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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1 – 20 dated 11/15/2024 are presently pending in the application and have been examined below, the claims 1, 10, 11, 12, 16, and 17 are presented in independent form.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 11/15/2024. These drawings are accepted.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) dated 11/15/2024, 10/21/2025, and 12/05/2025 have been received and considered.
Claim Objections
Claim 10, 16 and 17 objected under 37 CFR 1.75 as being substantial duplicate of claims 1, 11, and 12, respectively. The recited claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they cover the same things, despite a slight difference in wording. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
Claim 1 discloses a method applied to a first terminal device communicating to a second terminal device. Claim 10 discloses another method applied to a second terminal device communicating with a first terminal device. No essential differences in two terminal devices and in two claimed methods are indicated. Accordingly, claim 10 is considered as a duplicate of claim 1. Similar arguments apply to claims 16 and 17 with respect to claims 11 and 12, respectively.
Appropriate corrections are required.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1 – 3 and 5 – 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimaki (US 20240346844) (hereafter Nishimaki) and in view of Haddick et al. (US 20130127980) (hereafter Haddick).
As per claim 1 Nishimaki discloses: A video call method, applied to a first terminal device, the method comprising: establishing, by the first terminal device, a video call with a second terminal device; (Nishimaki, in para. [0041 – 0043] discloses a method to establish a video call by connecting a terminal device 1 with another terminal device [0204] per face recognition/authentication as depicted in Fig. 24), receiving face authentication request information from the second terminal device based on a preset data channel (Nishimaki, in para. [0163] discloses image recognition process comprising image detection by image sensor unit CIS11, requesting by processing unit AP12 respective data, followed by the processing unit AP12 configured according to predetermined conditions as disclosed in para. [0043, 0045]); acquiring face image information in response to the face authentication request information (Nishimaki, in para. [0048] discloses face authentication based on acquired image information);
Nishimaki fails to explicitly disclose privacy protection of video communication using data encryption technology. However, Haddick, discloses:
performing privacy protection processing on the face image information to obtain encrypted information or authentication information (Haddick, in para. [0822] discloses data encryption related to biometric information, i.e., face recognition [0635], used for authentication to protect privacy of communication per video call as depicted in Fig. 32 and disclosed in para. [0703-0704]);
and sending the encrypted information or the authentication information to the second terminal device based on the preset data channel, (Haddick, in para. [0635] discloses authentication per face recognition and sending the obtained information to respective device in the network, in para. [0650]),
such that the second terminal device determines a face authentication result of the first terminal device according to the encrypted information or the authentication information. (Haddick, in para. [0899] discloses processing of encrypted biometric information, i.e., authentication by face recognition, using known AES encryption technology).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nishimaki, in view of teaching of Haddick because they both disclose data processing related to the video communication. The motivation to combine would be to modify method of Nishimaki by using the data authentication and processing features to improve security of the system.
As per claim 2 Nishimaki as modified discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein performing privacy protection processing on the face image information to obtain encrypted information or authentication information comprises: performing encryption processing on the face image information according to a preset encryption rule to obtain the encrypted information; or performing authentication processing on the face image information according to a preset authentication database to obtain the authentication information (Nishimaki, in para. [0163] discloses image recognition process comprising image detection by image sensor unit CIS11 followed by the processing unit AP12 configured according to predetermined conditions as disclosed in para. [0043, 0045]).
As per claim 3 Nishimaki as modified discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein in response to performing the privacy protection processing on the face image information to obtain the authentication information, the privacy protection processing comprises: sending the face image information to a preset authentication server (Nishimaki, in para. [0043] discloses communication of the authentication information between the sensors and processing unit according to predetermined conditions), such that the authentication server performs authentication processing on the face image information; and receiving the authentication information from the authentication server (Nishimaki, in para. [0045] discloses processing of the authentication information by the CIS11 unit).
