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 .
Filed IDS of 10/22/2024 has been received and considered.
Amendments/Remarks filed on 07/26/2024 have been received and entered.
Claims 5-8, 11, 12, 16, 17, 23-27, 30, and 31 are herein amended.
Claims 3, 9, 10, 13-15, 18, 19, 22, 28, 29, and 32-38 have been canceled.
Claims 1, 2, 4-8, 11, 12, 16, 17, 20, 21, 23-27, 30, and 31 are currently pending. Please refer to the action below.
Examiner Notes
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. However, the claimed subject matter, not the specification, is the measure of the invention.
Claims Objections
Claim 8 objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because of a multiple dependent claim further depending of any preceding claim. See MPEP § 608.01(n). Accordingly, the claim 8 has not been further treated on the merits.
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, 2, 4-8, 11, 12, 16, 17, 20, 21, 23-27, 30, and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Frieder et al (US 2021/0048965, A1).
Regarding claim 1, Frieder teaches a method for generating a digital artifact (at least Figs. 1-4 and the Abstract teaches methods and systems for generating an interactive digital picture frame comprising said digital artifact from filtered and clustered digital artifacts or further para. 0108-0120),
the method comprising:
(a) extracting, by one or more computer processors of a user device, metadata from a plurality of digital items (for extracting features or metadata of at least para. 0110, by one or more computer processors of a user device and/or the cited deep learning systems of further para. 0215-0126, from said plurality of digital items/pictures/collections);
(b) selecting, by the one or more computer processors, a subset of digital items from the plurality of digital items based at least in part on the extracted metadata (select further in at least Figs. 1-4 a subset of clusters comprising said digital items from the plurality of digital items based at least in part on the extracted metadata);
(c) filtering, by the one or more computer processors, the subset of digital items based at least in part on a predetermined rule (the system further in at least Figs. 1-4 further cause filtering, by the one or more computer processors, the subset of digital items based at least in part on a predetermined rule which may comprise constraint and/or repetition filtering rules);
(d) estimating, by the one or more computer processors, a parameter associated with a set of resulting digital items for the digital artifact (the system may further estimate in at least Figs. 1-4 a criteria/criterion parameter associated with a set of resulting digital items for the digital artifact);
(e) decimating, by the one or more computer processors, the subset of digital items filtered in (c), based at least in part on the parameter associated with the set of resulting digital items and a respective quality assessment of each of the filtered subset of digital items (systems of further Figs. 1-4 and para. 0108-0120 further configured for decimating, or excluding the subset of digital items filtered in (c), based at least in part on the criteria or constraint parameter associated with the set of resulting digital items and a respective quality assessment of each of the filtered subset of digital items noted in at least para. 0015, 0110 and 0120);
and (f) generating, by the one or more computer processors, the digital artifact by arranging a remainder of digital items from the plurality of digital items based at least in part on a preselected layout, and presenting the digital artifact to a user on a display of the user device (presenting of a digital picture frame story of at least para. 0020 and 0108-0120 further comprising said digital artifact by arranging selected remainder of digital items from the plurality of digital items based at least in part on a preselected split layout of further para. 0013 and 0098, and presenting the digital artifact to a user on a display of the user device);
Frieder teaches the claimed digital artifact presentation in at least para. 0020 and para. 0094 except for specifically the above lined-out items such as wherein a subset of the digital artifact generated in (f) is presented to a user on the user device prior to a completion of (f). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art to modify the teachings of Frieder to include said subset of the digital artifact generated in (f) is presented to a user on the user device prior to a completion of (f), as one skill in the art would appreciate that said interactive digital picture frame of further Figs. 1-4 and para. 0020 may be configured for presenting a subset of the digital artifact generated in (f) to a viewing user on the user device prior to obviously a completion of (f) according to further known methods to yield predictable results, as the specific configuration of the device to present said subset of the digital artifact generated in (f) to a viewing user on the user device prior to obviously a completion of (f) appear to be a matter of design choice since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Since further known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art as said combination is thus the adaptation of an old idea or invention using newer technology that is either commonly available and understood in the art thereby a variation on already known art (See MPEP 2143, KSR Exemplary Rationale F).
