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 .
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the phrase “Embodiments of this application provide…” can be implied. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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) 1-10 and 18-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahiska (US 2010/0002071) in view of Tsai (US 2012/0120277).
PNG
media_image1.png
237
453
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Ahiska – Figure 10
Regarding claim 1, Ahiska discloses “displaying, by the terminal device, a first interface, wherein the first interface comprises a first window (Fig. 10, ref.# 910) and a second window (Fig. 10, ref.# 920), pictures acquired by the first camera in real time are displayed in the first window (Fig. 10, ref.# 910), the pictures comprise a first object (Fig. 10, ref.# 920: car), a focus of the first camera is on the first object (paragraph 0053: simultaneously focus), and a part of pictures related to the first object in the first window are displayed in the second window (Fig. 10, ref.# 920); detecting, by the terminal device at a first moment, that the first object is displayed at a first position of the first window, the focus of the first camera is on the first object, and a part of pictures that are related to the first object and that are at the first position of the first window are displayed in the second window; and detecting, by the terminal device at a second moment, that the first object is displayed at a second position of the first window, the focus of the first camera is on the first object, and a part of pictures that are related to the first object and that are at the second position of the first window are displayed in the second window (paragraph 0033: object tracking)”.
Ahiska teaches in Fig. 22 and paragraph 0106, exposure compensation controls. However, Ahiska does not specifically teach “wherein when a first exposure parameter of the pictures acquired by the first camera in real time is in a locked state, both an exposure parameter corresponding to the terminal device at the first moment and an exposure parameter corresponding to the terminal device at the second moment are the first exposure parameter.”
Likewise, regarding claims 2 and 18-20, Ahiska discloses all the structure set forth in the claim except (Claims 2 and 20) “wherein when the first exposure parameter of the pictures acquired by the first camera in real time is in an unlocked state, the exposure parameter corresponding to the terminal device at the first moment and the exposure parameter corresponding to the terminal device at the second moment are different”, (Claim 18) “wherein when a first exposure parameter of the pictures acquired by the first camera in real time is in a locked state, both an exposure parameter corresponding to the terminal device at the first moment and an exposure parameter corresponding to the terminal device at the second moment are the first exposure parameter” and (Claim 19) “ wherein when a first exposure parameter of the pictures acquired by the first camera in real time is in a locked state, both an exposure parameter corresponding to the terminal device at the first moment and an exposure parameter corresponding to the terminal device at the second moment are the first exposure parameter.”
In other words, Ahiska does not teach an automatic exposure control (AE) for a ROI that is either turned on or off. However, a camera system with a tracking system that has an exposure control system that can (1) control exposure by metering an area substantially the full frame (i.e., exposure parameter the same for different moments for a ROI), as well as, (2) control exposure based on the selected regions of interest (ROI) (i.e., exposure parameter different for different moments for ROI) was well known in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention as taught by Tsai (See paragraphs 0036, 0042, 0043, 0061 and Fig. 4). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Ahiska such that “wherein when a first exposure parameter of the pictures acquired by the first camera in real time is in a locked state, both an exposure parameter corresponding to the terminal device at the first moment and an exposure parameter corresponding to the terminal device at the second moment are the first exposure parameter”, or alternatively, “wherein when the first exposure parameter of the pictures acquired by the first camera in real time is in an unlocked state, the exposure parameter corresponding to the terminal device at the first moment and the exposure parameter corresponding to the terminal device at the second moment are different” in order to control the exposure of an image and/or a region of interest (ROI) to optimize image quality for the desired effect in the image / video.
Regarding claims 3 and 21, Ahiska discloses “wherein the pictures in the first window (Fig. 10, ref.# 910) further comprise a second object (Fig. 10: tree), and the method further comprises: detecting, by the terminal device at a third moment (paragraph 0033: tracking), a first operation of a user for the second object (paragraph 0052: select a region), wherein in response to the first operation, the focus of the first camera is on the second object, and a part of pictures related to the second object in the first window are displayed in the second window (Fig. 10, ref. 920)”. Ahiska does not teach “when the first exposure parameter of the pictures acquired by the first camera in real time is in the locked state, an exposure parameter corresponding to the terminal device at the third moment is the first exposure parameter.” Likewise, regarding claim 4, Ahiska does not teach “an exposure parameter corresponding to the terminal device at the third moment and the exposure parameter corresponding to the terminal device at the second moment are different”. However, a camera system with a tracking system that has an exposure control system that can (1) control exposure by metering an area substantially the full frame (i.e., exposure parameter the same for different moments for a ROI), as well as, (2) control exposure based on the selected regions of interest (ROI) (i.e., exposure parameter different for different moments for ROI) was well known in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention as taught by Tsai (See paragraphs 0036, 0042, 0043, 0061 and Fig. 4). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify Ahiska such “when the first exposure parameter of the pictures acquired by the first camera in real time is in the locked state, an exposure parameter corresponding to the terminal device at the third moment is the first exposure parameter”, or alternatively, “an exposure parameter corresponding to the terminal device at the third moment and the exposure parameter corresponding to the terminal device at the second moment are different” in order to control the exposure of an image and/or a region of interest (ROI) to optimize image quality for the desired effect in the image / video.
Regarding claim 5, Ahiska discloses “wherein the first object (Fig. 10, ref.# car) is displayed in the center of the second window (Fig. 10, ref.# 920).”
Regarding claim 6, Ahiska discloses “wherein the second window (Fig. 10, ref. 920) floats above the first window (Fig. 10, ref.# 910), and the second window is smaller than the first window (See Fig. 10).”
Regarding claim 7, Ahiska discloses “wherein before or after the displaying, by the terminal device, a first interface, the method further comprises: receiving, by the terminal device, a second operation for the first window; and locking, by the terminal device in response to the second operation, an exposure parameter of the first camera as the first exposure parameter.” (paragraphs 0036, 0054)
Regarding claim 8, Ahiska discloses “wherein before the displaying, by the terminal device, a first interface, the method further comprises: displaying, by the terminal device, a second interface, wherein the second interface comprises the first window (Fig. 10, ref.# 910); and displaying, by the terminal device when detecting that the pictures displayed in the first window comprise the first object (Fig. 10: car), a first tracking identity associated with the first object in the first window; and the displaying, by the terminal device, a first interface of a camera application comprises: displaying, by the terminal device, the first interface in response to a trigger operation of the user for the first tracking identity.” (paragraph 0036, 0052, 0054)
Regarding claim 9, Ahiska discloses “wherein the first interface is a preview interface in a video recording process, the first interface further comprises an end control, and the method further comprises: detecting, by the terminal device, a third operation for the end control; and storing, by the terminal device, a first video and a second video in response to the third operation, wherein the first video is a video formed by the pictures displayed in the first window, and the second video is a video formed by the pictures displayed in the second window.” (paragraph 0107; Fig. 23)
Regarding claim 10, Ahiska discloses “wherein the first interface is a preview interface before starting to record a video.” (paragraph 0033; Fig. 6, ref.# 505)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-13 and 15-17 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Gao, et al. (US 2015/0179219) and Kato, et al. (US 8,922,693) teach a video recording method and apparatus for tracking an object in a recorded scene.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RODNEY FULLER whose telephone number is (571)272-2118. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am - 4:30 pm, Monday - Friday.
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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached at 571-272-3555. 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.
/RODNEY E FULLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
May 29, 2026
Prosecution Insights