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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
I. Claims 1-18 of the instant application are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent 12,133,023 Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as seen by a representative sample of comparative analysis below:
Instant app: 18/898110
US Pat. 12,133,023
1. A method comprising: determining that a conferencing device participating in a video conference via a conferencing server is a mobile device, wherein the mobile device is performing virtual background processing to generate for display a virtual background during the video conference; determining, based on sensor data, that the conferencing device is in an unstable state; receiving, at an edge computing device, a stability status of the conferencing device, wherein the stability status relates to the unstable state; determining, at the edge computing device, a plurality of salient points of the virtual background; and performing an action on the virtual background based on the stability status of the conferencing device and at least one salient point of the plurality of salient points.
1. A computer-implanted method comprising: determining that a mobile computing device is participating in a video conference via a conferencing server, wherein the mobile computing device is located at a first geographic location and is in communication with the conferencing server via a communication network, and wherein during the video conference, a virtual background is being provided for display at the mobile computing device based at least in part on virtual background processing being performed at the mobile computing device; monitoring a parameter of the mobile computing device during the video conference; and determining, based on the monitored parameter, whether at least a portion of the virtual background processing being performed by the mobile computing device should be offloaded to an edge computing device located at a second geographic location remote from the first geographic location of the mobile computing device; and in response to determining that at least a portion of the virtual background processing being performed by the mobile computing device should be offloaded to the edge computing device, offloading the at least a portion of the virtual background processing being performed by the mobile computing device to the edge computing device by: causing the mobile computing device to transmit, to the edge computing device and via the communication network, a video feed captured by the mobile computing device; causing the edge computing device to modify the video feed by performing the at least a portion of the virtual background processing; and receiving, at the conferencing server from the edge computing device via the communication network, the modified video feed.
It is clear that the claims of the instant application, though the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. It would have been obvious to the ordinary artisan before the effective filing date to broaden the claim in order to enjoy greater protection and coverage.
II. Claims 1-18 of the instant application are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 of U.S. Patent 11,849,258. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as seen by a representative sample of comparative analysis below:
Instant app: 18/898,110
US Pat. 12,133,023
1. A method comprising: determining that a conferencing device participating in a video conference via a conferencing server is a mobile device, wherein the mobile device is performing virtual background processing to generate for display a virtual background during the video conference; determining, based on sensor data, that the conferencing device is in an unstable state; receiving, at an edge computing device, a stability status of the conferencing device, wherein the stability status relates to the unstable state; determining, at the edge computing device, a plurality of salient points of the virtual background; and performing an action on the virtual background based on the stability status of the conferencing device and at least one salient point of the plurality of salient points.
1. A method comprising: determining that a conferencing device participating in a video conference via a conferencing server is a mobile device, wherein the mobile device is performing virtual background processing to generate for display a virtual background during the video conference; monitoring a parameter of the mobile device during the video conference; determining, based on the monitored parameter, whether the virtual background processing being performed by the mobile device should be offloaded to an edge computing device; in response to determining the virtual background processing should be offloaded, offloading at least a portion of the virtual background processing being performed by the mobile device to the edge computing device, wherein the edge computing device is configured to receive a video feed from the conferencing device, modify the video feed by performing the virtual background processing, and transmit the modified video feed to the conferencing server; determining, subsequent to offloading at least a portion of the virtual background processing being performed by the mobile device to the edge computing device, and based on the monitored parameter, that the mobile device should resume performance of the virtual background processing; transmitting an indication to the edge computing device to cease performing the virtual background processing; and transmitting an indication to the mobile device to resume performing the virtual background processing.
It is clear that the claims of the instant application, though the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. It would have been obvious to the ordinary artisan before the effective filing date to broaden the claim in order to enjoy greater protection and coverage.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7 and 11-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Fagadar-Cosma et al (US 2015/0304606 – Hereinafter FC) and if necessary further in view of Hu (CN 111179302) or Dsouza et al (US 2019/0355172).
