CTNF 18/833,209 CTNF 79941 DETAILED ACTION 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: “a recognition unit that performs…the recognition processing” in claim 1. “a reset determination unit that resets” in claim 3. “a recognition unit that performs…the recognition processing” in claim 20; Claim 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claims 1-15,18 and 19 and 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,12,15,16,17,18 and 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated 1 by Huang et al. (US 2021/0192756 A1) . 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim(s) 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,12,15,16,17,18 and 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated 2 by Huang et al. (US 2021/0192756 A1) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (US 2021/0192756 A1) in view of 山本 啓太郎 et al. (Google Translate: Keitaro Yamamoto) (JP 6635222 B1) with SEARCH machine translation : 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (US 2021/0192756 A1) in view of Hofman et al. (US 2008/0063280 A1 ): 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (US 2021/0192756 A1) in view of Hofman et al. (US 2008/0063280 A1) as applied in claim 13 further in view of Lee et al. (US 2021/0133492 A1) : 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation 07-30-03 AIA 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. 07-30-05 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. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. 07-30-06 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: “a recognition unit that performs…the recognition processing” in claim 1. “a reset determination unit that resets” in claim 3. “a recognition unit that performs…the recognition processing” in claim 20. 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: Specification’s CPU with algorithms under 35 USC 112(f) PNG media_image1.png 619 749 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 925 554 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 1123 614 media_image3.png Greyscale 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 § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claim 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because claim 20’s “program” 3 (i.e., a sequence or a “wireless” 4 signal medium to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of applicant’s disclosure) does not fall in the four categories (process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter) of patent eligible subject matter. Claims 1-15,18 and 19 and 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. PNG media_image4.png 729 578 media_image4.png Greyscale Step 0: establish broadest reasonable interpretation, as indicated in the footnotes; Step 1: claim 1 is a machine; claim 19 a process; claim 20 is non-statutory subject matter; Step 2A, prong 1: The claim(s) recite(s) an abstract idea: organizing human activity: --using only a part of data--: [Claim 1] A signal processing apparatus comprising a recognition unit that performs, when performing recognition 5 processing 6 for each frame of a plurality of frames, the recognition processing, for at least a part of the frames, using 7 only a part of data 8 in an entire frame. Step 2A, prong 2:This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements (such as the clamed “signal processing apparatus” “recognition unit” “performing recognition processing”) is not improving a technical field (“cost reduction in recognition processing” 9 ) via applicant’s disclosure [0001]: PNG media_image5.png 355 871 media_image5.png Greyscale In contrast, claim 16 (including 17 depending on claim 16) reflects this computer cost reduction (i.e. an improvement under 35 USC 101) in recognition processing in view of applicant’s disclosure at [0022][0023]: [Claim 16] The signal processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the recognition unit uses a recognition result of each frame as an input for a next frame to recurrently connect recognition processing for each frame . [Claim 17] The signal processing apparatus according to claim 16, wherein the recognition unit performs the recognition processing, for second and subsequent frames among the plurality of frames, using a learning model smaller than a learning model used for an initial frame. [0022] A CNN model 51 that performs the recognition processing on the frame t performs the recognition processing on the data of the frame t, and outputs the recognition result of the frame t to a CNN model 51 that performs the recognition processing on the next frame t+1. The CNN model 51 that performs the recognition processing on the frame t+1 performs the recognition processing on the data of the frame t+1 with reference to the recognition result of the frame t, and outputs the recognition result of the frame t+1 to a CNN model 51 that performs the recognition processing on the next frame t+2. [0023] In such a way, since the recognition processing for each frame is connected recurrently, the recognition performance can be further improved as the number of frames to be processed increases. PNG media_image6.png 990 756 media_image6.png Greyscale PNG media_image6.png 990 756 media_image6.png Greyscale PNG media_image7.png 1260 986 media_image7.png Greyscale PNG media_image8.png 1261 925 media_image8.png Greyscale PNG media_image9.png 1263 922 media_image9.png Greyscale PNG media_image10.png 636 923 media_image10.png Greyscale Step 2B The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements (such as the clamed “signal processing apparatus” “recognition unit” “performing recognition processing”) that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements individually or in combination with the abstract adhere to the conventional in view of applicant’s disclosure’s background: PNG media_image11.png 955 876 media_image11.png Greyscale Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-12-aia AIA (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. