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 .
This action is in response to Amendments and Remarks filed on 06/04/2026
Application is a CON of PCT/JP2022/048142 12/27/2022
Application claims a FP date of 03/30/2022
Claims 1, 13 and 15 are independent
Claims 1, 9, 13-15 have been amended
Claims 1-15 are pending
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/04/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. With regards to Amendments made to the Specification and claims, the objections and 35 USC 101 and 112 rejections have been with withdrawn.
However, Applicant’s amendments and arguments with regards to prior rejections have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant’s allegation on page 9 of the remarks document that “neither Tojo nor Kinjo describes searching for accessory information based on search items as recited in present claim 1”, has been fully considered. However, Examiner respectfully disagrees since bot Tojo and Kinjo’s invention is about retrieving objects, especially face image from moving image. In Kojo’s invention, Kojo teaches about accessory information used as “searching patterns” that may be any kind that corresponds to specific information contained in the image.
In response to applicant' s arguments on page 10 of the Remarks that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Tojo and Kinjo are combinable because both are related to image searching and image processing methods for recognizing specific information.
Further, Applicant’s allegation that Tojo and Kinjo are silent about “plurality of items used to classify a search object” are unsubstantiated, since Kinjo in col 19, lines 15-20, Kinjo teaches that the shapes of figures that the user adopted to designate the scene – such as position, size, direction, colors etc., are classified into predetermined patterns as detailed in the following action.
In view of the above arguments, Examiner would like to maintain the rejections as detailed in the following action.
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, 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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tojo et al. (U.S. Patent Publication Number 2009/0324086 A1) in view of Kinjo (U. S. Patent Number 7,421,154 B2).
Regarding Claim 13, Tojo discloses a recording device that records in a frame of moving image data including a plurality of frames, accessory information related to a subject in the frame (Tojo’s invention is about a video camera device for detecting and storing human face patterns. In ¶0036, Tojo also discloses that the moving image data acquired by the moving image input unit is recorded in the moving image storing unit 202 as a moving image file. It is also well known in the art that video images and moving images comprises a plurality of frames), the recording device comprising:
a processor (Fig 2 – image processing apparatus 100), wherein the processor is configured to execute:
recognition processing of recognizing a plurality of recognition subjects in the plurality of frames (In ¶0037 and throughout, Tojo discloses that the face detection unit 203 detects the human face pattern from a predetermined frame in the moving image data acquired by the moving image input unit 201);
search processing of searching for the accessory information which is able to be recorded for search subjects based on search items that are a plurality of items used to classify the search subjects, the search subjects being at least some of the plurality of recognition subjects (In the flow chart of Fig 6 and in ¶0058- ¶0064, Tojo discloses that the face tracing unit 204 sets a search region in the subsequent frames for searching the human face pattern based on region information about the human face pattern detected by the face detection unit 203. Further in step S520, Tojo discloses that the face tracing unit 204 traces the human face pattern based on a correlation between the image cut from the search region and the human face pattern to be searched – and sets out correlation between brightness distribution; also see ¶0122; Examiner would like to state on the record that “accessory information” is not defined in the claim. However, since Tojo discloses searching using position information as disclosed in ¶0056-¶0059, Tojo discloses this limitation of the claim);
a setting step of setting the search items different from each other for each of the search subjects in a case where a plurality of the search subjects are present (In ¶0124 - ¶0136, Tojo discloses the similarity determination unit 1102 that determines whether a degree of similarity between the feature amount of the face is greater than or equal to a predetermined value); and
recording processing of recording (In ¶0036 Tojo discloses that the image storing unit 202 records and stores the moving image as a moving image file).
Tojo discloses “setting process” However, Tojo fails to clearly disclose search items that are a plurality of items used to classify the search subjects ; a setting step of setting the search items different from each other for each of the search subjects and recording processing of recording at least some of the search items as the accessory information based on a result of the search processing.
Instead in a similar endeavor, Kinjo discloses search items that are a plurality of items used to classify the search subjects (In col 19, lines 15-20, Kinjo teaches that the shapes of figures that the user adopted to designate the scene – such as position, size, direction, colors etc., are classified into predetermined patterns. Kinjo further teaches in Col 10, lines 37-42 that “searching patterns 20” as shown in Fig 2 is searched in the original image and the search pattern could be combination of different specific figures which may be any kind that corresponds to specific information contained in the image); a setting step of setting the search items different from each other for each of the search subjects (Kinjo teaches this in the “setting section” 338 where he teaches that the setting subsection sets from the specific information extracted from the extracting subsection or the related information for the recognized specific information – the related information including the position, size, direction, color, presence or absence and direction.); and
recording processing of recording at least some of the search items as the accessory information based on a result of the search processing (In page 29 and in lines 1-15, Kinjo further teaches that the image processing section 320 transfers the image data of the image of interest together with the accessory information from the setting subsection 338 to the DB 308 where the image data and the accessory information are as such stored)
Tojo and Kinjo are combinable because both are related to image searching and image processing methods for recognizing specific information.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the setting section as taught by Kinjo in the imaging module disclosed by Tojo.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to “utilize image searching method capable of efficient image detection or search using a key specific information such as the shape of subjects” as disclosed by Kinjo in the Abstract.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Tojo and Kinjo to obtain the invention as specified in claim 13.
