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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 July 7th, 2025 has been entered.
Claims 1, 3-4, 8-9, and 15 are amended. Claims 2, 5-7, and 12 are cancelled. Claims 1, 3-4, 8-11, and 13-20 remain pending in the application. Claims 16-18 are withdrawn from consideration.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed July 7th, 2025, with respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been considered. The rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) are withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, filed July 7th, 2025, with respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Interpretation
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:
(A) 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;
(B) 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
(C) 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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a communication unit configured to ... transmit/receive” in claims 8-9 and 15.
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.
The communication unit is defined in para. [0044, 0054] as a wireless network based on the Wi-Fi standard or a wired communication interface based on the Universal Serial Bus (USB) standard or the local area network (LAN) standard.
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
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.
Claims 1, 4 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiyoshige (US 20140340559 A1) in view of Abe (US 20140176772 A1), further in view of Igarashi (JP 2015172891 A English Translation), and further in view of Hao (US 20170112416 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kiyoshige discloses an imaging apparatus (image capturing device, Abstract) comprising: an image capturing unit (image capturing device 10, fig. 1); and one or more processors (image processing unit 306, fig. 2) operating to function as: a generation unit (“generated/generates”, para. [0025], image processing unit 306, fig. 2) configured to execute processing (“executes a program”, para. [0028]) for reducing a size of image data (“suppress the data size”; “reducing the first image area”, para. [0048, 0076]) of an image captured by the image capturing unit (“captured image”, para. [0022]), and generate processed image data (“perform image processing on image capturing data … generates image capturing data … by segmenting”, para. [0025]); a transmission unit (communication unit 308 … transmits, para. [0026], image processing unit 306, fig. 2) configured to (Examiner’s Note: functional language, i.e., capable of) transmit the generated processed image data to an external apparatus (“transmits the image capturing data for the display … to device 20”, para. [0026]); a reception unit (communication unit 308 … receives, para. [0026], image processing unit 306, fig. 2) configured to (Examiner’s Note: functional language, i.e., capable of) receive, from the external apparatus, live view image data image-processed based on the processed image data transmitted to the external apparatus, inclination information of the imaging apparatus when an image of had been captured (“receives the posture information about … unit 301 and the size information … from the display device 20 … shooting instruction”; “live view video”, para. [0026, 0040-0041]); a display control unit (operation unit 302, fig. 3) configured to display, on a display apparatus (display device 20, fig. 3).
Kiyoshige does not disclose the image captured by the image capturing unit including an affected part of an object; posture information of the object and inclination information of the imaging apparatus when an image of the affected part of the object had been captured in the past; and the display control unit configured to display, on a display apparatus, the posture information of the object and the inclination information of the imaging apparatus when the image of the affected part of the object had been captured in the past on the live view image data received from the external apparatus in a superimposed manner so that a user can compare the posture information captured in the past with subsequent posture information corresponding to the live view image data within the imaging apparatus.
However, Abe directed to an image capture apparatus and processing system discloses the image captured by the image capturing unit including an affected part of an object (“wounds … bedsores”; “image of a specified target portion has been captured”, para. [0005, 0087]); posture information of the object and inclination information of the imaging apparatus when an image of the affected part of the object had been captured in the past (“information indicating a posture of the target patient … a target portion … image capture angle … may be displayed”; “image of the same portion captured in the past is obtained as a reference image”, para. [0091-0092, 0095]); and the display control unit (“display control unit”, para. [0045]) configured to display, on a display apparatus (display unit 135, para. [0045]), the posture information of the object and the inclination information of the imaging apparatus when the image of the affected part of the object had been captured in the past (“image capture angle … … posture of the target patient in which an image is to be captured may be displayed”; “displaying an image captured in the past … in an image capture instruction … reference image”, para. [0091-0095, 0099-0100], figs. 9-10) on the live view image data received from the external apparatus in a superimposed manner (“image capture instruction is superimposed upon a live preview”; “live preview while superimposing a target portion”, para. [0048, 0095, 0099-0100], as seen in figs. 9-10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kiyoshige, such that the image captured by the image capturing unit includes an affected part of an object; posture information of the object and inclination information of the imaging apparatus when an image of the affected part of the object had been captured in the past; and the display control unit is configured to display, on a display apparatus, the posture information of the object and the inclination information of the imaging apparatus when the image of the affected part of the object had been captured in the past on the live view image data received from the external apparatus in a superimposed manner, in view of the teachings of Abe, in order to observe changes in the bedsores/affected areas over time by displaying shooting instructions on live view image data to capture images of the target portion.
Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe hereinabove, does not expressly disclose that a user can compare the posture information captured in the past with subsequent posture information corresponding to the live view image data within the imaging apparatus.
However, Igarashi directed to a method for photographing using a digital camera in a medical setting that displays multiple images of the same area side by side or overlapping each other and emphasizes the non-similarity between an instruction map and the photographed image (para. [0040], fig. 12) discloses comparing (“instruction drawing and photographed image are compared … images photographed with exposed skin”; “compared … comparison result … dissimilarity”, para. [0033-0034, 0040-0041]) posture information captured in the past (“instruction diagram … image … previously taken”; “patient’s posture”, para. [0012, 0023]) with subsequent posture information corresponding to live view image data within an imaging apparatus (“bedsores … observe changes in the affected areas over time”; “photographing device 130 … displays live view images and captured images”; “instruction drawing and the photographed image are compared”; “images captured in the past”, para. [0003, 0016, 0033, 0047]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe hereinabove, such that that a user can compare the posture information captured in the past with subsequent posture information corresponding to the live view image data within the imaging apparatus, in view of the teachings of Igarashi, in order to determine if the displayed captured image is different from the required image/captured according to the instruction diagram and observe changes in the affected areas over time.
Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe and Igarashi hereinabove, does not disclose wherein the posture information includes information that allows identification of at least any one of a prone posture, a recumbent posture, and a sitting posture of the object.
However, Hao directed to an imaging system comprising a positioning system (para. [0045]) discloses wherein the posture information includes information that allows identification of at least any one of a prone posture, a recumbent posture, and a sitting posture of the object (“automatically recognize a patient position … supine, prone, right lateral recumbent, left lateral recumbent … body scanned in certain direction”; “monitor patient’s status … imaging system 170 to target a selected ROI”, para. [0045, 0056]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe and Igarashi hereinabove, such that the posture information includes information that allows identification of at least any one of a prone posture, a recumbent posture, and a sitting posture of the object, in view of the teachings of Hao, for the obvious advantage of automatically recognizing a patient position such that the imaging system targets a selected region of interest during an imaging session and the body is scanned in a certain direction.
Regarding claim 4, Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, and Hao hereinabove, discloses the imaging apparatus according to claim 1. Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, and Hao hereinabove, does not expressly disclose wherein the affected part is a pressure ulcer.
However, Igarashi discloses wherein the affected part is a pressure ulcer (“bedsores”, para. [0003] (see also para. [0033]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, and Hao hereinabove, such that the affected part is a pressure ulcer, in view of the teachings of Igarashi, in order to observe changes in affected areas/bedsores.
Regarding claim 9, Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, and Hao hereinabove, discloses the imaging apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising a communication unit (communication unit 308, para. [0045], figs. 2-4) configured to (Examiner’s Note: functional language, i.e., capable of) , in a case where the image capturing unit captures the image of the affected part of the object (image capturing unit 307 … capturing, para. [0038], figs. 2-4), transmit the posture information regarding the object and the inclination information regarding the imaging apparatus (para. [0022, 0026], “tilt”, transmits captured image data to the display device 20 (“posture information”, see also para. [0039-0040])) to the external apparatus (display device 20, para. [0026]), wherein the communication unit receives, from the external apparatus (communication unit 308 … receives … from display device 20, para. [0045], figs. 2-4), the posture information and the inclination information transmitted from the communication unit (“tilt”, display device 20 notifies the image capturing device 10 of posture information, para. [0022, 0039], figures 2-4) and stored in the external apparatus (display device 20 … records the image capturing data on the memory unit 311, para. [0041]).
