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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/6/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant has amended the claim and argues the prior art does not teach the new amendment. The examiner disagrees with the applicant and asserts that Pettersson teaches on Pages 14 and 15 removing distortion artifacts caused by camera motion (time dependent artifacts) in a camera performing optical image stabilization based on an evaluation of internal OIS lens shift data (motion sensor data from the gyroscope detected during frame capture) captured at different times during frame exposure in order to improve image quality. Therefore, the rejection over the prior art is maintained.
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.
1: Claim(s) 1-6, 12, 13, 15-17, 19 and 20is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2018/0184010 A1 Cohen et al in view of CN 109076190 B Pettersson.
2: As for Claim 1, Claim 1 is rejected for reasons discussed related to Claim 20.
3: As for Claim 2, Cohen et al teaches in Paragraph [0047] wherein the generating of the stabilized video further comprises: maintaining spatial continuity for the scene as captured by the first (104) and second (102) cameras. Cohen et al teaches matching positions of the output images in order to generate a smooth transition (maintain spatial continuity).
4: As for Claim 3, Cohen et al teaches in Paragraph [0012] wherein the first camera (104) is associated with a first field of view (wide angle lens 102) and the second camera (110) is associated with a second field of view (telephoto lens 108), and wherein (a) the second field of view (telephoto lens) is included within the first field of view (wide angle lens), or (b) the first field of view is included within the second field of view.
5: As for Claim 4, Cohen et al teaches in Paragraph [0012] wherein the first camera, the second camera, or both, include a fixed-focal-length lens assembly.
6: As for Claim 5, Cohen et al teaches in Paragraph [0012] wherein the first camera, the second camera, or both, include an optical zoom capability.
7: As for Claim 6, Cohen et al teaches in Paragraph [0014] wherein the first zoom range and the second zoom range have a common overlap (Cohen teaches a different magnification image of the same scene is captured (grabbed) by each camera, resulting in FOV overlap between the two cameras).
8: As for Claim 12, Cohen et al teaches in Paragraph [0048] and depicts in Figures 1A and 4 wherein the second camera (telephoto camera 110) has a smaller field of view (telephoto) than the first camera (wide angle camera 104) and wherein a transition zoom level (see Figure 4) separates the first zoom range and the second zoom range, and further comprising: while capturing the one or more frames using the first zoom range (images captured using camera 104), receiving the user- specified magnification changes indicating a change of zoom level for video capture (Paragraphs [0013-0014] teaches the user specifies a zoom factor for a video operation); determining whether the indicated zoom level is greater than or equal to the transition zoom level (Paragraphs [0028 and 0047] teaches a switch is performed between cameras 104 and 110 based on a zoom level)); and upon a determination that the indicated zoom level is greater than or equal to the transition zoom level, transitioning from the first camera (wide angle camera 104) to the second camera telephoto camera 110), and wherein the capturing of the one or more additional frames (images captured using camera 110) is performed at the indicated zoom level using the second camera (110) (Paragraphs [0048 and 0049]).
9: As for Claim 13, Cohen et al teaches in Paragraph [0048] and depicts in Figures 1A and 4 wherein the second camera (110) has a smaller field of view (telephoto lens) than the first camera (wide angle lens camera 104) and wherein a transition zoom level (see Figure 4) separates the first zoom range and the second zoom range, and further comprising: while capturing the one or more additional frames (images captured by camera 110) using the second zoom range (zoom range of camera 110), receiving the user-specified magnification changes indicating a change of zoom level for video capture (Paragraphs [0013-0014] teaches the user specifies a zoom factor for a video operation); determining whether the indicated zoom level is smaller than the transition zoom level; upon a determination that the indicated zoom level is smaller than the transition zoom level, transitioning from the second camera (telephoto camera 110) to the first camera (wide angle camera 104); and capturing a second set of one or more frames at the indicated zoom level using the first camera (multiple image are captures using camera 104) (Paragraphs [0048 and 0049]).
10: As for Claim 15, Cohen et al teaches in Paragraph [0006] wherein the generating of the stabilized video is performed after the first camera (104) and the second camera (110) have completed image capture. Cohen et al teaches performing fusion processing on the two captured images. Furthermore, the fusion processing can only be performed after the two images have been generated.
11: As for Claim 16, Claim 16 is rejected for reasons discussed related to Claim 20.
12: As for Claim 17, Claim 17 is rejected for reasons discussed related to Claim 2.
13: As for Claim 19, Claim 19 is rejected for reasons discussed related to Claim 20.
14: As for Claim 20, Cohen et al depicts in Figures 1A and 1B and teaches in Paragraph [0041] A video capture device comprising: a first camera (104) having a first field of view (wide angle lens); a second camera (110) having a second field of view (telephoto lens); one or more processors (114, 126 and 128); and one or more computer readable storage media (inherent in the control system with processors 114, 126 and 128) comprising computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors (114, 126 and 128), are configured to perform operations comprising: providing, by the video capture device (100), a zoom capability permitting user-specified magnification changes within a zoom range during video recording (Paragraphs [0013-0014] teaches the user specifies a zoom factor for a video operation), wherein the zoom capability comprises a capability to capture one or more frames of a scene in the first field of view (wide angle lens) using the first camera (104) and one or more additional frames of the scene in the second field of view (telephoto lens 108) using the second camera (110) (Paragraphs [0048-0049]); generating a stabilized video (a video with smooth transitions without jumping is generated), wherein the stabilized video (video with smooth transition) comprises the one or more frames of the scene (images from camera 102) and the one or more additional frames of the scene (images from camera 110); and providing the stabilized video (video with smooth transition between frames from camera 104 to 110) by the video capture device (100) (Paragraphs [0048 and 0049]). However, does not teach removing time-dependent artifacts of optical image stabilization lens movement occurring during image capture based on an evaluation of internal OIS lens shift data captured at different times during frame exposure.
