DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the Amendments and Remarks received 06/13/2025 in which claims 2 and 4 are cancelled, claims 1, 17, 19, and 21 are amended, and no claims are added as new claims.
Response to Arguments
Examiner incorporates herein previous Responses to Arguments.
On pages 1–3 of the Remarks, Applicant contends the prior art of record does not teach or suggest the features added by way of amendment. While Examiner does not agree the previously cited prior art would not have suggested the features of the amended claims, in order to expedite prosecution, Examiner find the arguments moot in view of the new grounds of rejection necessitated by amendment. Specifically, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 relies on the additional teachings of Yoshizumi to teach or suggest the amended features as well as features already claimed regarding the tracking of multiple objects using center of mass. Accordingly, the amendments do not overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103. See rejections, infra.
Other claims are not argued separately. Remarks, 3.
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, 11, 12, 17, 19, 21, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boice (US 2006/0126737 A1), Kim (US 2021/0331706) A1, and Yoshizumi (US 2011/0157394 A1).
Examiner notes the claimed combination combines prior art object tracking and camera targeting on an object to maintain the object within the field of view with a prioritization scheme utilized to determine which object or set of objects within a plurality of objects to set as the target object. For example, if three people move right and one person moves left, the camera pans in the direction of the movement of the three people since their movements are likely more salient. Examiner notes three objects moving in the same direction can be grouped together as one super object having a larger size than the single person (or object) moving in another direction. Examiner further notes foreground objects are typically bigger in size and that obviously foreground objects are typically more salient than smaller background objects. Examiner finally notes that in camera surveillance applications, it is obvious to consider larger object movements to represent more salient objects than background smaller movements such that motion magnitude is an obvious parameter for determining saliency.
Regarding claim 1, the combination of Boice, Kim, and Yoshizumi teaches or suggests a tracking control apparatus comprising: at least one processor configured to function as a plurality of units comprising: (1) an object detector configured to detect a plurality of moving objects with different moving directions or velocities based on image data output from an image capturing unit (Examiner interprets this limitation consistent with the subject matter of original claim 1 where the image data was motion vectors for determining object motion in an image; Boice, ¶ 0006: teaches motion vector data generated from the output of a video camera; Boice, ¶ 0007: teaches a processor using detected motion vectors for generating PTZ adjustments to track an object in an image; Boice, Fig. 1, Element 24; Boice, ¶ 0014: teaches motion vectors are used to track objects; see Kim, infra, regarding multiple object tracking and prioritization; Boice, Fig. 1, Element 20; see also Boice, ¶ 0037: teaching PTZ adjustment data created from motion vector data; Boice, ¶ 0050: teaches taking account of velocity and direction for object tracking); and (2) a controlling unit configured to perform tracking control by controlling a driving unit that drives the image capturing unit (Boice, ¶ 0007: teaches a PTZ video camera; Boice, Fig. 1, Element 16; Boice, ¶ 0037: teaches controlling the PTZ drive mechanisms to track objects), wherein the controlling unit calculates respective weight coefficients of the plurality of moving objects for the tracking control based on information on the plurality of moving objects (Examiner notes Applicant somewhat defines this information in Applicant’s Specification (published paragraphs [0066] and [0067]); Kim, ¶¶ 0018 and 0342: teach a control unit that calculates priorities of a plurality of objects based on size and/or speed so that a camera may maintain the prioritized object within the field of view of a camera; Examiner finds prioritization in the art is executed by assigning weighting coefficients and several publications are cited under the Conclusion Section of this Office Action to establish this fact), (Examiner notes paragraphs [0061]–[0077] of Applicant’s published Specification describe six pieces of information obtained for each object in an image and a weight coefficient, which is assigned to each piece of information based on thresholds; Each individual weight coefficient is added to calculate a final weight coefficient and the final weight coefficient is used “for each detected moving body object.” Spec., ¶ 0077; Examiner finds, consistent with Applicant’s described invention, the weighted information, such as the size of the objects detected in the image, are used to prioritize which object of interest in the image is set as a targeted object so that the camera may pan and tilt accordingly to maintain the targeted object of interest in the field of view of the camera; Boice, ¶ 0050: teaches pan and tilt adjustments relative to object center point and center point of the camera field of view while the camera and/or objects are moving; While the prior art is replete with teachings of tracking objects and panning a camera targeted on an object of interest, Kim is principally relied upon for teaching automatically determining, in a scenario in which multiple objects are present in the scene, which object to target based on a prioritization scheme that tends to identify the most salient (important) objects in the scene; Kim, ¶¶ 0018 and 0342: teach a control unit that calculates priorities of a plurality of objects based on size and/or speed so that a camera may maintain the prioritized object within the field of view of a camera; Examiner finds prioritization in the art is executed by assigning weighting coefficients and several publications are cited under the Conclusion Section of this Office Action to establish this fact; Finally, in order to expedite prosecution, Examiner additionally relies on the teachings of Yoshizumi, ¶¶ 0275–0279 and Figs. 14A–B: teaches using the center of mass of multiple objects in a scene to control the pan/tilt mechanisms of the camera platform so as to maintain the objects in the field of view of the camera).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to combine the elements taught by Boice, with those of Kim, because both references are drawn to the same field of endeavor such that one wishing to practice camera targeting of moving objects would be led to their relevant teachings and because Kim teaches how the skilled artisan can handle the tracking of multiple objects in the scene such that the combination is a mere combination of prior art elements, according to known methods, to yield a predictable result. This rationale applies to all combinations of Boice and Kim used in this Office Action unless otherwise noted.
