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
Applicant’s arguments filed 11/18/2025 have been considered but are moot in view of a new ground of rejections.
Further, Examiner respectfully submits that some of Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
Specifically, on pages 11-12, Applicant argues that,
“…
The Examiner alleges that Ackerman teaches every element previously recited by independent claim 1. Office Action 17-20 (citing Ackerman FIGS. 3, 5B, 7, 13-15, 20, paras. [0063]-[0068], [0071]). However, there is nothing in Ackerman that would fairly teach or suggest the elements presently recited in relation to detecting a gazing point of a user on a real space based on distance measurement information and estimation information of a visual line and eye positions of the user, and performing control relating to the imaging using information of a gazing area set based on the detected gazing point, let alone that the control relating to the imaging is performed by determining a scale of a display image relating to the imaging, in anything remotely resembling the manner particularly claimed. As such, it is simply not possible for Ackerman to satisfy the elements particularly recited by amended independent claim 1.”
In response, Examiner respectfully disagrees and submits that Ackerman as cited in the Office Action, teaches that circuitry of a camera detects a gazing point of a user (i.e. intersection of left-eye and right eye visual lines of the user) and based on a depth image, which is ‘measurement information representing a distance measurement result for a predetermined range including an imaging range that is a target range of imaging on the real space’ measured by a depth camera. The circuitry then controls the imaging using the information of a gazing area, i.e. determining imaging parameters to capture the gazing area in focus. As such, Ackerman clearly teaches “an information processing device comprising: circuitry configured to detect a gazing point of a user on a real space based on distance measurement information representing a distance measurement result for a predetermined range including an imaging range that is a target range of imaging on the real space as a target and estimation information of a visual line and eye positions of the user, and perform control relating to the imaging using information of a gazing area set based on the detected gazing point,” as described in details below.
With respect to the limitation of “the control relating to the imaging is performed by determining a scale of a display image relating to the imaging,” Examiner respectfully submits that the limitation necessitated a new ground of rejections as detailed below.
Other arguments on pages 13-19 are moot in view of a ground of rejection of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-3, 7, 9-15, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ackerman et al. (US 2015/0003819 A1 – hereinafter Ackerman) and Cheng et al. (US 2016/0212357 A1 – hereinafter Cheng).
Regarding claim 1, Ackerman discloses an information processing device comprising: circuitry configured to detect a gazing point of a user on a real space ([0032]-[0033]; Figs. 1A-1B – a detecting unit detects a gazing point of a user 13 on a real space where objects A and B are located) based on distance measurement information representing a distance measurement result for a predetermined range including an imaging range that is a target range of imaging on the real space as a target ([0031]; [0038]; [0057] – based on a depth image, which is ‘measurement information representing a distance measurement result for a predetermined range including an imaging range that is a target range of imaging on the real space’ measured by a depth camera) and estimation information of a visual line and eye positions of the user ([0031]; [0036]-[0037]; [0076]; [0080]; [0129] – estimation information comprising gaze directions comprising visual line and eye positions of the user), and perform control relating to the imaging using information of a gazing area set based on the detected gazing point ([0038]-[0039] – a control unit performs focusing the camera lens using information of a gazing area set on the basis of the gazing point accordingly).
However, Ackerman does not disclose the control relating to the imaging is performed by determining a scale of a display image relating to the imaging.
Cheng discloses control relating to imaging is performed by determining a scale of a display image relating to the imaging (Fig. 8; [0037] – step 804 performs control relating to imaging by determining a scale, i.e. size, of a display image relating to the imaging).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Cheng into the device taught by Ackerman to bring better user experience where potential problem of making the user feel visually annoyed can be prevented ([0002]; [0008]).
Regarding claim 2, Ackerman also discloses the information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the circuitry is further configured to generate a three-dimensional map for the predetermined range based on the distance measurement information and detect an intersection with the visual line of the user on the three-dimensional map as the gazing point ([0054]; [0057] – generating a depth image, which is a three-dimensional map for the predetermined range, and detecting a point in the depth image corresponding to the intersection of gaze vectors).
Regarding claim 3, Ackerman also discloses the information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the circuitry is further configured to set an area including the gazing point as the gazing area ([0094]-[0095]; Fig. 6 – setting locations gazed at by the user to focus the camera).
