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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 9/2/2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 12, and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities: all of these claims recite limitation, inter alia,
“the frame being transformable by operation of points at four corners of the frame”
Should rather be recited as,
“the frame being transformable by operation on points at four corners of the frame”
This is because, a person of ordinary skill in the art might understand that the intended meaning is that the frame is transformed through user manipulation of control points located at its four corners. The problem is grammatical: ordinarily the user performs an operation on the points; the points themselves aren't performing the operation.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 11 is 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.
Claim 11 recites, “displaying an image stored in a storage of the smartphone” and subsequently recites “receiving selection of an image from the displayed image,” followed by performing the cut-out process on “the selected image.”
The meaning of “an image from the displayed image” is unclear because the preceding limitation establishes a single displayed image, rather than a plurality of images or other collection from which an image could be selected. Consequently, it is unclear how a separate “an image” is selected from the previously recited “displayed image.” The language can reasonably be understood as requiring selection of the displayed image itself, selection of an image contained within the displayed image, or, alternatively, selection of one image from a plurality of images intended to be displayed but not actually recited in the claim.
This ambiguity also makes the subsequent recitation of “the selected image” unclear because it cannot be determined with reasonable certainty which image constitutes the selected image upon which the cut-out process is performed. Accordingly, the relationship between “an image,” “the displayed image,” and “the selected image” cannot be determined with reasonable certainty from the language of the claim, rendering the scope of claim 11 indefinite.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-10, and 12-15 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
In the closest prior art, Nepomniachtchi et al. (US 20130287265 A1) discloses,
Regarding claim 2, a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program (¶0400) for causing a smartphone (100, fig. 1, ¶0079) to perform a method (title, abstract), the method comprising:
displaying on a display of the smartphone an image captured by a camera of the smartphone and a frame, the frame being displayed in a state where the captured image is displayed (figs. 8, 11, 22a, 28-31, 33, 35), and the frame being transformable by operation of points at four corners of the frame (figs. 8-10, ¶0029, ¶0142, ¶0152);
performing a cut-out process on the captured image using the frame (¶0316).
However, Nepomniachtchi is not found disclosing expressly the limitation of,
displaying a first object, a second object and a third object;
displaying, upon selection of the first object, a first image obtained by performing first image processing;
displaying, upon selection of the second object, a second image obtained by performing second image processing; and
displaying, upon selection of the third object, an image obtained by performing the cut-out process on the captured image,
wherein the second object is displayed between the first object and the third object.
Claims 12-15 also disclose similar allowable features within claims’ scope making them allowable.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claim 11 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Conclusion
The prior and/or pertinent art(s) made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, are – Roach et al. (US 20170270508 A1), Semenov (US 9160946 B1), Beato et al. (US 20140368891 A1), KASUYA et al. (US 20100322519 A1) – who disclose different document processing algorithms of interest, wherein the document is captured by a camera and potentially a camera in a smartphone.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAHBAZ NAZRUL whose telephone number is (571)270-1467. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 9.30 am-3 pm, 6.30 pm-9 pm, F: 9.30 am-1.30 pm, 4 pm-8 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, Lin Ye can be reached on 571-272-7372. 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.
/SHAHBAZ NAZRUL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2638
Prosecution Insights