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,12,15,16,17,18 and 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated 10 by Huang et al. (US 2021/0192756 A1) . 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim(s) 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,12,15,16,17,18 and 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated 11 by Huang et al. (US 2021/0192756 A1) . PNG media_image12.png 724 419 media_image12.png Greyscale Re [Claim 1] , Huang discloses A signal processing apparatus comprising a recognition unit (fig. 8:840: “Processor” plus algorithms: figs. 4,9,10,11) that performs, when performing recognition processing for each frame of a plurality of frames, the recognition processing, for at least a part of the frames (or likewise “perform object recognition using an object detection scheme or a partitioned object detection scheme for processing frames” [0033] 2 nd S), using only (or likewise “for 12 each…frame”) a part (understood given a frame from a plurality of “video”, [0040] last S, frames) of data in an entire frame (“entire frame” [0064] last S). Re [Claim 2] , Huang discloses The signal processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the recognition unit performs the recognition processing using all 13 (or likewise “for 14 each…frame”) of the data for an initial frame (or “a first frame (e.g., object detection for an initial frame)” [0066] 1 st S) among the plurality of frames. Re [Claim 3] , Huang discloses The signal processing apparatus according to claim 2, further comprising a reset determination unit that resets a number of frames counted from the initial frame when a predetermined condition is satisfied (or likewise “ If the current frame is the 11th frame (e.g., Count==11), the device 105 may reset the frame counter to ‘1’ at 440, for example, as part of partition control for deciding which scale to use for object detection. If the current frame is, for example, the 10th frame or earlier (e.g., Count≠11), the device 105 may proceed to 445.” [0090] last Ss), wherein upon reset by the reset determination unit, the recognition unit performs the recognition processing with a next frame as the initial frame (or likewise “a next frame…with respect to...the previous frame” “as the starting point for a new 15 processing cycle” [0057]). Re [Claim 4] , Huang discloses The signal processing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the predetermined condition is that the number of frames exceeds a predetermined number (or likewise “11” via said “If the current frame is the 11th frame (e.g., Count==11), the device 105 may reset the frame counter to ‘1’ at 440, for example, as part of partition control for deciding which scale to use for object detection. If the current frame is, for example, the 10th frame or earlier (e.g., Count≠11), the device 105 may proceed to 445.” [0090] last Ss). Re [Claim 5] , Huang discloses The signal processing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the predetermined condition is that a magnitude (or likewise “ 11 ” via said “If the current frame is the 11th frame (e.g., Count== 11 ), the device 105 may reset the frame counter to ‘1’ at 440, for example, as part of partition control for deciding which scale to use for object detection. If the current frame is, for example, the 10th frame or earlier (e.g., Count≠11), the device 105 may proceed to 445.” [0090] last Ss) of a change between a past recognition result and a current recognition result (or likewise “For example, the device 105 may estimate differences in image pixels (e.g., changes in position of each image pixel) between adjacent frames in a sequence of frames (e.g., a sequence of images).” [0056] 4 th S) exceeds a threshold (or likewise “ 11 ” via said “If the current frame is the 11th frame (e.g., Count== 11 ), the device 105 may reset the frame counter to ‘1’ at 440, for example, as part of partition control for deciding which scale to use for object detection. If the current frame is, for example, the 10th frame or earlier (e.g., Count≠11), the device 105 may proceed to 445.” [0090] last Ss). Re [Claim 6] , Huang discloses The signal processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the recognition unit performs the recognition processing using only (or said likewise “for 16 each…frame”) a part (said understood given a frame from a plurality of “video”, [0040] last S, frames) of bits of the data (or likewise “[0155] Information and signals described herein may be represented using any of a variety of different technologies and techniques. For example, data, instructions, commands, information, signals, bits , symbols, and chips that may be referenced throughout the description may be represented