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 Amendment
1. This office action is in response to communications filed 11/19/2025 Claims 1 and 26 are amended. Claims 2-7, 16, 19-22 are original. Claims 8, 11-13, 17, 18, 23-25 are previously presented. Claims 9-10 are canceled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks regarding claim 18 on page 9, filed 11/19/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by NPL “Portable Phone Holder with LED Wireless Dimming Light Filled with Selfie Used-8579707” (5 May 2021) 2021-05-05 Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCWT3ni9u_s
have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of CN 201210017321 A Sun [English Translation provided] under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 14, 17 and 26 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 7 recites the limitation "wherein receiving the stream of image data…" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 17 recites the limitation " wherein the stand comprises a mount for the mobile device" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
1. Claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 14, 17 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 11,322,149 Kim in view of CN 201210017321 A Sun [English Translation provided].
2. Regarding Claim 1, Kim discloses A method for recipe generation (See D1: Abstract, “method for generating recipe information”), comprising:
image data from images of the cooking surface during preparation of food on the cooking surface (Col. 1 line 55 “image, speech and text included in cooking content”, Col. 15 lines23-24 “the cooking content may be a frame-by-frame image in the cooking video”; Figs. 4, 8-9);
analyzing (Col. 7 lines 6-7, “generated by using a data analysis algorithm or a machine learning algorithm”) the image data by a computer to identify a set of ingredients and a sequence of cooking operations using the ingredients in the preparation of the food (Col. 13 lines 9-34 “a cooking ingredient recognition model”, Col. 15 line 24, “a frame-by-frame image in the cooking video”, Col. 15 lines 63-64, “description of steps”);
wherein analyzing the image data comprises using machine learning to recognize the ingredients and cooking operations specific to food preparation (Fig. 1: 130 learning processor; abstract, “artificial intelligence apparatus for generating recipe information including a learning processor configured to generate recipe text including at least one of cooking ingredient information or description text of cooking from cooking content, by providing the cooking content to a recipe text generation model, and a processor configured to generate recipe information of the cooking based on the recipe text”), including identifying, in one or more of the cooking operations, a tool used in the cooking operation (Col. 13 lines 11-18, “Cooking content may include a video and audio for explaining a cooking process, and may include a video and audio for explaining the name of food to be cooked, ingredients required for cooking, a cooking process, cooking utensils, cooking times, cooking temperatures, etc. In addition, the cooking content may be a cooking video for explaining a cooking method”) and a location on the cooking surface in which the cooking operation is carried out (Fig. 8: 804; Col. 15 lines 23-35, “The image 801 included in the cooking content may be a frame-by-frame image in the cooking video [i.e. location on the cooking surface]. The image 801 included in the cooking video may include text 804 represented by a graphic image as content for describing a cooking method. (156) In addition, the image description text 803 may be a result of recognizing the text 804 represented by the graphic image in the image 801 included in the cooking content and may become output text. For example, if the text 804 represented by the graphic image in the image 801 included in the cooking content is “Trim oyster mushrooms,” the text recognition model may output the image description text 803 “Trim oyster mushrooms.”); and
outputting from the computer a recipe comprising multiple steps and identifying the ingredients and cooking operations applied in each step (Col. 13 line 8-9, “a method of generating a recipe from a cooking video”, Col. 16 lines 1-2, “generate recipe information such that recipe step information”).
Kim does not specifically disclose a stand, which is configured to hold a camera in a location vertically above a cooking surface, whereby the camera is positioned to capture images of the cooking surface;
However, Sun discloses a stand device for smart phone to provide a desktop camera capable of performing imaging operation and adjusting an imaging angle on a smart phone (Abstract, “omnidirectional shooting tripod head solves the problem that the conventional technology of larger and monocular camera shooting and use of various electronic parts, all-angle of the invention applied to intelligent mobile phone shooting tripod head design, generally small digital camera and mobile phone with shooting function, omnidirectional shooting tripod head comprises a pedestal, a rotating platform and a carrier sleeve piece” See Figs. 6 and 7 below).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the techniques for capturing or processing image for improved usability and presentation taught in Kim with the omnidirectional shooting tripod head portable phone holder (Figs. 6 and 7) as taught in the Sun to improve the ability of a user to conveniently and effectively capture the images of a cooking surface or the like. Hence, providing stable positioning of the smartphone camera along with adjustable illumination, thereby reducing shadows and glare in image capture.