Regarding claim 10, Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, and Hao hereinabove, discloses the imaging apparatus according to claim 9, wherein the communication unit transmits image data obtained by the image capturing unit capturing an image of a posture of the object to the external apparatus (“10 … transmits the generated capturing data … 20”, para. [0041]).
Claims 3 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiyoshige in view of Abe, Igarashi, and Hao, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Enomoto (JP 2015172891 A English Translation).
Regarding claim 3, Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, and Hao hereinabove, discloses the imaging apparatus according to claim 1. Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, and Hao hereinabove, does not expressly disclose wherein the display control unit displays at least any one of a display item schematically illustrating a posture of the object, image data obtained by capturing an image of the posture of the object, inclination information regarding the imaging apparatus obtained when the image of the posture of the object is captured, and character information representing the posture of the object in a character, as the posture information on the display apparatus.
However, Enomoto discloses wherein the display control unit (113/135, figure 1) displays at least any one of a display item (fig. 9, para. [0032]) schematically illustrating a posture of the object (indicates the patient's posture, para. [0023], figs. 6 & 9), image data obtained by capturing an image of the posture of the object (instruction diagram 511, para. [0023, 0032]), inclination information regarding the imaging apparatus obtained when the image of the posture of the object is captured (camera position and direction at the time of imaging, para. [0023]), and character information representing the posture of the object in a character (figure 9, notes 515, para. [0023]), as the posture information (patient's posture, para. [0023]) on the display apparatus (display unit 134/112, para. [0010]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, and Hao hereinabove, such that the display control unit displays at least any one of a display item schematically illustrating a posture of the object, image data obtained by capturing an image of the posture of the object, inclination information regarding the imaging apparatus obtained when the image of the posture of the object is captured, and character information representing the posture of the object in a character, as the posture information on the display apparatus, in view of the teachings of Enomoto, in order to observe changes in the bedsores/affected areas over time by displaying shooting instructions on live view image data to capture images of the target portion.
Regarding claim 8, Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, and Hao hereinabove, discloses the imaging apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising a communication unit (communication unit 308, fig. 2). Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, and Hao hereinabove, does not expressly disclose the communication unit configured to transmit identification information regarding the object to the external apparatus, wherein the communication unit transmits the identification information to the external apparatus and receive the posture information and the inclination information associated with the identification information from the external apparatus.
However, Enomoto discloses the communication unit (wireless network 150, para. [0013]) configured to (Examiner’s Note: functional language, i.e., capable of) transmit identification information regarding the object (authentication … IC tag, face authentication, para. [0031]) to the external apparatus (image management server device 120, figure 1, para. [0013, 0031]), wherein the control unit (display control unit 135, para. [0016]) controls the communication unit (wireless network 150, para. [0016]) to transmit (communication, para. [0013]) the identification information (authentication, para. [0031]) to the external apparatus (120, para. [0013]) and receive (communication, para. [0013]) the posture information and the inclination information associated with the identification information from the external apparatus (instruction diagram that indicates, para. [0023, 0031]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, and Hao hereinabove, such that the communication unit configured to transmit identification information regarding the object to the external apparatus, wherein the communication unit transmits the identification information to the external apparatus and receive the posture information and the inclination information associated with the identification information from the external apparatus, in view of the teachings of Enomoto, for the obvious advantage of performing authentication of the photographer and the patient to be imaged to load associated shooting instructions.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiyoshige in view of Abe, Igarashi, and Hao, as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Noda (US 20180153445 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, and Hao hereinabove, discloses the imaging apparatus according to claim 9. Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, and Hao hereinabove, does not expressly disclose wherein the communication unit transmits posture information selected from a plurality of pieces of posture information by the user to the external apparatus.