by voltages, currents, electromagnetic waves, magnetic fields or particles, optical fields or particles, or any combination thereof.”). Re [Claim 7] , Huang discloses The signal processing apparatus according to claim 6, wherein the recognition unit performs the recognition processing using data representing the data with a part (said understood given a frame from a plurality of “video”, [0040] last S, frames) of bits of the data (or said likewise “[0155] Information and signals described herein may be represented using any of a variety of different technologies and techniques. For example, data, instructions, commands, information, signals, bits , symbols, and chips that may be referenced throughout the description may be represented by voltages, currents, electromagnetic waves, magnetic fields or particles, optical fields or particles, or any combination thereof.”) . Re [Claim 8], Huang discloses The signal processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the recognition unit performs the recognition processing using only (or said likewise “for 17 each…frame”) a part (said understood given a frame from a plurality of “video”, [0040] last S, frames) of colors (or likewise “For example, the multimedia manager 135 may perform white balancing, cropping, scaling (e.g., multimedia compression), adjusting a resolution, multimedia stitching, color processing” [0041] 2 nd S) of the data. Re [Claim 9] , Huang discloses The signal processing apparatus according to claim 8, wherein the part of colors is any one of Y, Cb, Cr, R, G, B, and GRAY (or likewise “For example, the multimedia manager 135 may perform white balancing, cropping, scaling (e.g., multimedia compression), adjusting a resolution, multimedia stitching, color 18 processing” [0041] 2 nd S). Re [Claim 10] , Huang discloses The signal processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the recognition unit performs the recognition processing using only (or said likewise “for 19 each…frame”) a part (said understood given a frame from a plurality of “video”, [0040] last S, frames) of pixels (or likewise “Image pixels” [0056] 4 th S) of the data. Re [Claim 12] , Huang discloses The signal processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the recognition unit performs the recognition processing using only (or said likewise “for 20 each…frame”) a part (said understood given a frame from a plurality of “video”, [0040] last S, frames) of information of the data, the information including data before signal processing is performed thereon (or said likewise “a next frame…with respect to...the previous frame” “as the starting point for a new 21 processing cycle” [0057]). Re [Claim 15] , Huang discloses The signal processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the recognition unit performs the recognition processing using only a difference , which is a part of the data, 22 between the frame and a past frame captured before the frame (or likewise “the device 105 may estimate differences in image pixels (e.g., changes in position of each image pixel) between adjacent frames in a sequence of frames (e.g., a sequence of images)” [0056] 4 th S). Re [Claim 16] , Huang discloses The signal processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the recognition unit uses a recognition result (or likewise “the device 105 may output a result (e.g., candidate bounding boxes 321-a and 321-b) indicating the device 105 has detected candidate objects 320-a and 320-b based on the medium scale. For example, the device 105 may output Tar Boxes' associated with the candidate objects 320-a and 320-b detected by the device 105.” [0079] last S) of each frame as an input for a next frame (or likewise said “ For example, for a next frame of the sequence of frames, the device 105 at 210 may calculate optical flow with respect to results from the previous frame (e.g., based on image pixels associated with a candidate object in the previous frame, compared to image pixels associated with the candidate object in the next frame).” [0057] penult S) to recurrently 23 connect (or attach or unify) recognition processing for each frame (or likewise “the motion estimation, the tuning, the partitioned object detection, and the tracking logic may be repeated or iterated over 24 multiple frames” [0072] 2 nd S). Re [Claim 17] ,Huang discloses The signal processing apparatus according to claim 16, wherein the recognition unit performs the recognition processing, for second and subsequent frames among the plurality of frames, using a learning model smaller than a learning model (“employing a machine learning network with … model size… reduced.” [0048] 3 rd S) used for an initial frame. Re [Claim 18] , Huang discloses The signal processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the recognition unit performs the recognition processing using a convolutional neural network (CNN) (or likewise “a convolutional neural network” [0042] 2 nd S). Claim 19 is rejected like claim 1: Re [Claim 19], Huang discloses A signal processing method performed by a signal processing apparatus, comprising performing, when performing recognition processing for each frame of a plurality of frames, the recognition processing , for at least a part of the frames, 25 using only a part of data in an entire frame. Claim 20 is rejected like claim 1: Re [Claim 20], Huang discloses A program that causes a computer to function as a recognition unit that performs, when performing recognition processing for each frame of a plurality of frames, the recognition processing, for at least a part of the frames, using only a part of data in an entire frame . