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.
Claims 1-3, 11, & 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gregg Wilensky Et. Al. (Pat. Pub. US-20220236863-A1, herein after “Wilensky”).
In regard to claims 1, 13, & 14, Wilensky teaches [a] method for effect processing, comprising:
in response to an effect triggering operation, obtaining an original picture “the dynamic image-filter system captures the one or more image frames for saving or sharing, such as for saving in memory devices, transmitting to client devices via an electronic communication” (Wilensky, ¶ [0033]) where an image, or original picture, can be captured or obtained via an electronic communication or interaction, which is read as an effect triggering operation, wherein at least one effect configuration identifier is displayed in the original picture “ the dynamic image-filter system provides, for display within an improved user interface, one or more dynamic image filters for user selection” (Wilensky, ¶ [0039]) where image filters are displayed for selection from a user and are read as effect configuration identifiers, since the displayed filters, or effects, are identifying the dynamic filter to be used on the photo; and
receiving an identifier selection operation for the at least one effect configuration identifier to display an effect picture corresponding to a selected effect configuration identifier in the original picture “In FIG. 5A, the computing device 500 displays a graphical user interface 502a comprising a digital image 504, dynamic image filters 506, and dynamic filter variations 507” where the user interface includes icons to select an image filter, and “the client application 108 identifies a user input via a user interface of the client device 106 to select a dynamic image filter. Subsequently, in some embodiments, the client application 108 causes the client device 106 to generate, store, receive, transmit, and/or execute electronic data using a graphical processing unit (“GPU”), such as executable instructions for identifying a dynamic-simulation function and modifying a digital image according to the dynamic-simulation function” (Wilensky, ¶ [0058]) where upon user input for selection of a dynamic image filter, the image is modified based on the dynamic-simulation function.
PNG
media_image1.png
548
798
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Wilensky, Fig. 5A, depicting graphic user interface (item 502A) with dynamic image filters (item 506) which are read as an effect configuration identifier, additionally, Wilensky depicts dynamic filter variations (item 507) which include more effect identifiers.
In regard to claim 13, claim 1 is substantially similar to claim 13, hence the rejection analysis for claim 1 is also applied to claim 13. Wilensky teaches the additional limitations of [a]n electronic device, comprising:
at least one processor “the components of the computing device 1800 can include one or more instructions stored on a computer-readable storage medium and executable by processors” (Wilensky, ¶ [0203]); and
a storage apparatus, configured to storage at least one program “the components of the computing device 1800 can include one or more instructions stored on a computer-readable storage medium and executable by processors” (Wilensky, ¶ [0203]),
wherein the at least one program, when performed by the at least one processor, causes the at least one processor to:
in response to an effect triggering operation, obtain an original picture (Wilensky, ¶ [0033]), wherein at least one effect configuration identifier is displayed in the original picture (Wilensky, ¶ [0039]); and
receive an identifier selection operation for the at least one effect configuration identifier to display an effect picture corresponding to a selected effect configuration identifier in the original picture (Wilensky, ¶ [0058]).
In regard to claim 14, claim 1 is substantially similar to claim 14, hence the rejection analysis for claim 1 is also applied to claim 14. Wilensky teaches the additional limitations of [a] non-transitory storage medium comprising computer- executable instructions, wherein the computer-executable instructions “a non-transitory computer-readable medium can comprise instructions” (Wilensky, ¶ [0206]), when executed by a computer processor, cause the computer processor to “when executed by one or more processors, cause a computing device to perform the acts of FIG. 19” (Wilensky, ¶ [0206]):
in response to an effect triggering operation, obtain an original picture (Wilensky, ¶ [0033]), wherein at least one effect configuration identifier is displayed in the original picture (Wilensky, ¶ [0039]); and
receive an identifier selection operation for the at least one effect configuration identifier to display an effect picture corresponding to a selected effect configuration identifier in the original picture (Wilensky, ¶ [0058]).
