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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 5-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2008/0034306 by Ording.
Regarding claim 1, a display method for generating an output video by selectively using a plurality of video streams, the display method comprising:
acquiring the plurality of video streams from a plurality of video sources (paragraph 0078 teaches “The multi-image icons of the invention can also be used by the GUI's of application programs to display multi-image content that are being organized, stored and/or edited by the programs. For instance, FIG. 9 illustrates the GUI 925 of a photo editing/organizing application. This photo editing/organizing application displays four multi-image icons of four digital film rolls, where a digital film roll is a set of digital images that are imported (from an external source, such as a digital camera or memory, or from an internal folder) into the photo organizing application during one import session. As shown in this figure, the film rolls are stored in a folder called vacations.”);
displaying on a display an image indicating the plurality of video streams acquired (fig. 4, 7 shows displaying plurality of video streams); and
receiving a selection by a user of at least one first video stream to be used for the output video among the plurality of video streams displayed (in addition to discussion above, fig. 6, paragraph 0065 teaches “As shown in FIG. 6, the process 600 selects (at 610) the subset of images based on the set of criteria identified at 605. Specifically, in some embodiments, the process uses the selection criteria to identify a certain number of images in the storage structure or structures that contain the set of images. For instance, in some embodiments, the process selects the nth frame in a video and every mth frame after that until x frames have been selected, where n, m, and x are integers.”), wherein
in the image, a display mode is different between the at least one first video stream selected and a second video stream which is not selected by the user as a video stream to be used for the output video among the plurality of video streams (fig. 5, paragraph 0104 teaches “When the motion picture preview starts in the icon's enlarged graphical window, certain playback controls appear in or with the icon. For instance, a stop button 525 replaces the icon's play button 1530, as shown in FIGS. 5 and 16. As further shown in FIG. 5, a playback bar 505 appears at the bottom of the icon's graphical window to indicate the location in video clip that is being displayed at any given time.”).
Regarding claim 5, the display method wherein a name set by the user for each of the plurality of video streams is displayed on the image (fig. 4-5, 7-8 shows name of video steams).
Regarding claim 6, the display method further comprising acquiring position information indicating an installation position of each of the plurality of video sources from the plurality of video sources, wherein in the image, the installation position of each of the plurality of video sources is displayed on a map based on the position information acquired (in addition to discussion above, paragraph 0084 teaches “FIG. 12 conceptually illustrates a data structure 1205 used in some embodiments to represent a multi-image icon. As shown in this figure, the data structure 1205 includes a reference 1210 to the file or files that contains the set of images associated with the icon. It also includes location data 1215 that specifies the location (e.g., the folder containing the icon, the position of the icon, etc.) of the icon in the GUI. The data structure also includes (1) multiple references 1220 to multiple thumbnails of images in the set of images represented by the icon, and (2) metadata 1225 related to these thumbnails (e.g., to the arrangement of the thumbnails, to the identity of their corresponding images in the set of images, etc.).”, paragraph 0006, 0074, 0079).
Regarding claim 7, the display method further comprising analyzing the plurality of video streams acquired, to calculate at least one feature quantity of an image feature quantity and an audio feature quantity for each of the plurality of video streams, wherein the at least one feature quantity of each of the plurality of video streams is displayed on the image (in addition to discussion above, fig. 3 shows feature quantity information, herein, metadata. paragraph 0074).
Regarding claim 8, the display method further comprising outputting change instruction information for instructing the plurality of video sources to change data amounts of the plurality of video streams (in addition to discussion above, paragraph 0018, paragraph 0075 teaches “As mentioned above, some embodiments allow a user to select the arrangement or size of the images that appear in the multi-image preview (e.g., allow the user to make such choices through the settings of the operating system or an application of the device). Some embodiments also allow a user to change the images that appear in the multi-image preview (e.g., to change the thumbnails in the icons).”, paragraph 0078 teaches “The multi-image icons of the invention can also be used by the GUI's of application programs to display multi-image content that are being organized, stored and/or edited by the programs. For instance, FIG. 9 illustrates the GUI 925 of a photo editing/organizing application. This photo editing/organizing application displays four multi-image icons of four digital film rolls, where a digital film roll is a set of digital images that are imported (from an external source, such as a digital camera or memory, or from an internal folder) into the photo organizing application during one import session. As shown in this figure, the film rolls are stored in a folder called vacations.”).
Claim 9 is rejected for the same reason as discussed in the corresponding claim 1 above (in addition to discussion above, paragraph 0137-0138).
Claim 10 is rejected for the same reason as discussed in the corresponding claim 1 above.
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2008/0034306 by Ording. in view of US 2019/0139285 by Chan et al., US 2021/0225406 by Han et al., and US 2012/0321187 by Yamaji et al.
Regarding claim 2, Ording discloses receiving a selection by a user of at least one first video stream (as discussed above), but fails to disclose the display method wherein an upper limit is set for a number of the at least one first video stream that is simultaneously selectable, and the display method further comprises displaying a warning on the display when an operation exceeding the upper limit is performed by the user.
Chan et al. discloses the display method wherein an upper limit is set for a number of the at least one first video stream (paragraph 0032-0033 teaches “The computer system then determines if the number of images is within a predetermined range (step 220). For example, the threshold for the number of images in the group can be 20 (i.e. the predetermined range is 20 or higher)…… In some embodiments, the predetermined range can depend on how the group of images is selected, whether they are selected for printing, or for electronic share, or placed in a single electronic folder or album, or received in an image upload, or tagged by a same label.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the ability to include the display method wherein an upper limit is set for a number of the at least one first video stream, as taught by Chan et al. into the system of Ording., because such incorporation would allow more options to a user to select images during editing, thus increase user flexibility of the system.
