DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Notice of Amendments
2. The Examiner acknowledges the amended claims filed on 03/17/2026.
- Claims 1, 11, 14 and 18 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant's arguments filed on 03/17/2026 with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered, but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection as necessitated by Applicant’s amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
5. 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.
6. Claims 1-3 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Grandin et al. (US-PGPUB 2014/0139694).
Regarding claim 1, Grandin discloses an apparatus (Electronic device 201; see fig. 3 and paragraph 0034) for capturing image data, the apparatus comprising:
at least one memory (Memories 244, 246, 248, 230; see fig. 3 and paragraphs 0034, 0039, 0040-0041, 0050, 0053, 0060, 0104); and at least one processor (Processor 240; see fig. 3 and paragraph 0034) coupled to the at least one memory and configured to:
obtain image-capture information, wherein the image-capture information relates to at least one of image-capture settings of the apparatus, image-processing settings of the apparatus, or image-capture conditions (Obtain image context, step 504. The image context can include a zoom level, a tilt of the camera 253 and other imaging capture conditions; see figs. 5-6 and paragraphs 0083-0084, 0096-0098);
determine, based on the image-capture information, an optical image stabilization (OIS) mode from among a plurality of OIS modes (Select a mode of operation for the OIS based on the obtained image context, steps 506/604. A mode of operating the OIS 298 can be selected to optimize one of the noise level and sharpness of the image of the scene based on the image context. Selecting a mode of operating the OIS can include selecting one of an engaged mode in which the OIS 298 is configured to counteract or compensate for a camera 253 movement, a special engaged mode in which the OIS 298 is configured to counteract or compensate for a predetermined range of motion of a camera 253 movement and a not engaged mode; see figs. 5-6 and paragraphs 0083-0085, 0091, 0098-0099); and
enable the determined OIS mode for capturing an image (Apply the OIS in the selected mode, steps 508/606. The process can include capturing an image or video using the camera 253 while the OIS 298 is applied using the selected mode of operation; see figs. 5-6 and paragraphs 0093-0095, 0100).
Regarding claim 2, Grandin discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). In addition, Grandin discloses wherein the image-capture information comprises at least one of**:
motion data indicative of motion of the apparatus (The image context includes the gyroscope provides information for the tilt of the camera 253; see paragraph 0084);
an indication of OIS capabilities of the apparatus;
a focal length;
a zoom factor (Zoom level; see paragraphs 0083, 0097, 0098);
an electronic image stabilization (EIS) margin;
an indication of lens distortion;
an exposure duration (A specific OIS can be applied to set the exposure longer or shorter; see paragraph 0085);
a readout duration;
a frame-capture rate;
an indication of a transition between sensors of the apparatus; or**
an indication of post-processing capabilities of the apparatus.
Regarding claim 3, Grandin discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). In addition, Grandin discloses wherein the image-capture information comprises at least one of**:
an electronic image stabilization (EIS) margin;
an exposure duration (A specific OIS can be applied to set the exposure longer or shorter; see paragraph 0085); or**
motion data indicative of motion of the apparatus (The image context includes the gyroscope provides information for the tilt of the camera 253; see paragraph 0084).
Regarding claim 17, Grandin discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). In addition, Grandin discloses the image-capture information comprises first image-capture information related to a first time instance, wherein the determined OIS mode comprises a first determined OIS mode, and wherein the image comprises a first image, the at least one processor further configured to: obtain second image-capture information related to a second time instance (Subsequent image context; see paragraph 0095); determine a second OIS mode based on the second image-capture information (Subsequent mode of operating the OIS 298 is selected and applied; see paragraph 0095); and enable the second determined OIS mode while a second image is captured (The mode of operation of the OIS 298 can be changed. For example, an image or a video can be captured by the camera 253 while the OIS 298 is applied in a selected mode of operation and then a subsequent image can be captured by the camera 253 while the OIS 298 is applied in another selected mode of operation. By way of further example, after an image is captured by the camera 253 subsequent image of the scene can be acquired (502), subsequent image context can be obtained (504) and a subsequent mode of operating the OIS 298 can be selected (506) and applied (508); see paragraph 0095).
