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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This communication is responsive to the Amendment filed on 12/22/2025.
In the Instant Amendment, Claim(s) 1, 4, 6, 10, 12-17 and 19 has/have been amended; Claim(s) 1, 10 and 17 is/are independent claims. Claims 1-20 have been examined and are pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
The claim objections are withdrawn because of the amendment and the persuasive argument in the remark (page 9).
Applicant's arguments filed 12/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments in the remarks (pages 10-13) with respect to claim(s) 1, 10 and 17 regarding the new feature “maintain an exposure having a first value during reduction of the frame rate from the first frame rate to the second frame rate” 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 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 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.
Claims 1, 3, 6, 8-10, 12, 14, 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Price et al (US 20210400185 A1) in view of Oshima et al (US 20100214439 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Price teaches A system (Figs. 1-3), comprising:
an image capture device (204) configured to capture one or more images (Figs. 1-3); and
one or more processors (208) configured to:
determine that a parameter of the one or more images meets a threshold (Fig. 3); and
cause the image capture device to reduce a frame rate of capturing the one or more images, from a first frame rate to a second frame rate, responsive to the parameter meeting the threshold (Fig. 3; paras. 0034, 0044; steps 321, 327),
but fails to teach
maintain an exposure having a first value during reduction of the frame rate from the first frame rate to the second frame rate.
However, in the same field of endeavor Oshima teaches
maintain an exposure having a first value during reduction of the frame rate from the first frame rate to the second frame rate (Fig. 22; para. 0021: “when the frame rate is returned to the pre-change frame rate, the exposure time and aperture transit to respective values that correspond to the pre-change frame rate, while the amount of exposure is kept to be constant. This makes it possible to keep the amount of exposure per frame before and after the frame rate is changed, and the image can be reproduced smoothly, with no sudden brightening up of the screen”; para. 0014: “when an image is shot by changing the frame rate in the middle of the shooting and the shot image is reproduced, the image is reproduced smoothly without darkening of the screen because the amount of exposure hardly varies before and after the change of the frame rate”; para. 0096: “so that the shooting modes change smoothly and the reproduced image is prevented from changing greatly in brightness, and the image quality is prevented from decreasing”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use the teachings as taught by Oshima in Price to have maintain an exposure having a first value during reduction of the frame rate from the first frame rate to the second frame rate for maintaining a same amount of exposure per frame before and after a frame rate is changed allowing smoothly transition between high-speed shooting and normal-speed shooting modes with no sudden darkening or brightening up in the images yielding a predicted result.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Price and Oshima teaches everything as claimed in claim 1. In addition, Price teaches wherein the one or more processors are configured to cause the image capture device to reduce the frame rate responsive to the parameter meeting a low light condition (para. 0044).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Price and Oshima teaches everything as claimed in claim 1. In addition, Price teaches further comprising a wearable housing coupled with the image capture device, a display device, and the one or more processors (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Price and Oshima teaches everything as claimed in claim 1. In addition, Price teaches wherein the image parameter corresponds one or more of a gain, an exposure, a frame brightness, an aperture, a signal to noise ratio (SNR) of the one or more images, or a sharpness of the one or more images (Fig. 3; paras. 0034, 0044).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Price and Oshima teaches everything as claimed in claim 1. In addition, Price teaches wherein the one or more processors are configured to perform a tracking operation using the one or more images (para. 0024).
Regarding claim 10, claim 10 reciting features corresponding to claim 1 is also rejected for the same reason above. In addition, Price/Oshima teaches the first frame rate corresponding to a first mode and the second frame rate corresponding to a second mode (Price: paras. 0038-0040; Oshima: as presented above).
Regarding claim 14, claim 14 reciting features corresponding to claim 6 is also rejected for the same reason above.
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 reciting features corresponding to claim 8 is also rejected for the same reason above.
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 reciting features corresponding to claim 1 is also rejected for the same reason above. In addition, Price in the combination teaches A non-transitory computer-readable medium (para. 0023) with instructions embodied thereon that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising: (features as claimed in claim 1).