PNG
media_image1.png
725
652
media_image1.png
Greyscale
3. Regarding Claim 2, Kim in view of Sun discloses The method according to claim 1,
Sun discloses wherein the stand is configured so as to enable the camera, while held by the stand, to capture the images along an optical axis that is perpendicular or parallel to a plane of the cooking surface (Abstract, “omnidirectional shooting tripod head solves the problem that the conventional technology of larger and monocular camera shooting and use of various electronic parts, all-angle of the invention applied to intelligent mobile phone shooting tripod head design, generally small digital camera and mobile phone with shooting function, omnidirectional shooting tripod head comprises a pedestal, a rotating platform and a carrier sleeve piece” See Figs. 6 and 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the techniques for capturing or processing image for improved usability and presentation taught in Kim with the omnidirectional shooting tripod head portable phone holder (Figs. 6 and 7) as taught in the Sun to improve the ability of a user to conveniently and effectively capture the images of a cooking surface or the like. Hence, providing stable positioning of the smartphone camera along with adjustable illumination, thereby reducing shadows and glare in image capture.
4. Regarding Claim 3, Kim in view of Sun discloses The method according to claim 1,
Sun discloses wherein the stand comprises a mount for the camera, wherein the mount is configured to tilt and shift so as to enable the camera to capture the images from different angles and locations relative to the cooking surface (Abstract, “omnidirectional shooting tripod head solves the problem that the conventional technology of larger and monocular camera shooting and use of various electronic parts, all-angle of the invention applied to intelligent mobile phone shooting tripod head design, generally small digital camera and mobile phone with shooting function, omnidirectional shooting tripod head comprises a pedestal, a rotating platform and a carrier sleeve piece; the angle of the invention shooting tripod head can be applied to all kinds of occasions 360, elevation 90 degrees and 90 degrees panoramic shooting.” See Figs. 6 and 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the techniques for capturing or processing image for improved usability and presentation taught in Kim with the omnidirectional shooting tripod head portable phone holder (Figs. 6 and 7) as taught in the Sun to improve the ability of a user to conveniently and effectively capture the images of a cooking surface or the like. Hence, providing stable positioning of the smartphone camera along with adjustable illumination, thereby reducing shadows and glare in image capture.
5. Regarding Claim 6, Kim in view of Sun discloses The method according to claim 1,
Sun discloses wherein the stand is configured to hold a mobile device in which the camera is embedded (Abstract, “an omnidirectional shooting cradle head, mainly is omnidirectional shooting tripod head solves the problem that the conventional technology of larger and monocular camera shooting and use of various electronic parts, all-angle of the invention applied to intelligent mobile phone shooting tripod head design, generally small digital camera and mobile phone with shooting function, omnidirectional shooting tripod head comprises a pedestal, a rotating platform and a carrier sleeve piece;” Fig.7).
6. Regarding Claim 7, Kim in view of Sun discloses The method according to claim 6,
Kim discloses wherein receiving the stream of image data comprises receiving the image data in the computer by communication over a network with the mobile device, and wherein outputting the recipe comprises transmitting recipe information from the computer over the network to a monitor at a location of the cooking surface (Col. 1 lines 45-46, “automatically generate a recipe using an image” receiving the stream of image data, and wherein outputting the recipe, Col. 1 lines 18-19, "generating recipe information from cooking content", Col. 14 lines 42-43,"the cooking content may be a frame-by-frame image", see Figs. 7-8)).
