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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent KR10-2023-0154309, filed on 11/09/2023.
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 2, 6, 11, 13, and 14 are amended.
Claims 10 and 20 are cancelled.
Claims 1 – 9, and 11-19 are pending.
Response to Arguments/Remarks
Objections
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and are persuasive. The Claim Objections has been withdrawn due to amendments.
35 U.S.C. §101
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 USC § 101 has been withdrawn due to amendments.
35 U.S.C. §102
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 – 9 and 11-19 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection as necessitated by applicant's amendments.
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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 – 9 and 11 - 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sammy Omari et al. [US20180204331, now Omari], with Arksey et al [US20220397917, now Arksey.
Claim 1
Omari discloses a method of determining a position of an object, the method comprising: receiving an image frame from a camera [see at least Omari, Abstract (“The method includes receiving user inputs “)];
determining object recognition information of an object included in the image frame by performing object recognition based on deep learning [see at least Omari, ¶ 0072 (using a “learning apparatus” to more effectively recognize objects and object frames); 0195-0196 (discusses “object recognition”)];
tracking the object by performing view control of the camera based on the object recognition information, wherein the tracking of the object comprises performing the view control of the camera so that the object is positioned at a center of the image frame; [see at least Omari, ¶ 0003; 0005; 0018; (all discuss the “tracking system” of Omari in detail and its ability to track an object by controlling a camera); 0060 (“perform full remote control of imaging device 100 functions;”); 101 (discusses centering the image); 121 (centered)]; and
determining object global positioning system (GPS) position information of the object based on view state information indicating a degree to which the camera is adjusted by the view control [see at least Omari, ¶ 0068 (“one or more components may be operable by one or more other control processes (e.g., a GPS receiver may include a processing apparatus configured to provide position and/or motion information to the processor 132 in accordance with a given schedule (e.g., values of latitude, longitude, and elevation at 10 Hz))”); 0075 (“The GPS sensor may provide GPS coordinates, time, and identifying location of the imaging device”); 0130 (using GPS to coordinate)]; and
controlling a flight of a drone system based on the object GPS position information [see at least Omari, ¶ 0066 (“ include movement commands, configuration commands, and other types of operational control commands.”); 0068; 0075; 0130)].
Note that Omari uses primarily voice commands but the instant Specification on Page 25, line 10 shows that input can be touch, voice or image input.
Omari does not specifically disclose but Arksey teaches using artificial intelligence (Al) with a neural network [see at least Arksey, ¶ 0076 (control of drome); 0115 (“Machine learning and artificial intelligence techniques may include, but are not limited to, neural networks, visual transformers, back propagation, convolutional neural networks (CNN), and deep learning, which may be implemented using software packages such as Tensorflow or PyTorch.”)].
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify/combine, with a reasonable expectation of success, the “controlling a movable imaging assembly having a movable platform and an imaging device,[abstract],” with the “method for controlling a plurality of drones [abstract]” of Arksey. Providing a more effective [Arksey, 0008] and efficient technology for surveillance and control of drones.
Claim 2
. Omari and Arksey discloses/teaches the method of Claim 1.
Omari further discloses the object recognition information comprises information about an object bounding box of the object, and a box size of the object bounding box is a predetermined size [see at least Omari, ¶ 0008; 0015; 0135; 0141 (all describe the use of a “bounding box” in image evaluation); 0101; 0121 (indicates centering or the center of the image)].
Claim 3
Omari and Arksey discloses/teaches the method of Claim 1.
Omari further discloses the performing of the view control comprises positioning the object at the center of the image frame by adjusting panning and tilting of the camera based on a distance between the center of the image frame and a center of the object bounding box and an angle of view of the camera [see at least Omari, ¶ 0131; 0222 (discuss “adjustment of the imaging device…” adjust the orientation of the imaging device“)].
Claim 4
Omari and Arksey discloses/teaches the method of Claim 1.
Omari further discloses receiving a second image frame following the image frame from the camera; and determining second object recognition information of the object included in the second image frame by performing the object recognition based on the deep learning, wherein the second object recognition information comprises information about a second object bounding box of the object, and the tracking of the object comprises reperforming the view control of the camera based on the view state information so that the object is positioned at a center of the second image frame and a second box size of the second object bounding box is the predetermined size [see at least Omari, ¶ 0009; 0015 (discuss the second image and second image frame to perform tasks); 0096 (discuss the size of the subject); 0131; 0222 ((discuss “adjustment of the imaging device…” adjust the orientation of the imaging device“ i.e. control of the camera); 0101; 0121 (indicate centering or the center of the image)].