Pettersson teaches on Pages 14 and 15 removing distortion artifacts caused by camera motion (time dependent artifacts) in a camera performing optical image stabilization based on an evaluation of internal OIS lens shift data (motion sensor data from the gyroscope detected during frame capture) captured at different times during frame exposure in order to improve image quality.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to perform optical image stabilization and removing distortion artifacts caused by camera motion as taught by Pettersson in the camera system of Cohen et al in order to improve image quality.
15: Claim(s) 7-11 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2018/0184010 A1 US 2018/0184010 A1 Cohen et al in view of CN 109076190 B Pettersson in view of US 2018/0059513 A1 Ikeda.
16: As for Claim 7, Cohen et al teaches a camera system for capturing video using a wide-angle camera and a telephoto lens camera and teaches performing a stabilization process to prevent jumping between frames. However, does not teach the stabilization is performed by applying an electronic image stabilization (EIS) to maintain the temporal continuity (smooth transition).
Ikeda depicts in Figure 13 and teaches in Paragraph [0060] a camera system that performs a zoom function in combination with an image stabilization function that performs both an optical image stabilization function and an electronic image stabilization function in combination with each other in order to improve image stabilization and therefore, improve image quality.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to perform the image stabilization control of the system of Ikeda in the camera system of Cohen et al in order to improve image stabilization and therefore, improve image quality.
17: As for Claim 8, Cohen et al teaches a camera system for capturing video using a wide-angle camera and a telephoto lens camera and teaches performing a stabilization process to prevent jumping between frames. However, does not teach the stabilization is performed wherein: the first camera comprises an optical image stabilization (OIS) system wherein the one or more frames are represented having a predetermined OIS position; or the second camera includes the OIS system wherein the one or more additional frames are represented having the predetermined OIS position.
Ikeda depicts in Figure 13 and teaches in Paragraph [0060] a camera system that performs a zoom function in combination with an image stabilization function that performs both an optical image stabilization function and an electronic image stabilization function in combination with each other in order to improve image stabilization and therefore, improve image quality.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to perform the image stabilization control of the system of Ikeda in the camera system of Cohen et al in order to improve image stabilization and therefore, improve image quality.
18: As for Claim 9, Cohen et al teaches a camera system for capturing video using a wide-angle camera and a telephoto lens camera and teaches performing a stabilization process to prevent jumping between frames. However, does not teach the stabilization is performed by applying an electronic image stabilization (EIS) to maintain the temporal continuity (smooth transition).
Ikeda depicts in Figure 13 and teaches in Paragraph [0060] a camera system that performs a zoom function in combination with an image stabilization function that performs both an optical image stabilization function and an electronic image stabilization function in combination with each other in order to improve image stabilization and therefore, improve image quality.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to perform the image stabilization control of the system of Ikeda in the camera system of Cohen et al in order to improve image stabilization and therefore, improve image quality.
19: As for Claim 10, Ikeda further depicts in Figure 13 and teaches in Paragraph [0060] adjusting, by an EIS system and based on OIS position data and device position data, an amount of stabilization applied for each captured frame. Ikeda teaches the amount of stabilization is changed based on the possible range, the zoom position and the remaining video area based on the electronic image stabilization)
20: As for Claim 11, Ikeda further depicts in Figure 13 and teaches in Paragraph [0060] estimating, by an EIS system and based on data indicating OIS lens shifts at different times during frame capture, corrected lens positions (correction amounts for shifting the lens during OIS) for the one or more frames of the scene and the one or more additional frames of the scene.
21: As for Claim 18, Claim 18 is rejected for reasons discussed related to Claim 9.
22: Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2018/0184010 A1 Cohen et al in view of CN 109076190 B Pettersson in view of USPN 10,645,294 B1 Manzari et al.
23: As for Claim 14, Cohen et al teaches a camera system providing the zoom capability. However, Cohen et al does not teach providing an on-display slider control to receive the user-specified magnification changes.
Manzari et al depicts in Figure 336 and teaches on Column 265, Lines 4-14 a camera system that allows a camera user to change the zoom setting of a camera by using a slider control displayed on a display of the camera system in order to easily change camera zoom settings.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a display with a zoom setting slider controller as taught by Manzari et al in the camera system of Cohen et al in order to provide a mechanism for easily changing the zoom settings that is viewable to a camera user.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES M HANNETT whose telephone number is (571)272-7309. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM-5:00 PM Monday thru Thursday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Twyler Haskins can be reached at 571-272-7406 The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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).
/JAMES M HANNETT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2639
JMH
July 28, 2026
Prosecution Insights