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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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, 4, 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Koseki (US 10,102,392 B2).
Regarding Claim 1, Koseki teaches A video process device comprising a processor configured to: (Koseki Col. 2, Ln. 17-19 “Hereinafter, an exemplary embodiment of a drive recorder, a storage method of the drive recorder and a computer-readable medium; fig. 1 drive recorder 1 that is mounted in vehicle 11”)
store associated information in which video shot by a drive recorder camera and identification information indicating identification result of a user of the drive recorder camera are associated; (Koseki Col. 4, Ln. 4-8 “Also, to the drive recorder 1, a portable storage medium M (for example, Secure Digital card (SD card), etc.) is detachable. The storage medium M records the traveling information that includes the traveling images for which the access limitation is set.”); (Col. 4 Ln. 9-12 “However, the storage medium M is not limited to a portable storage medium, and may be, for example, a Hard Disk Drive (HDD) built in the drive recorder 1, or a server apparatus in the cloud computing.”); (Col. 2, Ln. 53-59 “The traveling information F1 includes identification information that identifies the occupant A.”); (Col. 4, Ln. 56-58 “The drive recorder 1 includes a capture unit 2, a controller 4, and a storage 5. The controller 4 includes an authentication unit 4a and an access controller 4b.”); ( Col. 5 , Ln. 52-57 “When authenticating the occupant A, the authentication unit 4a sends an authentication result to the portable device 2, and outputs information on the occupant A included in the identification information 5a to the access controller 4b.”)
determine whether an access requestor to the video and the user of the drive recorder camera when the video was shot by the drive recorder camera are identical based on the identification information which is the other part of the associated information when an access to the video which is a part of the associated information is requested; and (Col. 5, Ln. 14-21 “Specifically, the authentication unit 4a determines whether or not the ID and the password that are sent from the portable device P equate to an ID and a password of the identification information 5a stored in the storage 5. When the IDs and the passwords equate to each other, the authentication unit 4a authenticates the occupant A, and sends to the portable device P an authentication result that indicates the fact that the authentication has done.”); (Col. 5 , Ln. 52-57 “Return to FIG. 3, the explanation of the authentication unit 4a will be continued. When authenticating the occupant A, the authentication unit 4a sends an authentication result to the portable device 2, and outputs information on the occupant A included in the identification information 5a to the access controller 4b.”); (Col. 6, Ln. 4-10 “Processes for the access limitation setting will be here explained with reference to FIG. 5. FIG. 5 is a diagram illustrating processes for the access limitation setting. As illustrated in FIG. 5, the drive recorder 1 according to the present embodiment employs, for example, a continuous-record method in which captured images G, which are input from the capture unit 2, are sequentially recorded.”); (Col. 6, Ln. 11-17 “In the method, the access controller 4b sets the access limitation for each of captured images that are sequentially input from the capture unit 2. Specifically, when a captured image G1 is captured at time t1 in which the occupant A is authenticated, the access controller 4b gives the captured image G1 a password (for example, “1234”) that is corresponding to an ID of the occupant A.”); (Col. 6, Ln.18-24 “when the occupant A gets off the vehicle 11, in other words, communication between the portable device P of the occupant A and the drive recorder 1 ceases, the access controller 4b removes the authentication of the occupant A, and does not give the password that is corresponding to the ID of the occupant A to captured images after the removal of the authentication.
(Col. 6 Ln. 25-31 “The access controller 4b stores each captured image, to which the password that is corresponding to the ID of the occupant A is given, in, for example, a folder FA that stores traveling information on the occupant A. In other words, the password that is corresponding to the ID of the occupant A is needed in order to read the traveling images to be stored in the folder FA.”)
permit the access requestor to access to the video when the access requestor to the video and the user of the drive recorder camera when the video was shot by the drive recorder camera are identical. (Col. 5, Ln. 59-64 “The access controller 4b, on the basis of information on the occupant A acquired from the authentication unit 4a, gives the occupant A an access right to traveling images that are input from the capture unit 2, and sets access limitation that limits an access to them from a person other than the occupant A.”); (Col. 6, Ln.11-17 “In the method, the access controller 4b sets the access limitation for each of captured images that are sequentially input from the capture unit 2. Specifically, when a captured image G1 is captured at time t1 in which the occupant A is authenticated, the access controller 4b gives the captured image G1 a password (for example, “1234”) that is corresponding to an ID of the occupant A.”)
