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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
planning unit in claims 8-11 and 19-20 (corresponding structure [0113 and 0115])
reading unit in claims 1 and 17-18 (corresponding structure [0113 and 0115])
determination unit (corresponding structure [0113 and 0115])
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 8 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2022/178668 A1 to Song et al., in view of “Song”.
Claim 1. Song teaches A multi-layer reading method, comprising: [page 1, 2nd para.] a method, apparatus and terminal device for processing multi-layer images
determining, in a case where multiple to-be-read layers overlap in a specified direction of a display screen, [page 2, 4th para.] before reading the layers…so when reading the layer, the content that contributes to the display effect in the layer is selected to be read understood to be “to be read layers”
[page 10, 2nd para.; page 14, 3rd para.] displaying image obtained by overlapping M second image layers
[page 21, 1st para.] The screen display content (eg, multiple layers) is extracted from the display memory 441 at a specified time according to the vertical synchronization signal
a sequential order of reading image blocks in the multiple layers, [page 19, 2nd-4th para.] S121: reading the pixels in the first layer of the top layer except the first target area to obtain the second layer of the top layer; S122: reading the pixels in the first layer of the middle layer except the second target area to obtain the second layer of the middle layer; S123: reading the pixels in the first layer of the bottom layer except the third target area to obtain the second layer of the bottom layer.
wherein the image blocks are determined according to upper and lower boundaries of the multiple layers on the display screen; [page 14, 3rd para.] determining each first image in the M first layers according to pixel transparency information of the M first layers and the relationship between upper and lower layers
[page 19, 8th para.] The pixels in the image area of the code are read to obtain M second layers with an upper and lower hierarchical relationship. Then, the terminal device can superimpose the M second layers according to the upper-lower hierarchical relationship to obtain the target image. Further, the terminal device may display the target image on the display screen.
and reading each image block according to the sequential order of reading the image blocks. [page 19, 1st-3rd para.] S121: reading the pixels in the first layer of the top layer except the first target area to obtain the second layer of the top layer; S122: reading the pixels in the first layer of the middle layer except the second target area to obtain the second layer of the middle layer; S123: reading the pixels in the first layer of the bottom layer except the third target area to obtain the second layer of the bottom layer. Examiner interprets this to be reading in sequential order.
[page 19, 6th para] the present application does not limit the execution order of the above S121, S122 and S123. For example, S121, S122 and S123 may be executed in sequence; or S121 and S122 may be executed at the same time first, and then S123 may be executed; S122 and S123 may be specifically determined according to actual usage requirements
[page 21, last para- page 22, 1st para.] the terminal device may divide each of the M first layers into N tiles (N is greater than 1) Integer), and then traverse all pixel data in each tile, and then obtain the pixel transparency information corresponding to each tile. Further, the terminal device may compress each block in the M first layers and the corresponding pixel transparency information and write it into the memory.
Claim 4. Song teaches The method according to claim 1, wherein the determining the sequential order of reading the image blocks in the multiple layers comprises: determining the sequential order of reading the image blocks according to positions of the image blocks on the display screen and an overlapping relation in the specified direction. [page 4, last para.]by analyzing the pixel transparency components in multiple layers and the relationship between the upper and lower layers of the layers, the transparent area and/covered area in the layer can be determined, and the transparent area and/covered area can be masked and marked, thereby Get the mask area. Further, the terminal device can read the pixels in the image areas that are not marked with masks in the M first layers, and may not read the pixels in the image areas marked with masks in the M first layers at this time. Since some pixels that contribute to the display effect are selected to be read 5 when the layers are read, the total number of pixels in the M second layers obtained by reading is less than the total number of pixels in the M first layers. Examiner interprets the image areas with and without mask to be the position and the covered area is understood to be the overlapping area.
Claim 8. Reviewed and analyzed in the same way as claim 1. See the above analysis and rationale.
Claim 10. Reviewed and analyzed in the same way as claim 4. See the above analysis and rationale.
Claim 12. Song teaches An electronic device, wherein the electronic device comprises a memory and a processor, the memory is configured to store computer programs, and the computer programs comprise program instructions; [page 7, 3rd para.] the terminal device includes a processor, the processor is coupled with a memory, the memory is used for storing computer programs or instructions
and the processor is configured to call the computer programs, so as to implement the multi-layer reading method according to claim 1. [page 7, 3rd para.] the processor is used for executing the computer programs or instructions stored in the memory
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3, 5-7, 9, 11 and 13-20 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.
The innovation that makes claims 2 and 16 allowable is “wherein the storage information comprises base addresses and data lengths of the layers, …and determine whether the multiple layers overlap in the specified direction according to the storage information and the display information”.
The innovation that makes claims 3 and 9 allowable is “simulating extension of the upper and lower boundaries of each layer in a target direction, to simulate segmentation of the multiple layers into multiple image blocks, wherein the target direction is a direction perpendicular to the specified direction”.
The innovation that makes claims 5, 11, and 14 allowable is “wherein grid coordinate sizes in the grid coordinate system characterize the sequential order of reading the image blocks; calculating basic coordinates of the each image block in the display screen; calculating base addresses of the each image block in the storage module according to the basic coordinates of the each image block; and associating grids in the grid coordinate system with the base addresses of the image blocks so as to obtain grid distribution, wherein the grid distribution is used to determine the sequential order of reading the image blocks.”
Claims 6 and 7 are allowed because they are dependents of claim 5.
Claim 13 is allowed because it is a dependent of claim 2.
Claim 15 is allowed because it is a dependent of claim 14.
Claim 17 is allowed because it is a dependent of claim 11.
Claim 18 is allowed because it is a dependent of claim 17.
Claim 19 is allowed because it is a dependent of claim 16.
Claim 20 is allowed because it is a dependent of claim 19.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2020/0272588 A1 to Curtis and US 2021/0329236 A1 to Hendry et al.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DELOMIA L GILLIARD whose telephone number is (571)272-1681. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-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, John Villecco can be reached at (571) 272-7319. 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.
/DELOMIA L GILLIARD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2661
Prosecution Insights