DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-19 are currently pending.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/05/2026 and 12/13/2024 have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
-The storage unit
-The detection unit
-The human body determination unit
-The generation unit
in claims 1-17.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6, 8, and 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Haggui (“Human Tracking in Top-view Fisheye Images with Color Histograms via Deep Learning Detection”).
Regarding claim 1, Haggui teaches:
An information processing device, comprising:
a storage unit configured to store color information of a human body as reference color information; ( Haggui, page 3 left column, the histograms of the detected objects in the previous frame is also computed to compare these histograms together (i.e. a reference histogram))
a detection unit configured to detect a human body candidate from a captured image captured by a fisheye camera; (Haggui, page 3 left column, To do so, bounding boxes of the detected objects (human body candidate) are easily isolated and their color histograms are computed… See also Figure 3 illustrated detected persons in a fisheye image)) and
a human body determination unit configured to acquire, from the storage unit, the reference color information corresponding to a detection area where the human body candidate is detected, ( Haggui, page 3 left column, the histograms of the detected objects in the previous frame is also computed to compare these histograms together (i.e. a reference histogram))and determine whether the human body candidate is a human body on the basis of a similarity between the acquired reference color information corresponding to the detection area and color information of the human body candidate. (Haggui, page 3 left column, As a matter of fact, the smallest distance (basis of similarity) is tied to the closest bounding box for the person we are trying to follow)
Regarding claim 2, Haggui teaches:
The information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the storage unit is configured to store color information of a human body detected in a plurality of areas obtained by dividing the captured image captured by the fisheye camera, for each of the plurality of areas as the reference color information. (Haggui, page 3 left column, To do so, bounding boxes of the detected objects (human body candidate) are easily isolated and their color histograms are computed))
Regarding claim 3, Haggui teaches:
The information processing device according to claim 2, further comprising a generation unit configured to generate, from the color information of a human body detected in the plurality of areas, the reference color information corresponding to each of the plurality of areas and store the reference color information in the storage unit. (Haggui, page 3 left column, To do so, bounding boxes of the detected objects (human body candidate) are easily isolated and their color histograms are computed… See also Figure 3 illustrated detected persons in a fisheye image))
Regarding claim 4, Haggui teaches:
The information processing device according to claim 3, wherein the generation unit is configured to generate, on the basis of color information of a human body detected in the plurality of areas of a plurality of the captured images, the reference color information corresponding to a corresponding area of the plurality of areas. (Haggui, page 3 left column, To do so, bounding boxes of the detected objects (human body candidate) are easily isolated and their color histograms are computed… See also Figure 3 illustrated detected persons in a fisheye image))
Regarding claim 6, Haggui teaches:
The information processing device according to 2,wherein the reference color information is generated on the basis of pixel values in a frame surrounding the human body detected in the area, and the color information of the human body candidate is generated on the basis of pixel values in a frame surrounding the human body candidate. (Haggui, page 3 left column, To do so, bounding boxes of the detected objects (human body candidate) are easily isolated and their color histograms are computed))
Regarding claim 8, Haggui teaches:
The information processing device according to claim 6, wherein the reference color information is a histogram of the pixel values in the frame surrounding the human body detected in the area, and the color information of the human body candidate is a histogram of the pixel values in the frame surrounding the human body candidate. (Haggui, page 3 left column, To do so, bounding boxes of the detected objects (human body candidate) are easily isolated and their color histograms are computed))
Regarding claim 14, Haggui teaches:
The information processing device according to claim 2,wherein the reference color information is a trained model, the trained model being trained using, as training data, color information of the human body detected in the plurality of areas in the plurality of captured images, and being configured to output whether color information of the human body candidate input is color information of the human body detected in the detection area. ( Haggui, page 3 left column, the histograms of the detected objects in the previous frame is also computed to compare these histograms together (i.e. a reference histogram))
Regarding claim 15, Haggui teaches:
The information processing device according claim 2,wherein each of the plurality of areas is associated with a plurality of pieces of the reference color information. (Haggui, page 3 left column, To do so, bounding boxes of the detected objects (human body candidate) are easily isolated and their color histograms are computed)
Regarding claim 16, Haggui teaches:
The information processing device according to claim 1,further comprising an output unit configured to present the human body candidate determined to be a human body by the human body determination unit to a user as a result of the detection of a human body. (Haggui, page 3 left column, To do so, bounding boxes of the detected objects (human body candidate) are easily isolated and their color histograms are computed… See also Figure 3 illustrated detected persons in a fisheye image))
Regarding claim 17, Haggui teaches:
The information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the storage unit is configured to store the reference color information according to a distance from a center position of the captured image captured by the fisheye camera. (Haggui, page 5, section C, In this part, we define a method to calculate the position of the person within the camera framework…. r is a pixel distanced clacualted between the bounding box center and the image center)
Regarding claim 18, Haggui teaches:
An information processing method executed by a computer, the method comprising the steps of:
storing color information of a human body in a storage unit as reference color information; ( Haggui, page 3 left column, the histograms of the detected objects in the previous frame is also computed to compare these histograms together (i.e. a reference histogram))
detecting a human body candidate from a captured image captured by a fisheye camera; (Haggui, page 3 left column, To do so, bounding boxes of the detected objects (human body candidate) are easily isolated and their color histograms are computed… See also Figure 3 illustrated detected persons in a fisheye image)) and
acquiring, from the storage unit, the reference color information corresponding to a detection area where the human body candidate is detected, ( Haggui, page 3 left column, the histograms of the detected objects in the previous frame is also computed to compare these histograms together (i.e. a reference histogram) ) and then determining whether the human body candidate is a human body on the basis of a similarity between the acquired reference color information corresponding to the detection area and color information of the human body candidate. (Haggui, page 3 left column, As a matter of fact, the smallest distance (basis of similarity) is tied to the closest bounding box for the person we are trying to follow)
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 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 5 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haggui as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Talaoubrind (“Human Tracking in Top-View Fisheye Images: Analysis of Familiarity Similarity Measures via HOG and against various Color Spaces”).
