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 07/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 7-8, Applicant argues that,
Argument 1:
The Office action asserts that paragraphs [0165]-[0166] of Fujiki have disclosed this feature.
In paragraph [0165] of Fujiki, it states: “the determination portion 37E determines whether or not the position of the target subject image is changing in the captured image. The acquisition portion 37A acquires a movement velocity of the target subject image by calculating a movement amount per unit time for the target subject image between the frames of the captured image stored in the image memory 32. In a case where the position of the target subject image is changing in the captured image, the derivation portion 37B derives the movement amount required for setting the position of the target subject image to the image center position based on the movement velocity.”
In this cited paragraph of Fujiki, Fujiki measures the movement velocity of the target subject image, and not a moving range as recited in claim 1.
As result, Fujiki fails to disclose the feature “outputs the notification signal when the processor determines a shift amount of a center of a photographing range of the camera with respect to the center of the moving range of the moving body is less than or equal to a predetermined threshold value”.
(original emphasis with added emphasis)
In response, Examiner respectfully disagrees and submits that Fujiki, at least in [0165], teaches the processor calculates a movement amount (per unit time). At least, such a movement amount is clearly a moving range. In other words, for a given unit time during which the target subject moves, there is a moving range corresponding to the movement amount the target subject makes.
Further, because the movement is made by the target subject, its position, clearly, can be interpreted as the center of the moving range for the unit time.
Alternatively, a moving range can be interpreted as sum of two movement amounts for two consecutive unit time durations. As such, the middle point of such a moving range is the position of the target subject, i.e. the tail point of the velocity vector shown in Fig. 19. For example, if the target subject moves from point A to point B during a first unit time duration and from point B to point C during a second unit time duration, the range from A to C is a moving range of the target subject, the point B is the center of the moving range.
As such, the position of the target subject can be interpreted as “the center of a moving range”.
Further, as described at least in [0167], Fujiki states,
[0167] As illustrated in FIG. 19 as an example, in a case where the position of the target subject image is changing in a rightward direction of heading toward the image center position side in the captured image, the speed of the component of the horizontal direction is greater than the component of the vertical direction of the captured image. The component having the higher speed (in the example illustrated in FIG. 19, the component of the horizontal direction of the captured image) is a component of the direction of heading toward the image center position side. Consequently, the derivation portion 37 B does not output the movement amount in the horizontal direction (pan direction) of the captured image. Accordingly, in the initial state, the movement amount in only the vertical direction (tilt direction) of the captured image is displayed on the movement amount display screen (refer to the upper part of FIG. 19). After position adjustment by the position adjustment portion 52 is completed, the position of the target subject image in the captured image changes in a direction of approaching the image center position (refer to the lower part of FIG. 19).
(emphasis added)
Clearly, Fujiki teaches when the processor determines the target subject moves toward the center of the photographic range of the camera (the center of the image), at least the processor outputs, in the initial state, the movement amount in only the vertical direction, which is interpreted as the notification signal.
However, the target subject is determined moving toward the center of the photographic range of the camera is the same as a shift amount of a center of a photographic range of the camera with respect to the center of the moving range is determined less than or equal to a predetermined threshold value WHEN the predetermined threshold value is taken as a previous distance between the center of the photographic range of the camera and the position of the target subject (when the subject moves toward the center, the shift amount is less than the previous distance).
For the reasons set forth above, Examiner respectfully submits that Fujiki clearly teach “the processor outputs the notification signal when the processor determines a shift amount of a center of a photographing range of the camera with respect to the center of the moving range of the moving body is less than or equal to a predetermined threshold value”.
On pages 8-9, Applicant argues that,
Argument 2:
The derivation portion 37B of Fujiki derives the movement amount required for setting the position of the target subject image to the image center position based on the movement velocity, as recited in paragraph [0165] of Fujiki.
This is also different from the feature “a shift amount of a center of a photographing range of the camera with respect to the center of the moving range of the moving body” recited in claim 1.
As result, Fujiki fails to disclose the feature “outputs the notification signal when the processor determines a shift amount of a center of a photographing range of the camera with respect to the center of the moving range of the moving body is less than or equal to a predetermined threshold value”.
