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
This non-final office action is in response to the Application filed on 3/20/2024.
Claim(s) 1-20 are pending for examination. Claim(s) 1, 13, 20 is/are independent claim(s).
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(s) 1, 13, 15, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheon; Kawon et al. US Pub. No. 20230300451 (Cheon).
Claim 1:
Cheon teaches:
A method comprising:
accessing, by an image system embodied on a server, an image [¶ 0031, 33, 47, 52] (server, commands or data may be transmitted or received between the electronic device and the server);
generating and causing display, by the image system, of a user interface that includes the image and an adjust tools portion, the adjust tools portion including aspect ratios [¶ 0232-33] (choose aspect ratio);
receiving, via the user interface by the image system, a selection of a plurality of the aspect ratios for application to the image [¶ 0235-236] (select additional aspect ratio);
in response to receiving the selection of the plurality of aspect ratios, generating, by the image system, an image preview that applies the plurality of aspect ratios to the image at the same time [¶ 0236-237] (apply both aspect ratios at the same time); and
updating, by the image system, the user interface to display the image preview [¶ 0230-237] (Fig. 15, display preview of two aspect ratios at the same time).
Cheon teaches all the elements of the claim, however some of these elements may by in different embodiments and use different terminology, for example Cheon does not use the phrase “same time” but the figures show the previews displayed together. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the different embodiments of Cheon and that the difference in terminology is an obvious variant.
The reason, rationale, and motivation for this combination would have been for “improving the usability of the display” [Cheon: ¶ 0003].
Claim 3:
Cheon teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein generating the image preview comprises:
generating a plurality of versions of the image, each version comprising a different aspect ratio of the plurality of aspect ratios; and
positioning the plurality of versions of the image side by side [¶ 0230-237] (Fig. 15, display preview of two aspect ratios at the same time side by side).
ALTERNATE REJECTION:
Claim(s) 1, 13, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimura; Kazuhiko et al. US Pub. No. 20170078515 (Shimura)
Claim 1:
Shimura teaches:
A method comprising:
accessing, by an image system embodied on a server, an image [¶ 0020, 31] (server);
generating and causing display, by the image system, of a user interface that includes the image and an adjust tools portion, the adjust tools portion including aspect ratios [¶ 0035, 43-45, 59, 62, 86-87] (displayed based on image data obtained by trimming the image data for live view display in a horizontal composition with the aspect ratio of 16:9);
receiving, via the user interface by the image system, a selection of a plurality of the aspect ratios for application to the image [¶ 0084] (Fig. 7B, frame 309b indicating an image range of the photograph in a horizontal composition created by the album creation service);
in response to receiving the selection of the plurality of aspect ratios, generating, by the image system, an image preview that applies the plurality of aspect ratios to the image at the same time [¶ 0085] (revision of the service content are performed when performing the live view display); and
updating, by the image system, the user interface to display the image preview [¶ 0084-85] (revision of the service content are performed when performing the live view display).
Shimura teaches all the elements of the claim, however some of these elements may by in different embodiments and use different terminology, for example live view instead of “preview”. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the different embodiments of Shimura and that the difference in terminology is an obvious variant.
ALTERNATE REJECTION:
Claim(s) 1, 13, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chun; Sinae et al. US Pub. No. 20140240576 (Chun)
Claim 1:
Chun teaches:
A method comprising:
accessing, by an image system embodied on a server, an image [¶ 059, 61] (transmit data to or receive data from an external device);
generating and causing display, by the image system, of a user interface that includes the image and an adjust tools portion, the adjust tools portion including aspect ratios [¶ 0075-85, 91-110] (Figs. 3-5, 7-10, adjust aspect ratio);
receiving, via the user interface by the image system, a selection of a plurality of the aspect ratios for application to the image [¶ 0075-85, 91-110] (Figs. 3-5, 7-10, multiple aspect ratios);
in response to receiving the selection of the plurality of aspect ratios, generating, by the image system, an image preview that applies the plurality of aspect ratios to the image at the same time [¶ 0075-85, 91-110] (Figs. 3-5, 7-10, preview aspect ratio); and
updating, by the image system, the user interface to display the image preview [¶ 0075-85, 91-110] (Figs. 3-5, 7-10, display preview of aspect ratio).
Chun teaches all the elements of the claim, however some of these elements may by in different embodiments and use different terminology, for example external device instead of “server”. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the different embodiments of Chun and that the difference in terminology is an obvious variant.
