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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 16489374, filed on 8/28/2019.
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) 1-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Marman et al. (US 20120062732 A1), and in view of Wang et al. (US 20150356840 A1).
Regarding Claim 11, Marman discloses A video image analysis apparatus (ABST reciting “A video system”, Fig. 1) comprising:
detect a tracking target object, (¶24 reciting “Video analytics 120 include an object detection module 210 for detecting objects appearing in the field of view of camera 110.”)
acquire a first image which is an image obtained by cutting out the tracking target object from a video image, including the tracking target object, taken at a first time,
acquire a second image which is an image obtained by cutting out the tracking target object from a video image, including the tracking target object, taken at a second time,
acquire a first display image displaying the first image,
acquire a second display image displaying the second image,
(¶103 reciting “display management module 340 extracts snapshot images 1705, 1710, 1715, 1720, 1725, 1730, and 1735 from the image data produced by imager 115. For example, one snapshot image of the object is extracted every second.” Therefore, Marmon discloses extracting images every second. As shown in Fig. 17, a second time for image 1710 is later than a first time for image 1705.)
display motions of the tracking target object, (¶71 reciting “display management module 340 generates a stream of video in which cropped close-up images of vehicle 1042 are presented in a zoomed-in tracking window for a period of time and cropped close-up images of license plate 1046 are presented in the zoomed-in tracking window for a second period of time.”)
display the first image and the second image on corresponding positions in a trajectory of the tracking target, (Fig. 17. ¶103 reciting “display management module 340 also produces a visible time stamp for each extracted snapshot corresponding to a time when the corresponding snapshot was captured by imager 115. For example, image 1705 includes a time stamp 00:01 above it indicating that image 1705 was captured within the first second of detection of object 1700.”) and
display an image corresponding to the first time or the second time on a display unit depending on a request of selecting the first display image or the second display image. (¶103 reciting “display management module 340 can generate a graphical timeline for an object that includes one or both of associated time capsules and close-up snapshots. The user can move a cursor over a specific point in the time line to provide a pop-up view of the time capsule or snapshot corresponding to the specific point in time. The user can then click on the pop-up window to view an intelligent fast playback clip, a cropped close-up video clip, or the original video clip.” (¶103). In other words, Marman discloses for a user to select a snapshot (i.e. a first or a second image) to display a close-up video clip (i.e. an image corresponding to the first time or the second time).”)
Marman discloses “Video analytics 120 may be implemented in software” (¶22) and “the term "module" is a component that may comprise one or more hardware circuits or devices or one or more software routines, functions, or objects.” (¶23). However, Marman does not explicitly disclose a memory storing software instructions, and one or more processors configured to execute the software instructions to implement the modules in the video system.
Wang teaches “an information processing system that can be used in a surveillance camera system” (¶2). Specifically, ¶326 recites “A non-transitory computer-readable medium having embodied thereon a program, which when executed by a computer causes the computer to perform a method, the method including: obtaining a plurality of segments compiled from at least one media source, wherein each segment of the plurality of segments contains at least one image frame within which a specific target object is found to be captured; and providing image frames of the obtained plurality of segments for display along a timeline and in conjunction with a tracking status indicator that indicates a presence of the specific target object within the plurality of segments in relation to time.”
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to implement apparatus (taught by Marman) by means of a general-purpose computer, with the processing modules being implemented by reading software programs corresponding to the processing of each processing section stored in computer memory, and having these programs executed by the computer (taught by Wang). The suggestions/motivations would have been to apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Regarding Claim 12. Marman in view of Wang discloses The video image analysis apparatus according to claim 11, wherein the one or more processors configured to execute the software instructions to display the trajectory of the tracking target on the display unit in a form according to at least one of a direction or a movement of the tracking target. (Marman, Fig. 17)
Regarding Claim 13. Marman in view of Wang discloses The video image analysis apparatus according to claim 11, wherein the one or more processors configured to execute the software instructions to acquire a request that designates a point in the trajectory being displayed, the request being associated with the trajectory superimposed and displayed on a background image, and realize a GUI (Graphical User Interface) function of performing screen control in accordance with the request. (Marman, ¶103 reciting “display management module 340 can generate a graphical timeline for an object that includes one or both of associated time capsules and close-up snapshots. The user can move a cursor over a specific point in the time line to provide a pop-up view of the time capsule or snapshot corresponding to the specific point in time. The user can then click on the pop-up window to view an intelligent fast playback clip, a cropped close-up video clip, or the original video clip.” (¶103). In other words, Marman discloses a request designates a point in the trajectory (i.e. a cursor over a specific point in the time line”), and a GUI function performing screen control in accordance with the request (i.e. a pop-up view of the time capsule)).
Regarding Claim 14. Marman in view of Wang discloses The video image analysis apparatus according to claim 11, wherein the one or more processors configured to execute the software instructions to display the trajectory in such a form that the point or the section can be recognized, when superimposing the trajectory. (Marman, Fig. 17 showing the timeline (i.e. the trajectory) superimposed on a background image, and each snapshot image representing a recognizable point)
Regarding Claim 15. Marman in view of Wang discloses The video image analysis apparatus according to claim 11, wherein the one or more processors configured to execute the software instructions to output a message indicating detection when a moving object crossing over a predetermined intrusion detection line is detected. (Marman, ¶34 reciting “rules engine 290 may trigger an alarm that alerts a user when a human is detected in the field of view of camera 110. Various different rules can be created by a user. For example, a user can create a rule that triggers an alarm when an object enters a specified region of interest (e.g., a fenced-in area) in the scene”. )
Claim 1, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 11, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 11.
Claim 2, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 12, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 12.
Claim 3, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 13, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 13.
Claim 4, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 14, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 14.
Claim 5, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 15, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 15.
Claim 6, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 11, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 11.
Claim 7, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 12, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 12.
Claim 8, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 13, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 13.
Claim 9, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 14, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 14.
Claim 10, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 15, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 15.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YI WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-6022. The examiner can normally be reached 9am - 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, Jason Chan can be reached at (571)272-3022. 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.
/YI WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2619
Prosecution Insights