In regard to claims 2 & 15, Wilensky teaches [t]he method for effect processing according to claim 1, wherein displaying the effect picture corresponding to the selected effect configuration identifier in the original picture comprises:
displaying the effect picture corresponding to the selected effect configuration identifier in the original picture as a background image of the original picture “the dynamic image-filter system 110 identifies a foreground or background layer to apply the dynamic image filter in response to detecting a user selection of the foreground or background layer prior to or during activation of a dynamic image filter” (Wilensky, ¶ [0074]) where the selected image filter, or effect, is applied to the background either before or after activation of the filter.
PNG
media_image2.png
550
800
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Wilensky, Fig. 9C, depicting a generated blue sky background with clouds as a second modified image (item 908).
In regard to claim 15, claim 2 is substantially similar to claim 15, hence the rejection analysis for claim 2 is also applied to claim 15. Wilensky teaches the additional limitations of [t]he device according to claim 13, wherein the at least one program causing the at least one processor to display the effect picture corresponding to the selected effect configuration identifier in the original picture comprises instructions to:
display the effect picture corresponding to the selected effect configuration identifier in the original picture as a background image of the original picture (Wilensky, ¶ [0074]).
In regard to claims 3 & 16, Wilensky teaches [t]he method for effect processing according to claim 1, wherein displaying the effect picture corresponding to the selected effect configuration identifier in the original picture comprises:
obtaining an effect material image corresponding to the selected effect configuration identifier and generating the effect picture based on the effect material image to display the effect picture in the original picture “based on detecting a user selection of a dynamic cloud generation image filter, the computing device 900 identifies a dynamic-simulation function to form the atmospheric clouds shown in FIG. 9A depicted with uniform distribution of moisture droplets visible as white clouds” (Wilensky, ¶ [0142]) where one example of a dynamic effect is the use of cloud generation. When a user selects the cloud effect, cloud generation models are produced, which is read as an effect material image that is obtained based on the selected effect configuration identifier.
In regard to claim 16, claim 3 is substantially similar to claim 16, hence the rejection analysis for claim 3 is also applied to claim 16. Wilensky teaches the additional limitations of [t]he device according to claim 13, wherein the at least one program causing the at least one processor to display the effect picture corresponding to the selected effect configuration identifier in the original picture comprises instructions to:
obtain an effect material image corresponding to the selected effect configuration identifier and generating the effect picture based on the effect material image to display the effect picture in the original picture (Wilensky, ¶ [0142]).
In regard to claim 11, Wilensky teaches [t]he method for effect processing according to claim 1, wherein the effect configuration identifier is used for indicating a picture constitution element in the effect picture, and the effect picture corresponding to the effect configuration identifier includes the picture constitution element indicated by the effect configuration identifier “based on detecting a user selection of a dynamic image filter, in certain implementations, the computing device 1400 identifies one or more dynamic-simulation functions” (Wilensky, ¶ [0174]) where the user selects a dynamic image filter, or configuration identifier, and then identifies simulation functions which control the applied filter or effect. This is being interpreted as a picture constitution element under the broadest reasonable interpretation that a picture constitution element is an aspect applied to a part of the picture. Under the broadest reasonable interpretation a simulation function is an aspect applied to a part of the picture, and corresponds to the selected dynamic image filter.
PNG
media_image3.png
739
527
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Wilensky, Fig. 19, depicting a flow chart with steps on applying the dynamic image filter which include the user’s selection of a dynamic image filter (item 1902, read as selecting an effect configuration identifier), which is then used for identifying a dynamic-simulation function (item 1906a, read as indicating a picture constitution element since the simulation function must be applied to an element of the picture).
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.
Claims 4-5, 7-11, 17-18, & 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilensky in view of Juntao Sun Et. Al. (Pat. Pub. WO-2021170013-A1, herein after “Sun”).