Claims 1 and 11. FC teaches a system and a method comprising:
determining that a conferencing device participating in a video conference via a conferencing server is a mobile device, wherein the mobile device is performing virtual background processing to generate for display a virtual background during the video conference; (FC: conference server… computes global motion in the background of a video stream by quantifying the displacement of a subset of features in the background. [0007-0013]).
determining, based on sensor data, that the conferencing device is in an unstable state; (FC: If the displacement on the contrary has a magnitude that exceeds a certain threshold, the present invention assumes that a camera shake phenomenon is detected, [0007, 0012]);
receiving, at an edge computing device, a stability status of the conferencing device, wherein the stability status relates to the unstable state; (In absence of camera shake, the background should be stable and the displacement of features in the background should be near zero, [0012] and this condition is determined by the camera shake detector 103, fig. 1 and [0040-0043]. and
determining, at the edge computing device, a plurality of salient points of the virtual background; (FC: a subset of features that belongs to the image background, [0012- 0017]. Here FC clearly suggests, or alternatively by obviousness, the subset of feature and examiner maps to a plurality of salient points since the current Specs, [0042] defines salient points being present in the background. Examiner wishes to provide additional references to support the obviousness where:
Wu teaches “ the first background image for anti-shake processing, the process of obtaining the first background image enhancing image may include: extracting the characteristic point of the first background image; according to the characteristic point of the first background image and the characteristic point of the second background image, obtaining the fourth motion track curve, the second background image is the background image of the second target image, the video to be processed comprises a second target image, and the second target image and the image to be processed are continuous image frames on the image sequence, (page 4) which again examiner maps the characteristic point to the salient point.
Hu identifies and avoids the background scene which includes shaking of the tree leave, rain and snow weather to improve the precision of the moving target detection, reduce the error rate.
Dsouza teaches images having virtual backgrounds associated with movement of mobile devices, [0003], proposing a more sophisticated synthesis method correspond with the orientation, position, and/or movement of the image capturing device (e.g., mobile devices). In this regard, as a mobile device moves in position, the existing or original background images, for example in a video, can be replaced with a virtual background associated with an orientation or position of the mobile device, [0019-0024] and See Figs. 1A-1C for salient points, i.e., 116, 126, 136, 118, 128, 138).
and
performing an action on the virtual background based on the stability status of the conferencing device and at least one salient point of the plurality of salient points.
FC: uses the Pyramidal Lukas-Kanade (LK) algorithm, i.e. the displacement of these features from one frame to another, and eliminate spurious features which the shake detector 103 will perform shake displacement. [0017, 0043] where processing logic configured to discard all features that do not belong to the dominant bin from calculating the displacement vector, [0027]; corrective measures are applied in order to obtain a stable cut-out foreground mask. These corrective measures result in translating each pixel in the current foreground mask using a displacement of the same magnitude as the displacement vector but oriented in the opposite direction, i.e. θ+180°, [0049]”. Also as seen above, Hu teaches, “The technical solution of the invention can improve the precision of the movement target detection and reduce the error detection rate” and Dsouza teaches, “synthesis of composite images having virtual backgrounds associated with movement of mobile devices.
It would have been obvious to the ordinary artisan before the effective fling date to make a modification to the teaching of FC to explicitly/expressly to include describe the salient points (, i.e., points of the background as in Wu, leave, rain and snow in HU and/or virtual background images in Dsouza) to avoid any dispute in carry out the method of the claimed invention that is to carry out a conference call.
Claims 2 and 12, wherein the sensor data is generated from one of a camera (see FC’s title), a gyrometer, or an accelerometer.
Claims 3 and 13, wherein the stability status of the conferencing device is received from the conferencing server. (See the ind. claim, specifically on FC: [0007] and Fig. 1).
Claims 4 and 14, wherein the conferencing server determines whether the conferencing device is in the unstable state. (see the ind. claims)
Claims 5 and 15, wherein the virtual background comprises a plurality of fixed portions, wherein each fixed portion of the plurality of fixed portions correspond to each salient point of the plurality of salient points. (See Dsouza’s Figs. 1A-1C).
Claims 6 and 16, wherein the action is an image stabilization. (Wu: the augmented background image of the next frame image and the augmented foreground image are subjected to image fusion, to obtain a stable image of the next frame image, and outputting the augmented image, page 16).
Claims 7 and 17, wherein the action is a smoothening. (performing path smoothing to the first motion track curve, obtaining the second motion track curve after the path is smooth, according to the second motion track curve and the first foreground image, obtaining the first foreground image after the stabilization; performing edge compensation to the first foreground image after the stability, obtaining the first foreground image.(page 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-10 and 18-20 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.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHUNG-HOANG J. NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1949. The examiner can normally be reached Reg. Sched. 6:00-3:00.
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, Duc Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-7503. 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.
/PHUNG-HOANG J NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2691
Prosecution Insights