Claim 5
Omari and Arksey discloses/teaches the method of Claim 1.
Omari further discloses the tracking of the object comprises generating a view control signal recognizable by a view controller that performs the view control of the camera, and the view state information is generated by converting a view state signal generated by the view controller [see at least Omari, ¶0062 (discusses manipulation of the image); 0069;0070; 0237 (discuss the control signals and controller); 0180 (discusses a converter unit)].
Claim 6
Omari and Arksey discloses/teaches the method of Claim 1.
Omari further discloses wherein the determining of the object GPS position information is performed further based on a second object recognition information [see at least Omari, ¶ 0015 (“second image frame”); 0068 (“GPS receiver”)].
Claim 7
Omari and Arksey discloses/teaches the method of Claim 1.
Omari further discloses the determining of the object GPS position information comprises: determining image center GPS position information of a center of the second image frame based on the view state information and the second object recognition information; and determining the object GPS position information based on the second object recognition information and the image center GPS position information [see at least Omari, ¶ 0100-0101; 0131; 0141 (discuss the use of GPS position to determine location and placement of images, as well as recognition information)].
Claim 8
Omari and Arksey discloses/teaches the method of Claim 1.
Omari further discloses determining of the image center GPS position information comprises: determining an object distance between the camera and the object; determining offsets based on the object distance; and determining the image center GPS position information of the center of the second image frame by applying the offsets to camera GPS position information of the camera [see at least Omari, ¶ 0014; 0106; 0131; 0222 (discuss center of object, object distance and BPS being used to determine location using GPS position information of camera)].
Claim 9
Omari and Arksey discloses/teaches the method of Claim 1.
Omari further discloses the second object recognition information comprises information about a second object bounding box of the object, and the determining of the object GPS position information based on the image center GPS position information comprises: determining shift values based on a distance between the center of the second image frame and a center of the second object bounding box; and determining the object GPS position information by applying the shift values to the image center GPS position information [see at least Omari, ¶ 0008-0009; 0015 (discuss second object in information therefore); 0009; 0075; 00131 (discuss GPS use); 0212 (discusses second image Bounding box); 0061; 0070 (discuss shift values and use of GPS)].
Claim 11
Omari and Arksey discloses/teaches the method of Claim 1.
Omari further discloses the controlling of the flight of the drone system is performed further based on drone GPS information obtained from the drone system [see at least Omari, ¶ 0064; 0066; 0270 (discuss the use of a drone and the control of the drone)].
Claim 12
This is the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions for Claim 1, thus, this claim is substantially similar to Claim 1 and is therefore rejected using the same references and rationale.
Omari further discloses a “non-transitory memory configured to store configuration information and/or processing code configured to enable…” in ¶ 0072.
Claim 13
Claim 13 is the apparatus for Claim 1 and has similar limitations to claim 1, therefore claim 13 is rejected with the same rationale as claim 1.
Claim 14
Claim 14 has similar limitations to claim 2, therefore claim 14 is rejected with the same rationale as claim 2.
Claim 15
Claim 15 has similar limitations to claim 3, therefore claim 15 is rejected with the same rationale as claim 3.
Claim 16
Claim 16 has similar limitations to claim 4, therefore claim 16 is rejected with the same rationale as claim 4.
Claim 17
Claim 17 has similar limitations to claim 7, therefore claim 17 is rejected with the same rationale as claim 7.
Claim 18
Claim 18 has similar limitations to claim 8, therefore claim 18 is rejected with the same rationale as claim 8.
Claim 19
Claim 19 has similar limitations to claim 9, therefore claim 19 is rejected with the same rationale as claim 9.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOAN T GOODBODY whose telephone number is (571) 270-7952. The examiner can normally be reached on M-TH 7-3 (US Eastern time).
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 https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.html.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, RACHID BENDIDI can be reached at (571) 272-4896. The Fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspot.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at (866) 217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from the USPTO Customer Serie Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800) 786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571) 272-1000.
/JOAN T GOODBODY/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3664
(571) 270-7952
Prosecution Insights