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 .
Application Status
This office action is responsive to the amendments filed on 03/17/2026.
The previous 35 USC 112 rejection is withdrawn in view of the Applicant’s amendments. However, please note a new 35 USC 112 rejection is now pending in view of the Applicant’s newly entered amendments.
This action has been made FINAL.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55 (Priority Date: 01/27/2022).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/10/2026 is being considered by the examiner. A signed IDS is hereby attached.
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 1-20 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.
Claims 1, 8 and 10 recites “determining a range in accordance with a predetermined condition.” It is unclear to the examiner how the determination is made. Therefore, this claim is considered as indefinite.
The dependent claims are rejected for depending upon a rejected base claim.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant alleged the following: “Applicant respectfully submits that Shigeta fails to disclose each and every feature of the pending independent claims. For example, Shigeta fails to disclose "calculat[ing] a feature value corresponding to an application of the image data on a basis of the image data," determin[ing] a range in accordance with a predetermined condition," "performing, on the determined range, image processing for hiding information within the determined range," or that "the determined range subjected to the image processing is determined on a basis of the predetermined condition corresponding to the application of the image data and the calculated feature value." Shigeta instead merely discloses performing predetermined image processing and fails to disclose any of the aforementioned claim features. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests reconsideration and withdrawal of the above anticipation rejection.” The examiner is not persuaded. The combination of Shigeta and Liu discloses the Applicant’s newly amended claim language. More specifically, the combination of Shigeta and Liu discloses the following:
"calculat[ing] a feature value corresponding to an application of the image data on a basis of the image data," (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0075; 0079-00811; 0092; 0101; 0125)
“determin[ing] a range in accordance with a predetermined condition," (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0064-0067; 0079-00812; 0092; 0125)
"performing, on the determined range, image processing for hiding information within the determined range," (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-00813; 0092; 0125; 0138-0140)
"the determined range subjected to the image processing is determined on a basis of the predetermined condition corresponding to the application of the image data and the calculated feature value." (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0064-0067; 0079-00814; 0092; 0125; 0138-0140)
MPEP § 2106 states Office personnel are to give claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure. In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 1054-55, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027-28 (Fed Cir. 1997). Accordingly, the examiner maintains the rejection.
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) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shigeta, US Patent Application Publication No.: 20150288883 in view of Liu, US 20190278985.
Claim 1:
Shigeta discloses an image processing apparatus (See Shigeta Abstract; Paragraph 0001) but fails to disclose calculate a feature value. However, Liu discloses this feature in paragraphs 0075; 0101. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Shigeta by the teachings of Liu by incorporating a calculated feature value, thereby allowing improved image processing, more efficiently (See Liu Abstract). In addition, both of the references teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor, such as, image processing. This close relation between both of the references highly suggests an expectation of success.
As modified:
The combination of Shigeta and Liu discloses the following:
at least one memory storing processing instructions (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0232-0234);
and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to (See Shigeta Paragraph 0245):
acquire image data (See Shigeta Paragraph 00645);
calculate a feature value (See Liu Paragraphs 0075; 0101) corresponding to an application of the image data on a basis of the image data (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-00816; 0092; 0125);
determine a range (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-00817; 0092; 0125) in accordance with a predetermined condition (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0064-00678);
and perform, on the determined range (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-00819; 0092; 0125), image processing for hiding information (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0138-014010) within the determined range (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-008111; 0092; 0125), wherein the determined range (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-008112; 0092; 0125) subjected to the image processing (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-008113; 0092; 0125) is determined on a basis of the predetermined condition (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0064-006714) corresponding to the application of the image data and the calculated feature value (See Liu Paragraphs 0075; 0101).
Claim 2:
The combination of Shigeta and Liu discloses specify the determined range (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-008115; 0092; 0125) subjected to the image processing using a result of skeleton recognition (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-008116; 0125) and perform the image processing on the specified range (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-008117; 0092; 0125).
Claim 3:
The combination of Shigeta and Liu discloses perform the image processing on the determined range (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-008118; 0092; 0125) in accordance with an application of the image data (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-0081; 0116; 0125).
Claim 4:
The combination of Shigeta and Liu discloses determine the determined range (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-008119; 0092; 0125) subjected to the image processing (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-008120; 0125) in accordance with the predetermined condition (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0064-0067); and perform the image processing on the determined range (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-008121; 0092; 0125) corresponding to a result of the determination (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-008122; 0125).
Claim 5:
The combination of Shigeta and Liu discloses determine the determined range (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-008123; 0092; 0125) subjected to the image processing based on an application of the image data (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-008124; 0116; 0125).
Claim 6:
The combination of Shigeta and Liu discloses calculate a predetermined feature value based on the image data (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0097-009925); and determine the determined range (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-008126; 0092; 0125) subjected to the image processing based on the calculated feature value (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0097-009927).
Claim 7:
The combination of Shigeta and Liu discloses determine the determined range (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-008128; 0092; 0125) subjected to the image processing for each person within the image data (See Shigeta Paragraphs 0079-008129; 0116; 0125).
Claims 8 and 9:
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected on the same basis as claims 1 and 2.
Claim 10:
Claim 10 is rejected on the same basis as claim 1.
Claims 11-15:
Claims 11-15 is rejected on the same basis as claims 3-7.
Claims 16-20:
Claims 16-20 is rejected on the same basis as claims 2-6.
Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wang, US 20220058376 discloses relates to the field of network technologies, and in particular, to a method for transmitting face image data, a method for transferring value, apparatuses, an electronic device, and a storage medium.
Conclusion
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHEREE N BROWN whose telephone number is (571)272-4229. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30-2:00 PM EST.
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, SAID BROOME can be reached at (571) 272-2931. 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.
/SHEREE N BROWN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2612 April 16, 2026
1 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
2 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
3 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
4 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
5 Paragraph 0064 recites “a captured image”.
6 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
7 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
8 Paragraphs 0064-0067 recites “identifies a region including the hand (an example of the detection target) based on a result of an edge detection process for the captured image or a result of a process of detecting a predetermined color, such as a skin color, for the captured image, to detect the position and the size of the hand from the captured image.”
9 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
10 Paragraphs 0138-0140 recites “applying a mask (i.e. hide) to a captured image”.
11 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
12 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
13 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
14 Paragraphs 0064-0067 recites “identifies a region including the hand (an example of the detection target) based on a result of an edge detection process for the captured image or a result of a process of detecting a predetermined color, such as a skin color, for the captured image, to detect the position and the size of the hand from the captured image.”
15 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
16 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
17 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
18 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
19 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
20 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
21 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
22 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
23 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
24 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
25 Paragraphs 0097-0099 recites “calculation of the values” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
26 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
27 Paragraphs 0097-0099 recites “calculation of the values” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
28 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
29 Paragraph 0081 recites “the image processing apparatus according to the present embodiment sets the manipulation target region by estimating an operating range of the user from the skeleton information” in which correlates to the Applicant’s claim language.
Prosecution Insights