DETAILED ACTION
[1] Remarks
I. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
II. Claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined, where claims 1-4, 7-9, 13-16, 18-20 is/are rejected and claim 5-6, 10-12 and 17 is/are objected to. Explanations will be provided below.
III. Inventor and/or assignee search were performed and determined no double patenting rejection(s) is/are necessary.
IV. Patent eligibility (updated in 2019) shown by the following: Claims 1-20 pass patent eligibility test because there is/are no limitation or a combination of limitations amounting to an abstract idea. Also, the following limitation or the combinations of the limitations: “determining, from the textual content, intersecting vector paths comprising one or more vector paths of the vector image that intersect with the bounding box; and filtering the intersecting vector paths to determine text vector paths outlining the textual content by removing, from the intersecting vector paths, one or more intersecting vector paths corresponding to non-textual elements” effects a transformation or a reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing / adds a specific limitation(s) other than what is well-understood, routine and conventional in the field, or adding unconventional steps that confine the claim to a particular useful application and providing improvements to the technical field of text recognition, which recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and amounting significant more.
[2] Claim Interpretation
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.
Claim(s) 9-15 are not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA U.S.C. 112 6th paragraph because of the following reason(s): limitations are modified by sufficient structure or material for performing the claimed function.
Claim(s) 1-8 and 16-20 do not require 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA U.S.C. 112 6th paragraph interpretation because they are method claims and / or they are CRM claims.
Upon examination of the specification and claims, the examiner has determined, under the best understanding of the scope of the claim(s), rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a)/(b) is not necessitated because of the following reasons: sufficient support are provided in the written description / drawings of the invention.
[3] Grounds of Rejection
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
1. 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.
2. Claims 1-4, 7-9, 13-16, 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adegeest (US 5872573) in view of Kataoka (US 20130346443).
Regarding claim 1, Adegeest discloses a computer-implemented method comprising:
extracting, from a vector image word “more” have a bounding box enclosed, where 203, 225, 233, and 217 are extracted textual content);
determining, from the textual content, intersecting vector paths comprising one or more vector paths of the vector image that intersect with the bounding box (see figure 2a illustration below and 203, 225, 233, and 217 are the additional extracted textual content); and
PNG
media_image1.png
229
653
media_image1.png
Greyscale
.
filtering the intersecting vector paths to determine text vector paths outlining the textual content by removing, from the intersecting vector paths, one or more intersecting vector paths corresponding to non-textual elements (see figure 2a to figure 7a, the text vector paths outlining textual content, where the non-textual elements are removed):
PNG
media_image2.png
410
1384
media_image2.png
Greyscale
.
Adegeest is silent in disclosing extracting, from a vector image using an optical character recognition (OCR) model, textual content and a bounding box corresponding to the textual content.
Kataoka discloses extracting, from a vector image using an optical character recognition (OCR) model, textual content and a bounding box corresponding to the textual content (see paragraph 291, scanner 3412 optically reads an image and takes in the image data into the computer, the scanner 3412 may have an optical character reader, OCR, function as well, the printer 3413 prints image data and text data).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include extracting, from a vector image using an optical character recognition (OCR) model because extracting both textual content and its corresponding bounding box from a vector image bridges the gap between raw visual data and structured, actionable information, which allows systems to convert static visuals into fully searchable, datasets.
Regarding claim 2, Adegeest discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein filtering the intersecting vector paths comprises removing the one or more intersecting vector paths according to one or more of:
a background constraint comprising a comparison of areas of the intersecting vector paths with an area of the bounding box (see column 8, lines 10-20, the edging clip mask, the subtraction operation is read as the comparing step, where the fill area is read as the background);
a coverage constraint comprising a comparison of areas of the intersecting vector paths with a character area associated with a character within the textual content (see column 8, lines 10-20, the edging clip mask, the subtraction operation is read as the comparing step, where CT-mask is read as the text); or
a path overlap constraint comprising a comparison of the areas of the intersecting vector paths with areas of overlap of the intersecting vector paths with the bounding box (see column 8, lines 10-20, the edging clip mask, the subtraction operation is read as the comparing step, the union operation includes and is read as the intersection):
PNG
media_image3.png
238
827
media_image3.png
Greyscale
.
Regarding claim 3, Adegeest discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein filtering the intersecting vector paths comprises removing the one or more intersecting vector paths based on a content aware constraint comprising a comparison of the intersecting vector paths with content metadata of character vectors (see column 8, lines 10-20, the edging clip mask, the subtraction operation is read as the comparing step, where the indices are read as i and j are read as the metadata).