Claim(s) 2, 4-8, 14, 16, 17, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheon; Kawon et al. US Pub. No. 20230300451 (Cheon) in view of Bhatt; Nikhil et al. US Pub. No. 2013/0016122 (Bhatt).
Claim 2:
Cheon teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein generating the image preview comprises:
generating an aspect ratio overlay that includes a bounding box for each of the plurality of aspect ratios [¶ 0230-237] (Fig. 15, display preview of two aspect ratios at the same time with a dashed box shown for each one); and …
Cheon does not appear to explicitly disclose “translucent”.
However, the disclosure of Bhatt teaches:
overlaying the aspect ratio overlay on the image, the overlaying causing the image to be shown translucent [¶ 0012, 28-29, 31, 36, 38, 44, 52] (opaque layer) [¶ 0012, 44, 52] (translucent layer, semitransparent).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of aspect ratio preview in Cheon and the method of aspect ratio cropping in Bhatt, with a reasonable expectation of success.
The motivation for doing so would have been the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; (See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 US 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (U.S. 2007) and MPEP § 2143(D)).
The know technique of adding a translucent layer in Bhatt could be applied to the aspect ratio preview in Cheon. Bhatt and Cheon are similar devices because each modify and preview aspect ratios. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique would improve the similar devices and resulted in an improved system, with a reasonable expectation of success, “to create a visually pleasing cropped output” [Bhatt: ¶ 0027].
Claim 4:
Cheon teaches:
The method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving a selection of an aspect ratio of the plurality of aspect ratios; and
in response to receiving the selection of the aspect ratio, causing a portion of the image within a bounding box corresponding to the selected aspect ratio to become transparent [¶ 0230-237] (Fig. 15, transparent box when the aspect ratio is selected).
Bhatt teaches: [¶ 0012, 28-29, 31, 36, 38, 44, 52] (opaque layer) [¶ 0012, 44, 52] (translucent layer, semitransparent).
Claim 5:
Bhatt teaches:
The method of claim 4, further comprising:
receiving a selection of the bounding box corresponding to the selected aspect ratio [¶ 0030] (move or resize crop box);
receiving an indication to move the bounding box corresponding to the selected aspect ratio to a different area of the image [¶ 0051] (custom aspect ratio); and
in response to receiving the indication, causing a portion of the image within the moved bounding box to be transparent and causing any portions outside of the moved bounding box to be translucent [¶ 0012, 28-29, 31, 36, 38, 44, 52] (opaque layer) [¶ 0012, 44, 52] (translucent layer, semitransparent).
Claim 6:
Bhatt teaches:
The method of claim 4, further comprising:
receiving a selection of the bounding box corresponding to the selected aspect ratio [¶ 0028] (select aspect ratio);
receiving an indication to resize the bounding box corresponding to the selected aspect ratio [¶ 0029-30] (resize crop box); and
in response to receiving the indication, resizing the bounding box, causing a portion of the image within the resized bounding box to be transparent and causing any portions outside of the resized bounding box to be translucent [¶ 0012, 28-29, 31, 36, 38, 44, 52] (opaque layer, the opaque layer changes when the crop box is resized) [¶ 0012, 44, 52] (translucent layer, semitransparent).
Claim 7:
Bhatt teaches:
The method of claim 4, further comprising:
receiving a selection of an apply trigger to apply the selected aspect ratio to the image; and
in response to receiving the selection of the apply trigger, applying the selected aspect ratio to the image by cropping the image to the selected aspect ratio [¶ 0028-33, 51-56] (crop box for cropping to custom aspect ratio).
Claim 8:
Cheon teaches:
The method of claim 4, further comprising:
receiving a selection of a second aspect ratio of the plurality of aspect ratios; and
in response to receiving the selection of the second aspect ratio, causing a portion of the image within a bounding box corresponding to the second aspect ratio to be transparent and causing any portions outside of the bounding box corresponding to the second aspect ratio to be translucent [¶ 0012, 28-29, 31, 36, 38, 44, 52] (opaque layer, the opaque layer changes when the crop box is resized) [¶ 0012, 44, 52] (translucent layer, semitransparent).