Regarding claim 18, Grandin discloses a method (see figs. 5-6) for capturing image data, the method comprising:
obtaining image-capture information, wherein the image-capture information relates to at least one of image-capture settings of a device, image-processing settings of the device, or image- capture conditions (Obtain image context, step 504. The image context can include a zoom level, a tilt of the camera 253 and other imaging capture conditions; see figs. 5-6 and paragraphs 0083-0084, 0096-0098);
determining, based on the image-capture information, an optical image stabilization (OIS) mode from among a plurality of OIS modes (Select a mode of operation for the OIS based on the obtained image context, steps 506/604. A mode of operating the OIS 298 can be selected to optimize one of the noise level and sharpness of the image of the scene based on the image context. Selecting a mode of operating the OIS can include selecting one of an engaged mode in which the OIS 298 is configured to counteract or compensate for a camera 253 movement, a special engaged mode in which the OIS 298 is configured to counteract or compensate for a predetermined range of motion of a camera 253 movement and a not engaged mode; see figs. 5-6 and paragraphs 0083-0085, 0091, 0098-0099); and
enabling the determined OIS mode for capturing an image (Apply the OIS in the selected mode, steps 508/606. The process can include capturing an image or video using the camera 253 while the OIS 298 is applied using the selected mode of operation; see figs. 5-6 and paragraphs 0093-0095, 0100).
Regarding claim 19, Grandin discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 18). In addition, Grandin discloses wherein the image-capture information comprises at least one of**:
motion data indicative of motion of the device (The image context includes the gyroscope provides information for the tilt of the camera 253; see paragraph 0084);
an indication of OIS capabilities of the device;
a focal length;
a zoom factor (Zoom level; see paragraphs 0083, 0097, 0098);
an electronic image stabilization (EIS) margin;
an indication of lens distortion;
an exposure duration (A specific OIS can be applied to set the exposure longer or shorter; see paragraph 0085);
a readout duration;
a frame-capture rate;
an indication of a transition between sensors of the device; or**
an indication of post-processing capabilities of the device.
Regarding claim 20, Grandin discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 18). In addition, Grandin discloses wherein the image-capture information comprises at least one of**:
an electronic image stabilization (EIS) margin;
an exposure duration (A specific OIS can be applied to set the exposure longer or shorter; see paragraph 0085); or**
motion data indicative of motion of the device (The image context includes the gyroscope provides information for the tilt of the camera 253; see paragraph 0084).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
8. 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.
9. Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grandin in view of Song et al. (US-PGPUB 2020/0267320).
Regarding claim 12, Grandin discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). However, Grandin fails to expressly disclose the at least one processor is further configured to adjust a frame-capture rate of the apparatus to allow for recentering duration between capturing of frames.
On the other hand, Song discloses the at least one processor is further configured to adjust a frame-capture rate of the apparatus to allow for recentering duration between capturing of frames (The stabilization processing unit 386 prevents the occurrence of image jitter by lowering a shutter speed to a first speed if the motion of the electronic device (or the image) is included in a designated intensity adjustment range (for example, if the motion is small enough to avoid image jitter) and increasing the shutter speed to a second speed if the motion is out of the designated intensity adjustment range (e.g., if the motion is large enough to cause image jitter); see paragraphs 0081, 0133).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Grandin and Song to provide the at least one processor is further configured to adjust a frame-capture rate of the apparatus to allow for recentering duration between capturing of frames for the purpose of improving image quality by seamlessly synchronizing the applied OIS with the capture rate.
Regarding claim 13, Grandin discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). However, Grandin fails to expressly disclose the at least one processor is further configured to adjust a readout duration of the apparatus to allow for recentering duration between capturing of frames.
Nevertheless, Song discloses the at least one processor is further configured to adjust a readout duration of the apparatus to allow for recentering duration between capturing of frames (The image stabilizer 240 can adjust the read-out timing of the image sensor 230 in response to the movement of the camera module 180 or the electronic device 101; see paragraph 0059).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Grandin and Song to provide the at least one processor is further configured to adjust a readout duration of the apparatus to allow for recentering duration between capturing of frames for the purpose of improving image.
10. Claims 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grandin in view of Gaizman et al. (US-PGPUB 2020/0412954).
Regarding claim 14, Grandin discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). However, Grandin fails to expressly disclose the determined OIS mode comprises a partially-recentering OIS mode and the at least one processor is further configured to determine a recentering rate based on the image-capture information.
On the other hand, Gaizman discloses the determined OIS mode comprises a partially-recentering OIS mode and the at least one processor is further configured to determine a recentering rate based on the image-capture information (Camera’s movement results in a motion blurred scene, the OIS moves the lens to reduce motion blur. If the device 600 performs lens shift OIS, the lens position may be used to determine a change in the lens distortion. A transform that is centered for a captured frame from the image sensor when the lens 602 is in a neutral position (such as centered for the image sensor), can be shifted based on a shift of the lens 602 during OIS; see paragraphs 0076, 0044, 0063-0064).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Grandin and Gaizman to provide the determined OIS mode comprises a partially-recentering OIS mode and the at least one processor is further configured to determine a recentering rate based on the image-capture information for the purpose of effectively shifting the lens position based on the detected camera’s movement.