Regarding claim 7, Ackerman also discloses the information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the circuitry is further configured to estimate whether or not the gazing point has been moved to another object based on gazing point detection results of a plurality of number of times acquired by the circuitry and perform, in a case in which it is estimated that the gazing point has been moved to another object, a switching process in which the gazing area based on the gazing point that is newly detected by the circuitry is applied as the gazing area used for control relating to the imaging ([0032]-[0033]; [0099]; [0108]-[0110] – gazing point has been moved from object A to object B, performing switching process to switch focus from object A to object B).
Regarding claim 9, Ackerman also discloses the information processing device according to claim 7, wherein, when estimation of the gazing point having been moved to the other object is set as a first condition, the circuitry performs the switching process in a case in which the first condition and a second condition different from the first condition are satisfied ([0095] - when a user moves their eyes and gazes for some minimum time, e.g. some predefined time such as 1 second, a few seconds etc.).
Regarding claim 10, Ackerman also discloses the information processing device according to claim 9, wherein the second condition is a condition that a state in which the gazing point is estimated to be present at the other object has lasted for a predetermined time or more ([0095] - when a user moves their eyes and gazes for some minimum time, e.g. some predefined time such as 1 second, a few seconds etc.).
Regarding claim 11, Ackerman also discloses the information processing device according to claim 9, wherein the second condition is a condition that an imaging direction is directed in a direction in which the other object is present ([0032]-[0033]; [0103] – second condition is a condition that an imaging direction is directed in a direction in which object B is present).
Regarding claim 12, Ackerman also disclose the information processing device according to claim 7, wherein, when switching to the gazing area of the other object is performed, the circuitry changes at least one of a position and a size of the gazing area in a stepped manner (Figs. 1A-1B; [0032]-[0033] – at least the control unit changes at least a position of the gazing area in a stepped manner).
Regarding claim 13, Ackerman also discloses the information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the circuitry performs control relating to recording of a captured image acquired using the imaging as control relating to the imaging ([0038]-[0039]; [0065]; [0086] – controlling recording of a captured image acquired using the imaging).
Regarding claim 14, Ackerman also discloses the information processing device according to claim 18, wherein the circuitry performs control of recording a captured image acquired using the imaging and information representing the gazing area as control relating to the imaging ([0038]-[0039]; [0065]; [0086] – controlling recording of a captured image acquired using the imaging and information representing the gazing area).
Regarding claim 15, Ackerman also discloses the information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the circuitry performs display control relating to a through image of a captured image acquired using the imaging as control relating to the imaging ([0038]-[0039]; [0065]; [0086] – controlling displaying of a captured image acquired using the imaging).
Regarding claim 18, Ackerman also discloses the information processing device according to claim 15, wherein, in a case in which the gazing point is not present inside of the captured image, the circuitry performs control to display a specific image (Fig. 2A – the user can gaze at any point, including a point not present inside of the currently captured image, in that case, a specific image displayed before or during the focus is adjusted is displayed).
Claim 19 is rejected for the same reason as discussed in claim 1 above.
Claim 20 is rejected for the same reason as discussed in claim 1 above in view of Ackerman also disclosing a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium having embodied therein a program, which when executed by a computer device, causes the computer device to execute the recited method ([0035]; [0063]).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ackerman and Cheng as applied to claims 1-3, 7, 9-15, and 18-20 above, and further in view of Yu et al. (US 2019/0236386 A1 – hereinafter Yu).
Regarding claim 4, see the teachings of Ackerman and Cheng as discussed in claim 3 above. However, Ackerman and Cheng do not explicitly disclose the information processing device according to claim 3, wherein the circuitry sets an area of which positions of left, right, upper, and lower area ends are positions of a predetermined distance from the gazing point as the gazing area.
Yu discloses circuitry configured to set an area of which positions of left, right, upper, and lower area ends are positions of a predetermined distance from a gazing point as a gazing area ([0109] – a unit sets a user's gaze region as a circle or sphere centered on the gazed point with a determined radius).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Hosoda into the device taught by Ackerman and Cheng to accommodate errors for the estimation of the gaze point.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ackerman as applied to claims 1-3, 7, 9-15, and 18-20 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (US 2014/0361984 A1 – hereinafter Kim).