7. Regarding Claim 8, Kim in view of Sun discloses The method according to claim 1,
Kim discloses wherein analyzing the image data comprises applying labels to the ingredients (col. 14 lines10-11, “The learning processor 130 may designate a label for specifying a food or ingredient image”) and the cooking operations by a classification program running on the computer (Col. 18 lines 61-62, “The present disclosure may be embodied as computer-readable codes on a program-recorded medium”), and wherein outputting the recipe comprises displaying the labels applied by the classification program (Fig. 7) , and
wherein the method comprises receiving an input from a user of the recipe correcting one of the displayed labels, and updating the classification program responsively to the input (Col. 13 lines19-22, "The learning processor 130 may provide cooking content to a recipe text generation model and generate recipe text including at least one of cooking ingredient information or description text of cooking from the cooking content", Col. 13 lines 26-29, "The recipe generation model may include at least one of a cooking ingredient recognition model, a text recognition model or a speech recognition model", Col. 14 lines 1-3,"ingredient recognition model may be classified into supervised learning", Fig. 4).
8. Regarding Claim 14, Kim in view of Sun discloses The method according to claim 1,
Kim discloses wherein analyzing the image data comprises inputting media assets, including the image data, to a Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) engine, which outputs the recipe (Col. 13 lines 38-39 “artificial intelligence apparatus 100 may store the cooking content in the memory 170” see Fig. 1, Col. 14 lines 39-40, “cooking ingredient information 703 included in the cooking content as output data”).
9. Regarding Claim 17, Kim in view of Sun discloses The method according to claim 1,
Sun discloses wherein the stand comprises a mount for the mobile device (fig. 7), which is configured to hold the mobile device stably in at least a first position in which a camera of the mobile device is positioned to capture images of the cooking surface (Fig. 6; omnidirectional position for capturing on a horizontal/cooking surface) and
a second position in which the mobile device is rotated to enable a user to interact with a touchscreen of the mobile device (abstract, “the rotating platform is set on the base and can rotate on the pedestal, carrier set is arranged on the rotating platform. for carrier shooting unit, shooting unit is linked with the rotating platform when the rotary platform rotates, by said structure, the angle of the invention shooting tripod head can be applied to all kinds of occasions 360, elevation 90 degrees and 90 degrees panoramic shooting.” See Fig. 6).
10. Claim 26 is a computer software product, comprising a non-transitory CRM, rejected with respect to the same limitation rejected in method 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.
11. Claim(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Sun as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of NPL Video “Portable Phone Holder with LED Wireless Dimming Light Filled with Selfie Used-8579707” (5 May 2021) 2021-05-05 Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCWT3ni9u_s
12. Regarding Claim 4, Kim in view of Sun discloses The method according to claim 1,
However, Kim in view of Sun does not explicitly disclose wherein the stand comprises lights for illuminating the cooking surface
Further, NPL discloses wherein the stand comprises lights for illuminating the cooking surface (the stand comprises lights, Sec. 6-9 of video).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the image capture system of Kim in view of Sun to include a stand with integrated illumination, such as the selfie stick lighting system as taught by the NPL Video, in order to improve image quality during capture of cooking scenes by providing consistent illumination of the cooking surface, thereby facilitating more reliable recognition of ingredients and cooking operations.
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.
13. Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Sun as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of CN 110278312A Li et al. (English Translation provided).
14. Regarding Claim 5, Kim in view of Sun discloses The method according to claim 1,
However, Kim in view of Sun does not explicitly disclose wherein the stand comprises a fan configured to ventilate the camera.
Further, Li teaches comprising a fan configured to ventilate the camera (Page 4 para 3, the front end of the rod body is connected with a bracket 2, the bracket 2 is provided with a cooling fan 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine a cooling fan as taught in Li and combine it to the portable phone holder as taught in the Sun in order to “assist in cooling the smartphone phone [i.e. camera], so as to ensure the safety and stability of using a mobile phone when using the selfie rod, prolongs the service life of the mobile phone battery.” See Li page 2-3, last para of page 2 first para of page 3.
PNG
media_image2.png
149
37
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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.