However, Noda discloses wherein the communication unit (communication unit 4, para. [0217]) transmits posture information (angle or distance, para. [0217]) selected (selecting”, para. [0053]) from a plurality of pieces of posture information (angle or the distance; determination result regarding whether or not the posture of the test subject is proper, para. [0217-0218]) by the user (“user operation …. selecting”, para. [0053]) to the external apparatus (another computer/printing device, para. [0048, 0217]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, and Hao hereinabove, such that the communication unit transmits posture information selected from a plurality of pieces of posture information by the user to the external apparatus, in view of the teachings of Noda, for the obvious advantage of outputting a determination result regarding the propriety of the posture of the test subject (Noda, para. [0216-0218]).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiyoshige in view of Abe, Igarashi, Hao, and Enomoto, as applied to claim 8 above, further in view of Cha (KR20100098063A English Translation), and further in view of Liu (US 20160286153 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, Hao, and Enomoto hereinabove, discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 8. Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, Hao, and Enomoto hereinabove, does not expressly disclose wherein the identification information regarding the object and the posture information regarding the object are stored in association with each other in a storage device, wherein the communication unit receives the identification information regarding the object and the posture information regarding the object from the imaging apparatus.
However, Cha discloses wherein the identification information regarding the object and the posture information regarding the object are stored in association with each other in a storage device (storage section … posture evaluation results together … subject identification information, page 2 lines 86-88), wherein communication unit (PC 200, page 3 lines 115-117) receives the identification information regarding the object (personal information input section for receiving subject identification information, page 2 lines 85-86) and posture information regarding the object from the imaging apparatus (camera 100 … captures the posture of the subject, page 3 lines 115-117).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, Hao, and Enomoto hereinabove, such that the identification information regarding the object and the posture information regarding the object are stored in association with each other in a storage device, wherein the communication unit receives the identification information regarding the object and the posture information regarding the object from the imaging apparatus, in view of the teachings of Cha, for the obvious advantage of storing the posture evaluation results together with the input subject identification information so that the degree of change in the results of posture correction learning performed so far can be checked when re-evaluated at a later date, so that it has the effect of providing results that can feel satisfaction with the efforts made to correct posture (Cha, page 3 lines 93-97).
Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, Hao, Enomoto, and Cha hereinabove, does not expressly disclose wherein, in a case where the posture information stored in the storage device in association with the same identification information as the identification information received by the communication unit does not match the posture information received by the communication unit, the posture information stored in the storage device is updated with the posture information received by the communication unit.
However, Liu discloses wherein, in a case where the posture information stored in the storage device in association with the same identification information as the identification information received by the communication unit does not match the posture information received by the communication unit (figures 4-6, matching unit 513 and association unit 514, para. [0095-0098]), the posture information stored in the storage device (memory, para. [0019]) is updated with the posture information received by the communication unit (figures 4-6, subject determining unit 515 … determine the subject; sending unit 521 automatically sends a connection request to at least one target device associated with the subject, para. [0100, 0105]). Liu further discloses according to an apparatus of an embodiment of the present application, the shooting device may be operated according to control of the selectable subject (para. [0109]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, Hao, Enomoto, and Cha hereinabove, such that in a case where the posture information stored in the storage device in association with the same identification information as the identification information received by the communication unit does not match the posture information received by the communication unit, the posture information stored in the storage device is updated with the posture information received by the communication unit, in view of the teachings of Liu, for the obvious advantage of associating at least one target device with the subject such that the shooting device may be operated according to control of the selectable subject (Liu, para. [0100, 0105, 0109]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiyoshige in view of Abe, Igarashi, Hao, and Enomoto, as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Cha.
Regarding claim 14, Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, Hao, and Enomoto hereinabove, discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 8. Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, Hao, and Enomoto hereinabove, does not disclose wherein the communication unit receives the identification information regarding the object and posture information regarding the object from the imaging apparatus, and wherein in a case where object information corresponding to the identification information received by the communication unit is not stored in a storage device, the identification information and the posture information received by the communication unit is stored in association with each other in the storage device.