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to combine the elements taught by Boice and Kim, with those of Yoshizumi, because all three references are drawn to the same field of endeavor such that one wishing to practice camera targeting of moving objects would be led to their relevant teachings and because Yoshizumi merely teaches to the skilled artisan the “simplest” way to setting the middle point of a field of view is calculating the center of mass of target objects so that the objects can be maintained within the field of view of the camera. Therefore, the combination is a mere combination of prior art elements, according to known methods, to yield a predictable result. This rationale applies to all combinations of Boice, Kim, and Yoshizumi used in this Office Action unless otherwise noted.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Boice, Kim, and Yoshizumi teaches or suggests the tracking control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the controlling unit performs the tracking control during motion image capturing (Boice, Abstract: teaches the disclosed invention is applied to a PTZ video camera; see also the teachings of Yoshizumi cited for the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Boice, Kim, and Yoshizumi teaches or suggests the tracking control apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising a panning-tilting unit configured to cause the image capturing unit to horizontally or vertically rotate, wherein the driving unit drives the panning-tilting unit (Boice, Abstract: teaches the disclosed invention is applied to a PTZ video camera; see also the teachings of Yoshizumi cited for the rejection of claim 1).
Claim 17 lists the same elements as claim 1, but in method form rather than apparatus form. Therefore, the rationale for the rejection of claim 1 applies to the instant claim.
Claim 19 lists the same elements as claim 1, but in CRM form rather than apparatus form. Therefore, the rationale for the rejection of claim 1 applies to the instant claim.
Claim 21 lists essentially the same elements as claim 1. Therefore, the rationale for the rejection of claim 1 applies to the instant claim.
Regarding claim 22, the combination of Boice, Kim, and Yoshizumi teaches or suggests the tracking control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the representative position is a center-of-gravity position of the plurality of moving objects (Boice, ¶¶ 0049 and 0138: teaches the object parameters used to track objects include the size and object centerpoint or centroid, which can be based on a highest area of interest; As explained in the rejection of claim 1, Kim teaches or suggests weight coefficients assigned to objects or areas of interest in teaching prioritization of objects or areas of interest within a scene for purposes of automated camera targeting; Boice, ¶¶ 0049, 0050, 0138, and 0139: teaches the camera adjusts rotation angles to maintain targeting of objects within the field of view of the PTZ camera based on location and movement of the centroid (i.e. center of gravity of a detected object) of the area of interest; see also the teachings of Yoshizumi cited for the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 29, the combination of Boice, Kim, and Yoshizumi teaches or suggests the tracking control apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the representative position is a center-of-gravity position (Boice, ¶¶ 0049 and 0138: teaches the object parameters used to track objects include the size and object centerpoint or centroid, which can be based on a highest area of interest; As explained in the rejection of claim 1, Kim teaches or suggests weight coefficients assigned to objects or areas of interest in teaching prioritization of objects or areas of interest within a scene for purposes of automated camera targeting; Boice, ¶¶ 0049, 0050, 0138, and 0139: teaches the camera adjusts rotation angles to maintain targeting of objects within the field of view of the PTZ camera based on location and movement of the centroid (i.e. center of gravity of a detected object) of the area of interest; see also the teachings of Yoshizumi cited for the rejection of claim 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
61
92
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 30, the combination of Boice, Kim, and Yoshizumi teaches or suggests the tracking control system according to claim 1, wherein the representative position is calculated using the following formula:
wherein H represents the representative position, N represents a number of the plurality of moving objects, xi represents a weight coefficient, of the respective weight coefficients of the plurality of moving objects, corresponding to an i-th object of the plurality of moving objects, and yi represents a position, of the respective positions of the plurality of moving objects, corresponding to the i-th object of the plurality of moving objects (Examiner finds the skilled artisan would recognize the claimed mathematical formula is a center of mass calculation as evidenced by both van Biezen and Gilbert Strang & Edwin “Jed” Herman, cited under the Conclusion Section of this Office Action; Examiner further notes center of mass, center of gravity, and centroid in this art are synonymous or equivalents as evidenced, infra; Examiner notes that the art knows how to calculate the center of mass of a single object for purposes of tracking a single object and that applying that to multiple objects is as simple as finding the center of mass of centers of mass; Boice, ¶¶ 0049 and 0138: teaches the object parameters used to track objects include the size and object centerpoint or centroid, which can be based on a highest area of interest; As explained in the rejection of claim 1, Kim teaches or suggests weight coefficients assigned to objects or areas of interest in teaching prioritization of objects or areas of interest within a scene for purposes of automated camera targeting; Boice, ¶¶ 0049, 0050, 0138, and 0139: teaches the camera adjusts rotation angles to maintain targeting of objects within the field of view of the PTZ camera based on location and movement of the centroid (i.e. center of gravity of a detected object) of the area of interest; see also the teachings of Yoshizumi cited for the rejection of claim 1).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Liu (US 2020/0257918 A1) teaches it is well-established in the art to define objects of interest by their center of gravity (¶ 0095).
Yeung (US 2018/0296281 A1) teaches it is well-established in the art to define the location of an object of interest using center of mass (¶ 0133).
Yamamoto (US 2016/0117840 A1) is assigned to Canon and teaches it is well-established to set weights for tracked regions wherein the region’s position is defined by the center of gravity (e.g. ¶¶ 0065, 0068).
Lankalapalli (US 2021/0118167 A1) teaches centroid is synonymous with center of gravity or center of mass (¶ 0201).
Hu (US 2021/0235020 A1) teaches tracking objects and grouping multiple objects as a tracked super object (¶ 0023).
Nadeau (US 2020/0092460 A1) teaches centering the field of view of a camera on a centroid representing an object of interest by adjusting pan/tilt angle of the camera (e.g. ¶ 0101).
Gyotoku (US 2018/0309930 A1) is assigned to Canon and appears to admit as prior art a large amount of the claimed features of the independent claim (e.g. ¶¶ 0003–0005).
Kinoshita (US 2015/0116517 A1) teaches determining shake amount and measuring against thresholds for maintaining objects in a field of view (e.g. ¶ 0366).
Itsukaichi (US 2024/0071104 A1) teaches prioritization in the art takes the form of assigning weight coefficients (¶ 0141).
Akiba (US 2022/0021799 A1) teaches assigning priorities is synonymous with using weighting coefficients (¶ 0033).
Hirai (US 2008/0122939 A1), assigned to Canon, teaches weighting coefficients are used for indicating priority (e.g. ¶¶ 0019, 0020, 0058).
Tsuji et al., “Tracking and Segmentation of Moving Objects in Dynamic Line Images,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, no. 6, pp. 516-522, Nov. 1980. Section V of the publication describes grouping of objects into a single object by iterating through a comparison algorithm that merges two objects into a group if their movements are similar.
Michel van Biezen, “Physics 14 Finding the Center of Mass (1 of 4) Four Objects,” YouTube, accessed at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufPysPtpYxw on 08/05/2025, 6:14. Screenshot below.
PNG
media_image2.png
133
244
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Gilbert Strang & Edwin “Jed” Herman, “6.6: Moments and Center of Mass, LibreTexts Mathematics, accessed at https://math.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Calculus/Calculus_(OpenStax)/06%3A_Applications_of_Integration/6.06%3A_Moments_and_Centers_of_Mass on 08/05/2025. Screenshot below, full text provided in record.
PNG
media_image3.png
138
141
media_image3.png
Greyscale
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael J Hess whose telephone number is (571)270-7933. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00am-5:30pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, William Vaughn can be reached on (571)272-3922. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8933.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MICHAEL J HESS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2481