Claim(s) 1-2, 10-11 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Quan et al (US 20070166020 A1) in view of Oshima et al (US 20100214439 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Quan teaches A system (Figs. 1-3), comprising:
an image capture device (104) configured to capture one or more images (Figs. 1-3); and
one or more processors (106) configured to:
determine that a parameter of the one or more images meets a threshold (Figs. 4A, 5A; paras. 0036; 0048); and
cause the image capture device to reduce a frame rate of capturing the one or more images, from a first frame rate to a second frame rate, responsive to the parameter meeting the threshold (Figs. 4A, 5A; paras. 0036, 0048; “the exposure time-gain product at the far right in region R2 may be near or the same as the exposure time-gain product at the far left in region R3. Since the exposure time is at a maximum, as shown at the far right in region R2, the frame rate may be lowered at boundary b. The lowering of the frame rate, i.e., changing the frame rate from fr1 to fr2, allows an increase in the exposure time.”; para. 0040: “frame rate fr1 is 30 frames per second (fps), and frame rate fr2 is 15 fps”),
but fails to teach
maintain an exposure having a first value during reduction of the frame rate from the first frame rate to the second frame rate.
However, in the same field of endeavor Oshima teaches
maintain an exposure having a first value during reduction of the frame rate from the first frame rate to the second frame rate (Fig. 22; para. 0021: “when the frame rate is returned to the pre-change frame rate, the exposure time and aperture transit to respective values that correspond to the pre-change frame rate, while the amount of exposure is kept to be constant. This makes it possible to keep the amount of exposure per frame before and after the frame rate is changed, and the image can be reproduced smoothly, with no sudden brightening up of the screen”; para. 0014: “when an image is shot by changing the frame rate in the middle of the shooting and the shot image is reproduced, the image is reproduced smoothly without darkening of the screen because the amount of exposure hardly varies before and after the change of the frame rate”; para. 0096: “so that the shooting modes change smoothly and the reproduced image is prevented from changing greatly in brightness, and the image quality is prevented from decreasing”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use the teachings as taught by Oshima in Price to have maintain an exposure having a first value during reduction of the frame rate from the first frame rate to the second frame rate for maintaining a same amount of exposure per frame before and after a frame rate is changed allowing smoothly transition between high-speed shooting and normal-speed shooting modes with no sudden darkening or brightening up in the images yielding a predicted result.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Quan and Oshima teaches everything as claimed in claim 1. In addition, Quan teaches wherein:
the parameter of the one or more images corresponds to a gain and an exposure (para. 0033: “The exposure time-gain product, i.e., (exposure time)*(gain)”); and
the one or more processors are configured to cause the image capture device to reduce the frame rate responsive to a function of the gain and the exposure exceeding a threshold (Figs. 4A, 5A; paras. 0033, 0036, 0048; “the exposure time-gain product at the far right in region R2 may be near or the same as the exposure time-gain product at the far left in region R3. Since the exposure time is at a maximum, as shown at the far right in region R2, the frame rate may be lowered at boundary_b. The lowering of the frame rate, i.e., changing the frame rate from fr1 to fr2, allows an increase in the exposure time.”).
Regarding claim 10, claim 10 reciting features corresponding to claim 1 is also rejected for the same reason above. In addition, Quan teaches the first frame rate corresponding to a first mode and the second frame rate corresponding to a second mode (Quan: figs. 4-5; Oshima: as presented above).
Regarding claim 11, claim 11 reciting features corresponding to claim 2 is also rejected for the same reason above.
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 reciting features corresponding to claim 1 is also rejected for the same reason above. In addition, Quan teaches A non-transitory computer-readable medium (paras. 0049-0050) with instructions embodied thereon that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising: (features as claimed in claim 1).