Regarding Claim 4, Koseki teaches A video process method comprising: (Koseki Col. 2, Ln. 17-19 “Hereinafter, an exemplary embodiment of a drive recorder, a storage method of the drive recorder and a computer-readable medium”) and further recites similar limitation as claim 1 and is being rejected based on the same rational as claim 1 above.
Regarding Claim 5, Koseki teaches A non-transitory recording medium having recorded thereon a computer program for causing a processor to execute a process comprising: (Koseki (Col. 11, Ln. 53-56 “The computer 200 includes a Central Processing Unit (CPU) 210, a Read Only Memory (ROM) 220, a Random Access Memory (RAM) 230, and a Hard Disk Drive (HDD) 240.”); (Col. 12, Ln. 26-30 “the computer 200 functions as the drive recorder 1, the CPU 210 of the computer 200 executes programs loaded on the RAM 230, and thus realizes each function of the authentication unit 4a and the access controller 4b.”) and further recites similar limitation as claim 1 and is being rejected based on the same rational as claim 1 above.
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) 2 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koseki (US 10,102,392 B2 in view of Quach et al. (US 10,445,603 B1) (hereinafter Quach).
Regarding Claim 2, Koseki teaches The video process device according to claim 1, outlined above.
Koseki fails to explicitly teach wherein identification of the user of the drive recorder camera is performed by using an image shot by a driver monitor camera.
However, Quach teaches wherein identification of the user of the drive recorder camera is performed by using an image shot by a driver monitor camera.(Quach Col. 2 Ln. 11-16 “A system for capturing a driver image comprises an input interface for receiving sensor data associated with a vehicle, and a processor for determining whether to capture a driver image based at least in part on the sensor data, and in the event, it is determined to capture the driver image, indicating to capture the driver image.); (Col. 2 Ln. 19-29 “In some embodiments, a system for capturing a driver image comprises a vehicle event recorder comprising a processor and a memory. The vehicle event recorder is coupled to a set of sensors (e.g., audio sensors, video sensors, accelerometers, gyroscopes, global positioning system sensors, vehicle state sensors, etc.) including an inward-facing camera mounted on or in the vicinity of the rear-view mirror (e.g., at the top middle of the windshield, to the right of the driver). In some embodiments, the vehicle event recorder sits on the dashboard. The system for capturing a driver image captures images. In some embodiments, the driver image is used to identify the driver.”)
Koseki and Quach are analogues in that they are both in the same field of driver identification systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Koseki to incorporate the teachings of Quach wherein identification of the user of the drive recorder camera is performed by using an image shot by a driver monitor camera. Doing so is important to be able to associate the sensor data with a driver. Col. 1, Ln. 19-20 Quach
Regarding Claim 3, Koseki in view of Quach teaches The video process device according to claim 2, outlined above.
Koseki further teaches, wherein identification of the user of the drive recorder camera is performed by using authentication information received by a smart phone which functions as a key used at least when a vehicle having the drive recorder camera is started. (Koseki Col. 3, Ln. 41-57 “The portable device P is a portable electronic device such as a cell-phone or a smartphone, which is owned by, for example, an occupant of the vehicle 11. The portable device P is not limited to a cell-phone or a smartphone. It is sufficient that the portable device P can identify an occupant, and may be, for example, an electronic key that unlocks doors or controls engine starting of the vehicle 11.”); (Col. 3, Ln. 48-53 “The portable device P is communicatively connected to the drive recorder 1. For example, the portable device P and the drive recorder 1 execute wireless communication, and further send and receive with each other the identification information, an authentication request, an authentication result, etc.”)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Nemat-Nasser (US 2014/0324281 A1) teaches Driver identification based on face data.
Haley (US 2016/0224827 A1) teaches camera in vehicle reports identity of driver.
Shimoshimano (JP 2021118499A) teaches recording control device, recording control method and program.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MALA BOYD whose telephone number is (571)272-6450. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:00.
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 Eleni Shiferaw can be reached at (571) 272-3867. 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.
/Mala Boyd/Patent Examiner
Art Unit 24697
/ELENI A SHIFERAW/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2497
Prosecution Insights