However, Cha discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 12, wherein the communication unit (PC 200, page 3 lines 115-117) receives the identification information regarding the object (personal information input section for receiving subject identification information, page 2 lines 85-86) and posture information regarding the object from the imaging apparatus (camera 100 … captures the posture of the subject, page 3 lines 115-117), and wherein in a case where object information corresponding to the identification information received by the communication unit is not stored in a storage device (“request ‘screen saving’”, page 5 228-232), the identification information and the posture information received by the communication unit is stored in association with each other in the storage device (storage section … posture evaluation results together … subject identification information; stores, page 2 lines 86-88 & page 5 lines 228-232).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, Hao, and Enomoto hereinabove, such that the communication unit receives the identification information regarding the object and posture information regarding the object from the imaging apparatus, and wherein in a case where object information corresponding to the identification information received by the communication unit is not stored in a storage device, the identification information and the posture information received by the communication unit is stored in association with each other in the storage device, in view of the teachings of Cha, for the obvious advantage of storing the posture evaluation results together with the input subject identification information so that the degree of change in the results of posture correction learning performed so far can be checked when re-evaluated at a later date, so that it has the effect of providing results that can feel satisfaction with the efforts made to correct posture (Cha, page 3 lines 93-97).
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kiyoshige in view of Abe, Igarashi, and Hao, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cai (US 20130185673 A1).
Regarding claim 19, Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, and Hao hereinabove, discloses wherein the display control unit displays, on the display apparatus, a first screen (Kiyoshige, display unit 301, fig. 1) in which first posture information of the object (Abe, “imaging instruction”; “imaging position … angle”; “right elbow is positioned on the front of the body”, para. [0024, 0029, 0040] (see also para. [0030-0031])) is superimposed on the live view image data received from the external apparatus, based on an operation by a user on the live view image data (Abe, fig. 11, “shooting instructions are displayed superimposed on live view image data”; “ photographer touches the display area 1105 … displays an imaging screen”, para. [0029, 0051-0052]).
Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, and Hao hereinabove, does not expressly disclose wherein the display control unit displays a second screen including second posture information different from the first posture information .
However, Cai discloses wherein the display control unit (304, fig. 3) displays the first screen in which first information is superimposed on the live view image data received from the external apparatus (“superimposing the first type of the information entry within the first region of the first image with a first display effect”, para. [0057, 0089]) and a second screen including second information (“second region superimposing module for superimposing the second type of the information entry within the second region of the first image with a second display effect”, para. [0057, 0089]) different from the first information (“different”, para. [0090]), based on an operation by a user on the live view image data (“switched automatically according to different operations to the electronic device by the user to make the electronic device into different states”, para. [0044]). Cai further discloses the user may switch between the two views frequently to compare and refer to each other (para. [0005]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, and Hao hereinabove, such that the display control unit displays, on the display apparatus, a first screen in which first posture information of the object is superimposed on the live view image data received from the external apparatus, and displays a second screen including second posture information different from the first posture information, based on an operation by a user on the live view image data, in view of the teachings of Abe and Cai, in order to switch between two views for comparison and display shooting instructions on the live view image data for photographing to observe changes in the affected areas over time.
Regarding claim 20, Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, Hao, and Cai hereinabove, discloses the imaging apparatus according to claim 19. Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, Hao, and Cai hereinabove, does not expressly disclose wherein the display control unit displays the second screen in a case where the user selects the first posture information on the first screen.
However, Abe discloses a case where the user selects the first posture information on the first screen (photographer has selected … displays the image capture instruction regarding the target selected portion, para. [0046-0047, 0081]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, Hao, and Cai hereinabove, such that the user selects the first posture information on the first screen, in view of the teachings of Abe, in order to display the selected imaging instructions regarding the selected target portion.
Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, Hao, and Cai hereinabove, does not expressly disclose wherein the display control unit displays the second screen in a case where the user selects the first posture information on the first screen.
