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 12/1/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues Kim et al do not teach where the at least one re-captured media segment of the re-captured media segments has a duration different from the target media segment. The Examiner disagrees. Paragraph 287 of Kim et al teach video capturing may be carried out for a preset period of time according to a touch method. For example, when a long touch input is applied to the video capture icon 310, videos may be captured for ten seconds by each camera. When a short touch input is applied to the video capture icon 310, videos may be captured for three seconds by each camera. These teaching corresponds to the claimed the at least one re-captured media segment of the re-captured media segments has a duration different from the target media segment.
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, 4-9, 11-14 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being described by Kim et al (US 2017/0092329).
For claim 1, Kim et al teach a method for processing media content (e.g. paragraphs 56, 344, figures 18, 22), comprising:
determining a target media segment based on the selection (e.g. figure 22, paragraph 345: “As illustrated in FIG. 22, after the delete icon 1050 is selected, a touch input may be applied to a thumbnail image 1860 corresponding to a video (1-3 video), which has been captured by the rear camera and output on the third region 1430, of the first full video”.); and
receiving a request for processing the target media segment, in response to a triggering on the target media segment (e.g. paragraph 349: “In another exemplary embodiment, when a touch input is applied to the add icon 2210, a video which is to be inserted in replacement of the 1-3 video deleted from the first full video may be captured. In this instance, re-capturing may be executed for the same period of time as the previous capturing by the camera which has captured the 1-3 video.”);
wherein in response to the request comprising a request for re-capturing processing, the method further comprises:
re-capturing a plurality of re-captured media segments (e.g. paragraph 349: “In another exemplary embodiment, when a touch input is applied to the add icon 2210, a video which is to be inserted in replacement of the 1-3 video deleted from the first full video may be captured. In this instance, re-capturing may be executed for the same period of time as the previous capturing by the camera which has captured the 1-3 video.”); and
replacing the target media segment with at least one media segment of the plurality of re-captured media segments (e.g. paragraph 349: “In another exemplary embodiment, when a touch input is applied to the add icon 2210, a video which is to be inserted in replacement of the 1-3 video deleted from the first full video may be captured. In this instance, re-capturing may be executed for the same period of time as the previous capturing by the camera which has captured the 1-3 video.”), wherein at least one of the re-captured media segments has a duration different from the target media segment (e.g. paragraph 205: “a video may be captured for a preset period of time in response to a touch input. Paragraph 287 of Kim et al teach video capturing may be carried out for a preset period of time according to a touch method. For example, when a long touch input is applied to the video capture icon 310, videos may be captured for ten seconds by each camera. When a short touch input is applied to the video capture icon 310, videos may be captured for three seconds by each camera.).
claims 14 and 20 are rejected for the same reasons as discussed in claim 1 above, wherein paragraph 68 of Kim et al disclose memory 170 stores application programs executed in the mobile terminal 100.
For claim 9, Kim et al teach wherein in response to the request comprising a request for clipping processing, the method further comprises: determining a second media segment from the target media segment; and clipping out the second media segment(e.g. figure 22, paragraph 345: “As illustrated in FIG. 22, after the delete icon 1050 is selected, a touch input may be applied to a thumbnail image 1860 corresponding to a video (1-3 video), which has been captured by the rear camera and output on the third region 1430, of the first full video”. figure 4 shows video has at least two segment).
For claim 12, Kim et al teach wherein the method further comprises at least one of: controlling re-capturing to be stopped when it is detected that a duration of the re-captured media segment reaches a duration of the target media segment; or controlling the re-capturing to be stopped when a triggering for stopping the re-capturing is detected (e.g. paragraph 349: In this instance, re-capturing may be executed for the same period of time as the previous capturing by the camera which has captured the 1-3 video. In detail, video capturing (capturing a 1-4 video) may be carried out for ten seconds by the rear camera).
For claim 13, Kim et al teach wherein the method further comprises: determining a third media segment from preset media content; and clipping out the third media segment from the preset media content, wherein the preset media content comprises at least one media segment of the processed media content, and the processed media content obtained by processing the target media segment in the media content (e.g. figure 22, paragraph 345: “As illustrated in FIG. 22, after the delete icon 1050 is selected, a touch input may be applied to a thumbnail image 1860 corresponding to a video (1-3 video), which has been captured by the rear camera and output on the third region 1430, of the first full video”. figure 4 shows video has at least two segment).
For claims 4 and 17, Kim et al teach the media segment is not a last media segment among the at least two media segments (e.g. figure 22, paragraph 345: “As illustrated in FIG. 22, after the delete icon 1050 is selected, a touch input may be applied to a thumbnail image 1860 corresponding to a video (1-3 video), which has been captured by the rear camera and output on the third region 1430, of the first full video”. figure 4 shows video has at least two segment. So user can select any segments he/she desires which includes not a last media segment).
For claims 6 and 18, Kim et al teach wherein in response to the request comprising a request for deletion processing, the application program, when executed by the processor, causes the processor to: delete the target media segment, to obtain media content after the deletion processing (e.g. figure 22, paragraph 345: “As illustrated in FIG. 22, after the delete icon 1050 is selected, a touch input may be applied to a thumbnail image 1860 corresponding to a video (1-3 video), which has been captured by the rear camera and output on the third region 1430, of the first full video”.).
