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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8/7/2024 and 7/21/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant has amended independent claim 1 and 11 to recite in part, “wherein the area where the content does not change in real time includes an area whose position is fixedly maintained in the moving image by at least one of a characteristic of a camera that captured the moving images or a mounting position of the camera.” Examiner maintains that the prior art of record, Kim Ji et. al., does disclose these features in paragraphs [0094], claim 9, figures 2a and 2b, [0089], claim 7, recognizing state information about an object included in the video and surrounding state information about the object, and generating a composition image from the video, [0170]: In this case, the situation where the moving image is photographed with the camera fixed thereto may be, for example, photographed the entire space where the movement of the person occurs. [0175]: An image synthesizer may apply movement in a direction opposite to a movement path of the predicted camera to the image to generate first to fourth images from the first to fourth images. In this case, backgrounds of the first ‘to fourth’ images 421 a-424 may be fixed and appear to move only a person included in the image. Thus, the prior rejections of claims 1 and 11 under 35 U.S.C 103 is maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, and 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim Ji et. al. (Korean Patent KR10-2018-0049786 A) in view of Kim (Korean Patent KR10-1632065 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Kim Ji et. al. discloses an object detection device, comprising: memory; and at least one processor operatively connected to the memory, wherein the at least one processor: obtains a moving image (Kim Ji et. al. see [0210, figure 7, [0084], claim 6, and figures 2a and 2b, a video input unit for receiving a video); identifies an area where content changes in real time and an area where the content does not change in real time, as included in the moving image, wherein the area where the content does not change in real time includes an area whose position is fixedly maintained in the moving image by at least one of a characteristic of a camera that captured the moving image or a mounting position of the camera; obtains image information about the moving image by analyzing the area where content changes in real time (Kim Ji et. al. see [0094], claim 9, figures 2a and 2b, [0089], claim 7, recognizing state information about an object included in the video and surrounding state information about the object, and generating a composition image from the video, [0170]: In this case, the situation where the moving image is photographed with the camera fixed thereto may be, for example, photographed the entire space where the movement of the person occurs. [0175]: An image synthesizer may apply movement in a direction opposite to a movement path of the predicted camera to the image to generate first to fourth images from the first to fourth images. In this case, backgrounds of the first ‘to fourth’ images 421 a-424 may be fixed and appear to move only a person included in the image.). However, Kim Ji et. al. fails to disclose merges the image information into the area where the content does not change in real time.
Kim teaches merges the image information into the area where the content does not change in real time (Kim [0051]-[0054], claim 1, figure 2, combining or merging each sector image data corresponding to object information, ID information about a plurality of sectors corresponding to a display region, using sector location information, location information about the center of the sector or actual location information about the outline of the sector). This is important to the claimed information so that the image information is shown in a static area, enhancing user accessibility and optimizing the performance of the processor. Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Kim Ji et. al. and Kim so that these solutions are fully captured.
Regarding claim 11, which pertains to a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing one or more programs, wherein the one or more programs comprise instructions that, when executed by a processor of an object detection device, enable the processor, which corresponds to the object detection device of claim 1, which the rejection analysis is incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 2, Kim Ji et. al. and Kim disclose the object detection device of claim 1, and Kim Ji et. al. further discloses wherein the moving image is received from a camera module different from the object detection device (Kim Ji et. al. [0128], figure 3, an external device records a video of the surrounding environment of an external electronic device by using a camera and sends the video to an electronic device).
Regarding claim 3, the object detection device of claim 1, and claim 12, the non-transitory computer-readable recording medium of claim 11, Kim Ji et. al. discloses wherein the image information includes at least one of per-pixel distance information about the moving image, drivable road information, or information about an object included in the moving image (Kim Ji et. al. [0094], claim 9, figures 2a and 2b, recognizing the state information of the object included in the video and the surrounding state information about the object).
Regarding claim 9, Kim Ji et. al. and Kim disclose the object detection device of claim 1, and Kim Ji et. al. further disclose wherein the at least one processor transmits a moving image where the image information is merged to an application processor different from the object detection device (Kim Ji et. al. [0101]-[0102], figure 2a, wherein a recognition result of the video output from a data recognition device is transmitted to the electronic device equipped with a service provision unit).
Regarding claim 10, Kim Ji et. al. and Kim disclose the object detection device of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor identifies the area where the content does not change in real time, based on a set period. This amounts to a simple option that would normally be adopted by a person skilled in the art.
Claim(s) 4 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim Ji et. al. (Korean Patent KR10-2018-0049786 A) in view of Kim (Korean Patent KR10-1632065 B1) as applied to claims 3 and 12 above, and further in view of Koo et. al. (Korean Patent KR20210081894 A).
Regarding claim 4, the object detection device of claim 3, and claim 13, the non-transitory computer-readable recording medium of claim 12, Kim Ji et. al. and Kim disclose the object detection device of claim 3 and the non-transitory computer-readable recording medium of claim 12, but Kim Ji et. al. and Kim fail to disclose wherein the information about the object includes information related to an object detected as a polygonal window of a hexagon or an octagon, and wherein four sides included in the polygonal window overlap four sides, respectively, included in one rectangle.