However, Cai discloses a first screen (“first region of the first image with a first display effect”, para. [0057, 0089]) and a second screen (displays the … second region of the display screen, para. [0104], fig. 2), wherein the display control unit (304, fig. 3) displays the second screen (displays the … second region of the display screen, para. [0104], fig. 2) in a case where the control module 304 (para. [0116]) selects the first posture information on the first screen (fig. 2, para. [0104]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kiyoshige, as modified by Abe, Igarashi, Hao, and Cai hereinabove, such that the display control unit displays the second screen in a case where the user selects the first posture information on the first screen, in view of the teachings of Abe and Cai, in order to switch between two views for comparison and displaying shooting instructions on the live view image data for photographing to observe changes in the affected areas over time.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Enomoto in view of Kiyoshige, further in view of Abe, further in view of Igarashi, and further in view of Hao.
Regarding claim 15, Enomoto discloses an image processing system (system 100, para. [0013]) comprising: an information processing apparatus (120, para. [0013]) including: a communication unit (wireless network 150, para. [0013]) configured to (Examiner’s Note: functional language, i.e., capable of) receive (“communicate”, para. [0013]) identification information regarding an object from an imaging apparatus (authentication … IC tag, face authentication, para. [0031]) and transmit (“communicate”, para. [0013]), to the imaging apparatus (130, para. [0013]), posture information regarding the object (instruction diagram … indicates the patient's posture, para. [0023]) obtained when an image of an affected part of the object (“wounds … scars, and bedsores”, images taken with the skin exposed; part 512, para. [0003, 0023, 0033]) has been captured in the past (para. [0008, 0012], image previously obtained) and inclination information regarding the imaging apparatus (instruction diagram … indicates … camera position, para. [0023]) that are associated with the identification information (shooting instruction, para. [0031]); and the imaging apparatus (130, para. [0016]) including: an image capturing unit (“camera”, photographing unit 133, para. [0016]); and one or more processors (computer, CPU, MPU, para. [0048]), an image captured by the image capturing unit and including an affected part of an object (“wounds … scars, and bedsores”, images taken with the skin exposed; part 512, para. [0003, 0023, 0033]), posture information of the object (instruction diagram … indicates the patient's posture, para. [0023]) and inclination information of the imaging apparatus (instruction diagram … indicates … camera position, para. [0023]) when an image of the affected part of the object (“wounds … scars, and bedsores”, images taken with the skin exposed; part 512, para. [0003, 0023, 0033]) had been captured in the past (para. [0008, 0012], image previously obtained); a display control unit (113/135, fig. 1) configured to (Examiner’s Note: functional language, i.e., capable of) display, on a display apparatus (display unit 134, para. [0010]), the posture information of the object (figure 9, indicates the patient's posture, para. [0023]) and the inclination information of the imaging apparatus on the live view image data when the image of the affected part of the object had been captured in the past (figure 9, camera position and direction at the time of imaging, para. [0023]).
Enomoto does not expressly disclose the one or more processors operating to function as: a generation unit configured to execute processing for reducing a size of image data of an image captured by the image capturing unit and including an affected part of an object, and generate processed image data; a transmission unit configured to transmit the generated processed image data to an external apparatus; a reception unit configured to receive, from the external apparatus, live view image data image-processed based on the processed image data transmitted to the external apparatus, posture information of the object and inclination information of the imaging apparatus when an image of the affected part of the object had been captured in the past.
