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 .
Claim Interpretation Under - 35 USC § 112(f)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Use of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is invoked is rebutted when the function is recited with sufficient structure, material, or acts within the claim itself to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is not invoked is rebutted when the claim element recites function but fails to recite sufficiently definite structure, material or acts to perform that function.
Claim elements in this application that use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Similarly, claim elements that do not use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed not to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “obtaining unit” in claims 8-14.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 8, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 102(a)(2)as being anticipated by Tao et al. (CN-113473181-A, hereinafter Tao. English translation is provided herewith, wherefrom Examiner is providing citations for the rejection below).
Regarding claim 1, Tao discloses an image frame rendering method for an electronic device (Title, Abstract), the method comprising:
obtaining a first rendering instruction, wherein the first rendering instruction instructs the electronic device to render a first target image frame (In step 201, the first detected video frame comprising a target object as the first video frame, also can be the received video processing instruction after the first detection comprises a target object of the video frame as the first video frame, page 8, ¶3, Also see, step 201 of figure 2 and corresponding description);
obtaining a first image frame and a second image frame based on the first rendering instruction, wherein the first image frame is a previous frame of the second image frame, and the second image frame is a previous frame of the first target image frame (see e.g. figures 4a 4b and corresponding description, page 11, 2nd to last para, page 12, ¶3); and
when a similarity between the first image frame and the second image frame is greater than or equal to a first threshold, obtaining the first target image frame based on the second image frame (In some embodiments, the rendering condition can be based on the similarity between the action of the target object in the first video frame F1 and the action of the target object rendered to the intermediate cache frame last time. Under the condition that the similarity satisfies the set similarity condition, determining the full rendering condition; otherwise, determining that the rendering condition is not satisfied. the similarity condition can be that the similarity is in the preset first similarity range, or the similarity is equal to a certain preset similarity value. The first similarity range can be set according to the actual requirement. For example, in the desired rendering to each target object in the intermediate cache frame as the same as possible, the first similarity range is greater than the range of the first similarity threshold value. For example, in the desired rendering to each target object in the intermediate cache frame has a certain area index, the first similarity range is less than the range of the second similarity threshold value. In the above example, the first similarity threshold value is greater than or equal to the second similarity threshold. it can detect the key point of the target object, so as to determine the key point position of the target object, and based on the difference between the key point position of the two target objects, determining the similarity between the actions of the two target objects., page 9, ¶3, Also see e.g. the paragraphs of the description preceding the discussion of step 301 of figure 3 which address the question of similarity).
Regarding claim 8, Tao discloses a rendering apparatus (abstract), comprising:
an obtaining unit (processor 1201 functions as obtainment unit, page 17, ¶5-7) configured to:
obtain a first rendering instruction, wherein the first rendering instruction instructs the obtaining unit to render a first target image frame (In step 201, the first detected video frame comprising a target object as the first video frame, also can be the received video processing instruction after the first detection comprises a target object of the video frame as the first video frame, page 8, ¶3, Also see, step 201 of figure 2 and corresponding description); and
obtain a first image frame and a second image frame based on the first rendering instruction, the first image frame being a previous frame of the second image frame, and the second image frame being a previous frame of the first target image frame (see e.g. figures 4a 4b and corresponding description, page 11, 2nd to last para, page 12, ¶3); and
a processing unit (processor 1201, page 17, ¶5-7)configured to obtain the first target image frame based on the second image frame when a similarity between the first image frame and the second image frame is greater than or equal to a first threshold, wherein content of the first target image frame is the same as content of the second image frame (In some embodiments, the rendering condition can be based on the similarity between the action of the target object in the first video frame F1 and the action of the target object rendered to the intermediate cache frame last time. Under the condition that the similarity satisfies the set similarity condition, determining the full rendering condition; otherwise, determining that the rendering condition is not satisfied. the similarity condition can be that the similarity is in the preset first similarity range, or the similarity is equal to a certain preset similarity value. The first similarity range can be set according to the actual requirement. For example, in the desired rendering to each target object in the intermediate cache frame as the same as possible, the first similarity range is greater than the range of the first similarity threshold value. For example, in the desired rendering to each target object in the intermediate cache frame has a certain area index, the first similarity range is less than the range of the second similarity threshold value. In the above example, the first similarity threshold value is greater than or equal to the second similarity threshold. it can detect the key point of the target object, so as to determine the key point position of the target object, and based on the difference between the key point position of the two target objects, determining the similarity between the actions of the two target objects., page 9, ¶3, Also see e.g. the paragraphs of the description preceding the discussion of step 301 of figure 3 which address the question of similarity).
