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
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) submitted on 3/7/2024 and 8/21/2025 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 9 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 9 and 12, the term “nearly adjacent” in the claims is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “nearly adjacent” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
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) 1-4, 8-9, 14-17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sommerlade et al (US 20220262326 A1) in view of Katagai (JP-2004180245-A).
Regarding claim 1, Sommerlade teaches A computer-implemented method comprising:
causing presentation of a camera view user interface (UI) on a computing device, the camera view UI comprising an output of a digital image sensor of a camera (para. 0032: “the size, shape, position, and color parameters of the graphical element 140 may vary based on the image and/or video acquired by the image sensor, such as the image sensor 108”; para. 0031: “windows 144A-144D may be reduced in size such that a graphical element 140, such as a ring of light, may be presented as part of the rendered and displayed content. The graphical element 140 may be positioned, sized, and/or otherwise configured to illuminate the user 102”);
detecting a face in an image corresponding to the output of the digital image sensor of the camera (para. 0048; “based on… face locations, … neural network model 940 may provide display device lighting parameters including, but not limited to, a modified display image…the modified display image may refer to a graphical element, such as the graphical element 316 and/or 324…”);
in response to detecting the face, generating a ring light comprising:
a
a portion of a color with a predetermined lightness (para. 0032; color parameters of the graphical element: ring light 316/324); and
causing display, on the computing device, of the ring light over the camera view UI (Figs. 3A-B),
but fails to teach
generating a ring light comprising: a non-opaque portion.
However, in the same field of endeavor Katagai teaches
generating a ring light comprising: a non-opaque portion (para. 0053: “the through image TI is displayed at the center of the monitor display unit 2, while the other peripheral portions are made to make the liquid crystal display panel constituting the monitor display unit 2 fully transparent, and a light source constituting a backlight, such as a cold source, is used. The light emitted from the white light source of the cathode ray tube is directly emitted to the user of the digital camera 1 which is the subject”; para. 0063: “FIG. 5A, the liquid crystal display panel of the monitor display unit 2 is set to be in a completely transmitting state and the light emitted from the light source of the backlight is directly emitted toward the subject. The amount of emitted light may be adjusted by controlling the drive voltage or by increasing or decreasing the density (degree of black component) of the peripheral portion of the liquid crystal display panel as a gray display”; para. 0083: “by displaying an arbitrary color in accordance with the setting of the user and using it as an auxiliary light source, it is possible to obtain a color filter effect according to a subject or a photographing intention”; para. 0089: “can arbitrarily additionally set a light emission pattern corresponding to the position, color, and time in the peripheral portion of the monitor display unit 2”).
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 Katagai in Sommerlade to have generating a ring light comprising: a non-opaque portion for utilizing transparent level and color of the liquid crystal display panel to optimize illumination control for the light ring during photographing yielding a predicted result.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Sommerlade and Katagai teaches everything as claimed in claim 1. In addition, the combination of Sommerlade and Katagai teaches wherein generating the ring light (ring light 316/324) further comprises configuring at least one of the non-opaque (Katagai as presented above) portion and the portion of the color with the predetermined lightness using a base color (Sommerlade: figs. 3; paras. 0032).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Sommerlade and Katagai teaches everything as claimed in claim 2. In addition, Sommerlade teaches further comprising computing coordinates of facial landmarks based on the detected face, and wherein determining the ring size of the ring shape uses an inner radius computed based on the coordinates of the facial landmarks (Figs. 3; paras. 0032, 0047-0050, 0057).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Sommerlade and Katagai teaches everything as claimed in claim 3. In addition, Sommerlade teaches further comprising generating a set of center offset coordinates based on the coordinates of facial landmarks, and wherein determining the position of the ring shape is further based on the set of center offset coordinates (Figs. 3; paras. 0032, 0047-0050, 0057).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Sommerlade and Katagai teaches everything as claimed in claim 1. In addition, the combination of Sommerlade and Katagai teaches wherein the portion () of the color with the predetermined lightness is opaque (Katagai: fig. 5, 6: transparent is adjusted to be more opaque) along a perimeter of the camera view UI (Sommerlade: Figs. 3A-B; paras. 0037-0038).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Sommerlade and Katagai teaches everything as claimed in claim 1. In addition, Sommerlade teaches wherein the portion of the color with the predetermined lightness is nearly adjacent to the non-opaque portion or surrounds the non-opaque portion (Sommerlade: Fig. 3B; para. 0038: “the right-side of a user's face is shadowed or otherwise appears to be not as bright as another portion of the user, such as the left-side of the user, the graphical element 324 may cause more light to be projected from the display device 304 and directed to the right-side of the user's face”; ring light 324 can have more light on the right side than the left side where Katagai teaches different light levels are set with different transparent levels or opacities [figs. 5-6]).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Sommerlade and Katagai teaches everything as claimed in claim 1. In addition, Sommerlade teaches A computing apparatus (Figs. 14) comprising:
at least one processor; and a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor (Figs. 14; para. 0072), configure the apparatus to: (corresponding features as taught in claim 1).
