DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 12/04/2025 with respect to the amended independent claims 1, 7 and 8 by incorporating the limitations from claims 2 and 9 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant submits that Takahashi fails to teach “display on the display the guide image at a position responsive to information related to a distance between the camera and the light source.” The Applicant states that Takahashi in paragraphs 159-160 and Figs. 16-18 refers to a position of the light source, but do not disclose using a distance between the camera and the light in the manner claimed in claim 1, and similarly in claims 7 and 8. (Applicant’s remarks, pages 5 and 6).
In response, the Examiner understands the Applicant’s arguments but respectfully disagrees for the reasons set forth below.
As mentioned by the Examiner in the previous Office Action in claims 1 and 2, Takahashi discloses a database that stores all information related to the measurement and position of the light source, camera image sensor and size corresponding to each camera model (Fig. 20). Takahashi then discloses the guide image (the reference image in Figs. 17 & 18) to be displayed in responsive to an implicit distance calculated from the position relationship between the light source and the camera unit (Fig. 16). From a technical point of view, the disclosure of Takahashi implicitly includes a distance between the light source and the camera unit in the calculation by the processor in order to place the reference image at the position as shown in Figs. 17 & 18 since the database shown in Fig. 20 has already incorporated all necessary measurement information. The Examiner respectfully submits that the distance is only the matter of calculation from the position by the processor in order to display the reference image at the correct coordinate/location on the display unit as disclosed. The Examiner notes Fig. 16 in Takahashi that indicates a distance between the light source and the camera unit already been incorporated in the calculation as a whole process (Figs. 16-20 and par. [0159]-[0160]). In other words, the distance between the light source and the camera unit is fixed for each terminal model in terms of position of the light source and position of the camera unit. The distance is determined at least by the processor when the information of the terminal model is retrieved, and then subsequently the reference image is projected at the location based on the implicit and inherent distance calculation by the processor as illustrated in Figs. 16-18.
The Examiner also notes that the independent claims 1, 7 and 8 do not require a variable distance for each device. As such, a fixed distance for each terminal model in Takahashi meets the claim limitations.
At least in view of the above, the rejection of the claims are respectfully maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-8 and 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takahashi et al. (US 2017/0287147 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Takahashi discloses a mobile terminal (Figs. 15-21) comprising:
a light source (61 in Fig. 15, or 11 in Fig. 16);
a camera (152 in Fig. 15, or 12 in Fig. 16);
a display (153 in Fig. 15, or 13 in Fig. 17); and
a processor (154 in Fig. 15) configured to: when a comparison region (collation area) of a target is imaged, display on the display a guide image (a reference image) at an angle of rotation (i.e., at least horizontal or vertical angle of rotation shown in Figs. 17 & 18) responsive to information related to a positional relationship of the camera and the light source, the guide image being used to image the comparison region, with a relative position and posture of the light source, the camera, and the comparison region satisfying a specific relationship (see par. [0156]-[0161]. Note: “This reference image is an image for capturing a collation area in a state where the relative position/posture between the light source unit 61, the camera unit 152, and the collation area including the textured pattern of the object satisfies a predetermined relationship when the user images the collation area of the object.” As clearly disclosed in Takahashi, not only horizontal and vertical angles of rotation are shown in Figs. 17 & 18 but other angles of rotations are also suggested by Takahashi for different mobile terminal models that have different relative arrangements between the light source and the camera that causes the reference image to be displayed at different angles of rotation accordingly. Also see the database in Fig. 20 for more model dependence information), and
display on the display the guide image at a position responsive to information related to a distance between the camera and the light source (see Figs. 16-18 and par. [0159]-[0160]. Note the Examiner’s discussion in section 1 above for the distance a in FIG. 16).
Regarding claim 3, it is further seen in Takahashi that the position is set in accordance with a distance between a center of the display and a center of the comparison region displayed in the guided image (Figs. 17 and 18 show that the comparison region is displayed offset from the center of the display of the mobile terminal, e.g., on the top or on the right with respect to the center of the display, which implicitly discloses a distance between the centers of the display and the comparison region in the guided image being taken into account for the display position).
Regarding claim 4, Takahashi further discloses that the processor is configured to display on the display the guide image in a size responsive to information related to performance of the camera (see Figs. 17 & 18 and par. [0159]-[0160], wherein the performance of the camera includes the number of pixels, the size of image sensor and the focal length, etc.).
Regarding claim 5, as discussed in claim 4 above, the information related to the performance of the camera is related to an angle of view of the camera (e.g., focal length) and an image pixel size of the camera (par. [0159]-[0160]).
Regarding claim 6, as also disclosed by Takahashi, the processor is configured to display on the display the guide image in a size responsive to information on an imaging resolution of the camera at a distance (note distance b in Fig. 16) between a predetermined target and the camera (see Figs. 16-18 and par. [0159]-[0160]).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, these are also met by Takahashi as discussed in claim 1. Furthermore, Takahashi discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a program causing a computer in a mobile terminal including a light source, a camera and a display to execute the process as claimed (see par. [0591] and claim 10 in Takahashi).
Regarding claims 10-12, please refer to discussions in claims 3-5, respectively, for similar limitations.
Conclusion
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 NHAN T TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7371. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Lin Ye can be reached at 571-272-7372. 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.
/NHAN T TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2638