Regarding claim 2 (according to claim 1), Frieder further teaches wherein further comprising transmitting an interactive unit to the user to solicit a user response (the interactive digital picture frame of at least Fig. 1 and the abstract further adapted to solicit user interaction when presenting a subset of the digital artifact to the user).
Regarding claim 4 (according to claim 2), Frieder further teaches wherein further comprising altering the digital artifact based on the user response (the frame of further the Abstract and Fig. 1 further configured further in at least para. 0211 for altering the digital artifact based on the user response).
Regarding claim 5 (according to claim 1), Frieder further teaches wherein the extracted metadata comprises a timestamp (photo grouping of further para. 0011, and 0018 further based on extracted metadata comprising a timestamp).
Regarding claim 6 (according to claim 1), Frieder further teaches wherein the extracted metadata comprises a location (para. 0011-013).
Regarding claim 7 (according to claim 1), Frieder further teaches wherein one or more machine learning algorithms are employed to perform one or more of (a)-(f) (the machine learning systems of further para. 0020 and 0215-0216).
Regarding claim 8 (according to method of any preceding claim), Frieder further teaches wherein the user device is a mobile device, a hard drive, a digital camera, a television, a computer, a computer system, a tablet device, a cloud platform, or a third party platform or service (devices 29 of Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 11 (according to claim 1), Frieder further teaches wherein the plurality of digital items comprises a plurality of image files, a plurality of audio files, a plurality of video files, or a combination thereof (Figs. 1-5 and 11-15 further illustrates a case said plurality of collected digital items from at least devices 29 or the server may comprise a plurality of image files, a plurality of audio files, a plurality of video files, or a combination thereof).
Regarding claim 12 (according to claim 1), Frieder further teaches wherein further comprising clustering the plurality of digital items based at least in part on a similarity between each of the plurality of digital items (the clustering of further Figs. 1-4 further comprises clustering the plurality of digital items based at least in part on a similarity between each of the plurality of digital items).
Regarding claim 16 (according to claim 1), Frieder further teaches wherein the extracted metadata comprises one or more faces, shapes, objects, or a combination thereof (extracted metadata of at least para. 0007-0013 further comprises one or more faces, shapes, objects, or a combination thereof).
Regarding claim 17 (according to claim 1), Frieder further teaches wherein the extracted metadata comprises a visual pattern (extracted metadata of at least para. 0007-0013 and the Abstract further comprises metadata comprising detected visual pattern).
Regarding claim 20, Frieder teaches a computer system for generating a digital artifact (at least Figs. 1-4 and the Abstract teaches methods and systems for generating an interactive digital picture frame comprising said digital artifact from filtered and clustered digital artifacts or further para. 0108-0120),
comprising: one or more processors (para. 0054), individually or collectively, configured to:(a) extract metadata from a plurality of digital items (for extracting features or metadata of at least para. 0110, by one or more computer processors of a user device and/or the cited deep learning systems of further para. 0215-0126, from said plurality of digital items/pictures/collections);
(b) select a subset of digital items from the plurality of digital items based at least in part on the extracted metadata (select further in at least Figs. 1-4 a subset of clusters comprising said digital items from the plurality of digital items based at least in part on the extracted metadata);
(c) filter the subset of digital items based at least in part on a predetermined rule (the system further in at least Figs. 1-4 further cause filtering, by the one or more computer processors, the subset of digital items based at least in part on a predetermined rule which may comprise constraint and/or repetition filtering rules);
(d) estimate a parameter associated with a set of resulting digital items for the digital artifact (the system may further estimate in at least Figs. 1-4 a criteria/criterion parameter associated with a set of resulting digital items for the digital artifact);
(e) decimate the subset of digital items filtered in (c), based at least in part on the parameter associated with the set of resulting digital items and a respective quality assessment of each of the filtered subset of digital items (systems of further Figs. 1-4 and para. 0108-0120 further configured for decimating, or excluding the subset of digital items filtered in (c), based at least in part on the criteria or constraint parameter associated with the set of resulting digital items and a respective quality assessment of each of the filtered subset of digital items noted in at least para. 0015, 0110 and 0120);