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 reciting features corresponding to claim 2 is also rejected for the same reason above.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 10, 12, 17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frank et al (US 20200314314 A1) in view of Oshima et al (US 20100214439 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Frank teaches A system (Figs. 1-2), comprising:
an image capture device configured to capture one or more images; and
one or more processors configured to:
determine that a parameter of the one or more images meets a threshold; and
cause the image capture device to reduce a frame rate of capturing the one or more images, from a first frame rate to a second frame rate, responsive to the parameter meeting the threshold (Fig. 2; para. 0053: “In case the Updated Exposure Time ETN is no longer within the Min/Max for the current frame rate, the frame rate is adjusted. For ETN>Max, the frame rate is reduced to the next available fps. For ETN<Min, the frame rate is increased at the next available frame rate”),
but fails to teach
maintain an exposure having a first value during reduction of the frame rate from the first frame rate to the second frame rate.
However, in the same field of endeavor Oshima teaches
maintain an exposure having a first value during reduction of the frame rate from the first frame rate to the second frame rate (Fig. 22; para. 0021: “when the frame rate is returned to the pre-change frame rate, the exposure time and aperture transit to respective values that correspond to the pre-change frame rate, while the amount of exposure is kept to be constant. This makes it possible to keep the amount of exposure per frame before and after the frame rate is changed, and the image can be reproduced smoothly, with no sudden brightening up of the screen”; para. 0014: “when an image is shot by changing the frame rate in the middle of the shooting and the shot image is reproduced, the image is reproduced smoothly without darkening of the screen because the amount of exposure hardly varies before and after the change of the frame rate”; para. 0096: “so that the shooting modes change smoothly and the reproduced image is prevented from changing greatly in brightness, and the image quality is prevented from decreasing”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use the teachings as taught by Oshima in Price to have maintain an exposure having a first value during reduction of the frame rate from the first frame rate to the second frame rate for maintaining a same amount of exposure per frame before and after a frame rate is changed allowing smoothly transition between high-speed shooting and normal-speed shooting modes with no sudden darkening or brightening up in the images yielding a predicted result.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Frank and Oshima teaches everything as claimed in claim 1. In addition, Frank teaches wherein the one or more processors are configured to:
reduce the frame rate from the first frame rate to the second frame rate responsive to the parameter exceeding a first threshold (Max) (Fig. 2; para. 0053: “In case the Updated Exposure Time ETN is no longer within the Min/Max for the current frame rate, the frame rate is adjusted. For ETN>Max, the frame rate is reduced to the next available fps. For ETN<Min, the frame rate is increased at the next available frame rate”); and
increase the frame rate from the second frame rate to the first frame rate responsive to the parameter (Updated Exposure Time ETN) falling below a second threshold (Min) less than the first threshold (Max) (Fig. 2; para. 0053).
Regarding claim 10, claim 10 reciting features corresponding to claim 1 is also rejected for the same reason above. In addition, Frank teaches the first frame rate corresponding to a first mode and the second frame rate corresponding to a second mode (Frank: figs. 4-5; Oshima: as presented above).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Frank and Oshima teaches everything as claimed in claim 10. In addition, Frank teaches comprising:
reducing, by the one or more processors, the frame rate from the first frame rate to the second frame rate responsive to the parameter exceeding a first threshold (Max) (Fig. 2; para. 0053: “In case the Updated Exposure Time ETN is no longer within the Min/Max for the current frame rate, the frame rate is adjusted. For ETN>Max, the frame rate is reduced to the next available fps. For ETN<Min, the frame rate is increased at the next available frame rate”); and
increasing, by the one or more processors, the frame rate from the second frame rate to the first frame rate responsive to the parameter falling below a second threshold less than the first threshold (Fig. 2; para. 0053).
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 reciting features corresponding to claim 1 is also rejected for the same reason above. In addition, Frank teaches A non-transitory computer-readable medium (para. 0069) with instructions embodied thereon that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising: (features as claimed in claim 1).
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 reciting features corresponding to claim 4 is also rejected for the same reason above.
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 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.