Regarding claims 15-17, claims 15-17 reciting features corresponding to claims 2-4 are also rejected for the same reasons above, respectively.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Sommerlade and Katagai teaches everything as claimed in claim 1. In addition, Sommerlade teaches A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (Figs. 14; paras. 0072, 0077) storing instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform operations comprising: (corresponding features as taught in claim 1).
Claim(s) 5-6 and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sommerlade et al (US 20220262326 A1) in view of Katagai (JP-2004180245-A) as applied to claim 3, and further in view of Yamazaki et al (US 20150163410 A1).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Sommerlade and Katagai teaches everything as claimed in claim 3. In addition, Sommerlade teaches wherein computing the inner radius is further based on a value selected
but fails to teach
wherein computing the inner radius is further based on a value selected via a scale factor slider displayed on the computing device.
However, in the same field of endeavor Yamazaki teaches
wherein computing the inner radius is further based on a value selected via a scale factor slider displayed on the computing device (Figs. 8; paras. 0090-0091; slider 108A displayed in the UI display can scale the size of luminance region 106).
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 Yamazaki in the combination to have wherein computing the inner radius is further based on a value selected via a scale factor slider displayed on the computing device for allowing the size of the ring light to be customized manually as desired improving UI control freedom yielding a predicted result.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Sommerlade and Katagai teaches everything as claimed in claim 2. In addition, Sommerlade teaches
but fails to teach
further comprising displaying user selectable elements actionable to select the base color or the ring size.
However, in the same field of endeavor Yamazaki teaches
further comprising displaying user selectable elements actionable to select the base color or the ring size (Figs. 8-9; paras. 0090-0092; sliders 108A-D displayed in the UI display can scale the size and change colors of luminance region 106).
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 Yamazaki in the combination to have further comprising displaying user selectable elements actionable to select the base color or the ring size for allowing size and color of the ring light to be customized manually as desired improving UI control freedom yielding a predicted result.
Regarding claims 18-19, claims 18-19 reciting features corresponding to claims 5-6 are also rejected for the same reasons above, respectively.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 10 and 11 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 12-13 are also objected for being dependent of the base claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Jain et al (US 20240127457 A1): add transparency to an RGB image creating an RGBA layout-aware background image using Red Green Blue (RGB) values. A pixel with an alpha value of one allows the pixel to be opaque and a pixel with an alpha value of zero allows the pixel to be transparent.
Hung et al (US 9036086 B2): a display device that is partitioned into an imaging area and a compensation area that is further partitioned into a color compensation area and a color temperature compensation area.
Mouizina et al (US 20200336705 A1): the activated segment of the display 14 has a ring-shaped configuration, and thus the display 14 shows a ring of light 34. The light emitted from the display 14 is transmitted through the mirror 12 to the user-side of the mirror 12, and thus the emitted right of light is visible to the user 30.
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