Regarding claim 15, Tao discloses an electronic device (computing device, fig. 12), comprising: a memory (1202, fig. 12) including program instructions (page 17, ¶5-7); and at least one processor (1201, fig. 12, page 17, ¶5-7), wherein execution by the at least one processor causes the electronic device to perform operations (abstract, page 17, ¶5-7) including: obtaining a first rendering instruction, wherein the first rendering instruction instructs the at least one processor to render a first target image frame; obtaining a first image frame and a second image frame based on the first rendering instruction, wherein the first image frame is a previous frame of the second image frame, and the second image frame is a previous frame of the first target image frame; and when a similarity between the first image frame and the second image frame is greater than or equal to a first threshold, obtaining the first target image frame based on the second image frame (for the rest of the claim, please refer the claim 1 rejection above).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-7, 9-14, 18-22 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:
Regarding claim 2, Prior arts of record taken alone or in combination fails to reasonably disclose or suggest, the method according to claim 1, wherein the first rendering instruction comprises a first observation point location in a to-be-rendered three-dimensional model; and
the method further comprises:
obtaining a second observation point location corresponding to the second image frame, wherein the second image frame is obtained by rendering the three-dimensional model based on the second observation point location; and
when a distance between the first observation point location and the second observation point location is less than or equal to a second threshold, determining the similarity between the first image frame and the second image frame.
Regarding claim 3, Prior arts of record taken alone or in combination fails to reasonably disclose or suggest, the method according to claim 1, further comprising: obtaining a second rendering instruction, wherein the second rendering instruction instructs the electronic device to render a second target image frame, and the second rendering instruction comprises a third observation point location in the to-be-rendered three-dimensional model; obtaining a third image frame, a fourth image frame, and a fourth observation point location corresponding to the fourth image frame based on the second rendering instruction, wherein the third image frame is a previous frame of the fourth image frame, the fourth image frame is a previous frame of the second target image frame, and the fourth image frame is obtained by rendering the three-dimensional model based on the fourth observation point location; and when a distance between the third observation point location and the fourth observation point location is greater than the second threshold, executing the second rendering instruction to obtain the second target image frame through rendering; or when a distance between the third observation point location and the fourth observation point location is less than or equal to the second threshold, and a similarity between the third image frame and the fourth image frame is less than the first threshold, executing the second rendering instruction to obtain the second target image frame through rendering.
Regarding claim 4, Prior arts of record taken alone or in combination fails to reasonably disclose or suggest, the method according to claim 1, further comprising: separately dividing the first image frame and the second image frame into multiple image blocks, to obtain multiple first image blocks corresponding to the first image frame and multiple second image blocks corresponding to the second image frame, wherein the multiple first image blocks are in a one-to-one correspondence with the multiple second image blocks; separately calculating similarities between image blocks having correspondences in the multiple first image blocks and the multiple second image blocks to obtain multiple similarities; and determining a target similarity in the multiple similarities as the similarity between the first image frame and the second image frame, wherein the target similarity is a similarity having a smallest value of values associated with each of the multiple similarities.
Regarding claim 5, Prior arts of record taken alone or in combination fails to reasonably disclose or suggest, the method according to claim 1, wherein the first threshold is determined based on a third threshold, the third threshold being a preset fixed value; and when a third target image frame is obtained through rendering, the first threshold is the same as the third threshold, the third target image frame is located before the first target image frame, and a rendering manner of the third target image frame is determined based on a similarity between image frames; or when a third target image frame is obtained by multiplexing an image frame, the first threshold is a difference between the third threshold and a fourth threshold, and the fourth threshold is a preset fixed value.
Regarding claim 6, Prior arts of record taken alone or in combination fails to reasonably disclose or suggest, the method according to claim 1, further comprising: determining target duration, wherein the target duration is a difference between display duration of two image frames and duration of the first target image frame obtained through calculation; and stopping running a rendering thread, wherein duration in which the rendering thread does not run is the target duration, the rendering thread providing for rendering based on a rendering instruction to obtain an image frame.
Regarding claim 7, Prior arts of record taken alone or in combination fails to reasonably disclose or suggest, the method according to claim 1, further comprising: performing zoom-out processing on the first image frame and the second image frame to obtain a zoom-out first image frame and a zoom-out second image frame; and calculating a similarity between the zoom-out first image frame and the zoom-out second image frame to obtain the similarity between the first image frame and the second image frame.
Regarding claims 9-14, although wording is different, the material is substantively similar to the claims 2-7 respectively as discussed above and are hence objected.
Regarding claims 18-22, although wording is different, the material is substantively similar to the claims 2-6 respectively as discussed above and are hence objected.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NURUN FLORA whose telephone number is (571)272-5742. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 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, Jason Chan can be reached at (571) 272-3022. 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.
/NURUN FLORA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2619