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 .
Claim Interpretation
Claim(s) 1-9 do not use “means for” (or “step for”) language, or generic placeholders for "means” coupled with functional language without recitation of sufficient structure for carrying out the claimed functions and therefore do not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.[claims 1-7]
Claim 1 recites “in a case where enlargement display of a first image area and a second image area among the plurality of image areas is performed, in the acquisition processing, an enlarged image of the first image area is acquired and stored in a storage, and then an enlarged image of the second image area is acquired”.
Claim 3 recites “wherein in a case where the user operation is performed, in the acquisition processing, processing to acquire the enlarged image of the first image area and store the enlarged image in the storage and processing to acquire the enlarged image of the second image area are sequentially executed”.
It is unclear whether the language of claim 1 requires that the operations be performed in a sequential manner as would typically be implied by the “and then” language, or whether claim 1 does not require the specific timing of the operations.
It is noted that since claim 3 recites performing the operations in a sequential manner, by the doctrine of claim differentiation, it can reasonably be inferred that “and then” does not require that the operations be performed sequentially.
However, if this is the case, it is unclear what specifically is meant by “and then” in claim 1.
For the purposes of applying prior art, claim 1 will be read as not requiring any specific ordering of capturing/storing the first and second images.
Claims 2-7 are similarly rejected due to their dependence on claim 1.
Clarification is required.
Note that claims 8 and 9 similarly recite “and then”. The “and then” limitation in claims 8 and 9 will be read as requiring a specific ordering as a matter of grammar since no dependent claim which further limits the ordering to be “sequential” exists which depends on these claims. See MPEP 2111.01 and Altiris Inc. v. Symantec Corp., 318 F.3d 1363, 1371, 65 USPQ2d 1865, 1869-70 (Fed. Cir. 2003).
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 (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 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, 2 and 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakabayashi et al. (US 2011/0234881 A1) in view of Kim et al. (US 2012/0038747 A1).[claim 1]
Regarding claim 1, Wakabayashi discloses an electronic device comprising:
a processor (Figure 2, 110); and
a memory storing a program which, when executed by the processor (Figure 2, 114; Paragraphs 0064-0065), causes the electronic device to execute acquisition processing to
acquire an image output from an imaging apparatus that captures a plurality of image areas via a plurality of optical systems respectively (Figure 3, S14; Figure 7; S22),
execute display control processing to perform control so that the image is displayed (e.g. Figure 5), and
execute reception processing to receive a user operation for performing enlargement display (Paragraph 0056, 0113-0114).
However, Wakabayashi does not explicitly disclose wherein, in a case where enlargement display of a first image area and a second image area among the plurality of image areas is performed, in the acquisition processing, an enlarged image of the first image area is acquired and stored in a storage, and then an enlarged image of the second image area is acquired, and
in the display control processing, control is performed so that the stored enlarged image of the first image area and the acquired enlarged image of the second image area are displayed side by side.
Kim discloses a similar electronic device including first and second cameras, and further discloses wherein, in a case where enlargement display of a first image area and a second image area among the plurality of image areas is performed, in the acquisition processing, an enlarged image of the first image area is acquired and stored in a storage, and then an enlarged image of the second image area is acquired (Figure 10, S510-S515; Paragraphs 0036 0100; capturing and storing first and second images using a zoom function of first and second cameras in response to a zoom command), and
in the display control processing, control is performed so that the stored enlarged image of the first image area and the acquired enlarged image of the second image area are displayed (e.g. Paragraph 0099; captured images are displayed on display module as described in S505).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to provide a zoom command which commands zoom of both the first and second cameras so that zoomed in images from both cameras may be captured as taught by Kim.
