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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 10 and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With regards to claim 3, several of the features of this claim were known in the art as evidenced by Citerin et al (US PG Pub. No. 2017/0177947), which discloses determining, using image data obtained using a plurality of image sensors (e.g., “camera #1” and “camera #2”) capturing a first region of interest (view) and the second region of interest (view) of the same monitored area at: ¶ [0066]; ¶ [0071]; ¶ [0102] and FIGS. 3a and 3b:
PNG
media_image1.png
258
636
media_image1.png
Greyscale
See, also: ¶ [0008]; ¶ [0021]; ¶ [0036]. However, Citerin does not disclose the first region of interest and the second region of interest correspond to a same aisle in a monitored area. Consistent with its usage in the specification-as-filed at ¶¶ [0006]-[0007], the term “aisle” has been interpreted as the area between rows of parking spaces in a parking lot through which vehicles may traverse.
With regards to claim 10, several of the features of this claim were known in the art as evidenced by Citerin et al (US PG Pub. No. 2017/0177947), which discloses generating a combined trajectory (e.g., “final trajectory”) from the plurality of image-space trajectories based at least on determining that the plurality of image-space trajectories correspond to a same object at: ¶ [0073]; ¶¶ [0087]-[0097]; ¶¶ [0173]-[0174] and FIG. 5b:
PNG
media_image2.png
346
634
media_image2.png
Greyscale
However, Citerin does not disclose the combined trajectory includes a global tracking identifier assigned to the same object based at least on the same object being identified in a designated entrance to a monitored area that corresponds to the plurality of fields of view
With regards to claim 15, several of the features of this claim were known in the art as evidenced by Citerin et al (US PG Pub. No. 2017/0177947), which discloses generating a combined trajectory (e.g., “final trajectory”) from the plurality of image-space trajectories based at least on determining that the plurality of image-space trajectories correspond to a same object at: ¶ [0073]; ¶¶ [0087]-[0097]; ¶¶ [0173]-[0174] and FIG. 5b. However, Citerin does not disclose the operations further include presenting, using the combined trajectory, video depicting a representation of the same object traversing the combined trajectory.
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 1-2, 4-6, 8-9, 11-14 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Citerin et al (US PG Pub. No. 2017/0177947).
With regards to claim 1, Citerin discloses determining, using image data obtained using a plurality of image sensors (e.g., “camera #1” and “camera #2”) capturing a plurality of fields of view, a plurality of sets of image coordinates of a plurality of object detections within the plurality of fields of view at: ¶ [0066]; ¶ [0071]; ¶ [0102] and FIGS. 3a and 3b:
PNG
media_image1.png
258
636
media_image1.png
Greyscale
See, also: ¶ [0008]; ¶ [0021]; ¶ [0036].
Citerin discloses generating, using the plurality of sets of image coordinates, a plurality of image space trajectories corresponding to the plurality of fields of view at: ¶ [0072]; ¶ [0103] and FIGS. 3c and 3d:
PNG
media_image3.png
163
558
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Citerin discloses generating a combined trajectory (e.g., “final trajectory”) from the plurality of image-space trajectories based at least on determining that the plurality of image-space trajectories correspond to a same object at: ¶ [0073]; ¶¶ [0087]-[0097](“Each tracklet set can be considered as representing a trajectory chunk of a target trajectory. Therefore, determining the trajectory of a target consists in determining a trajectory chunk for each of several tracklet sets and in combining these trajectory chunks”) and FIG. 3e:
PNG
media_image4.png
335
484
media_image4.png
Greyscale
See, also, ¶¶ [0173]-[0174] and FIG. 5b:
PNG
media_image2.png
346
634
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regards to claim 2, Citerin discloses a first trajectory (e.g., “target path 310-1”) of the plurality of image-space trajectories is tracked within a first region of interest corresponding to a first field of view (e.g., view of “camera #1”) of the plurality of fields of view and a second trajectory (e.g., “target path 315-1”) of the plurality of image-space trajectories is tracked within a second region of interest corresponding to a second field of view (e.g., view of “camera #2”) of the plurality of fields of view at ¶¶ [0071]-[0073] and ¶¶ [0102]-[0105].