Ording and Chan et al. fail to disclose at least one first video stream that is simultaneously selectable, and the display method further comprises displaying a warning on the display when an operation exceeding the upper limit is performed by the user.
Han et al. discloses at least one first video stream that is simultaneously selectable (fig. 2, paragraph 0030 teaches “Exemplarily, FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram of a video selection interface according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. As shown in FIG. 2, a multi-selection control 21 may be disposed on the video selection interface, indicating that the user can currently select at least two existing video segments. The multi-selection control may be disposed at any position at the edge of the interface. In FIG. 2, the multi-select control is exemplarily disposed at the lower left. The video interactive application acquires, in real time, existing video segments selected by the user in response to the video multi-selection request of the user when detecting that the user clicks on the multi-selection control.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the ability to include at least one first video stream that is simultaneously selectable, as taught by Han et al. into the system of Ording., and Chan et al., because such incorporation would allow more options to a user to select images during editing, thus increase user flexibility of the system.
Ording, Chan et al., Han et al. fail to disclose the display method further comprises displaying a warning on the display when an operation exceeding the upper limit is performed by the user.
Yamaji et al. discloses the display method further comprises displaying a warning on the display when an operation exceeding the upper limit is performed by the user (paragraph 0052 teaches “When the user selects images through the image selecting section 22, the warning generating section 24 generates a warning if the number of images of the group corresponding to the selected images exceeds the upper limit number of images in the corresponding page or the group corresponding to the selected images is subjected to at least one of first exception processing and second exception processing.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the ability to displaying a warning on the display, as taught by Yamaji et al. into the system of Ording., Chan et al., and Han et al., because such incorporation would allow more options to a user to select images during editing, thus increase user flexibility of the system.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2008/0034306 by Ording. in view of US 2019/0139285 by Chan et al., US 2021/0225406 by Han et al.
Regarding claim 3, Ording discloses receiving a selection by a user of at least one first video stream (as discussed above), but fails to disclose the display method wherein an upper limit is set for a number of the at least one first video stream that is simultaneously selectable, and the display method further comprises displaying the upper limit and the number of the at least one first video stream.
Chan et al. discloses the display method wherein an upper limit is set for a number of the at least one first video stream, and the display method further comprises displaying the upper limit and the number of the at least one first video stream (paragraph 0032-0033 teaches “The computer system then determines if the number of images is within a predetermined range (step 220). For example, the threshold for the number of images in the group can be 20 (i.e. the predetermined range is 20 or higher)…… In some embodiments, the predetermined range can depend on how the group of images is selected, whether they are selected for printing, or for electronic share, or placed in a single electronic folder or album, or received in an image upload, or tagged by a same label.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the ability to include the display method wherein an upper limit is set for a number of the at least one first video stream, as taught by Chan et al. into the system of Ording., because such incorporation would allow more options to a user to select images during editing, thus increase user flexibility of the system.
Ording and Chan et al. fail to disclose at least one first video stream that is simultaneously selectable, and the display method further comprises displaying the upper limit and the number of the at least one first video stream.
Han et al. discloses at least one first video stream that is simultaneously selectable (fig. 2, paragraph 0030 teaches “Exemplarily, FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram of a video selection interface according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. As shown in FIG. 2, a multi-selection control 21 may be disposed on the video selection interface, indicating that the user can currently select at least two existing video segments. The multi-selection control may be disposed at any position at the edge of the interface. In FIG. 2, the multi-select control is exemplarily disposed at the lower left. The video interactive application acquires, in real time, existing video segments selected by the user in response to the video multi-selection request of the user when detecting that the user clicks on the multi-selection control.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the ability to include at least one first video stream that is simultaneously selectable, as taught by Han et al. into the system of Ording., and Chan et al., because such incorporation would allow more options to a user to select images during editing, thus increase user flexibility of the system.
Claim(s) 4, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2008/0034306 by Ording. in view of US 2019/0139285 by Chan et al.
Regarding claim 4, Ording discloses receiving a selection by a user of at least one first video stream (as discussed above), but fails to disclose the display method wherein the upper limit is smaller than a total number of the plurality of video streams indicated by the image.
Chan et al. discloses the display method wherein the upper limit is smaller than a total number of the plurality of video streams indicated by the image (paragraph 0032-0033 teaches “The computer system then determines if the number of images is within a predetermined range (step 220). For example, the threshold for the number of images in the group can be 20 (i.e. the predetermined range is 20 or higher)…… In some embodiments, the predetermined range can depend on how the group of images is selected, whether they are selected for printing, or for electronic share, or placed in a single electronic folder or album, or received in an image upload, or tagged by a same label.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the ability to include the display method wherein the upper limit is smaller than a total number of the plurality of video streams indicated by the image, as taught by Chan et al. into the system of Ording., because such incorporation would allow more options to a user to select images during editing, thus increase user flexibility of the system.
Claim 11 is rejected for the same reason as discussed in the corresponding claim 4 above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NIGAR CHOWDHURY whose telephone number is (571)272-8890. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM.
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 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.
/NIGAR CHOWDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2484
Prosecution Insights