15. Claim(s) 11, 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Sun as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of 2021/0030199 Olson (hereinafter Olson et al.)
16. Regarding Claim 11, Kim in view of Sun discloses The method according to claim 1,
However, Kim in view of Sun does not explicitly disclose comprising storing a corpus of rules indicating dependencies between different ingredients, dependencies between different operations, and dependencies between given operations and the ingredients used in each of the given operations, and wherein outputting the recipe comprises applying the dependencies in organizing and correcting the steps of the recipe.
Further, Olson teaches comprising storing a corpus of rules indicating dependencies between different ingredients, dependencies between different operations, and dependencies between given operations and the ingredients used in each of the given operations, and wherein outputting the recipe comprises applying the dependencies in organizing and correcting the steps of the recipe ([0028],"recognize food items and food preparation steps completed" [0036], “determines from recipe data on the food item steps necessary to prepare the food item…” “The system may constantly monitor the food items so that even if the food items are moved, an applicable or correct subsequent step is displayed or projected to the kitchen worker for the food item”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the combination of Kim in view of Sun video with a system for assisting in food preparation in order to provide a more comprehensive and intelligent cooking assistance platform.
17. Regarding Claim 12, Kim in view of Sun discloses The method according to claim 1,
However, Kim in view of Sun does not explicitly disclose comprising storing a library of cooking practices, and wherein outputting the recipe comprises making a comparison between the identified sequence of cooking operations and the cooking practices in the library, and outputting a suggested modification to the recipe based on the comparison.
Further, Olson teaches comprising storing a library of cooking practices, and wherein outputting the recipe comprises making a comparison between the identified sequence of cooking operations and the cooking practices in the library ([0147], “IR data is used to determine whether a food item is done cooking by comparing an estimated internal temperature to a maximum or target internal temperature for the food item”), and outputting a suggested modification to the recipe based on the comparison ([0147], “The computational engine is operable to receive the IR data and trained to predict the internal temperature of the food item based on the IR data, and to evaluate whether the recognized food item is done”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the combination of Kim in view of Sun with a system for assisting in food preparation in order to provide a more comprehensive and intelligent cooking assistance platform.
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.
18. Claim(s) 13, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Sun as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of 2013/0149677, Slone et al.
19. Regarding Claim 13, Kim in view of Sun discloses The metho according to claim 1,
However, Kim in view of Sun does not explicitly disclose comprising receiving in the computer inputs made by a user to edit the recipe, and publishing the edited recipe.
Slone teaches comprising receiving in the computer inputs made by a user to edit the recipe, and publishing the edited recipe ([0122], “A melting temperature associated with each ingredient may be used to modify the exposed area function depending on the cooking temperature associated with the particular cooking step” [0125], “the exposed area coefficient may be determined such that an exposed area metric associated with a particular ingredient is modified due to a slicing or chopping cooking step”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the combination of Kim in view of Sun with a system with identifying missing cooking steps as taught in Slone to improve the automatic addition of missing steps to a recipe, ensuring that added steps align with cooking context and user expectations. Hence providing dynamic adaptation of recipes to user needs.
20. Regarding Claim 15, Kim in view of Sun discloses The method according to claim 14,
However, Kim in view of Sun does not explicitly disclose wherein outputting the recipe comprises adding, by the Generative AI engine, a step to the recipe that was absent from the media assets that were input to the computer.
Slone teaches wherein outputting the recipe comprises adding, by the Generative AI engine ([0039], “generation of different virtual cooking results associated with different recipes allows computer programs to leverage machine learning techniques”), a step to the recipe that was absent from the media assets that were input to the computer (Fig. 5B; [0095], “In step 535, one or more missing cooking steps are identified and, in response, one or more new nodes are added to the recipe graph associated with the one or more missing cooking steps. In one example, an input ingredient of 2 cups of mild cheddar may require a shredding cooking step in order to provide the 2 cups of mild cheddar. If the shredding cooking step is missing from the recipe, it may be deemed a missing cooking step”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the combination of Kim in view of Sun with a system with identifying missing cooking steps as taught in Slone to improve the automatic addition of missing steps to a recipe, ensuring that added steps align with cooking context and user expectations. Hence providing dynamic adaptation of recipes to user needs.