Claim 10:
Bhatt teaches:
The method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving a selection of a custom icon; and
in response to response to receiving the selection of the custom icon, providing a field in which one or more custom aspect ratios are entered, wherein the plurality of aspect ratios include the one or more custom aspect ratios [¶ 0028-33, 51-56] (crop box for cropping to custom aspect ratio).
Claim(s) 9, 11, 12, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheon; Kawon et al. US Pub. No. 20230300451 (Cheon) in view of Choi; Hongsuk et al. US Pub. No. 2014/0204244 (Choi).
Claim 9:
Cheon teaches the elements of the claims as shown above.
Cheon does not appear to explicitly disclose “an ALL icon”.
However, the disclosure of Choi teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein receiving the selection of a plurality of the aspect ratios comprises receiving a selection of an ALL icon, the ALL icon causing all applicable aspect ratios to be applied [¶ 0171] (a select all button 1017 for selecting all the screen ratios in a lump) [¶ 0141-157] (Fig. 5, 7, 8-10; simultaneously output the plurality of images through a plurality of preview windows, aspect ratio).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the method of aspect ratio preview in Cheon and the method of aspect ratio selection in Choi, with a reasonable expectation of success.
The motivation for doing so would have been the use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; (See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 US 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1396 (U.S. 2007) and MPEP § 2143(D)).
The know technique of selecting all in Choi could be applied to the aspect ratio preview in Cheon. Choi and Cheon are similar devices because each modify and preview aspect ratios. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique would improve the similar devices and resulted in an improved system, with a reasonable expectation of success, because it “provides improved user conveniences and may contribute to the improvement of usability, convenience, and competitiveness” [Choi: ¶ 0023].
Claim 11:
Choi teaches:
The method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving an indication to share the image with an external site; and
in response to receiving the indication to share, determining aspect ratios corresponding to the external site, wherein the plurality of aspect ratios include the aspect ratios corresponding to the external site [¶ 0055] (web upload, a mobile transmission, a message transmission, and a Social Networking Service (SNS) transmission) [¶ 0145, 147, 163, 166, 220, 223, 272-273] (1:1 aspect ratio is used for social networking).
Claim 12:
Choi teaches:
The method of claim 11, wherein receiving the selection of the plurality of the aspect ratios for application to the image is automatic based on the indication to share [¶ 0055] (web upload, a mobile transmission, a message transmission, and a Social Networking Service (SNS) transmission) [¶ 0145, 147, 163, 166, 220, 223, 272-273] (1:1 aspect ratio is used for social networking).
Claims 13-20:
Claim(s) 13, 20 is/are substantially similar to claim 1 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim 1 is a “method” claim, claim 13 is a “system” claim and claim 20 is a “medium” claim, but the steps or elements of each claim are essentially the same.
Claim(s) 14 is/are substantially similar to claim 2 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 15 is/are substantially similar to claim 3 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 16 is/are substantially similar to claim 4 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 17 is/are substantially similar to claim 6 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 18 is/are substantially similar to claim 10 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Claim(s) 19 is/are substantially similar to claim 11 and is/are rejected using the same art and the same rationale.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Please See PTO-892: Notice of References Cited.
Citations to Prior Art
A reference to specific paragraphs, columns, pages, or figures in a cited prior art reference is not limited to preferred embodiments or any specific examples. It is well settled that a prior art reference, in its entirety, must be considered for all that it expressly teaches and fairly suggests to one having ordinary skill in the art. Stated differently, a prior art disclosure reading on a limitation of Applicant's claim cannot be ignored on the ground that other embodiments disclosed were instead cited. Therefore, the Examiner's citation to a specific portion of a single prior art reference is not intended to exclusively dictate, but rather, to demonstrate an exemplary disclosure commensurate with the specific limitations being addressed. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968". In re: Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323,75 USPQ2d 1213,1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005); In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1264,23 USPQ2d 1780, 1782 (Fed. Cir. 1992); Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Labs., Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807,10 USPQ2d 1843, 1846 (Fed. Cir. 1989); In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d 792,794 n.1, 215 USPQ 569, 570 n.1 (CCPA 1982); In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d 747, 750, 192 USPQ 278, 280 (CCPA 1976); In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385,1390,163 USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN J SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-3825. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 11:00 - 7:30 EST.
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, ADAM QUELER can be reached at (571) 272-4140. 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.
/Benjamin Smith/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2172 Direct Phone: 571-270-3825
Direct Fax: 571-270-4825
Email: benjamin.smith@uspto.gov