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 § 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 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 of this title, 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) 1-2, 12, 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frisken et al. (US 20040189644 A1, hereinafter Frisken) in view of Nose (US 20110261091 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Frisken discloses an effect image generation method (Abstract, ¶0021, claim 1 and dependent), comprising:
acquiring an image to be processed in response to an effect trigger operation (401, 701, in figs. 4, 7, ¶0106-0108, ¶0161);
determining an edge contour effect corresponding to the image to be processed (Distance fields also have much to offer in the area of kinetic typography or animated type because distance fields provide information important for simulating interactions between objects, ¶0043. Level set methods, which use signed distance fields, can be used to model numerous effects such as melting and fluid dynamics. ADFs are a compact implicit representation that can be efficiently queried to compute distance values and gradients, two important computations required for the methods listed above, ¶0182.
Our methods also provide a computational substrate for distance-based automatic hinting, for distance-based grid fitting, for unifying three common digital font design paradigms, and for generating a variety of special effects for kinetic typography, ¶0189. Also see Abstract); and
obtaining a target effect image by adding the edge contour effect to the image to be processed (ibid, ¶0182, abstract, In addition, distance fields can be used to provide non-photorealistic rendering of an animated object to add artistic effect, ¶0184. Also see Abstract, ¶0063, ¶0189),
wherein the edge contour effect is obtained based on a distance field
Although, Frisken discloses that stochastic sampling tends to replace moir pattern aliasing with high frequency noise and has been shown to be particularly effective in reducing temporal aliasing (¶0164), Frisken is not found disclosing expressly that the edge contour effect is obtained based on a distance field and at least one noise image.
However, Nose discloses that display image data generation unit generates display image data by adding a noise pattern (Abstract, ¶0100).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the invention of Frisken, with its own disclosure of ¶0164 of adding noise to generate the dynamic image besides dynamism based on signed distance field, and disclosure of Nose of adding Noise pattern to the animation image, to obtain, the edge contour effect is obtained based on a distance field and at least one noise image, because, combining prior art elements ready to be improved according to known method to yield predictable results is obvious (see MPEP §2143.I).
Regarding claim 2, Frisken in view of Nose discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the edge contour effect comprises at least one of: an object contour effect corresponding to a target subject in the image to be processed, and a frame effect corresponding to the image to be processed (Frisken: A method animates an object as a sequence of frames according to an animation script. The object is represented as a two-dimensional distance field. For each frame in the sequence of frames, a pose of the object is updated according to the animation script. The object is rendered using the updated pose and an antialiasing rendering method – Abstract, figs. 1-2, ¶0047).
Regarding claim 12, Frisken in view of Nose discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein obtaining the target effect image by adding the edge contour effect to the image to be processed comprises:
obtaining the target effect image by fusing the image to be processed with the edge contour effect (Frisken: For example, individual components of glyphs such as stems, bars, rounds, and serifs can be designed separately. After design, the components can be blended together using implicit blending methods to compose different glyphs of the same typeface, ¶0042
For component-based design, our font editor provides the ability to efficiently reflect and rotate ADFs using quadtree manipulation to model the symmetries common in glyphs. Additional features include ADF scaling, translation, and operations to combine multiple ADFs, e.g., CSG and blending, ¶0159).
Regarding claim 16, Frisken discloses an electronic device (computer, ¶0001), comprising:
acquire an image to be processed in response to an effect trigger operation;
determine an edge contour effect corresponding to the image to be processed; and
obtain a target effect image by adding the edge contour effect to the image to be processed,
wherein the edge contour effect is obtained based on a distance field and at least one noise image (see substantively similar claim 1 rejection above).
Although Frisken discloses his method is implemented in a computer graphics system, Frisken is not found explicitly disclosing,
at least one processor; and
a storage, configured to store at least one program,
wherein the at least one program, when executed by the at least one processor, causes the at least one processor to perform the steps.
Nevertheless, Nose discloses, at least one processor; and
a storage, configured to store at least one program,
wherein the at least one program, when executed by the at least one processor, causes the at least one processor to perform the steps (title, ¶0002, claims 8-9, ¶0045, ¶0075).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to implement the computer graphics system of Frisken in at least one processor; and a storage, configured to store at least one program, wherein the at least one program, when executed by the at least one processor, causes the at least one processor to perform the steps, described above, because, combining prior art elements ready to be improved according to known method to yield predictable results is obvious (see MPEP §2143.I).
Regarding claim 17, Frisken discloses
acquire an image to be processed in response to an effect trigger operation;
determine an edge contour effect corresponding to the image to be processed; and
obtain a target effect image by adding the edge contour effect to the image to be processed,
wherein the edge contour effect is obtained based on a distance field and at least one noise image (see substantively similar claim 1 rejection above).
Although Frisken discloses his method is implemented in a computer graphics system, Frisken is not found explicitly disclosing,
a non-transitory storage medium comprising computer-executable instructions, wherein the computer-executable instructions, when executed by a computer processor, causing a computer to, execute the steps.
