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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/22/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-8, 10, 14, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The limitation “determining, as a function of an interaction between the first and second setting parameters, a performance criterion of the camera system” was not found to be properly described in the specification. The specification does not appear to disclose “a function of an interaction between the first and second setting parameters”. Therefore, the limitation “determining, as a function of an interaction between the first and second setting parameters, a performance criterion of the camera system” is not described with sufficient detail such that one of ordinary skill in the art can reasonably conclude that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention. To satisfy the written description requirement, a patent specification must describe the claimed invention in sufficient detail that one skilled in the art can reasonably conclude that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention. See AriadPharms., Inc. v. EliLilly & Co., 598 F.3d 1336, 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2010). “[T]he test requires an objective inquiry into the four comers of the specification from the perspective of a person of ordinary skill in the art. Based on that inquiry, the specification must describe an invention understandable to that skilled artisan and show that the inventor actually invented the invention claimed.” “[A] description that merely renders the invention obvious does not satisfy the requirement.” See Ariad, 598 F.3d at 1352. Therefore, the non-provisional specification is not commensurate with the full scope of the claims. Thus, given the state of this technology, one of ordinary skill in the art would not have recognized that the inventor possessed the full scope of the claimed invention. Consequently, this raise doubt as to possession, by the applicant, of the claimed invention at the time the invention was filed.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-8, 10, 14, 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Citerin et al (US 20200275016).
As to claim 1, Citerin discloses a method for determining how well a camera system will perform a task, the camera system comprising a camera connected via a communication network to a controller arranged to control the camera (FIG. 1: cameras 110, backbone network 130, video manager system (VMS) 150), the method comprises:
identifying a task to be performed by the camera system (see [0046], [0048] and [0075]: auto-setting a video content analysis module configured to analyse representation of predetermined targets in images of a scene captured by a video-camera);
obtaining a first setting parameter of the camera (see [0076] and [0139]: image quality parameter);
obtaining a second setting parameter of the communication network and/or the controller (see [0071]: f.sub.resource.sub.i), wherein the second parameter comprises at least one of the following: a type of processor of the controller; a memory capacity of a memory device of the controller; and an operating parameter of the controller (see [0011], [0048] and [0071]: resource requirements for a video content analysis module, in particular in terms of CPU and of memory … Other examples of resource constraints are memory storage and bandwidth … f.sub.resource.sub.i is a function that makes it possible to compute the consumption of resource i for the video content analysis module to perform its task … it is directed to at least the use of the CPU); and
determining, as a function of an interaction between the first and second setting parameters (see [0067]-[0076]: score function score(t) is a function of an interaction between at least the image quality parameter and the resource consumption parameter), a performance criterion of the camera system, wherein the performance criterion is indicative of how well the camera system will perform the identified task (see claim 1 and [0029]: estimating a performance indicator of the video content analysis module according to the considered setting, the performance indicator being determined as a function of at least the obtained quality indicator and the obtained characteristics; see claim 6: wherein the performance indicators further depend on resource consumption).
As to claim 2, Citerin further discloses wherein at least one of the first and second setting parameters is configurable as a function of the task to be performed based on images obtained from the camera (see [0076], [0139]).
As to claim 3, Citerin further discloses wherein the method comprises determining, based on the performance criterion of the camera system, an indication of the expected performance of the camera system to perform the task, and/or an indication of a setting parameter of the camera system which is required to perform the task (see [0029]: performance indicator, quality indicator).
As to claim 4, Citerin further discloses wherein the method comprises displaying the indication to a user of the camera system, the indication comprises an instruction to a user to configure the camera system to satisfy the setting parameter (FIG. 9; [0056], [0086], [0145], [0150]).
As to claim 5, Citerin further discloses wherein the method comprises displaying the performance indication and/or the parameter indication to a user via a display apparatus of the camera system (see [0054]; FIG. 9).
As to claim 6, Citerin further discloses wherein the method comprises determining, based on the performance criterion of the camera system, a parameter control for configuring a component of the camera system to satisfy the setting parameter (see [0030]-[0031] and [0143]).
As to claim 7, Citerin further discloses wherein the first parameter comprises at least one of the following:
a position of the camera (see [0007], [0010]);
a camera type (see [0050]);
a camera lens type; and
an operating parameter of the camera.