However, Kiyoshige directed to an image capturing system discloses one or more processors (image processing unit 306, fig. 2) operating to function as: a generation unit (“generated/generates”, para. [0025]) configured to execute processing (“executes a program”, para. [0028]) for reducing a size of image data (“suppress the data size”; “reducing the first image area”, para. [0048, 0076]) of an image captured by the image capturing unit (“captured image”, para. [0022]), and generate processed image data (“perform image processing on image capturing data … generates image capturing data … by segmenting”, para. [0025]); a transmission unit (communication unit 308 … transmits, para. [0026]) configured to transmit the generated processed image data to an external apparatus (“transmits the image capturing data for the display … to device 20”, para. [0026]); a reception unit (communication unit 308 … receives, para. [0026]) configured to receive, from the external apparatus, live view image data image-processed based on the processed image data transmitted to the external apparatus, inclination information of the imaging apparatus when an image of had been captured (“receives the posture information about … unit 301 and the size information … from the display device 20 … shooting instruction”; “live view video”, para. [0026, 0040-0041]). Kiyoshige further discloses that the tilt of the image is adjusted such that the subject 30 has the same tilt as the actual tilt in the image displayed on the display unit 301 of the display device 20 and further that it is possible to obtain an image in which the sense of visual incompatibility given to the user is reduced (para. [0022, 0078]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Enomoto such that the one or more processors operate to function as: a generation unit configured to execute processing for reducing a size of image data of an image captured by the image capturing unit and including an affected part of an object, and generate processed image data; a transmission unit configured to transmit the generated processed image data to an external apparatus; a reception unit configured to receive, from the external apparatus, live view image data image-processed based on the processed image data transmitted to the external apparatus, posture information of the object and inclination information of the imaging apparatus when an image of the affected part of the object had been captured in the past, in view of the teachings of Kiyoshige, for the obvious advantage of obtaining an image in which the sense of visual incompatibility given to the user is reduced and adjusting the tilt of the image obtained such that the subject has the same tilt as the actual tilt in the image displayed on the display unit.
Enomoto, as modified by Kiyoshige hereinabove, does not expressly disclose the display control unit configured to display, on a display apparatus, the posture information of the object and the inclination information of the imaging apparatus when the image of the affected part of the object had been captured in the past on the live view image data received from the external apparatus in a superimposed manner.
However, Abe directed to an image capture apparatus and processing system discloses the display control unit (“display control unit”, para. [0045]) configured to display, on a display apparatus (display unit 135, para. [0045]), the posture information of the object and the inclination information of the imaging apparatus when the image of the affected part of the object had been captured in the past (“image capture angle … … posture of the target patient in which an image is to be captured may be displayed”; “displaying an image captured in the past … in an image capture instruction … reference image”, para. [0091-0095, 0099-0100], figs. 9-10) on the live view image data received from the external apparatus in a superimposed manner (“image capture instruction is superimposed upon a live preview”; “live preview while superimposing a target portion”, para. [0048, 0095, 0099-0100], as seen in figs. 9-10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Enomoto, as modified by Kiyoshige hereinabove, such that the display control unit configured to display, on a display apparatus, the posture information of the object and the inclination information of the imaging apparatus when the image of the affected part of the object had been captured in the past on the live view image data received from the external apparatus in a superimposed manner, in view of the teachings of Abe, in order to observe changes in the bedsores/affected areas over time by displaying shooting instructions on live view image data to capture images of the target portion.
Enomoto, as modified by Kiyoshige and Abe hereinabove, does not expressly disclose that does not expressly disclose that a user can compare the posture information captured in the past with subsequent posture information corresponding to the live view image data within the imaging apparatus.
However, Igarashi directed to a method for photographing using a digital camera in a medical setting that displays multiple images of the same area side by side or overlapping each other and emphasizes the non-similarity between an instruction map and the photographed image (para. [0040], fig. 12) discloses comparing (“instruction drawing and photographed image are compared … images photographed with exposed skin”; “compared … comparison result … dissimilarity”, para. [0033-0034, 0040-0041]) posture information captured in the past (“instruction diagram … image … previously taken”; “patient’s posture”, para. [0012, 0023]) with subsequent posture information corresponding to live view image data within an imaging apparatus (“bedsores … observe changes in the affected areas over time”; “photographing device 130 … displays live view images and captured images”; “instruction drawing and the photographed image are compared”; “images captured in the past”, para. [0003, 0016, 0033, 0047]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Enomoto, as modified by Kiyoshige and Abe hereinabove, such that that a user can compare the posture information captured in the past with subsequent posture information corresponding to the live view image data within the imaging apparatus, in view of the teachings of Igarashi, in order to determine if the displayed captured image is different from the required image/captured according to the instruction diagram and observe changes in the affected areas over time.
Enomoto, as modified by Kiyoshige, Abe, and Igarashi hereinabove, does not disclose wherein the posture information includes information that allows identification of at least any one of a prone posture, a recumbent posture, and a sitting posture of the object.
Howeve