With regards to claim 4, Citerin discloses generating the combined trajectory includes combining at least two image-space trajectories of the plurality of image-space trajectories based at least on determining that at least two fields of view that correspond to the at least two image space trajectories partially overlap in world-space at: ¶ [0008]; ¶ [0021]; ¶ [0036]; ¶¶ [0071]-[0073]; ¶¶ [0087]-[0097] and FIG. 3e; ¶¶ [0102]-[0105]; ¶¶ [0130]-[0137].
With regards to claim 5, Citerin discloses the generating the combined trajectory includes receiving global coordinates that correspond to the plurality of image-space trajectories at: ¶¶ [0081]-[0082](“[T]he target paths generated by the tracking modules may be converted into a two-dimensional (2D) real world coordinate system as illustrated with references 205-1 and 205-2.”)
Citerin discloses grouping the global coordinates into one or more clusters (“tracklet sets”) based at least on evaluating attributes associated with the global coordinates at: ¶¶ [0087]-[0092].
Citerin discloses generating at least a portion of the combined trajectory based at least on the cluster at ¶¶ [0092]-[0097].
With regards to claim 6, Citerin discloses the determining that the plurality of image-space trajectories correspond to the same object includes comparing one or more first attribute values (e.g., “
x
→
i
t
k
” ) assigned to at least one first image-space trajectory of the plurality of image-space trajectories to one or more second attribute values (e.g., “
x
→
j
t
k
” ) assigned to at least one second image-space trajectory of the plurality of image-space trajectories at ¶¶ [0130]-[0137]; see, also, ¶ [0104] and FIG. 3e.
With regards to claim 8, Citerin discloses the generating of the plurality of image-space trajectories includes generating, using a first data stream that corresponds to a first image sensor (e.g., “camera #1”) of the plurality of image sensors, a first image-space trajectory (e.g., “310-1”) of the plurality of image-space trajectories as well as generating, by a second data stream that corresponds to a second image sensor (e.g., “camera #2”) of the plurality of image sensors and operates in parallel to the first data stream, a second image-space trajectory (e.g., “315-1”) of the plurality of image-space trajectories at: ¶ [0177](“As illustrated with reference 610, steps 600 and 605 are done for each source of images, preferably in a parallel way”); ¶ [0066]; ¶ [0071]; ¶ [0102] and FIGS. 3a and 3b:
PNG
media_image1.png
258
636
media_image1.png
Greyscale
See, also: ¶ [0008]; ¶ [0021]; ¶ [0036]; ¶ [0072]; ¶ [0103] and FIGS. 3c and 3d:
PNG
media_image3.png
163
558
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With regards to claim 9, Citerin discloses the generating of the combined trajectory includes assigning one or more object attributes assigned to one or more of the plurality of image-space trajectories to the combined trajectory at: ¶ [0174]; ¶¶ [0092]-[0099].
With regards to claim 11, Citerin discloses analyzing image data obtained using a plurality of image sensors capturing a plurality of fields of view to generate a plurality of object detections within the plurality of fields of view at ¶ [0066]; ¶ [0071]; ¶ [0102] and FIGS. 3a and 3b. See, also: ¶ [0008]; ¶ [0021]; ¶ [0036].
Citerin discloses determining, using the plurality of object detections, a plurality of image space trajectories corresponding to the plurality of object detections in the plurality of fields of view at: ¶ [0072]; ¶ [0103] and FIGS. 3c and 3d.
Citerin discloses forming a combined trajectory by merging one or more portions of the plurality of image-space trajectories based at least on determining that the one or more portions correspond to a same object at: ¶ [0073]; ¶¶ [0087]-[0097](“Each tracklet set can be considered as representing a trajectory chunk of a target trajectory. Therefore, determining the trajectory of a target consists in determining a trajectory chunk for each of several tracklet sets and in combining these trajectory chunks”) and FIG. 3e. See, also, ¶¶ [0173]-[0174] and FIG. 5b.
With regards to claim 12, the steps performed by the apparatus of this claim are anticipated by Citerin for the same reasons as were provided in the discussion of claim 2, which recites a method performing these same steps.
With regards to claim 13, the steps performed by the apparatus of this claim are anticipated by Citerin for the same reasons as were provided in the discussion of claim 4, which recites a method performing these same steps.
With regards to claim 14, the steps performed by the apparatus of this claim are anticipated by Citerin for the same reasons as were provided in the discussion of claim 5, which recites a method performing these same steps.