In regard to claims 4 & 17, Wilensky teaches [t]he method for effect processing according to claim 3, wherein generating the effect picture based on the effect material image comprises:
in a case that a plurality of effect material images is obtained, performing image processing on each effect material image to obtain an effect layer corresponding to the effect material image “the computing device 500 detects additional user input to apply image filters or image modifications that alter the fluid simulation and/or pause, bookmark, or capture an image frame” (Wilensky, ¶ [0121]) where the use of multiple filters is taught, but not necessarily of an effect or filter layer; and
generating the effect picture based on the effect layer corresponding to each effect material image “the dynamic image-filter system 110 identifies a foreground or background layer to apply the dynamic image filter in response to detecting a user selection of the foreground or background layer prior to or during activation of a dynamic image filter” (Wilensky, ¶ [0074]) where the background or foreground may be a layer for the dynamic filter, but are not their own effect layer.
Wilensky does not explicitly teach processing on each effect material image to obtain an effect layer corresponding to the effect material image; and
generating the effect picture based on the effect layer corresponding to each effect material image.
Sun teaches processing on each effect material image to obtain an effect layer corresponding to the effect material image “In response to an instruction to add a special effect object on the initial image, determine the target display area of the special effect object on the initial image” (Sun, Page 4) where the target display area is read as an effect layer; and
generating the effect picture based on the effect layer corresponding to each effect material image “the added special effect object may be one or more, and when there are more than one, the target display area of each special effect object on the initial image is determined respectively” (Sun, Page 5) where each effect has a layer and the picture is generated with each effect applied.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of displaying a selected effect taught by Wilensky with the method of effect layers taught by Sun to produce a final edited image product with layered effects chosen by the user. The motivation to do so would be to display and visualize each effect.
In regard to claim 17, claim 4 is substantially similar to claim 17, hence the rejection analysis for claim 4 is also applied to claim 17. Wilensky in view of Sun teach the additional limitations of [t]he device according to claim 16, wherein the at least one program causing the at least one processor to generate the effect picture based on the effect material image comprises instructions to:
in a case that a plurality of effect material images is obtained, perform image processing on each effect material image to obtain an effect layer corresponding to the effect material image (Wilensky, ¶ [0121]) & (Sun, Page 4); and
generate the effect picture based on the effect layer corresponding to each effect material image (Wilensky, ¶ [0074]) & (Sun, Page 5).
In regard to claims 5 & 18, Wilensky in view of Sun teach [t]he method for effect processing according to claim 4, wherein performing the image processing on each effect material image to obtain the effect layer corresponding to the effect material image comprises:
determining a material configuration type corresponding to the effect material image for each effect material image “The target display area is the foreground area or the background area of the initial image” (Sun, Page 5) where a configuration type can be read as a foreground or background effect; and
performing image processing on the effect material image according to a preset image processing mode corresponding to the material configuration type to obtain the effect layer corresponding to the effect material image “Taking the initial image as a face image as an example, if the special effect object selected by the user is a face sticker, a special effect adding instruction is generated according to the face sticker, wherein the special effect adding instruction includes a target display area, and the target display area is a foreground area” (Sun, Page 5) where a face sticker, for example, is an effect associated with the foreground layer, or configuration type, and the adding instructions that are generated alongside the sticker’s selection are read as image processing according to a preset processing mode.
In regard to claim 18, claim 5 is substantially similar to claim 18, hence the rejection analysis for claim 5 is also applied to claim 18. Wilensky in view of Sun teach the additional limitations of [t]he device according to claim 17, wherein the at least one program causing the at least one processor to perform the image processing on each effect material image to obtain the effect layer corresponding to the effect material image comprises instructions to:
determine a material configuration type corresponding to the effect material image for each effect material image (Sun, Page 5); and
perform image processing on the effect material image according to a preset image processing mode corresponding to the material configuration type to obtain the effect layer corresponding to the effect material image (Sun, Page 5).