Nevertheless, Nose discloses, a non-transitory storage medium comprising computer-executable instructions, wherein the computer-executable instructions, when executed by a computer processor, causing a computer to: to perform the steps (title, ¶0002, claims 8-9, ¶0045, ¶0075).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to implement the computer graphics system of Frisken in a non-transitory storage medium comprising computer-executable instructions, wherein the computer-executable instructions, when executed by a computer processor, causing a computer to perform the steps described above, because, combining prior art elements ready to be improved according to known method to yield predictable results is obvious (see MPEP §2143.I).
Regarding claim 18, Frisken in view of Nose discloses the device according to claim 16, wherein the edge contour effect comprises at least one of: an object contour effect corresponding to a target subject in the image to be processed, and a frame effect corresponding to the image to be processed (Frisken: A method animates an object as a sequence of frames according to an animation script. The object is represented as a two-dimensional distance field. For each frame in the sequence of frames, a pose of the object is updated according to the animation script. The object is rendered using the updated pose and an antialiasing rendering method – Abstract, figs. 1-2, ¶0047).
Claim(s) 3, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frisken in view of Nose and further in view of Dudovitch et al. (US 20220270265 A1, hereinafter Dudovitch)
Regarding claim 3, Frisken in view of Nose discloses the method according to claim 1, except, wherein the method further comprises, before determining the edge contour effect corresponding to the image to be processed:
in response to a type trigger operation for an edge contour effect, determining, based on the type trigger operation, to generate an object contour effect or a frame effect.
However, Dudovitch discloses that based on user selection made for Visual effect selection module 519, either of contour effect or a frame effect could be selected (¶0111).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to take user input for animation effect to be applied to the image in Frisken according to the teaching of Dudovitch, and apply the selected effect to the image, to obtain, wherein the method further comprises, before determining the edge contour effect corresponding to the image to be processed: in response to a type trigger operation for an edge contour effect, determining, based on the type trigger operation, to generate an object contour effect or a frame effect, because, combining prior art elements ready to be improved according to known method to yield predictable results is obvious (see MPEP §2143.I).
Regarding device claim(s) 19, although wording is different, the material is considered substantively equivalent to the method claim(s) 3 as described above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-11, 13-14, 20-21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 4, prior arts of record taken alone or in combination fails to reasonably disclose or suggest, wherein determining the edge contour effect corresponding to the image to be processed comprises: determining whether the image to be processed comprises the target subject; in response to determining that the image to be processed comprises the target subject, generating the object contour effect based on the target subject; and
in response to determining that the image to be processed does not comprise the target subject, generating the frame effect based on the image to be processed.
Regarding claim 5, prior arts of record taken alone or in combination fails to reasonably disclose or suggest, the method according to claim 2, wherein determining the edge contour effect corresponding to the image to be processed comprises:
determining a contour image corresponding to a target subject in the image to be processed, and generating a first distance field based on the contour image; or generating a first distance field corresponding to a preset frame display style according to the preset frame display style; and determining the edge contour effect based on the first distance field and at least one predetermined noise image.
Regarding claim 13, prior arts of record taken alone or in combination fails to reasonably disclose or suggest, the method according to claim 1, wherein the method further comprises, before obtaining the target effect image by adding the edge contour effect to the image to be processed: in response to detecting that a sequence frame material corresponding to the edge contour effect exists, updating the edge contour effect by superimposing the sequence frame material on the edge contour effect.
Regarding claim 14, prior arts of record taken alone or in combination fails to reasonably disclose or suggest, wherein the edge contour effect comprises an animation effect, and motion information of at least part of the animation effect corresponds to a preset flow direction information.
Regarding claim 20, prior arts of record taken alone or in combination fails to reasonably disclose or suggest, the device according to claim 17, wherein the at least one program causing the at least one processor to determine the edge contour effect corresponding to the image to be processed further causes the at least one processor to:
determine whether the image to be processed comprises the target subject;
in response to determining that the image to be processed comprises the target subject, generate the object contour effect based on the target subject; and
in response to determining that the image to be processed does not comprise the target subject, generate the frame effect based on the image to be processed.
Regarding claim 21, prior arts of record taken alone or in combination fails to reasonably disclose or suggest, the device according to claim 17, wherein the at least on program causing the at least one processor to determine the edge contour effect corresponding to the image to be processed further cause the at least one processor to: determine a contour image corresponding to a target subject in the image to be processed, and generating a first distance field based on the contour image; or generating a first distance field corresponding to a preset frame display style according to the preset frame display style; and
determine the edge contour effect based on the first distance field and at least one predetermined noise image.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NURUN FLORA whose telephone number is (571)272-5742. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 am -5:00 pm.
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, Jason Chan can be reached at (571) 272-3022. 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.
/NURUN FLORA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2619
Prosecution Insights