In response, Examiner respectfully disagrees and submits that any movement amount can be interpreted as a moving range because it indicates a range that the subject moves. For example, a movement amount of 1 meter indicates a moving range that the subject moves from a start position to a point 1 meter away from the start position. Further, as discussed in [responses to] Argument 1 above, the center of the moving range of the moving body is the position of the moving target subject. As a result, Fujiki teaches “the processor outputs the notification signal when the processor determines a shift amount of a center of a photographing range of the camera with respect to the center of the moving range of the moving body is less than or equal to a predetermined threshold value” as discussed above.
Arguments by Applicant in section Argument 3 on page 9 are not moot in view of the discussion of Fujiki above.
As such, Applicant arguments are not persuasive.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Fujiki et al. (US 2022/0256083 A1 – hereinafter Fujiki).
Regarding claim 1, Fujiki discloses a photographing system, comprising: a camera (Fig. 4 – camera 15); a processor, processing an image captured by the camera and outputting a notification signal (Fig. 4; [0104] – processor 37 as further illustrated in Fig. 6 processing an image captured by the camera as further described at least at [0106] and outputting a notification signal by an output portion 37D as further described at least at [0126]); and a notification portion, notifying an outside that the notification signal has been received (Fig. 4 – communication I/F 34); wherein the processor detects a moving body from the image ([0165]-[0166] – the processor detects a moving target subject as its position changes in the captured image), obtains a center of a moving range of the moving body ([0165]-[0166] – the processor obtains a center of a moving range of the target subject as the position of the target subject – also see “Response to Arguments” above), and outputs the notification signal when a shift amount of a center of a photographing range of the camera with respect to the center of the moving range of the moving body is less than or equal to a predetermined threshold value (Fig. 19; [0167] – a predetermined threshold value can be taken as the last distance between the target subject and the center of a photographing range, the processor determines the shift amount between the center of the photographic range of the camera with respect to the center of the moving range of the moving body, which is the position of the moving body, is less than the previous distance, which means the moving subject moves toward the center of the photographic range, the processor outputs, in an initial state, the movement amount in only the vertical direction (tilt direction) of the captured image on the movement amount display screen shown in Fig. 19 – also see “Response to Arguments” above).
Regarding claim 3, Fujiki also discloses the photographing system according to claim 1, wherein the notification portion is capable of adjusting a notification level to the outside in multiple stages according to the notification signal, and the processor adjusts a level of the notification signal according to the shift amount (Figs. 17, 19-20 – a notification level is equivalent to the distance shown in the movement amount display screen).
Regarding claim 4, Fujiki also discloses the photographing system according to claim 1, wherein the notification portion notifies the outside using at least one of sound, light, and vibration ([0127]; [0161]).
Regarding claim 5, Fujiki also discloses the photographing system according to claim 1, wherein the notification portion is capable of audio output ([0127]; [0161] – outputting sound instead of the visible display shown in Figs. 11, 14), and the processor obtains a shift direction and the shift amount of the center of the photographing range with respect to the center of the moving range and outputs a first notification signal for audio outputting the shift direction from the notification portion and a second notification signal for audio outputting the shift amount from the notification portion as the notification signal ([0127]; [0161] – outputting sound instead of the visible display shown in Figs. 11, 14, since outputting sound in place of the visible display shown in Figs. 11, 14, the sound must notify the user of the same information that is direction and movement amount).
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.
Claims 2 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujiki as applied to claims 1 and 3-5 above.
Regarding claim 2, Fujiki also disclose the photographing system according to claim 1, wherein when the moving body makes a motion, the processor obtains the center by using a range of the motion as the moving range ([0165]-[0166] – the processor obtains a center of a moving range of the target subject as shown in Fig. 19).
However, Fujiki does not explicitly disclose the motion as a reciprocating motion. However, Fujiki discloses the motion of the moving body is made when the camera is vibrated ([0008]; [0010]-[0011]).
Official Notice is taken that vibration of the camera resulting in a reciprocating motion by an object in a captured image is well known.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate processing a reciprocating motion into the system taught by Fujiki to accommodate different types of motion that the target object can make, thus enhancing the robustness of the system.
Regarding claim 6, Fujiki also discloses he photographing system according to claim 1, wherein the camera is caused by traffic of a vehicle ([0065]).
However, Fujiki does not disclose the camera is mounted on a vehicle so as to face forward.
Official Notice is taken that a camera mounted on a vehicle so as to face forward is well known in the art.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate a camera mounted on a vehicle so as to face forward into the system taught by Fujiki to enhance the utility of the system by employing the system in various fields of application.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 HUNG Q DANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1116. The examiner can normally be reached IFT.
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 Q 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.
/HUNG Q DANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2484