For claims 7 and 19, Kim et al teach wherein after the target media segment is deleted, the application program, when executed by the processor, causes the processor to: capture one or more media segments, select at least one media segment from the captured media segments, and add the selected media segment into the media content after the deletion processing, wherein a position of the added media segment with respect to media segments in the media content after the deletion processing is the same as a position of the deleted target media segment with respect to the media segments in the media content after the deletion processing; or restore the deleted target media segment, to obtain media content before the deletion processing (e.g. paragraph 349: “In another exemplary embodiment, when a touch input is applied to the add icon 2210, a video which is to be inserted in replacement of the 1-3 video deleted from the first full video may be captured. In this instance, re-capturing may be executed for the same period of time as the previous capturing by the camera which has captured the 1-3 video.”).
For claim 11, Kim et al teach wherein the method further comprises at least one of: controlling capturing to be stopped when it is detected that a duration of the captured media segment reaches a duration of the target media segment; or controlling the capturing to be stopped when a triggering for stopping the capturing is detected (e.g. paragraph 349: “In another exemplary embodiment, when a touch input is applied to the add icon 2210, a video which is to be inserted in replacement of the 1-3 video deleted from the first full video may be captured. In this instance, re-capturing may be executed for the same period of time as the previous capturing by the camera which has captured the 1-3 video.”).
For claim 8, Kim et al teach wherein in response to the request comprising a request for adding processing, the method further comprises: determining a first media segment and a target position of the media content; and adding the first media segment at the target position of the media content(e.g. paragraph 349: “In another exemplary embodiment, when a touch input is applied to the add icon 2210, a video which is to be inserted in replacement of the 1-3 video deleted from the first full video may be captured. In this instance, re-capturing may be executed for the same period of time as the previous capturing by the camera which has captured the 1-3 video.”).
For claim 5, Kim et al teach before the receiving a selection on a media segment in a media content, the method further comprises: displaying identification information corresponding to respective media segments in the media content, and the receiving a selection on a media segment in a media content comprises: receiving the selection on identification information corresponding to the media segment (e.g. figure 11, Music 1 is selected).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al, as applied to claims 1, 4-9, 11-14 and 17-20 above, and further in view of Suchland (US 10,534,525).
For claim 10, Kim et al do not further disclose the target media segment comprises frames, and in response to the request comprising a request for at least one of an addition processing of an effect and a change processing of a filter, the method further comprises: determining at least one frame from the target media segment; and performing at least one of the addition processing of the effect and the change processing of the filter on the frame. Suchland disclose the target media segment comprises frames, and in response to the request comprising a request for at least one of an addition processing of an effect and a change processing of a filter, the method further comprises: determining at least one frame from the target media segment; and performing at least one of the addition processing of the effect and the change processing of the filter on the frame (e.g. column 7, lines 1-21, figure 2: Radius, intensity, contrast in 208 and filter 206). It would have obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Suchland into the teaching of Kim et al to make high-quality edits of the media content (e.g. column 1, lines 5-17, Suchland).
Claims 3 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al, as applied to claims 1, 4-9, 11-14 and 17-20 above, and further in view of different embodiment of Kim et al.
For claims 3 and 16, Kim et al teach wherein the method further comprises: displaying re-captured media segment in a first interface; determining the at least one media segment of the plurality of re-captured media segments for replacing the target media segment; and in response to determining the at least one media segment, wherein displays the media content comprising the at least one media segment (e.g. paragraph 349, figure 22, delete icon 1050 was selected and then user touch input is applied to the add icon 2210 to re-capturing is executed in the bottom interface. Kim et al do not further specify display plurality of re-captured media segment in a first interface. A different embodiment of Kim et al, teach display plurality media segment in a first interface (e.g. figure 19). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the embodiment of Kim et al, such as figure 19, to display plurality of re-captured media segment since displaying re-captured video segments does not change the display function of figure 19 and the result of displaying re-captured video segments are predictable (e.g. (D) Applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results, KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007), see MPEP 2143).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 4-14 and 17-20rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-13 of U.S. Patent No. 11,893,054. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant application claims broader in every aspect than the patent claim and is therefore an obvious variant thereof.
Claims 1, 14 and 20 of the instant application are corresponds to claims 1, 10 and 17 of the Patent, respectively.
Claims 4 and 17 of the instant application correspond to claim 1 of the Patent.
Claim 5 of the instant application corresponds to claim 2 of the Patent.
Claim 6 of the instant application corresponds to claim 3 of the Patent.
Claim 7 of the instant application corresponds to claim 4 of the Patent.
Claim 8 of the instant application corresponds to claim 4 of the Patent.
Claim 9 of the instant application corresponds to claim 6 of the Patent.
Claim 10 of the instant application corresponds to claim 7 of the Patent.
Claim 11 of the instant application corresponds to claim 5 of the Patent.
Claim 12 of the instant application corresponds to claim 8 of the Patent.
Claim 13 of the instant application corresponds to claim 9 of the Patent.
Claim 18 of the instant application corresponds to claim 12 of the Patent.
Claim 19 of the instant application corresponds to claim 13 of the Patent.
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 DAQUAN ZHAO whose telephone number is (571)270-1119. The examiner can normally be reached M-Thur: 7:00 am-5:00 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, Thai Tran can be reached on 571-272-7382. 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.
Email: daquan.zhao1@uspto.gov.
Phone: (571)270-1119
/DAQUAN ZHAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2484