Koo et. al. teaches wherein the object information includes information related to an object detected as a polygonal window of a hexagon or an octagon, and wherein four sides included in the polygonal window overlap four sides, respectively, included in one rectangle (Koo et. al. [0053]-[0055], claim 1, and figure 4, detecting an object as various types of polygons according to the shape of the object). This is important to the claimed invention because it defines the features of the object of interest. Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Kim Ji et. al., Kim, and Koo et. al. so that the object of interest is detected as a polygonal window as described in the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 7-8 and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim Ji et. al. (Korean Patent KR10-2018-0049786 A) in view of Kim (Korean Patent KR10-1632065 B1) as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Park et. al. (Korean Patent KR20200027871 A).
Regarding claims 7 and 14, Kim Ji et. al. and Kim disclose the object detection device of claim 1, the non-transitory computer-readable recording medium of claim 11. However, Kim Ji et. al. and Kim fail to disclose wherein the moving image includes a plurality of frames, and wherein the at least one processor identifies an area where a pixel value difference corresponding to at least two or more frames among the plurality of frames is within a set range and/or an area within a set distance as the area where the content does not change in real time.
Park et. al. teaches wherein the moving image includes a plurality of frames, and wherein the at least one processor identifies an area where a pixel value difference corresponding to at least two or more frames among the plurality of frames is within a set range and/or an area within a set distance as the area where the content does not change in real time (Park et. al. [0188], claims 2-3, figure 19, in a two-dimensional grid map, an integer between 0 and 255 is expressed as a weight to indicate the presence or absence of an object, unnavigable regions correspond to a weight of 0 to a, unknown regions correspond to a weight of a+1 to b, and navigable regions correspond to a weight of b+1 to 255). This is important to the claimed invention because this defines the contrast between the moving image within a static area. Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Kim Ji et. al., Kim, and Park et. al. so that these features are included together.
Regarding claim 8, Kim Ji et. al. and Kim disclose the object detection device of claim 1. However, Kim Ji et. al. and Kim fail to disclose wherein the at least one processor identifies a blank area with no pixel value in four corners of the moving image as the area where the content does not change in real time, and wherein the blank area is generated based on the characteristic of the camera.
Park et. al. teaches wherein the at least one processor identifies a blank area with no pixel value in four corners of the moving image as the area where the content does not change in real time, and wherein the blank area is generated based on the characteristic of the camera (Park et. al. [0188], claims 2-3, figure 19, in a two-dimensional grid map, an integer between 0 and 255 is expressed as a weight to indicate the presence or absence of an object, unnavigable regions correspond to a weight of 0 to a, unknown regions correspond to a weight of a+1 to b, and navigable regions correspond to a weight of b+1 to 255). This is important to the claimed invention because this defines the contrast between the moving image within a static area. Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Kim Ji et. al., Kim, and Park et. al. so that these features are included together.
Regarding claim 15, Kim Ji et. al. and Kim disclose the non-transitory computer-readable recording medium of claim 11. However, Kim Ji et. al. and Kim fail to disclose wherein the one or more programs comprise instructions that, when executed by the processor, enable the processor to: identify a blank area with no pixel value in four corners of the moving image as the area where the content does not change in real time; and identify the area where the content does not change in real time based on a set period.
Park et. al. teaches wherein the one or more programs comprise instructions that, when executed by the processor, enable the processor to: identify a blank area with no pixel value in four corners of the moving image as the area where the content does not change in real time; and identify the area where the content does not change in real time based on a set period (Park et. al. [0188], claims 2-3, figure 19, in a two-dimensional grid map, an integer between 0 and 255 is expressed as a weight to indicate the presence or absence of an object, unnavigable regions correspond to a weight of 0 to a, unknown regions correspond to a weight of a+1 to b, and navigable regions correspond to a weight of b+1 to 255). This is also a simple option that would normally be adopted by a person skilled in the art. This is important to the claimed invention because this defines the contrast between the moving image within a static area. Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Kim Ji et. al., Kim, and Park et. al. so that these features are included together.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6 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.
None of the prior art of record disclose the features shown in claims 5-6 and could not have been easily derived by a person skilled in the art.
Claim 5 recites the object detection device of claim 4, wherein the at least one processor obtains information about the polygonal window of the hexagon or the octagon as output data of a first artificial intelligence model among at least one artificial intelligence model stored in the memory, in response to inputting the moving image, as input data, to the first artificial intelligence model, and wherein the first artificial intelligence model is trained to input, as training data, a learning image and six or eight parameters related to a polygonal window obtained using first annotation information of a rectangular bounding box type of the learning image and second annotation information of a segmentation type of the learning image, to output, as output data, six or eight parameters related to a polygonal window indicating an object included in an image which is input data.
Claim 6 recites the object detection device of claim 4, wherein the object information further includes contact position information between the object and a ground, wherein the at least one processor obtains the contact position information between the object and the ground, as output data of a second artificial intelligence model among at least one artificial intelligence model stored in the memory, in response to inputting the moving image, as input data, to the second artificial intelligence model, and wherein the second artificial intelligence model is trained to input, as training data, a first learning image including a first object, position information about the first object, contact position information between the first object and the ground, a second learning image including a second object where a contact position between the first object and the ground is hidden, position information about the second object, and contact position information between the second object and the ground to obtain, as output data, contact position information between the ground and the object included in an image which is input data.
Conclusion
Response to Amendment
Examiner has carefully considered the amendments to the claims and performed an updated search. However, the amended claims are not sufficient to overcome the prior art rejections.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA YIFANG LIN whose telephone number is (571)272-6435. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00am-6:15pm, with optional day off.
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, Vu Le can be reached at 571-272-7332. 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.
/JESSICA YIFANG LIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2668 August 8, 2026
/VU LE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2668
Prosecution Insights