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 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.
Claim 8 is 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.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the system" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Applicant's Specification states, in paragraph [00302]-[00304]:
[00302] In certain example implementations, the matching operations outlined herein, such as those carried out by server and/or provided as an application program for an endpoint being operated by an end user (e.g., a mobile application program for an iPhone or Android device), may be implemented by logic encoded in one or more non-transitory, tangible media (e.g., embedded logic provided in an application specific integrated circuit ("ASIC"), digital signal processor ("DSP") instructions, software (potentially inclusive of object code and source code) to be executed by a processor, or other similar machine, etc.). In some of these instances, a memory930 can store data used for the operations described herein. This includes the memory930 being able to store software, logic, code, or processor instructions (e.g., program935) that are executed to carry out the activities described in this Specification.
[00303] The processor940 can execute any type of instructions associated with the data to achieve the operations detailed herein in this Specification. The activities outlined herein can be implemented with fixed logic or programmable logic (e.g., software/computer instructions executed by a processor) and the elements identified herein can be a programmable processor, programmable digital logic (e.g., a field programmable gate array ("FPGA"), an erasable programmable read only memory ("EPROM"), an electrically erasable programmable ROM ("EEPROM")) or an ASIC that includes digital logic, software, code, electronic instructions, or any suitable combination thereof.
[00304] These devices illustrated herein can maintain information in any suitable memory (random access memory ("RAM"), ROM, EPROM, EEPROM, ASIC), software, hardware, or in any other suitable component, device, element, or object where appropriate. Any of the memory items discussed herein should be construed as encompassed within the broad term "memory." Similarly, any of the potential processing elements, modules, and machines described in this Specification should be construed as encompassed within the broad term "processor." Each of the network elements can also include suitable interfaces for receiving, transmitting, and/or otherwise communicating data or information in a network environment.
The cited paragraph discloses exemplary embodiments of computer readable medium. In the broadest reasonable interpretation, claim 15 can include a signal as one of the other not mentioned examples given by applicant's specification. The examiner, in the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language, construes claim-15's “computer-readable medium encoded with a computer program” to be a signal carrying processor-executable instructions, and therefore, it is a non-statutory subject matter.
The examiner suggest to correct claim 15 to recite "non-transitory computer readable medium", "computer readable device" or some other phrase that explicitly excludes a signal as the computer readable medium.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 6-8, 13, 15, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)as being anticipated by Jacobs (Pub. No. 2023/0290177).
Regarding claims 1, 8 and 15, Jacobs teaches a computing device (user devices 16, Figs. 3-5; or servers 14, Figs. 1, 10 and 11) (with corresponding method and computer-readable medium encoded with a computer program) comprising:
a memory that stores at least one instruction; and at least one processor configured to execute the at least one instruction (these elements are inherent on these computing devices; [0044]) to cause the system to at least take a first photo with a camera of the computing device (photograph 12, [0042]; [0043]; [0046]),
determine an embedding of the first photo ([0043]; [00046], and facial metrics are obtained from photograph 12),
identify a second photo stored in the computing device, at least in part based on the embedding of the first photo ([0048]-[0051]), and
upload the second photo ([0052]).
Regarding claims 6, 13 and 20, Jacobs teaches wherein the second photo is stored in a camera roll or a picture album of the computing device ([0048]-[0050]; [0057], where the facial metrics are compared to pictures that were imported/uploaded from/to a storage library).
Regarding claims 7 and 19, Jacobs teaches further comprising: displaying the second photo, wherein the second photo is uploaded, at least in part based on a determination that a selection of the second photo was received ([0052]; 186, 188, Fig. 14, where in order to share the determined pics, the system should have been selected them and received from the system. Additionally, the user needs to select ‘Yes, Spot my Photos’ in order to view and potentially share them).
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, 3, 9, 10, 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jacobs (Pub. No. 2023/0290177) in view of Kernick et al. (hereinafter ‘Kernick’, Pub. No. 2021/0049128).
Regarding claims 2, 9 and 16, Jacobs teaches all the limitations of the claims they depend on. Although Jacobs teaches counting the one or more faces in the first photo and the second is uploaded ([0005]; [0105]; [0106], where the shared pictures are based on the number of faces found on the first group picture), Jacobs does not explicitly teach at least in part based on a determination whether the count of the one or more faces in the first photo exceeds a predetermined threshold.
However, in an analogous art, Kernick teaches a system for finding pictures for deleting and/or that are worth sharing based on different criteria (Abstract; [0108]; [0124]; [0125]). The system can use a picture or group of pictures, with machine learning model, to select groups of photos ([0108]). The criteria could be to deleting/sharing group pictures of a minimum number of faces found in the pics ([0110]).
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 Jacobs’ invention with Kernick’s feature of determining a group of pictures based on the number of faces on the pictures that exceeds a predetermined number/threshold for the benefit of keeping for sharing pictures of a family/friends group.
Regarding claims 3, 10 and 17, Jacobs and Kernick teach further comprising:
displaying the count of the one or more faces in the first photo, at least in part based on a determination whether the count of the one or more faces in the first photo exceeds a predetermined threshold (Kernick: [0044]-[0046], where the pictures are presented for confirmation for preserving pictures for potential sharing).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 5, 11, 12, 18 and 19 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMAR S PARRA whose telephone number is (571)270-1449. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: Mostly 10-6PM.
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, Nathan Flynn can be reached at 571-2721915. 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.
/OMAR S PARRA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2421