Regarding claim 15, Grandin discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). However, Grandin fails to expressly disclose the at least one processor is further configured to provide an indication of the determined OIS mode to an electronic-image- stabilization (EIS) engine.
On the other hand, Gaizman discloses the at least one processor is further configured to provide an indication of the determined OIS mode to an electronic-image-stabilization (EIS) engine (The camera controller 610 (or processor 604) determines a configuration of the image signal processor 612 to perform EIS based on the OIS performed (indicated by the OIS information); see paragraphs 0071, 0075, 0076 and fig. 8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Grandin and Gaizman to provide the at least one processor is further configured to provide an indication of the determined OIS mode to an electronic-image-stabilization (EIS) engine for the purpose of improving image quality by compensating for lens distortions that are generated during OIS compensation.
Regarding claim 16, Grandin discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). However, Grandin fails to expressly disclose the at least one processor is further configured to adjust electronic-image-stabilization (EIS) parameters based on the determined OIS mode.
Nevertheless, Gaizman discloses the at least one processor is further configured to adjust electronic-image-stabilization (EIS) parameters based on the determined OIS mode (Figures 7-8 illustrate performing EIS based on OIS. The EIS transform 738 complements the OIS performed to provide a desired combined image stabilization processing of the frames 724. The device 600 determines an EIS filter based on the OIS information; see paragraphs 0071, 0075, 0076 and figs. 7-8).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Grandin and Gaizman to provide the at least one processor is further configured to adjust electronic-image-stabilization (EIS) parameters based on the determined OIS mode for the purpose of improving image quality by compensating for lens distortions that are generated during OIS compensation.
Allowable Subject Matter
11. Claims 4-11 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 4, the specific limitation of “the at least one processor is further configured to, based on the EIS margin exceeding an EIS-margin threshold and the exposure duration exceeding an exposure-duration threshold, determine a recentering OIS mode as the determined OIS mode” in the combination as claimed is neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
Regarding claim 5, the specific limitation of “the at least one processor is further configured to, based on the EIS margin exceeding an EIS-margin threshold and the exposure duration not exceeding an exposure-duration threshold, determine a centered OIS mode as the determined OIS mode” in the combination as claimed is neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
Regarding claim 6, the specific limitation of “the at least one processor is further configured to, based on the EIS margin not exceeding an EIS-margin threshold, the exposure duration exceeding an exposure-duration threshold, and the motion data exceeding a motion-data threshold, determine a full-range OIS mode as the determined OIS mode” in the combination as claimed is neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
Regarding claim 7, the specific limitation of “the at least one processor is further configured to, based on the EIS margin not exceeding an EIS-margin threshold, the exposure duration exceeding an exposure-duration threshold, and the motion data not exceeding a motion-data threshold, determine a recentering OIS mode as the determined OIS mode” in the combination as claimed is neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
Regarding claim 8, the specific limitation of “the at least one processor is further configured to, based on the EIS margin not exceeding an EIS-margin threshold, and the exposure duration exceeding an exposure-duration threshold, determine a partially-recentering OIS mode as the determined OIS mode; and determine a motion factor for the partially-recentering OIS mode” in the combination as claimed is neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
Regarding claim 9, the specific limitation of “the at least one processor is further configured to, based on the EIS margin not exceeding an EIS-margin threshold, the exposure duration not exceeding an exposure-duration threshold, and the motion data exceeding a motion-data threshold, determine a full-range OIS mode as the determined OIS mode” in the combination as claimed is neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
Regarding claim 10, the specific limitation of “the at least one processor is further configured to, based on the EIS margin not exceeding an EIS-margin threshold, the exposure duration not exceeding an exposure-duration threshold, and the motion data not exceeding a motion-data threshold, determine a centered OIS mode as the determined OIS mode” in the combination as claimed is neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
Regarding claim 11, the specific limitation of “the plurality of OIS modes comprise: a centered OIS mode; a full-range OIS mode; a recentering OIS mode; and a partially-recentering OIS mode” in the combination as claimed is neither anticipated nor made obvious over the prior art made of record.
**Note: The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office considers Applicant’s “or”, “one of”, and “at least one of” language to be anticipated by any reference containing one of the preceding or subsequent corresponding elements.
Conclusion
12. 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.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CYNTHIA CALDERON whose telephone number is (571)270-3580. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 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, TWYLER HASKINS can be reached at (571)272-7406. 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.
/CYNTHIA CALDERON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2639 03/30/2026