21. Regarding Claim 16, Kim in view of Sun discloses The method according to claim 14,
However, Kim in view of Sun does not explicitly disclose wherein outputting the recipe comprises suggesting, by the Generative AI engine, a correction or improvement to the recipe.
Slone teaches wherein outputting the recipe comprises suggesting, by the Generative AI engine ([0039], “generation of different virtual cooking results associated with different recipes allows computer programs to leverage machine learning techniques”), a correction or improvement to the recipe Fig. 5B; [0095], “In step 535, one or more missing cooking steps are identified and, in response, one or more new nodes are added to the recipe graph associated with the one or more missing cooking steps. In one example, an input ingredient of 2 cups of mild cheddar may require a shredding cooking step in order to provide the 2 cups of mild cheddar. If the shredding cooking step is missing from the recipe, it may be deemed a missing cooking step”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the combination of Kim in view of Sun with a system with identifying missing cooking steps as taught in Slone to improve the automatic addition of missing steps to a recipe, ensuring that added steps align with cooking context and user expectations. Hence providing dynamic adaptation of recipes to user needs.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 –
(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.
22. Claim(s) 18, 19, 20, 21, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 201210017321 A Sun [English Translation provided].
23. Regarding Claim 18, Sun discloses A stand for a mobile device (Fig. 7), which includes a camera and a touchscreen (mobile device 61 in fig. 7 includes a camera and touchscreen), the stand comprising:
a pedestal, comprising a base for placement on a surface and a turntable configured to rotate on the base (Figs. 7: 12 rotating platform [i.e. base], Fig. 9: 91 rotating platform);
a strut protruding upward from the pedestal (Fig. 6; abstract, “intelligent mobile phone shooting tripod head design, generally small digital camera and mobile phone with shooting function, omnidirectional shooting tripod head comprises a pedestal, a rotating platform and a carrier sleeve piece; the rotating platform is set on the base and can rotate on the pedestal, carrier set is arranged on the rotating platform”);
a telescopic arm having a first end attached by a hinge to the strut so that the telescopic arm swivels on the hinge (see Fig. 6); and
a mount for the mobile device (fig. 7), which is attached by an articulating joint to a second end of the telescopic arm (Fig. 6: second end is the telescoping arm that swivels into an omnidirectional position) and is configured to hold the mobile device stably in at least a first position in which the camera is positioned to capture images of the surface and a second position in which the mobile device is rotated to enable a user to interact with the touchscreen (abstract, “an omnidirectional shooting cradle head, mainly is omnidirectional shooting tripod head solves the problem that the conventional technology of larger and monocular camera shooting and use of various electronic parts, all-angle of the invention applied to intelligent mobile phone shooting tripod head design, generally small digital camera and mobile phone with shooting function, omnidirectional shooting tripod head comprises a pedestal, a rotating platform and a carrier sleeve piece; the rotating platform is set on the base and can rotate on the pedestal, carrier set is arranged on the rotating platform. for carrier shooting unit, shooting unit is linked with the rotating platform when the rotary platform rotates, by said structure, the angle of the invention shooting tripod head can be applied to all kinds of occasions 360, elevation 90 degrees and 90 degrees panoramic shooting.”).
24. Regarding Claim 19, Sun discloses The stand according to claim 18, wherein in the first position the mobile device is horizontal (Fig. 6; omnidirectional/horizontal), and in the second position the mobile device is vertical (Fig. 7 appears vertical).
25. Regarding Claim 20, Sun video discloses The stand according to claim 18, wherein the pedestal comprises a counterweight, which is mounted on the turntable opposite the vertical strut (Fig. 6: a pedestal comprises a counterweight, which is mounted on the turntable opposite the vertical strut).