and(f) generate the digital artifact by arranging a remainder of digital items from the plurality of digital items based at least in part on a preselected layout, and present the digital artifact to a user on a display of the user device (presenting of a digital picture frame story of at least para. 0020 and 0108-0120 further comprising said digital artifact by arranging selected remainder of digital items from the plurality of digital items based at least in part on a preselected split layout of further para. 0013 and 0098, and presenting the digital artifact to a user on a display of the user device);
Frieder teaches the claimed digital artifact presentation in at least para. 0020 and para. 0094 except for specifically the above lined-out items such as wherein a subset of the digital artifact generated in (f) is presented to a user on the user device prior to a completion of (f). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art to modify the teachings of Frieder to include said subset of the digital artifact generated in (f) is presented to a user on the user device prior to a completion of (f), as one skill in the art would appreciate that said interactive digital picture frame of further Figs. 1-4 and para. 0020 may be configured for presenting a subset of the digital artifact generated in (f) to a viewing user on the user device prior to obviously a completion of (f) according to further known methods to yield predictable results, as the specific configuration of the device to present said subset of the digital artifact generated in (f) to a viewing user on the user device prior to obviously a completion of (f) appear to be a matter of design choice since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Since further known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art as said combination is thus the adaptation of an old idea or invention using newer technology that is either commonly available and understood in the art thereby a variation on already known art (See MPEP 2143, KSR Exemplary Rationale F).
Regarding claim 21 (according to claim 20), Frieder further teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to transmit an interactive unit to the user to solicit a user response (the interactive digital picture frame of at least Fig. 1 and the abstract further adapted to solicit user interaction when presenting a subset of the digital artifact to the user).
Regarding claim 23 (according to claim 21), Frieder further teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to alter the digital artifact based on the user response (the frame of further the Abstract and Fig. 1 further configured further in at least para. 0211 for altering the digital artifact based on the user response).
Regarding claim 24 (according to claim 20), Frieder further teaches wherein the extracted metadata comprises a timestamp (photo grouping of further para. 0011, and 0018 further based on extracted metadata comprising a timestamp).
Regarding claim 25 (according to claim 20), Frieder further teaches wherein the extracted metadata comprises a location (para. 0011-013).
Regarding claim 26 (according to claim 20), Frieder further teaches wherein one or more machine learning algorithms are employed to perform one or more of (a)-(f) (the machine learning systems of further para. 0020 and 0215-0216).
Regarding claim 27 (according to claim 20), Frieder further teaches wherein the user device is a mobile device, a hard drive, a digital camera, a television, a computer, a computer system, a tablet device, a cloud platform, or a third party platform or service (devices 29 of Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 30 (according to claim 20), Frieder further teaches wherein the plurality of digital items comprises a plurality of image files, a plurality of audio files, a plurality of video files, or a combination thereof (Figs. 1-5 and 11-15 further illustrates a case said plurality of collected digital items from at least devices 29 or the server may comprise a plurality of image files, a plurality of audio files, a plurality of video files, or a combination thereof).
Regarding claim 31 (according to claim 20), Frieder further teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cluster the plurality of digital items based at least in part on a similarity between each of the plurality of digital items (the clustering of further Figs. 1-4 further comprises clustering the plurality of digital items based at least in part on a similarity between each of the plurality of digital items), and wherein the extracted metadata comprises one or more faces, shapes, objections, or a combination thereof (extracted metadata of at least para. 0007-0013 further comprises one or more faces, shapes, objects, or a combination thereof).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCELLUS AUGUSTIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3384. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM- 5 PM.
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, BENNY TIEU can be reached at 571-272-7490. 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.
/MARCELLUS J AUGUSTIN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2682 11/17/2025