In regard to claims 7 & 20, Wilensky in view of Sun teach [t]he method for effect processing according to claim 5, wherein performing the image processing on the effect material image according to the preset image processing mode corresponding to the material configuration type to obtain the effect layer corresponding to the effect material image comprises:
in a case that the material configuration type is a background configuration type, performing backgrounding processing on the effect material image to obtain the effect layer having a preset size and used as a background image of the effect picture “For special effects (for example, barrage), the target display area of the special effect object is determined to be the background area, and if the special effect object is to mark the edge of the foreground area, the target display position of the special effect object is determined to be the edge of the foreground area” (Sun, Page 5) where some effects are background effects, which is read as their configuration type, and have background processing to determine a layer and area of effect, which is able to have a preset size and be used as a background, wherein the backgrounding processing comprises at least one of image completion processing “if the special effect object is to mark the edge of the foreground area, the target display position of the special effect object is determined to be the edge of the foreground area” (Sun, Page 5) where edge detection is read as completion processing and stylization processing.
Sun fails to teach where the processing is stylization processing.
Wilensky teaches stylization processing “Examples of a parameterized-static-filter include Photoshop's Gaussian blur, blur gallery, liquify, pixelate, distort, noise, render, stylized filters, neural filters, neural style filters, lens correction, oil paint” (Wilensky, ¶ [0055]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of displaying a selected effect and using stylization taught by Wilensky with the method of processing effect layers taught by Sun to produce a final edited image product with layered effects and stylization chosen by the user. The motivation to do so would be to display and visualize each effect as the user desires.
In regard to claim 20, claim 7 is substantially similar to claim 20, hence the rejection analysis for claim 7 is also applied to claim 20. Wilensky in view of Sun teach the additional limitations of [t]he device according to claim 19, wherein the at least one program causing the at least one processor to perform the image processing on the effect material image according to the preset image processing mode corresponding to the material configuration type to obtain the effect layer corresponding to the effect material image comprises instructions to:
in a case that the material configuration type is a background configuration type, perform backgrounding processing on the effect material image to obtain the effect layer having a preset size and used as a background image of the effect picture, wherein the backgrounding processing comprises at least one of image completion processing and stylization processing (Sun, Page 5) & (Wilensky, ¶ [0055]).
Claims 6 & 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilensky in view of Sun and Shun-fei Wang Et. Al. (Pat. Pub. CN-113610884-A, herein after “Wang”).
In regard to claims 6 & 19, Wilensky in view of Sun teach [t]he method for effect processing according to claim 5, wherein performing the image processing on the effect material image according to the preset image processing mode corresponding to the material configuration type to obtain the effect layer corresponding to the effect material image comprises:
in a case that the material configuration type is a foreground configuration type, determining a target foreground element in the effect material image according to the selected effect configuration identifier corresponding to the effect material image “For example, if the special effect object is a special effect used to display in the foreground area (for example, a face sticker), the target display area of the special effect object is determined to be the foreground area” (Sun, Page 5) where the face sticker has a foreground configuration type, and the face would be the target foreground element; and
performing foregrounding processing on the effect material image based on the target foreground element to obtain the effect layer including the target foreground element “if the image is a face image, the face area in the image can be identified by the face recognition algorithm, the face area is used as the foreground area, and the rest of the image is the background area” (Sun, Page 5) where the face sticker effect is processed for foreground use, specifically on a face, and the effect layer will be the foreground with the face, wherein the foregrounding processing comprises at least one of matting processing, image segmentation processing, image fusion processing, and stylization processing “if the special effect object includes a part displayed in the foreground area and a part displayed in the background area, the part displayed in the foreground area and the part displayed in the background area of the special effect object are respectively segmented” (Sun, Page 6) where segmentation methods are used.
Sun fails to teach where the processing comprises at least one of matting processing, image fusion processing, and stylization processing.