As per claim 5 Nishimaki as modified discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein before acquiring face image information in response to the face authentication request information, the method further comprises: acquiring video information; anonymizing the video information; and sending the anonymized video information to the second terminal device (Haddick, in para. [1295] discloses usage of the inventive method for any kind of private communication, I.e., anonymizing the communication).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nishimaki, in view of teaching of Haddick because they both disclose data processing related to the video communication. The motivation to combine would be to modify method of Nishimaki by using the invention for any kind of private communication, to improve security of the system.
As per claim 6 Nishimaki as modified discloses: The method of claim 5, wherein before anonymizing the video information, the method further comprises: acquiring a face region parameter; performing frame segmentation on the video information to determine a plurality of video frames; and determining a face region of each of the video frames according to the face region parameter (Haddick, in para. [0437, 0511, 0513] discloses image segmentation method, creation of frames and subframes [0826-0827] for data processing with improved privacy of communication [0384]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nishimaki, in view of teaching of Haddick because they both disclose data processing related to the video communication. The motivation to combine would be to modify method of Nishimaki by using image segmentation for private communication, to improve security of the system.
As per claim 7 Nishimaki as modified discloses: The method of claim 5, wherein before anonymizing the video information, the method further comprises: performing frame segmentation on the video information to determine a plurality of video frames (Haddick, in para. [0437, 0511, 0513] discloses image segmentation method, creation of frames and subframes [0826-0827] for data processing with improved privacy of communication [0384]); and performing face detection processing on each of the video frames to determine a face region of each of the video frames (Haddick, in para. [0625] discloses authentication based on the stored biometric information, including face image segmentation analysis [0513, 0625, 0825-0826]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nishimaki, in view of teaching of Haddick because they both disclose data processing related to the video communication. The motivation to combine would be to modify method of Nishimaki by using image segmentation for private communication, to improve security of the system.
As per claim 8 Nishimaki as modified discloses: The method of claim 6, wherein the anonymizing comprises one of: performing blurring processing on the face region; performing fogging processing on the face region (Haddick, in para. [0465, 0483] discloses image clarity improvement including processing of blurred and fogged image regions); performing mosaic processing on the face region (Haddick, in para. [0890] discloses usage of mosaic print sensor for image clarity improvement); or performing virtual image replacement processing on the face region (Haddick, in para. [0655] discloses application of multi-sensory virtual 3D environment to process video data).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nishimaki, in view of teaching of Haddick because they both disclose data processing related to the video communication. The motivation to combine would be to modify method of Nishimaki by using image clarity improvement, to improve quality of video communication.
As per claim 9 Nishimaki as modified discloses: The method of claim 6, wherein acquiring face image information in response to the face authentication request information further comprises: in response to the face authentication request information, obtaining the face image information from the video frames based on the face region of each of the video frames (Haddick, in para. [0437, 0511, 0513] discloses image segmentation method, creation of frames and subframes [0826-0827] for data processing with improved privacy of communication [0384]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nishimaki, in view of teaching of Haddick because they both disclose data processing related to the video communication. The motivation to combine would be to modify method of Nishimaki by using image segmentation for private communication, to improve security of the system.
As per claim 10 Nishimaki discloses: A video call method, applied to a second terminal device, the method comprising: acquiring face authentication request information (Nishimaki, in para. [0041 – 0043] discloses a method to establish a video call by connecting a terminal device 1 with another terminal device [0204] per face recognition/authentication as depicted in Fig. 24);
sending the face authentication request information to a first terminal device based on a preset data channel (Nishimaki, in para. [0163] discloses image recognition process comprising image detection by image sensor unit CIS11, requesting by processing unit AP12 respective data, followed by the processing unit AP12 configured according to predetermined conditions as disclosed in para. [0043, 0045])
and the face image information is acquired by the first terminal device in response to the face authentication request information (Nishimaki, in para. [0048] discloses face authentication based on acquired image information);
Nishimaki fails to explicitly disclose privacy protection of video communication using data encryption technology. However, Haddick, discloses:
receiving encrypted information or authentication information from the first terminal device based on the preset data channel, wherein the encrypted information or the authentication information is obtained by the first terminal device by performing privacy protection processing on face image information (Haddick, in para. [0822] discloses data encryption related to biometric information, i.e., face recognition [0635], used for authentication to protect privacy of communication per video call as depicted in Fig. 32 and disclosed in para. [0703-0704]);
and determining a face authentication result of the first terminal device according to the encrypted information or the authentication information. (Haddick, in para. [0899] discloses processing of encrypted biometric information, i.e., authentication by face recognition, using known AES encryption technology).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nishimaki, in view of teaching of Haddick because they both disclose data processing related to the video communication. The motivation to combine would be to modify method of Nishimaki by using the data authentication and processing features to improve security of the system.