Regarding claim 4, Adegeest discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising:
providing, for display within a graphical user interface of a client device, an option to select the textual content (see column 7, lines 3-8, the table is displayed to the user, and the user may now manually select any text color or colors to be excluded from the enhancing operation, any additional line art objects such as logos to be included for enhancement also may be selected in this dialog session, where having this table displayed to the user is through an user interface); and
selecting, in response to a single input from the client device selecting the textual content, the text vector paths for display within the graphical user interface of the client device (see column 7, lines 3-5, “the user may now manually select any text color or colors to be excluded from the enhancing operation”).
Regarding claim 7, Adegeest discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein filtering the intersecting vector paths further comprises: retaining a first set of vector paths comprising the one or more vector paths with one or more of a left edge or a right edge within a horizontal span of the bounding box (see figure 2b illustration below); and retaining a second set of vector paths comprising the one or more vector paths with one or more of a top edge or a bottom edge within a vertical span of the bounding box (see figure 2b, the bottom edge is retained).
PNG
media_image4.png
171
491
media_image4.png
Greyscale
.
Regarding claim 8, Adegeest discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein extracting the textual content further comprises extracting textual content corresponding to a word within the vector image (see figure 2b to figure 8).
PNG
media_image5.png
188
448
media_image5.png
Greyscale
.
Regarding claim 9, Adegeest discloses a system comprising: one or more memory devices; and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memory devices, the one or more processors configured to cause the system to:
determine a bounding box corresponding to textual content within a vector image (see figure 2a, the word “more” have a bounding box enclosed, where 203, 225, 233, and 217 are extracted textual content);
identify a plurality of vector paths depicted in the vector image (see figure 2a illustration below and 203, 225, 233, and 217 are the additional extracted textual content); and
PNG
media_image1.png
229
653
media_image1.png
Greyscale
.
Adegeest is silent in disclosing generate, from the plurality of vector paths, one or more sets of sorted vector paths based on locations of the plurality of vector paths within the vector image; and determine, using a binary search on the one or more sets of sorted vector paths, intersecting vector paths that intersect the bounding box of the textual content.
Kataoka discloses
generate, from the plurality of vector paths, one or more sets of sorted vector paths based on locations of the plurality of vector paths within the vector image (see paragraph 143, The "higher-order character code" refers to a character group that includes characters at a predetermined number of highest ranks, for example, the highest 1,024 ranks, identified as the result of the tabulation of the number of appearances of each of the characters described in the object file group, see figure 1 illustration, where the bounding box indicates the locations of the texts); and
determine, using a binary search on the one or more sets of sorted vector paths, intersecting vector paths that intersect the bounding box of the textual content (see figure 1 illustration below, also see paragraph 143, computer executes a binary search in a higher-order character code structure 500 for the character "" at the head of the character string to be searched for "", the "higher-order character code structure 500" is a data structure that stores therein a higher-order character code "e#" and the pointer to its leaf L#):
PNG
media_image6.png
181
433
media_image6.png
Greyscale
.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include determine, using a binary search on the one or more sets of sorted vector paths, intersecting vector paths that intersect the bounding box of the textual content in order to isolate textual boundaries from complex vector-based background graphics, clipping paths, or shapes which improves character recognition. Also if the bounding boxes do not intersect, the complex underlying paths cannot possibly intersect saving computational power.
Regarding claim 13, Adegeest discloses the system of claim 9, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to filter the intersecting vector paths by:
determining a content aware constraint for a character of the textual content based on comparing a number of the intersecting vector paths to a number of predicted vector paths box (see column 8, lines 10-20, the edging clip mask, the subtraction operation is read as the comparing step, the union operation includes and is read as the intersection):
PNG
media_image3.png
238
827
media_image3.png
Greyscale
.
and filtering the intersecting vector paths by removing vector paths of the intersecting vector paths that do not satisfy the content aware constraint (see figure 2b to figure 7a illustration below):
PNG
media_image7.png
410
1384
media_image7.png
Greyscale
.
Regarding claim 14, Adegeest discloses the system of claim 9, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to cause the system to:
provide, for display within a graphical user interface of a client device, an option to select text vector paths outlining the textual content (see column 7, lines 3-8, the table is displayed to the user, and the user may now manually select any text color or colors to be excluded from the enhancing operation, any additional line art objects such as logos to be included for enhancement also may be selected in this dialog session, where having this table displayed to the user is through an user interface);
filter the intersecting vector paths to determine the text vector paths outlining the textual content by removing one or more of the intersecting vector paths corresponding to non-textual elements see figure 2a illustration below and 203, 225, 233, and 217 are the additional extracted textual content); and
PNG
media_image1.png
229
653
media_image1.png
Greyscale
.
provide, in response to an input from the client device, the text vector paths outlining the textual content for display within the graphical user interface of the client device (see column 7, lines 3-14, table is displayed to the user, and the user may now manually select any text color or colors to be excluded from the enhancing operation, where the objects such as logos to be included for enhancement also may be selected in this dialog session. In addition, the user may select the color desired for the enhancing edge to be different from the default color, or, in an improved embodiment, the user may change the default color for this enhancing edge, typically white. In addition, the user can change the toggle from excluding text and other selections which are in the default color to including such text and other selected objects).