Wilensky teaches stylization processing “Examples of a parameterized-static-filter include Photoshop's Gaussian blur, blur gallery, liquify, pixelate, distort, noise, render, stylized filters, neural filters, neural style filters, lens correction, oil paint” (Wilensky, ¶ [0055]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of displaying a selected effect and using stylization taught by Wilensky with the method of processing effect layers taught by Sun to produce a final edited image product with layered effects and stylization chosen by the user. The motivation to do so would be to display and visualize each effect as the user desires.
Wilensky in view of Sun fail to teach where the processing comprises at least one of matting processing and image fusion processing.
Wang teaches where the processing comprises at least one of matting processing “the electronic device can firstly identify the portrait area in the first image, obtaining the first image corresponding to the divided picture, then based on the portrait divided picture identifying the hair area in the first image, obtaining the first image of the thread matting result, can according to the thread matting result for correcting the portrait divided picture obtaining the image segmentation result satisfying the precision condition” (Wang, Page 13) where matting processes are taught and image fusion processing “a fusion unit, for fusing the second foreground identification result corresponding to each image area with the first foreground identification result to obtain the target foreground identification result” (Wang, Page 18) where fusion processes are taught.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of displaying a selected effect in layers and using stylization taught by Wilensky in view of Sun with the method of using matting and fusion processing taught by Wang to allow for more types of image processing. The motivation to do so would be to produce more desired effects for the user with various techniques.
In regard to claim 19, claim 6 is substantially similar to claim 19, hence the rejection analysis for claim 6 is also applied to claim 19. Wilensky in view of Sun and Wang teach the additional limitations of [t]he device according to claim 18, wherein the at least one program causing the at least one processor to perform the image processing on the effect material image according to the preset image processing mode corresponding to the material configuration type to obtain the effect layer corresponding to the effect material image comprises instructions to:
in a case that the material configuration type is a foreground configuration type, determine a target foreground element in the effect material image according to the selected effect configuration identifier corresponding to the effect material image (Sun, Page 5); and
perform foregrounding processing on the effect material image based on the target foreground element to obtain the effect layer including the target foreground element, wherein the foregrounding processing comprises at least one of matting processing, image segmentation processing, image fusion processing, and stylization processing (Sun, Page 6), (Wilensky, ¶ [0055]), & (Wang, Pages 13 & 18).
Claims 8 & 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilensky in view of Sun and Kundu Malay (Pat. Pub. US-20220030179-A1, herein after “Malay”).
In regard to claims 8 & 21, Wilensky in view of Sun teach [t]he method for effect processing according to claim 4, wherein generating the effect picture based on the effect layer corresponding to each effect material image comprises:
determining a picture display position “the target display position of the special effect object is determined” (Sun, Page 5) determining position for effects is performed and a picture display size of the effect layer corresponding to each effect material image in the original picture, and stacking the effect layers corresponding to the plurality of effect material images based on the picture display position and the picture display size of each effect layer to obtain the effect picture “Respectively determine the display order of each sub-special effect object in the special effect object” (Sun, Page 12) where ordering the sub-special effects is considered stacking the special effects, the display order is not limited to being based on size or position.
Wilensky in view of Sun do not sufficiently teach stacking the effect layers corresponding to the plurality of effect material images based on the picture display position and the picture display size of each effect layer to obtain the effect picture.
Malay teaches stacking the effect layers corresponding to the plurality of effect material images based on the picture display position and the picture display size of each effect layer to obtain the effect picture “the output video may comprise one or more scenes having three or more different layers where the layers are positioned or stacked (i.e., a depth position within the layers/stack of layer) to create the three-dimensional effect” (Malay, ¶ [0048]) where layers are stacked, and “the multilayer scene can comprise multiple layers of background layers to create a varying degree of depth in the background, such as placing an image (or a frame of a video) of a mountain further behind an image of a tree” (Malay, ¶ [0048]) where layers of the same type can be stacked based on position or size.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of display position for effects taught by Sun with the method of different layers for display based on size and position taught by Malay to produce method of layering based on position and size for the image effects. The motivation to do so would be to visualize all the effects at once with minimal occlusion.