As per claims 11 and 12, claims 11 and 12 each encompasses same or similar scope as claim 1. Therefore, claims 11, 12 each is rejected based on the same reasons set forth above in rejecting claim 1.
As per claims 13, 14 and 15, claims 13, 14 and 15 each encompasses same or similar scope as claims 3, 8, and 9, respectively. Therefore, claims 13, 14 and 15 are rejected based on the same reasons set forth above in rejecting claims 3, 8 and 9.
As per claims 16 and 17, claims 16 and 17 each encompasses same or similar scope as claim 10. Therefore, claims 16 and 17 each is rejected based on the same reasons set forth above in rejecting claim 10.
As per claims 18 and 19, claims 18 and 19 each encompasses same or similar scope as claims 2 and 3, respectively. Therefore, claims 18 and 19 are rejected based on the same reasons set forth above in rejecting claims 2 and 3.
Claims 4 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimaki (US 20240346844) (hereafter Nishimaki), in view of Haddick et al. (US 20130127980) (hereafter Haddick) and in view of Tiwari et al. (US 20200396793) (hereafter Tiwari).
As per claim 4 Nishimaki as modified discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein before receiving face authentication request information from the second terminal device based on a preset data channel, the method further comprises: receiving data channel establishment information from the second terminal device; and in response to the data channel establishment information, sending preset configuration information to the second terminal device (Examiner note, the limitation “data channel establishment information” is broadly disclosed in the claim as a certain peace of information that in response to its detection and upon meeting a pre-condition, causing data transfer, without any further details; the limitation is met in Nishimaki by the operations of the CIS11-AP12 processing units included in terminal device and detecting a communication for predetermined configuration of the operational state and controlling data communication accordingly, i.e., establishing data communication process as disclosed by Nishimaki in para. [0043-0045]) (Nishimaki, in para. [0163] discloses image recognition process comprising image detection by image sensor processing unit CIS11 followed by the processing unit AP12 controlling communication according to predetermined conditions as disclosed in para. [0043-0045]).
Nishimaki as modified failed to explicitly disclose: usage of internet multimedia subsystem, IMS. However, Tiwari, discloses: such that the second terminal device establishes a data channel based on an Internet Protocol Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) domain with the first terminal device according to the preset configuration information (Examiner note, the Internet Protocol Multimedia Subsystem, is a standard framework for voice and video communication as disclosed by applicant in SPECS, [0030-0032]) (Tiwari, in para. [0103-0105] discloses usage of Internet Protocol Multimedia Subsystem service for video communication).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nishimaki-Haddick, in view of teaching of Tiwari because they all disclose data processing related to the video communication. The motivation to combine would be to modify method of Nishimaki-Haddick by using the Internet Protocol Multimedia Subsystem to improve efficiency of communication in the system.
As per claim 20, claim 20 encompasses same or similar scope as claim 4. Therefore, claim 20 is rejected based on the same reasons set forth above in rejecting claim 4.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Cho US_20200004940, Chung US_20160100314, Cui US_20210344675, Park US_20170142589, Shi US_20240223376, Yonishi US_20190199898.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VLADIMIR IVANOVICH GAVRILENKO whose telephone number is (313)446-6530. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 7:30-4:30 EST.
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, Lynn Feild can be reached on (571) 272-2092. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/VLADIMIR I GAVRILENKO/Examiner, Art Unit 2431
Prosecution Insights