26. Regarding Claim 21, Sun discloses The stand according to claim 18, wherein the pedestal comprises a scale indicating an angle of rotation of the pedestal relative to the surface ([0024], “the base 11 has 360 degrees of the angle scale 14...the base 11 of the angle scale 14 know the rotating angle of the rotating platform 12”).
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.
27. Claim(s) 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 201210017321 A Sun [English Translation provided] in view of NPL Video “Portable Phone Holder with LED Wireless Dimming Light Filled with Selfie Used-8579707” (5 May 2021) 2021-05-05 Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCWT3ni9u_s
28. Regarding Claim 24, Sun discloses The stand according to claim 18,
However, Sun does not explicitly disclose comprising one or more lights for illuminating the surface.
Further, NPL Video discloses comprising one or more lights for illuminating the surface (the stand comprises lights, See Sec. 6-9 of video).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the image capture system of Sun to include a stand with integrated illumination, such as the selfie stick lighting system as taught by the NPL Video, in order to improve image quality during capture of cooking scenes by providing consistent illumination of the cooking surface, thereby facilitating more reliable recognition of ingredients and cooking operations.
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.
29. Claim(s) 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 201210017321 A Sun [English Translation provided] in view of U.S. Patent Application 2014/0029183, Ashcraft et al.
30. Regarding Claim 22, Sun discloses The stand according to claim 18,
However, Sun does not explicitly disclose comprising a stylus, which is held on the stand and configured for interaction with the touchscreen.
Ashcraft teaches comprising a stylus (Fig. 3A: Stylus 320, [0014]), which is held on the stand (stylus clip 310) and configured for interaction with the touchscreen ([0011], “Stylus 120 represents a pen-shaped tool for facilitating user input on a touch- based computing device” stylus can interact with touchscreen).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the stylus clip as taught in Ashcraft and incorporate onto a side of the portable mobile device stand as taught in Sun in order to hold a stylus so that the user can access an area for a stylus when their fingers are messy and won’t operate the touch screen of the mobile device. Hence, providing better precision and control for small interface elements. Therefore, eliminating unintended touches.
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.
31. Claim(s) 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 201210017321 A Sun [English Translation provided] in view of U.S. Patent 10,535,360, Ho et al.
32. Regarding Claim 23, Sun discloses The stand according to claim 18,
However, Sun does not explicitly disclose wherein the mount comprises a communication chip for communicating with the mobile device.
Ho teaches wherein the mount comprises a communication chip (Fig. 1: local wireless network interface 626) for communicating with the mobile device (Col. 4 lines 28-31, system controller 630 interacts with phone 111 over one or more data communication sessions via local wireless network interface 626 to phone 111 to process voice session 121 and audio session 141).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the phone stand 600 which comprises a local wireless network interface (i.e. communication chip) with the portable phone holder as taught in Sun. The combination would provide predictable benefits of allowing the holder not only to support the phone physically but also to enable wireless connectivity and audio output. Hence reducing the need for separate accessories and improves user convenience.
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.
33. Claim(s) 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 201210017321 A Sun [English Translation provided] in view of CN 110278312A Li et al. (English Translation provided).
34. Regarding Claim 25, Sun discloses The stand according to claim 18,
However, Sun does not explicitly disclose comprising a fan configured to ventilate the camera.
Li teaches comprising a fan configured to ventilate the camera (Page 4 para 3, the front end of the rod body is connected with a bracket 2, the bracket 2 is provided with a cooling fan 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine a cooling fan as taught in Li and combine it to the portable phone holder as taught in the Sun in order to “assist in cooling the smartphone phone [i.e. camera], so as to ensure the safety and stability of using a mobile phone when using the selfie rod, prolongs the service life of the mobile phone battery.” See Li page 2-3, last para of page 2 first para of page 3.
PNG
media_image2.png
149
37
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMER KHALID whose telephone number is (571)270-5997. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 9am-7pm.
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, John Miller can be reached at (571) 272-7353. 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.
/OMER KHALID/Examiner, Art Unit 2422
/BRIAN P YENKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2422