DETAILED ACTION
Preliminary Remarks
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
This application claims the benefit of application no. 63/729,367 filed 12/07/2024 which further claims the benefit of application no. 65/553,637 filed 02/14/2024.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: #928 of Figure 9C not in spec. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-8 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.
In reference to claim 1, claim 1 recites, “A method for influencing a blending of a first visual media…responsive to a user input, adjusting a blend curve, wherein the blend curve is representative of an influence…” (see lines 1-2 and last 3 lines of the claim) of which the Examiner deems as indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim that which Applicant regards as the invention. In particular, the claim seems to indefinitely recite whether any actual “blending” is performed by solely reciting that an “influence” is adjusted without actually ever reciting a “blending” step. In other words, it seems the claim lacks any actual performing of “blending” of media assets but instead seems to perhaps abstractly perform such “blending” or assume it is performed? This leads the Examiner to ponder possible 35 USC 101 subject matter eligibility issues for the claim however the Examiner holds this matter for later judgement until a response to such 35 USC 112 rejection is made. Note, claims 2-8 depend upon affected claim 1 and are therefore also at least inherently included in this rejection. Lastly note, the Examiner states that claims 9-16 and 17-20 are NOT included in this rejection since they are system and computer-readable media type claims which do not comprise the preamble as claim 1 comprises which creates the indefiniteness as detailed above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
In reference to claims 9 and 17, the Examiner makes note of a term/concept which, in combination and integration with the other limitations of the claims, is seen as the major novel aspect of the invention and which was not found in the prior art of record. The Examiner makes note of the term/concept present a blending interface, wherein the blending interface displays at least one frame of the first input visual media and at least one frame of the second input visual media; responsive to a user input, adjust a blend curve, wherein the blend curve is representative of an influence of the first input visual media relative to the second input visual media over time.
In reference to claims 10-16 and 18-20, these claims depend upon allowable claims 9 and 17 respectively and are therefore also deemed allowable.
Claim 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
References Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Brooks et al. (U.S. Publication 2025/0259362) (related)
Brooks et al. discloses a prompt editor for use with a visual media generative response engine.
Wilson et al. (U.S. Publication 2025/0200843)
Wilson et al. discloses using generative image models in teleconferencing where images are inpainted and restyled.
Lee et al. (U.S. Publication 2016/0300377)
Lee et al. discloses a method and system for progressively sculpting 3D geometry which receives user input for transitions and curves in rendering animations.
Manzari et al. (U.S. Patent 11,416,134)
Manzari et al. discloses user interfaces for altering visual media having editing and playback modes.
Zhang (WO 2023/197723 A1)
Zhang discloses an image sequence processing method and apparatus that utilizes fusion weights for determining blend curves for poses in target image frames.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Antonio Caschera whose telephone number is (571) 272-7781. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday between 6:30 AM and 2:30 PM EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Said Broome, can be reached at (571) 272-2931.
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Mail Stop ____________
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
or faxed to:
571-273-8300 (Central Fax)
See the listing of “Mail Stops” at http://www.uspto.gov/patents/mail.jsp and include the appropriate designation in the address above.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the Technology Center 2600 Customer Service Office whose telephone number is (571) 272-2600.
/Antonio A Caschera/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2612
8/6/26
Prosecution Insights