Additionally, since Wakabayashi discloses providing either a 2D parallel or 3D display mode which is selectable, it further would have been obvious to display the first and second zoomed/enlarged images in a side-by-side arrangement (Wakabayashi, Paragraph 0053).[claim 2]
Regarding claim 2, Wakabayashi in view of Kim discloses wherein in a case where a user operation for performing enlargement display of the first image area is performed (Wakabayashi, Figures 3 and 5),
in the acquisition processing, the enlarged image of the first image area is acquired and in the display control processing, control is performed so that the acquired enlarged image of the first image area is displayed (Wakabayashi, Figure 5; images are acquired and displayed), and
in a case where a user operation for performing enlargement display of the second image area is performed in a state where the enlargement display of the first image area is performed (Wakabayashi, Figure 3, S7-S8),
in the acquisition processing, the acquired enlarged image of the first image area is stored in the storage, and the enlarged image of the second image area is acquired (Wakabayashi, Figure 3; live view images are acquired, including first image area and enlarged second image area), and
in the display control processing, control is performed so that the stored enlarged image of the first image area and the acquired enlarged image of the second image area are displayed side by side (Figure 5; displaying acquired images).
Further note that Kim additionally discloses a mode in which a first image and an enlarged second image are acquired (Figure 8, S520 and S525; Paragraph 0101).[claim 5]
Regarding claim 5, Wakabayashi in view of Kim discloses wherein the enlarged image of the first image area stored in the storage is the enlarged image of the first image area acquired last (Wakabayashi, Paragraphs 0066, 0074, 0099-0100; note the last captured images are stored as described).[claim 6]
Regarding claim 6, Wakabayashi in view of Kim discloses wherein the image acquired by the acquisition processing is a live view image (Wakabayashi, Figure 3, S3 LIVE VIEW).[claim 7]
Regarding claim 7, Wakabayashi in view of Kim discloses wherein the imaging apparatus captures an image in which the first image area and the second image area are arranged side by side (Wakabayashi, Figure 2; note optical systems arranged side-by-side which would capture areas of a scene which are side-by-side).
Claim(s) 3, 4, 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wakabayashi et al. (US 2011/0234881 A1) in view of Kim et al. (US 2012/0038747 A1) in view of Cui et al. (US 10,497,129 B1).[claim 3]
Regarding claim 3, Wakabayashi in view of Kim teaches wherein in a case where the user operation is performed, in the acquisition processing, processing to acquire the enlarged image of the first image area and store the enlarged image in the storage and processing to acquire the enlarged image of the second image area (e.g. Wakabayashi, Paragraphs 0066, 0074, 0099-0100), and in the display control processing, control is performed so that the stored enlarged image of the first image area and the acquired enlarged image of the second image area are displayed side by side (Wakabayashi, Figure 5).
However, Wakabayashi in view of Kim does not disclose that the acquiring and storing of the first and second images are sequentially executed.
Cui discloses a stereoscopic imaging device similar to that of Wakabayashi and Kim and further discloses that the capture of stereo image pairs may be done sequentially (c. 23, l. 58 – c.24, l. 12). By sequentially capturing the images the amount of instantaneous data to transfer may be reduced since the images are read at separate times. Therefore, it would have been obvious to sequentially capture the images as taught by Cui to reduce the amount of data transferred at one time.
Note that since the images are captured in a sequential manner, the images would similarly be stored in a sequential manner since the images are stored directly after output as taught by Wakabayashi (Paragraph 0074).[claim 4]
Regarding claim 4, Wakabayashi in view of Kim in view of Cui discloses wherein the user operation is a user operation for setting a predetermined mode (e.g. Wakabayashi, Figure 3, selection of tele/wide or 3D shooting mode; see also Kim, Figure 10, selection of BASIC ZOOM or WIDE ZOOM modes).[claim 8]
Claim 8 is a method claim corresponding to apparatus claim 3. Therefore, claim 8 is analyzed and rejected as previously discussed with respect to claim 3.[claim 9]
Regarding claim 9, see the rejection of claims 3 and 8 above and note that Wakayabashi discloses implementing the system/method using a non-transitory computer readable medium that stores a program, wherein the program causes a computer to execute a control method of an electronic device (Paragraphs 0156-0157, 0217).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references show additional prior art systems/methods for performing capture and display of first and second images:
Ueda US 2013/0162784 A1
Sawachi US 2013/0100257 A1
Aizawa US 2012/0154547 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY J HENN whose telephone number is (571)272-7310. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday ~10-6.
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.
/Timothy J Henn/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2639