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (US 2021/0192756 A1) in view of 山本 啓太郎 et al. (Google Translate: Keitaro Yamamoto) (JP 6635222 B1) with SEARCH machine translation: PNG media_image13.png 724 484 media_image13.png Greyscale Re [Claim 11], Huang teaches The signal processing apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the recognition unit performs the recognition processing using only pixels (or said likewise “Image pixels” [0056] 4 th S) obtained by thinning out the data. Huang does not teach the difference of claim 11 of: thinning out ( the data ) 26 . Yamamoto teach the difference of claim 11 of: thinning out (or likewise “data thinned out”, pg. 29, penult txt blk) ( the data ) 27 . Since Huang teaches data and recognition thereof, one of skill in data recognition can make Huang’s be as Yamamoto’s seeing in the change “the recognition processing can be further shortened and power consumption can be reduced”, Yamamoto, 3 rd txt blk . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (US 2021/0192756 A1) in view of Hofman et al. (US 2008/0063280 A1): PNG media_image14.png 724 484 media_image14.png Greyscale Re [Claim 13] , Huang teaches The signal processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the recognition unit performs the recognition processing using (or said likewise “for 28 each…frame”) a part of the data including a plurality of pieces of data (said understood given a frame from a plurality of “video”, [0040] last S, frames) obtained by different types of (or likewise “various types of” [0002] 1 st S) exposure . Huang does not teach the difference of claim 13 of: ( different type of ) 29 exposure. Hofman teach the difference of claim 13 of: ( different type of ) 30 exposure (or likewise “exposures” [0033]). Since Huang teaches capturing images, one of skill in the art of capturing images can make Huang’s be as Hofman’s seeing in the change “Different types of exposures and different illumination spectrums, are employed in order to achieve the best lighting parameters possible...with fast and accurate images to…perform a highly accurate identification” [0033] last S & [0056] last S & [0057] 1 st S . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (US 2021/0192756 A1) in view of Hofman et al. (US 2008/0063280 A1) as applied in claim 13 further in view of Lee et al. (US 2021/0133492 A1): PNG media_image15.png 724 503 media_image15.png Greyscale Re [Claim 14] , Huang of the combination of Huang,Hofman teaches The signal processing apparatus according to claim 13, wherein the part is any one of high exposure data, medium exposure data, and low exposure data. Huang of the combination of Huang,Hofman does not teach the difference of claim 14 of: any one of high ( exposure ) 31 …medium ( exposure )…low ( exposure ). Lee teach the difference of claim 14 of: any one of high ( exposure ) 32 …medium ( exposure )…low ( exposure ) (or likewise “ In FIG. 2B, the different color frames represent low exposure, mid exposure, high exposure and IR imaging.” [0038] 4 th S: PNG media_image16.png 678 1072 media_image16.png Greyscale ). Since Huang of the combination of Huang,Hofman teaches exposure, one of skill in the art of exposure can make Huang’s of the combination of Huang,Hofman be as Lee’s seeing in the change “a better chance to have a correct recognition or detection”, Lee [0038] 6 th S. Conclusion The prior art “nearest to the subject matter defined in the claims” (MPEP 707.05) made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following table lists several references that are relevant to the subject matter claimed and disclosed in this Application. The references are not relied on by the Examiner, but are provided to assist the Applicant in responding to this Office action: Citation Relevance IDS (07/25/2024) cited ホン，ウェイ(Google Translate: Hong Wei) et al. (JP 2021-506019 A): the first X-reference: applicable under 35 USC 102 WEI teaches: “Alternatively, an image in which movement occurs at a particular part of the image (eg, start, middle, or end) can be recognized as a motion image or a static image, depending on the particular implementation.” as the closest to the claimed “the recognition processing, for at least a part of the frames, using only a part of data in an entire frame” of claim 1. IDS (07/25/2024) cited KEITARO et al. (JP 2020-039124 A)” the 2 nd X-reference: applicable under 35 USC 102 KEITARO teaches: “On the other hand, it is also possible to perform processing by the CNN based on the image for each line and obtain a recognition result from a part of the image to be recognized.” as the closest to the claimed “the recognition processing, for at least a part of the frames, using only a part of data in an entire frame” of claim 1. IDS (07/25/2024) cited HISASHI (JP 2015-185135 A): the 3 rd X-reference: applicable under 35 USC 102 HISASHI teaches: “Stop Recognition Method Using Optical Flow…performs stop detection…based on…only a predetermined partial region of the image frame”: PNG media_image17.png 1288 1044 media_image17.png Greyscale as the closest to the claimed “the recognition processing, for at least a part of the frames, using only a part of data in an entire frame” of claim 1. Kieritz et al. (Joint detection and online multi-object tracking) Kieritz et al. teaches a recurring connection in each frame, pg. 1572, rcol, last para, 2 nd S: “We use a recursive neural network (RNN) to associate the tracks with the detections and update the track representation in each frame”: PNG media_image18.png 590 972 media_image18.png Greyscale as the closest to the claimed “the recognition unit uses a recognition result of each frame as an input for a next frame to recurrently connect recognition processing for each frame” of claim 16 and applicant’s figures 4-11, reproduced above. Nijhawan et al. (includes the common inventor names of 18/833.209) (Efficient Joint Detection and Multiple Object Tracking with Spatially Aware Transformer) Nijhawan cites to above reference [9] Kieritz et al. (Joint detection and online multi-object tracking): “Contrary to SDT, JDT methods like [9] use Single Shot MultiBox (SSD) object detector [13] on a single frame and feeds the output to recurrent neural net work for integrating detections into tracks.”: [9] Hilke Kieritz, Wolfgang H¨ubner, and Michael Arens. Joint detection and online multi-object tracking. In 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pat tern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW), pages 1540–15408, 2018. 1, 4 as the closest to the claimed “the recognition unit uses a recognition result of each frame as an input for a next frame to recurrently connect recognition processing for each frame” of claim 16 and applicant’s figures 4-11, reproduced above. Montserrat (MACHINE LEARNING-BASED MULTIMEDIA ANALYTICS) Montserrat teaches a recurrent connection, pg. 95: Gated Recurrent Unit, 2 nd para, 1 st two Ss: “In order to merge the features from all face regions and frames, we include a Recurrent Neural Network (RNN) on top of the automatic face weighting. We use a Gated Recurrent Unit (GRU) to combine the features, logits, and weights of all face regions to obtain a final estimate.” PNG media_image19.png 689 1018 media_image19.png Greyscale as the closest to the claimed “the recognition unit uses a recognition result of each frame as an input for a next frame to recurrently connect recognition processing for each frame” of claim 16 and applicant’s figures 4-11, reproduced above. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DENNIS ROSARIO whose telephone number is (571)272-7397. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9AM-5PM 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, Henok Shiferaw can be reached at 571-272-4637. 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. /DENNIS ROSARIO/Examiner, Art Unit 2676 /Henok Shiferaw/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 2 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 3 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 4 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 5 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 6 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 7 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 8 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 9 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 10 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 11 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 12 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 13 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 14 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 15 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 16 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 17 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 18 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 19 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 20 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 21 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 22 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 23 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 24 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 25 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 26 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 27 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 28 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 29 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 30 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 31 Art Unit: 2676 Application/Control Number: 18/833,209 Page 32 Art Unit: 2676 1 MPEP 2131 Anticipation — Application of 35 U.S.C. 102 [R-08.2017] , 2 nd para 2 nd to last S: “ The elements must be arranged as required by the claim, but this is not an ipsissimis verbis test, i.e., identity of terminology is not required. In re Bond , 910 F.2d 831, 15 USPQ2d 1566 (Fed. Cir. 1990). 2 MPEP 2131 Anticipation — Application of 35 U.S.C. 102 [R-08.2017] , 2 nd para 2 nd to last S: “ The elements must be arranged as required by the claim, but this is not an ipsissimis verbis test, i.e., identity of terminology is not required. In re Bond , 910 F.2d 831, 15 USPQ2d 1566 (Fed. Cir. 1990). 