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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/08/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
All objections and Prior Art rejections are withdrawn.
The 35 USC 112(b) rejections numbered 9 and 12 on the Non-Final Office Action are withdrawn.
Regarding 35 USC 112(b) rejection numbered 10, directed to claims 1, 11, and 18: the Applicant’s amendment (“adjusting the focal table to include each of the face bounding boxes by extending a range of depth values in focus until pixels of each face bounding box are in the focal range”) do help clarify the limitation. However, “adjusting the focal table to include each of the face bounding boxes” still lacks clarity: In view of the Applicant’s arguments on Page 10 of Remarks and the amendment, the focal table is adjusted for the focal range depth values to include the face bounding boxes. As currently written, the claim describes adjusting so that the focal table itself includes the face bounding boxes. As explained in the Non-Final Office Action, the focal table is data that describes parameters, not something that can clearly ‘include’ the claimed bounding box. See 35 USC 112(b) rejections below.
Regarding 35 USC 112(b) rejection numbered 13, directed to claims 8 and 9: The rejection of claim 9 is withdrawn. However, the rejection of claim 8 is maintained, despite Applicant’s arguments on Page 11 of Remarks. As explained in the Non-Final Office Action, “based on claim 1, all images receive information about depth and focus, as claim 1 estimates and determines both of them.” Accordingly, it is impossible for the input image to not have metadata about focus and depth, as such metadata is determined in claim 1. See 35 USC 112(b) rejections below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 3-11, 13-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1 (and similarly claims 11 and 18): claim 1 recites “adjusting the focal table to include each of the face bounding boxes by extending a range of depth values in focus until pixels of each face bounding box are in the focal range”. As explained above, the claim describes adjusting so that the focal table itself includes the face bounding boxes. The apparent intended meaning, however, is that the focal table is adjusted for the focal range depth values to include the face bounding boxes. The focal table is data that describes parameters, not something that can clearly ‘include’ the claimed bounding boxes, rendering the claim indefinite.
Claims 3-10, 13-17, and 20, are rejected as dependent on the above claims.
Regarding claim 8, according to claim 1, the image receives depth metadata and focal metadata. However, claim 8 recites, “the image does not include metadata about focus and depth”. This is contradictory and appears to mean that prior to the steps of claim 1, the image does not include metadata about focus and depth. The claim is being interpreted accordingly.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3-11, 13-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 USC 112(b), but would be allowable if amended to overcome these rejections
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: With respect to claims 1, 11, and 18 (as well as the respective dependent claims), in addition to other limitations in the claims the Prior Art of Record fails to teach, disclose or render obvious the applicant' s invention as claimed, in particular:
Claim 1 (and similarly claims 11 and 18) recite: “A computer-implemented method comprising: estimating depth for an image to obtain a depth map that indicates depth for each pixel of the image;
generating a focal table for the image based on the depth map, wherein the focal table includes parameters that indicate a focal range and at least one of: a front slope or a back slope;
determining if one or more faces are detected in the image;
if it is determined that one or more faces are detected in the image, identifying a respective face bounding box for each face of the one or more faces, wherein the respective face bounding box includes a region of the image that corresponds to the face, and adjusting the focal table to include each of the face bounding boxes by extending a range of depth values in focus until pixels of each face bounding box are in the focal range;
if it is determined that no faces are detected in the image, scaling the focal table wherein the scaling includes adjusting at least one of the front slope or the back slope;
and applying blur to the image using the focal table and the depth map to generate an output image, wherein the output image includes an in-focus region and one or more blurred regions.”
Gong teaches generating a bokeh effect on android images based on depth maps, foreground-background segmentation, and isolating facial regions for protection from blurring. Liang teaches depth-based blurring to images, wherein foregrounds and backgrounds are identified according to depth values, and blurring is applied to provide processed images. Ignatov teaches deep learning-based methods for achieving bokeh effects. Suszek teaches applying blur to images based on depth data in accordance with depth map associated with the image, and additionally generating a focal table with focal range, back slope, and front slope. Tsai teaches the performance image processing strategies, including bokeh effects, based on identified foreground and backgrounds where the foreground is in focus and the background is blurred. Manzari (US20220353425A1) teaches altering visual media including modifying depth of freedom (focal range) to accommodate faces. Seely (US10992845B1) teaches synthesizing blurring effects in digital images based on depth estimations and foreground-background segmentations. However, none of the references expressly disclose the bolded limitation above, in particular, a conditional statement directed to a lack of faces in the image, resulting in an adjustment to the front and/or back slopes.
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 AARON JOSEPH SORRIN whose telephone number is (703)756-1565. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 5pm.
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, Sumati Lefkowitz can be reached at (571) 272-3638. 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.
/AARON JOSEPH SORRIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2672
/SUMATI LEFKOWITZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2672
Prosecution Insights