Regarding claim 5, Haggui teaches:
The information processing device according to claim 3, wherein the generation unit is configured to,
in a case where a correlation coefficient between color information of a human body newly detected in an area of the plurality of areas and the reference color information corresponding to the area is equal to or greater than a first threshold, update the reference color information corresponding to the area on the basis of the color information of the human body newly detected in the area, (Haggui, page 3, left column, As a matter of fact the smallest distance is tied to the closest bounding box for the person we are trying to follow….page 5 left column Then the model is updated by keeping the histogram of the minimum distance for the next frame) and
in a case where the correlation coefficient between the color information of the human body newly detected in the area and the reference color information corresponding to the area is less than a second threshold being equal to or less than the first threshold, store the color information of the human body newly detected in the area in the storage unit as new reference color information corresponding to the area. (Haggui, page 3, left column, As a matter of fact the smallest distance is tied to the closest bounding box for the person we are trying to follow….page 5 left column Then the model is updated by keeping the histogram of the minimum distance for the next frame)
Haggui fails to disclose a correlation coefficient as claimed.
Talaoubrid teaches on page 7 “Comparison is based on six similarity measures summarized in Table 2….. Histogram Correlation… To standardize it with other distances, in particular, the complement of this measure is computed so that it translates to a value close to 0, for better matching.”
Before the time of filing, it would have been obvious to substitute the histogram correlation of Talaoubrid for the distance measure of similarity in Haggui. The inventions lie in the same field of endeavor of person tracking. The rationale for the substitution is the simple substitution of one well known comparison metric for another yielding a predictable result of a determination of similarity of histograms.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Haggui and Talaoubrid teaches:
The information processing device according to claim 8, wherein the human body determination unit is configured to determine that the human body candidate is a human body in a case where a correlation coefficient between the histogram of the color information of the human body candidate and the histogram of the reference color information corresponding to the detection area is equal to or greater than a predetermined threshold. (Talaoubrid, page 7, Comparison is based on six similarity measures summarized in Table 2….. Histogram Correlation… To standardize it with other distances, in particular, the complement of this measure is computed so that it translates to a value close to 0, for better matching.)
Before the time of filing, it would have been obvious to substitute the histogram correlation of Talaoubrid for the distance measure of similarity in Haggui. The inventions lie in the same field of endeavor of person tracking. The rationale for the substitution is the simple substitution of one well known comparison metric for another yielding a predictable result of a determination of similarity of histograms.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Haggui and Talaoubrid teaches:
The information processing device according to claim 8, wherein the histogram of the pixel values includes histograms for RGB. (Haggui, page 3 left column, To do so, bounding boxes of the detected objects (human body candidate) are easily isolated and their color histograms are computed…. See also page 2 right column, In this preliminary study, we focused on RGB (Red-Green-Blue) and the HSV (Hue-Saturation-Value) color spaces))
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Haggui and Talaoubrid teaches:
The information processing device according to claim 10, wherein the human body determination unit is configured to determine whether the human body candidate is a human body on the basis of a mean value, a maximum value, or a minimum value of correlation coefficients between the histograms for RGB of the color information of the human body candidate and the histograms for RGB of the reference color information corresponding to the detection area. (Haggui, page 3 left column, As a matter of fact, the smallest distance (minimum value of correlation coefficients) is tied to the closest bounding box for the person we are trying to follow)
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haggui (same as above) in view of Yamada (US 2012/02744634).
Regarding claim 19, Haggui teaches:
storing color information of a human body in a storage unit as reference color information; ( Haggui, page 3 left column, the histograms of the detected objects in the previous frame is also computed to compare these histograms together (i.e. a reference histogram))
detecting a human body candidate from a captured image captured by a fisheye camera; (Haggui, page 3 left column, To do so, bounding boxes of the detected objects (human body candidate) are easily isolated and their color histograms are computed… See also Figure 3 illustrated detected persons in a fisheye image)) and
acquiring, from the storage unit, the reference color information corresponding to a detection area where the human body candidate is detected, ( Haggui, page 3 left column, the histograms of the detected objects in the previous frame is also computed to compare these histograms together (i.e. a reference histogram) ) and then determining whether the human body candidate is a human body on the basis of a similarity between the acquired reference color information corresponding to the detection area and color information of the human body candidate. (Haggui, page 3 left column, As a matter of fact, the smallest distance (basis of similarity) is tied to the closest bounding box for the person we are trying to follow)
Haggui fails to teach:
A non-transitory computer readable medium storing a program for causing a computer to execute the steps of:
Yamada teaches:
A non-transitory computer readable medium storing a program for causing a computer to execute the steps of: (Yamada [00239], processor implemented in the form of an IC, ASIC, LSI, and DSP)
Before the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to add the processor of Yamada to the tracking system of Haggui. The rationale for the combination is the combination of known elements to yield the predictable result of a computer implemented person tracking system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 12-13 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. Refer to PTO-892, Notice of References Cited for a listing of analogous art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Molly K Wilburn whose telephone number is (571)272-3589. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-4pm.
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, Emily Terrell can be reached at (571) 270-3717. 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.
/Molly Wilburn/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2666
Prosecution Insights