3 program: Also called computer program . Digital Technology . a precise sequence of instructions enabling a computer to perform a task; a piece of software. (Dictionary.com) 4 Applicant’s disclosure: [0209] The program to be executed by the CPU 301 is provided, for example, by being recorded on the removable medium 311 or via a wired or wireless transmission medium such as a local area network, the Internet, or digital broadcasting, and is installed in the storage unit 308. 5 recognition: the automated conversion of information, as words or images, into a form that can be processed by a machine, especially a computer or computerized device. (Dictionary.com) 6 processing: Computers . the act of carrying out operations on data or programs. (Dictionary.com) 7 using: to employ for some purpose; put into service; make use of. (Dictionary.com) 8 Applicant’s disclosure: [0017] The mode setting unit 23 sets a processing mode indicating what kind of data the recognition unit 25 uses to perform recognition processing on the basis of a user's operation signal input from an operation input unit (not illustrated). [0018] On the basis of the set processing mode and the number of frames supplied from the frame counting unit 22, the mode setting unit 23 determines data to be input to the recognition unit 25 as to the position of the frame supplied from the frame counting unit 22 and what kind of data is to be acquired from the frame. Although details will be described later, what kind of data or a part of data is acquired from each frame is determined here. The mode setting unit 23 outputs, to the data acquisition unit 24, information regarding the determined data and the frame supplied from the frame counting unit 22. 9 Figure 13 appears to disclose eight different ways to reduce cost in recognition processing (i.e., improve the function of a computer under 35 USC 101) 10 MPEP 2131 Anticipation — Application of 35 U.S.C. 102 [R-08.2017] , 2 nd para 2 nd to last S: “ The elements must be arranged as required by the claim, but this is not an ipsissimis verbis test, i.e., identity of terminology is not required. In re Bond , 910 F.2d 831, 15 USPQ2d 1566 (Fed. Cir. 1990). 11 MPEP 2131 Anticipation — Application of 35 U.S.C. 102 [R-08.2017] , 2 nd para 2 nd to last S: “ The elements must be arranged as required by the claim, but this is not an ipsissimis verbis test, i.e., identity of terminology is not required. In re Bond , 910 F.2d 831, 15 USPQ2d 1566 (Fed. Cir. 1990). 12 for: intended to belong to, or be used in connection with. (Dictionary.com) 13 all: each; apiece. (Dictionary.com) 14 for: intended to belong to, or be used in connection with. (Dictionary.com) 15 new: of a kind now existing or appearing for the first time; novel. 16 for: intended to belong to, or be used in connection with. (Dictionary.com) 17 for: intended to belong to, or be used in connection with. (Dictionary.com) 18 color: Physics . any of the labels red, green, or blue that designate the three states in which quarks are expected to exist, or any of the corresponding labels for antiquark states. (Dictionary.com) 19 for: intended to belong to, or be used in connection with. (Dictionary.com) 20 for: intended to belong to, or be used in connection with. (Dictionary.com) 21 new: of a kind now existing or appearing for the first time; novel. 22 The cross-out text does not have a limiting effect under the broadest reasonable interpretation via MPEP 2143.03 All Claim Limitations Must Be Considered [R-01.2024] : The following types of claim language may raise a question as to its limiting effect (this list is not exhaustive: I am added Nonrestrictive comma Phrases, (Non-Limiting comma Phrases (NLPs): for example --, which is a part of the data,--), to the list): • preamble (MPEP § 2111.02); • clauses such as "adapted to," adapted for," "wherein," and "whereby" (MPEP § 2111.04, subsection I); • contingent limitations (MPEP § 2111.04, subsection II); • printed matter (MPEP § 2111.05); and • functional language associated with a claim term (MPEP § 2181). 23 recurrently: Derived word form of recurrent , wherein recurrent is defined: that recurs ; occurring or appearing again, especially repeatedly or periodically, wherein recur is defined: to occur again , as an event, experience, etc . (Dictionary.com) 24 over: so as to rest on or cover; on or upon, wherein on is defined: so as to be attached to or unified with . (Dictionary.com) 25 The cross-out text does not have a limiting effect under the broadest reasonable interpretation via MPEP 2143.03 All Claim Limitations Must Be Considered [R-01.2024] : The following types of claim language may raise a question as to its limiting effect (this list is not exhaustive: I am added Nonrestrictive comma Phrases, (Non-Limiting comma Phrases (NLPs): for example --, which is a part of the data,--), to the list): • preamble (MPEP § 2111.02); • clauses such as "adapted to," adapted for," "wherein," and "whereby" (MPEP § 2111.04, subsection I); • contingent limitations (MPEP § 2111.04, subsection II); • printed matter (MPEP § 2111.05); and • functional language associated with a claim term (MPEP § 2181). 26 (italics) represent claim limitations already taught 27 (italics) represent claim limitations already taught 28 for: intended to belong to, or be used in connection with. (Dictionary.com) 29 (italics) represent claim limitations already taught 30 (italics) represent claim limitations already taught 31 (italics) represent claim limitations already taught 32 (italics) represent claim limitations already taught
Prosecution Insights