As to claim 8, Citerin further discloses wherein the operating parameter of the camera comprises at least one of: a gain value; a shutter speed value; an aperture size value; and an image encoding value (these features are not part of the BRI based on claim 7).
As to claim 10, Citerin further discloses wherein the second parameter comprises at least one of the following: a type of router of the communication network; a position of a router of the communication network; and an operating parameter of a router of the communication network (these features are not part of the BRI based on claim 1; claim 1 requires only a second parameter of the controller because of “and/or”; see also [0048], [0051]-[0052]).
As to claim 14, Citerin discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium for storing instructions of a computer program for implementing a method for determining how well a camera system will perform a task (see [0034] and [0065]), the camera system comprising a camera connected via a communication network to a controller arranged to control the camera (FIG. 1: cameras 110, backbone network 130, video manager system (VMS) 150), the method comprises, the method comprising:
identifying a task to be performed by the camera system (see [0046], [0048] and [0075]: auto-setting a video content analysis module configured to analyse representation of predetermined targets in images of a scene captured by a video-camera);
obtaining a first setting parameter of the camera (see [0076] and [0139]: image quality parameter);
obtaining a second setting parameter of the communication network and/or the controller (see [0071]: f.sub.resource.sub.i), wherein the second parameter comprises at least one of the following: a type of processor of the controller; a memory capacity of a memory device of the controller; and an operating parameter of the controller (see [0011], [0048] and [0071]: resource requirements for a video content analysis module, in particular in terms of CPU and of memory … Other examples of resource constraints are memory storage and bandwidth … f.sub.resource.sub.i is a function that makes it possible to compute the consumption of resource i for the video content analysis module to perform its task … it is directed to at least the use of the CPU); and
determining, as a function of an interaction between the first and second setting parameters (see [0067]-[0076]: score function score(t) is a function of an interaction between at least the image quality parameter and the resource consumption parameter), a performance criterion of the camera system, wherein the performance criterion is indicative of how well the camera system will perform the identified task (see claim 1 and [0029]: estimating a performance indicator of the video content analysis module according to the considered setting, the performance indicator being determined as a function of at least the obtained quality indicator and the obtained characteristics; see claim 6: wherein the performance indicators further depend on resource consumption).
As to claim 16, Citerin discloses an apparatus for determining an ability of a camera system to perform a task, the camera system comprising a camera connected via a communication network to a controller arranged to control the camera (FIG. 1: cameras 110, backbone network 130, video manager system (VMS) 150), the apparatus comprising a processor configured to carry out the method steps of (FIG. 2):
identifying a task to be performed by the camera system (see [0046], [0048] and [0075]: auto-setting a video content analysis module configured to analyse representation of predetermined targets in images of a scene captured by a video-camera);
obtaining a first setting parameter of the camera (see [0076] and [0139]: image quality parameter);
obtaining a second setting parameter of the communication network and/or the controller (see [0071]: f.sub.resource.sub.i), wherein the second parameter comprises at least one of the following: a type of processor of the controller; a memory capacity of a memory device of the controller; and an operating parameter of the controller (see [0011], [0048] and [0071]: resource requirements for a video content analysis module, in particular in terms of CPU and of memory … Other examples of resource constraints are memory storage and bandwidth … f.sub.resource.sub.i is a function that makes it possible to compute the consumption of resource i for the video content analysis module to perform its task … it is directed to at least the use of the CPU); and
determining, as a function of an interaction between the first and second setting parameters (see [0067]-[0076]: score function score(t) is a function of an interaction between at least the image quality parameter and the resource consumption parameter), a performance criterion of the camera system, wherein the performance criterion is indicative of how well the camera system will perform the identified task (see claim 1 and [0029]: estimating a performance indicator of the video content analysis module according to the considered setting, the performance indicator being determined as a function of at least the obtained quality indicator and the obtained characteristics; see claim 6: wherein the performance indicators further depend on resource consumption).
As to claim 17, Citerin discloses a camera system comprising a camera, a controller according to claim 16 (see rejection of claim 16), and a communication network for connecting the controller to the camera (FIG. 1: cameras 110, backbone network 130, video manager system (VMS) 150).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 14 and 16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BOUBACAR ABDOU TCHOUSSOU whose telephone number is (571)272-7625. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, Chris Kelley can be reached at 5712727331. 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.
/BOUBACAR ABDOU TCHOUSSOU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482