Claim(s) 5, 7, 13 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Price et al (US 20210400185 A1) in view of Oshima et al (US 20100214439 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Baldwin et al (US 20200084387 A1).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Price and Oshima teaches everything as claimed in claim 1. In addition, Price teaches wherein:
the image capture device is a first image capture device;
the system comprises a second image capture device (para. 0024: “one or more optical sensors 204 may be integrated with the HMD device 202”; para. 0031: “optical sensor 204 depicted in FIG. 2. Such an optical sensor may be included in an imaging device, such as a 2D and/or 3D camera, and/or may be a standalone digital light sensor”); and
the one or more processors are configured to
but fails to teach
the one or more processors are configured to maintain alignment of images captured by the first image capture device and the second image capture device.
However, in the same field of endeavor Baldwin teaches
the one or more processors are configured to maintain alignment of images captured by the first image capture device and the second image capture device (para. 0058: “For example, 3D imaging (such as for VR) may require temporal alignment of frames from the first camera 201 and the second camera 202 to reduce artifacts or ghosting in a composite 3D image”; para. 0084: “The command 518 may be executed (decreasing the frame capture rate of the second camera 202 from the first frame capture rate to a second frame capture rate”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use the teachings as taught by Baldwin in the combination to have the one or more processors are configured to maintain alignment of images captured by the first image capture device and the second image capture device for reducing artifacts or ghosting enabling obtaining better composite 3D images yielding a predicted result.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Price and Oshima teaches everything as claimed in claim 1. In addition, Price teaches wherein the one or more processors are configured to reduce the frame rate from a first frame rate
However, in the same field of endeavor Baldwin teaches
wherein the one or more processors are configured to reduce the frame rate from a first frame rate of 120 Hz to a second frame rate of 50 Hz or 60 Hz (para. 0069: “if the second camera 202 may be configured to have a frame capture rate of 12 fps, 24 fps, 30 fps, 60 fps, or 120 fps, the device 200 may set the second camera's frame capture rate to 120 fps”; para. 0084: “The command 518 may be executed (decreasing the frame capture rate of the second camera 202 from the first frame capture rate to a second frame capture rate”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use the teachings as taught by Baldwin in Price to have wherein the one or more processors are configured to reduce the frame rate from a first frame rate of 120 Hz to a second frame rate of 50 Hz or 60 Hz for enabling fast frame rates options improving capturing capabilities of the system yielding a predicted result.
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 reciting features corresponding to claim 5 is also rejected for the same reasons as in claim 5. In addition, Price teaches causing, by the one or more processors, the image capture device to reduce the frame rate responsive to the parameter meeting a low light condition (para. 0044).
Regarding claim 20, claim 20 reciting features corresponding to claim 5 is also rejected for the same reasons as in claim 5.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frank et al (US 20200314314 A1) in view of Oshima et al (US 20100214439 A1) as applied to claim 10, and further in view of Baldwin et al (US 20200084387 A1).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Frank and Oshima teaches everything as claimed in claim 10. In addition, Frank teaches
the method of claim 9 (interpreted as claim 12), wherein the second frame rate is 50 Hz or 60 Hz (para. 0009: “This frame rate is called the output frame rate and can vary from 10 fps to 100 fps”; para. 0054: “we have a fixed number of available frame rates i.e. 5, 10, 20, 40 and 80 fps”).
In the alternative, in the same field of endeavor Baldwin teaches
wherein the second frame rate is 50 Hz or 60 Hz (para. 0069: “if the second camera 202 may be configured to have a frame capture rate of 12 fps, 24 fps, 30 fps, 60 fps, or 120 fps, the device 200 may set the second camera's frame capture rate to 120 fps”; para. 0084: “The command 518 may be executed (decreasing the frame capture rate of the second camera 202 from the first frame capture rate to a second frame capture rate”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to use the teachings as taught by Baldwin in the combination to have wherein the second frame rate is 50 Hz or 60 Hz for enabling other frame rates options improving capturing capabilities of the system yielding a predicted result.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Quan Pham whose telephone number is (571)272-4438. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-7pm.
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, Sinh Tran can be reached at (571) 272-7564. 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.
/Quan Pham/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2637