Regarding claim 5, see the teachings of Ackerman and Cheng as discussed in claim 3 above. Ackerman in view of Cheng also discloses the information processing device according to claim 3, wherein the circuitry identifies an object including the gazing point among objects detected in an object detecting process for the real space as a target as a gazing object ([0099]; [0108]-[0110] – identifying faces, objects, etc.).
However, Ackerman and Cheng do not disclose the circuitry sets an area including the gazing object as the gazing area.
Kim discloses circuitry configured to identify an object including the gazing point in an object detecting process for the real space as a target as a gazing object and sets an area including the gazing object as the gazing area ([0144]; Fig. 12 – setting area 732 including the gazing object 722).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Kim into the device taught by Ackerman and Cheng to simplify focusing on the gazing object, i.e. processing an area with a basic shape is simpler than processing a sophisticated shape such as a shape of a tree.
Regarding claim 6, see the teachings of Ackerman, Cheng, and Kim as discussed in claim 5 above. Kim also discloses the circuitry sets the gazing area such that the gazing object is located at a position inside of an area designated in advance through an operation (Fig. 12; [0144] – the gazing object, i.e. a tree, is located at a position inside gazing area 732, such an area is designated in advance through an operation according to a specific algorithm).
The motivation for incorporating the teachings of Kim has been discussed in claim 5 above.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ackerman and Chen as applied to claims 1-3, 7, 9-15, and 18-20 above, and further in view of Hirose et al. (US 2021/0203856 A1 – hereinafter Hirose).
Regarding claim 8, see the teachings of Ackerman and Cheng as discussed in claim 7 above. However, Ackerman and Cheng do not explicitly disclose the circuitry is further configured to estimate whether or not the gazing point has been moved to the other object on the basis of range information of objects detected in the object detecting process for the real space as a target.
Hirose discloses circuitry configured to estimate whether or not a gazing point has been moved to another object on a basis of range information of objects detected in an object detecting process for a real space as a target ([0077]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Hirose into the device taught by Ackerman and Cheng to detect an object using the gaze point accurately and quickly.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ackerman and Cheng as applied to claims 1-3, 7, 9-15, and 18-20 above, and further in view of Sung (US 2017/0060234 A1 – hereinafter Sung).
Regarding claim 16, see the teachings of Ackerman and Cheng as discussed in claim 15 above. However, Ackerman and Cheng do not disclose in a case in which the gazing area is present inside of the captured image, the circuitry performs control such that an extraction image acquired by extracting the gazing area from the captured image is displayed as the through image.
Sung discloses in a case in which a gazing area is present inside of a captured image, circuitry performs control such that an extraction image acquired by extracting the gazing area from the captured image is displayed as a through image (Fig. 17D; [0285]; [0291]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Sung into the information processing device taught by Ackerman and Cheng to allow the user to recognize or confirm the object to be focused on more noticeably.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ackerman and Cheng as applied to claims 1-3, 7, 9-15, and 18-20 above, and further in view of Spencer et al. (US 2022/0326766 A1 – hereinafter Spencer).
Regarding claim 17, see the teachings of Ackerman and Cheng as discussed in claim 15 above. However, Ackerman and Cheng do not disclose, in a case in which the gazing area comes close to an end of the captured image to be within a predetermined distance, the circuitry performs control to display notification information to the user.
Spencer discloses in a case in which a gazing area comes close to an end of a captured image to be within a predetermined distance ([0032]-[0034]; [0038]-[0039] – when the user’s view of ambient environment and the FOV of the camera is misaligned, user gazes at an object close to an end of a captured image captured by camera 116 to be within an offset), circuitry performs control to prompt the user ([0039] – displaying to prompt the user).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Spencer into the device taught by Ackerman and Cheng to assist the user in correcting the FOV of the camera.
Ackerman, Cheng, and Spencer do not explicitly disclose the prompt is by “displaying notification information to the user”.
Official Notice is taken that sending a prompt by displaying notification information to the user is well known in the art.
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate “displaying notification information to the user” into the device taught by Ackerman, Cheng, and Spencer because displaying notification information to the user is intuitive and effective in guiding the user.
Conclusion
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 HUNG Q DANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1116. The examiner can normally be reached IFT.
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, Thai Q Tran can be reached at 571-272-7382. 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.
/HUNG Q DANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2484
Prosecution Insights