With regards to claim 17, Citerin discloses receiving sets of global coordinates of an object in a monitored area, the sets of global coordinates corresponding to sets of image coordinates of a position of the object as depicted in a plurality of fields of view of a plurality of image sensors at: ¶¶ [0081]-[0082](“[T]he target paths generated by the tracking modules may be converted into a two-dimensional (2D) real world coordinate system as illustrated with references 205-1 and 205-2.”). See, also, ¶ [0008]; ¶ [0021]; ¶ [0036]; ¶ [0066]; ¶ [0071]; ¶ [0102] and FIGS. 3a and 3b.
Citerin discloses associating at least two sets of global coordinates from the sets of global coordinates into one or more clusters based at least on evaluating attributes associated with the at least two sets of global coordinates at: ¶¶ [0087]-[0092]; ¶ [0073]; ¶¶ [0087]-[0097] and FIG. 3E.
Citerin discloses generate at least a portion of a trajectory of the object in the monitored area using the one or more clusters at ¶¶ [0092]-[0097]. Also, ¶¶ [0173]-[0174] and FIG. 5b.
With regards to claim 18, Citerin discloses the evaluating includes computing a distance between the at least two sets of global coordinates and the at least two sets of global coordinates are associated into one or more clusters based at least on the distance at ¶¶ [0130]-[0137]; ¶¶ [0122]-[0123].
With regards to claim 19, Citerin discloses the at least two sets of global coordinates as associated into one or more clusters based at least on evaluating relative locations of the plurality of image sensors in the monitored area at ¶¶ [0080]-[0081].
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Citerin et al (US PG Pub. No. 2017/0177947) in view of Brewer et al (US PG Pub. No. 2013/0266181).
With regards to claim 7, Citerin discloses the one or more first attribute values and the one or more second attribute values correspond to person information at ¶ [0170](“ It is to be recalled that re-identification algorithms are usually used to detect same targets across several different cameras, thanks to machine-learning based algorithms (which compare appearances of different target images among a database of possible candidates, to detect the candidate who most likely matches one target).”) However, Citerin does not disclose the person information is for a detected face. However, this limitation was known in the art as evidenced by the Brewer reference:
Brewer discloses first attribute values and second attribute values correspond to person information for a detected face at ¶¶ [0065]-[0067]; see, also: ¶¶ [0022]-[0025]. At the time of filing of the present application, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to track a person using a detected face, as taught Brewer, as a substitute for the step of tracking a person taught by Citerin. This combination is a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results. The prior art contained a method, taught by Citerin, which differed from the claimed method by the substitution of the attributes used to track a person. Tracking a person by detecting and tracking faces, and its functions were known in the art as evidenced by Brewer. One of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted the facial tracking taught by Brewer into the method taught by Citerin and the results would have been predictable; to wit, the locations of people would be tracked regardless.
Claims 16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Citerin et al (US PG Pub. No. 2017/0177947) in view of Fujimatsu et al (US PG Pub. No. 2015/0015718).
With regards to claim 16, Citerin discloses a system implemented on a computing device at ¶¶ [0182]-[0194], but does not specify the use of cloud computing resources. However, this limitation was known in the art:
Fujimatsu discloses a tracking system implemented at least partially using cloud computing resources at ¶ [0101]. At the time of filing of the present application, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to implement a tracking system using cloud computing resources, as taught by Fujimatsu, as a substitute for implementing a tracking system on a computer, as taught by Citerin. This combination is a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results. The prior art contained a method, taught by Citerin, which differed from the claimed method by the substitution of the computing resources (i.e, cloud v. local cpu) used to process the tracking data. Cloud computing, and its use in processing tracking data were known in the art as evidenced by the Fujimatsu reference. One of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted cloud computing into the method taught by Citerin and the results would have been predictable; to wit, there would be no functional difference in the steps performed; the particular computing resources irrelevant in the processing steps.
With regards to claim 20, Fujimatsu discloses a tracking system implemented at least partially using cloud computing resources at ¶ [0101]. The motivation for the combination is the same as previously presented.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID F DUNPHY whose telephone number is (571)270-1230. 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, Chineyere Wills-Burns can be reached at (571) 272-9752. 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.
/DAVID F DUNPHY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2673