 increases (right), noise increases and an image with no shake may be taken even in a dark environment).
Regarding Claim 7, Park in view of MANZARI and DEVANI discloses the method of claim 1. Park discloses wherein determining the first brightness comprises: identifying pixel values of pixels of the first portion; and determining the first brightness based at least in part on the pixel values and a normalization of pixel values of corresponding pixels associated with the object as depicted in previously received images ([0041] captures a vision change at a high speed, and is a sensor that may obtain image data of a moving object such as dynamic vision sensor transmits the image data to the processor 120 only when a local change due to a motion in a pixel unit occurs. That is, the dynamic vision sensor 102 may transmit the image data to the processor 120 when a motion event occurs; [0042], receives data on a per-pixel basis rather than a frame basis, a blur phenomenon may be overcome)
Regarding Claim 8, Park in view of MANZARI and DEVANI discloses the method of claim 1. Park discloses wherein the second brightness is indicative of a level of ambient lighting in the physical environment ([0038] Meanwhile, the object captured by the camera 101 may include a static environment element (e.g., a lane, a drivable road, a traffic sign, a traffic light, a tunnel, a bridge, a street tree, etc.) and a dynamic environment element (e.g., a vehicle, a pedestrian, a motorcycle, etc.).
Regarding Claim 9, Park in view of MANZARI and DEVANI discloses the method of claim 1. MANZARI discloses wherein setting the brightness level of the display comprises: determining that the first brightness is brighter than the second brightness; and reducing the brightness level of the display ([0325], FIGS. 9A-9B , changing (930) the magnitude of change of the appearance of one or more portions of the representation of image data that are associated with light-emitting objects (e.g., 818A, 818B, 818C, 818D) relative to other portions of the representation of image data that are not associated with light-emitting objects (e.g., 820A, 820B) such as gradually increasing a brightness, size, and/or saturation of the objects associated with light-emitting sources relative to other portions of the representation of data). The same reason or rational of obviousness motivation applied as used above in claim 1.
Regarding Claim 10, Park in view of MANZARI and DEVANI discloses the method of claim 1. MANZARI discloses wherein setting the brightness level of the display comprises: determining that the second brightness is brighter than the first brightness; and increasing the brightness level of the display ([0325], in response to detecting the one or more inputs (e.g., 803, 805) changing the value of the image distortion parameter, (e.g., gradually increasing a brightness, size, and/or saturation of the objects associated with light-emitting sources relative to other portions of the representation of data as the distortion parameter gradually increases (and the blurriness of regions of time image outside of the simulated focal plane gradually increases), and gradually decreasing a brightness, size, and/or saturation of the objects associated with light-emitting sources relative to other portions of the representation of data as the distortion parameter gradually decreases (and the blurriness of regions of time image outside of the simulated focal plane gradually decreases)). The same reason or rational of obviousness motivation The same reason or rational of obviousness motivation applied as used above in claim 1.
Regarding Claim 11, Park in view of MANZARI and DEVANI discloses the method of claim 1. Park discloses wherein the brightness analysis model comprises at least one of: a recurrent neural network, or a long short-term memory layer ([0110], determine whether the object-unrecognizable region exists in the first RGB image by using a first artificial intelligence mode and the first artificial intelligence model is a neural network model that learns from RGB images, and may be a model that has been trained to determine an object-unrecognizable region in RGB images).
Regarding Claim 12, Park in view of MANZARI and DEVANI discloses the method of claim 1. MANZARI discloses wherein the image is a frame of an image stream that is received in association with the camera being in a preview mode ([0265], while moving the adjustable slider, in accordance with a determination that the representation of image data corresponds to a live preview of image data being captured by the one or more cameras). The same reason or rational of obviousness motivation applied as used above in claim 1.
Regarding Claim 13, Park in view of MANZARI and DEVANI discloses the method of claim 1.
DEVANI disclose further comprising: identifying that the object depicted in the image is an eye of a user of the user device, wherein the image is a first image; determining a first measurement of an attribute of the eye; receiving, from the camera, a second image that depicts the eye; determining a second measurement of the attribute of the eye as depicted in the second image ([0166], face capture in combination with face and eye recognition might also be used in performing a PLR measurement. Some facial recognition frameworks, such as Vision Framework, can detect and track human faces in real-time by creating requests and interpreting the results of those requests. In other embodiments, face tracking, for example via an augmented reality session, might be used); and adjusting, based at least in part on the second brightness, the brightness level based at least in part on a difference in the first measurement and the second measurement ([0148], allows the user to easily implement the method in any sufficiently lit or bright room that has enough ambient light to trigger the reflex after the user opens their eyes from a closed and dark-adapted state).`The same reason or rational of obviousness motivation applied as used above in claim 1.
Regarding Claims 14-19, Apparatus claims 14-19 of using the corresponding method claimed in claims 1-2, 4-5 & 9-10 and the rejections of which are incorporated herein for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Regarding Claims 20-25, Computer media claims 14-19 of using the corresponding method claimed in claims 1-2, 4-5 & 9-10 and the rejections of which are incorporated herein for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Regarding Claims 26-30, Apparatus claims 26-30 of using the corresponding method claimed in claims 1-2, 4-5 & 9-10 and the rejections of which are incorporated herein for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Samuel D Fereja whose telephone number is (469)295-9243. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-5PM.
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, DAVID CZEKAJ can be reached on (571) 272-7327. 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.
/SAMUEL D FEREJA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487