Regarding Claim 1, this claim is a methods claim that has limitation similar to claim 13. Claim 1 is rejected on the same grounds as Claim 13.
Regarding Claim 2, Tojo in view of Kinjo discloses wherein the search step is executed for the search subject selected by a predetermined condition (Tojo: Tojo discloses this in Fig 6 – step S510 and in ¶0058 where he discloses that a search region is set for searching human face pattern based on region information about human face pattern detected. Kinjo: Kinjo also teaches in step 501 and in Col 13 that the designated searching pattern 20 is input as a searching condition).
Regarding Claim 3, Tojo in view of Kinjo discloses wherein the condition is a condition based on image quality information or size information of the search subject in the frame (Kinjo: In Col 15, Kinjo teaches that the position, size, direction are designated as searching pattern 20 used as search condition to make comparison and verification with the accessory information).
Regarding Claim 4, Tojo in view of Kinjo discloses wherein the condition is a condition based on a focusing position which is set by a recording device that records the moving image data or a visual line position of a user during recording of the moving image data (Kinjo: In Col 25, Kinjo teaches about depth information for various subjects in the image which can be derived using shooting position information. He also teaches that for various subjects in the image may be derived from multi-stage focused images or stereoscopic images, In Fig 14 he shows exampled for designating searching patterns 130 which contains depth information).
Regarding Claim 5, Tojo in view of Kinjo discloses wherein, in the recording step, coordinate information of the focusing position or the visual line position is recorded in the frame as the accessory information (Kinjo: Kinjo teaches the use of coordinates and shown in tables 1 -3).
Regarding Claim 6, Tojo in view of Kinjo discloses wherein, in the search step, the search item selected by a user is used (Kinjo: In Fig 2 and throughout, Kinjo teaches the use of searching pattern entered by the user to search through the original image).
Regarding Claim 7, Tojo in view of Kinjo discloses wherein, in the setting step (Kinjo: “setting section” 338), priorities for the search subjects are set for each of the search subjects (Kinjo: In Col 7, Kinjo teaches that the image areas are searched area by area and a priority of reference in search mode is set in accordance with access frequency), and an accuracy of the search item which is set for the search subject having a higher priority is higher than an accuracy of the search item which is set for the search subject having a lower priority (Kinjo: In Col 25, Kinjo teaches about the “degree of agreement” is calculated where the degree exceeds a predetermined threshold, the characteristic value is found to “agree” with the accessory information).
Regarding Claim 8, Tojo in view of Kinjo discloses wherein, in the setting step (Kinjo: “setting section” 338), an accuracy of the search item is set according to a result of the search step that is executed in the past (Kinjo: Kinjo teaches this throughout – especially in Col 1 where he teaches that the present invention relates to an image searching method which extracts the subjects of interest on the basis of the position information and uses results of extraction to search through images. Since it uses the results of extraction, it is clear that uses the steps executed in the past).
Regarding Claim 9, Tojo in view of Kinjo discloses wherein, in a case where the search subject in a first frame of the plurality of frames is present in a second frame recorded before the first frame in the plurality of frames, in the setting step, the accuracy of the search item that is set for the search subject in the first frame is set to be higher than the accuracy of the search item that is set for the search subject in the second frame (Kinjo: In Fig 9 teaches an example of the result of searching for dynamically changing images in response to the designated shape. Also See Col 17, lines 5-25. Kinjo also teaches that the areas that have been searched through are managed on the database area by area and the priority of reference in search more or the image resolution for data storage is set in accordance with access frequency).
Regarding Claim 10, Tojo in view of Kinjo discloses further comprising: a receiving step (Kinjo: input section 326 that inputs the searching condition) of receiving an input of a user that is related to an item of the accessory information (Kinjo: Fig 2 teaches a designated searching pattern entered by the user to search through the original image), wherein the recording step is executed to record the accessory information corresponding to the input item in an input frame corresponding to the input of the user, among the plurality of frames (Kinjo: In Col 29, Kinjo teaches that the image data recording medium may be used to receive the image data for acquiring the accessory information in the acquiring section 310 and the image data for storing in the DB 308).
Regarding Claim 11, Tojo in view of Kinjo discloses wherein, in the receiving step, an item of the accessory information is able to be received, the item being different from the search item which is set in the setting step (Kinjo: In Col 27, Kinjo teaches that the image processing section 320 transfers the image data to acquiring section 310 and receives the accessory information obtained in the acquiring section 110. The accessory information is then transferred to and stored in the DB 308 together with the image data).
Regarding Claim 12, Tojo in view of Kinjo discloses wherein the accessory information is stored in a data file different from the moving image data (Kinjo: In Col 27, Kinjo teaches that the image processing section 320 transfers the image data to acquiring section 310 and receives the accessory information obtained in the acquiring section 110. The accessory information is then transferred to and stored in the DB 308 together with the image data).
Regarding Claim 14, this claim is a program claim that has limitation similar to claim 1 and 13. Claim 14 is rejected on the same grounds as Claim 1 and 13.
Regarding Claim 15, this claim is a methods claim that has limitation similar to claim 1. Claim 15 is rejected on the same grounds as Claim 1.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PADMA HALIYUR whose telephone number is (571)272-3287. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7AM - 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, Twyler Haskins can be reached at 571-272-7406. 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.
/PADMA HALIYUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2639 June 16, 2026
Prosecution Insights