Regarding claim 15, Adegeest discloses the system of claim 9, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to determine the intersecting vector paths by selecting, from the one or more sets of sorted vector paths, at least one intersecting vector path comprising one or more of a left edge, a right edge, a bottom edge, or a top edge positioned within the bounding box (see figure 2b illustration below):
PNG
media_image8.png
199
470
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16 see the rationale and rejection for claims 1 and 2. Also see column 11, lines 24-25 which include a processor.
Regarding claim 18 see the rationale and rejection for claims 1.
Regarding claim 19, see the rationale and rejection for claims 7 and 15.
Regarding claim 20, see the rationale and rejection for claim 3.
[4] Claim Objections
Claim(s) 5-6, 10-12 and 17 is/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.
With regards to claim 5, the examiner cannot find any applicable prior art providing teachings for the following limitation(s): “the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein determining the intersecting vector paths further comprises: generating, from the one or more vector paths, one or more sets of sorted vector paths based on horizontal positions and vertical positions of the one or more vector paths within the vector image; and selecting the intersecting vector paths using a binary search on the one or more sets of sorted vector paths” in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 1.
Claim(s) 6 is/are objected as well because it is dependent on a claim with allowable subject matter.
Regarding claim 6, Adegeest discloses
PNG
media_image3.png
238
827
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, the examiner cannot find any applicable prior art providing teachings for the following limitation(s): the system of claim 9, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to filter the intersecting vector paths by: determining a minimum coverage constraint for a character of the textual content based on a threshold character area for the character; and filtering the intersecting vector paths by removing vector paths of the intersecting vector paths that do not satisfy the minimum coverage constraint; in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 9.
Adegeest discloses the system of claim 9, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to filter the intersecting vector paths by:
determining a minimum coverage constraint for a character of the textual content
PNG
media_image9.png
153
372
media_image9.png
Greyscale
filtering the intersecting vector paths by removing vector paths of the intersecting vector paths
PNG
media_image2.png
410
1384
media_image2.png
Greyscale
.
Regarding claim 11, the examiner cannot find any applicable prior art providing teachings for the following limitation(s): “the system of claim 9, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to filter the intersecting vector paths by: determining a maximum coverage constraint for a character within the textual content based on a threshold character area for the character; and filtering the intersecting vector paths by removing vector paths of the intersecting vector paths that do not satisfy the maximum coverage constraint” in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 9.
Adegeest discloses the system of claim 9, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to filter the intersecting vector paths by:
filtering the intersecting vector paths by removing vector paths of the intersecting vector paths
PNG
media_image2.png
410
1384
media_image2.png
Greyscale
.
Claim 12 is objected because they are dependent to an objected claim with allowable subject matter.
Regarding claim 17, the examiner cannot find any applicable prior art providing teachings for the following limitation(s): “the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 16, wherein filtering the set of intersecting vector paths comprises removing one or more intersecting vector paths wherein: the area of the one or more intersecting vector paths is less than a first threshold character area corresponding to the bounding box; or the area of the one or more intersecting vector paths is more than a second threshold character area corresponding to the bounding box” in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 1.
Kataoka discloses computer determines whether the total occurrence probability is less than or equal to one, where a threshold value t, if it is not desired to provide the threshold value t, t=1 may be used, if less than the threshold value t, a shift to correction B is made, if greater than or equal to the threshold value t and less than or equal to one, the number of leaves at each compression code length at this point is fixed without shifting to the correction B.
Kataoka is silent in disclosing the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 16, wherein filtering the set of intersecting vector paths comprises removing one or more intersecting vector paths wherein: the area of the one or more intersecting vector paths is less than a first threshold character area corresponding to the bounding box; or the area of the one or more intersecting vector paths is more than a second threshold character area corresponding to the bounding box.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX LIEW (duty station is located in New York City) whose telephone number is (571)272-8623 (FAX 571-273-8623), cell (917)763-1192 or email alexa.liew@uspto.gov. Please note the examiner cannot reply through email unless an internet communication authorization is provided by the applicant. The examiner can be reached anytime.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, MISTRY ONEAL R, can be reached on (313)446-4912. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ALEX KOK S LIEW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2674 Telephone: 571-272-8623
Date: 5/23/26
Prosecution Insights