In regard to claim 21, claim 8 is substantially similar to claim 21, hence the rejection analysis for claim 8 is also applied to claim 21. Wilensky in view of Sun and Malay teach the additional limitations of [t]he device according to claim 17, wherein the at least one program causing the at least one processor to generate the effect picture based on the effect layer corresponding to each effect material image comprises instructions to:
determine a picture display position and a picture display size of the effect layer corresponding to each effect material image in the original picture, and stack the effect layers corresponding to the plurality of effect material images based on the picture display position and the picture display size of each effect layer to obtain the effect picture (Sun, Pages 5 & 12) & (Malay, ¶ [0048]).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilensky in view of Ralf Weber (Pat. Pub. US-20100169784-A1, herein after “Weber”).
In regard to claim 9, Wilensky teaches[t]he method for effect processing according to claim 3, wherein obtaining the effect material image corresponding to the selected effect configuration identifier comprises:
determining a preset material library corresponding to the selected effect configuration identifier to obtain the effect material image corresponding to the selected effect configuration identifier from the preset material library, wherein the preset material library stores at least one effect material image “the digital content management system 104 receives, transmits, organizes, stores, updates, and/or recommends digital images to/from the client device 106. For instance, in certain implementations, the digital content management system 104 comprises a data store of digital images from which the client device 106 selects a digital image to apply one or more dynamic image filters via the client application 108” (Wilensky, ¶ [0061]) where the images are stored, but not as a library for the effect material image.
Wilensky does not explicitly teach a preset material library corresponding to the selected effect configuration identifier to obtain the effect material image corresponding to the selected effect configuration identifier from the preset material library, wherein the preset material library stores at least one effect material image.
Weber teaches a preset material library corresponding to the selected effect configuration identifier to obtain the effect material image corresponding to the selected effect configuration identifier from the preset material library, wherein the preset material library stores at least one effect material image “ the main effects library 1009 or the subset of the main effects library 1012; and, effects may further comprise one or more slides like, for example, images, movies, audio, text (e.g., a string with font information that may determine how text will look and feel), and other media content” (Weber, ¶ [0033]) where one or more effects are stored and selected from.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of storing images for editing taught by Wilensky with the use of an effects library taught by Weber to produce a method of storing the effects in a library and selecting the effect image from the library. The motivation to do so would be to have all effects stored together.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilensky in view of Yu-wei Yang (Pat. Pub. CN-114217720-A, herein after “Yang”).
In regard to claim 10, Wilensky teaches [t]he method for effect processing according to claim 1.
Wilensky fails to explicitly teach further comprising:
in a case of detecting that a preset picture adjustment condition is satisfied, adjusting a display mode for the effect picture in the original picture.
Yang teaches detecting that a preset picture adjustment condition is satisfied, adjusting a display mode for the effect picture in the original picture “after determining the rotating screen response condition is satisfied, the electronic device can further execute the rotating screen response.” (Yang, Page 9) where tilting the screen to rotate the display is read as an adjustment condition and adjusting the display mode.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of editing images taught by Wilensky with display adjustment method taught by Yang to produce an image editing system that can rotate the screen when the device is tilted. The motivation to do so would be to adjust the display to the user’s liking.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yun-hao Liao (Pat. Pub. CN-114428573-A) discloses an image processing method including a special effect trigger operation, preset image display, and special effect display (Abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAIDEN ALEXANDER USSERY whose telephone number is (571)272-1192. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday* 7:30AM - 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, Tammy Goddard can be reached at (571) 272-7773. 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.
/C.A.U./Examiner, Art Unit 2611
/TAMMY GODDARD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2611
Prosecution Insights