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 .
Response to Arguments
The examiner agrees with the applicant that the prior art doesn’t teach:
determining one or more animation effects corresponding to the event information according to a pre-established effect mapping relationship table, wherein the pre-established effect mapping relationship table comprises the event information and the one or more animation effects corresponding to the event information;
determining effect display parameters of the animation model based on the part parameters and the one or more animation effects corresponding to the event information.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested:
VIDEO IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD, APPARATUS, ELECTRONIC DEVICE AND STORAGE MEDIUM FOR FUSING A FACE IMAGE OF AN OBJECT INTO AN ANIMATION MODEL
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
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.
Claims 1-8 and 10-16 are 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 1 is directed to a video image processing method, comprising the steps of acquiring, determining, determining, determining and fusing which are nothing more than software instructions. Software instructions are non-statutory under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 2-8 and 10-16 depend from claim 1 and comprise additional steps, for example claim 2 comprises the steps of acquiring and determining, therefore claims 2-8 and 10-16 have the same problem as claim 1 and are therefore rejected under the same rationale.
The examiner suggests amending claim 1 to:
“A video image processing method, comprising:
utilizing a processor to perform the following: …”
The examiner also suggests amending claims 7-8 and 16 as follows:
7. (Previously Presented) “The method according to claim 1, further comprising:
utilizing a processor to perform:… “
8. (Previously Presented) “The method according to claim 1, further comprising:
utilizing a processor to perform:… “
16. (Original) “The method according to claim 15, further comprising:
utilizing a processor to perform:… “ in order to overcome the 101 rejection of claims 1-8 and 10-16.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18-21 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 18 (claim 19 is similar in scope), the prior art doesn’t teach:
determining one or more animation effects corresponding to the event information according to a pre-established effect mapping relationship table, wherein the pre-established effect mapping relationship table comprises the event information and the one or more animation effects corresponding to the event information;
determining effect display parameters of the animation model based on the part parameters and the one or more animation effects corresponding to the event information;
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.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAURICE L MCDOWELL, JR whose telephone number is (571)270-3707. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 2pm-10pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Said A. Broome can be reached at 571-272-2931. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MAURICE L. MCDOWELL, JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2612
