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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-21 of U.S. Patent No. 10,997,730. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the present claims are either anticipated by or obvious variants of the patent claims. In particular, the following table shows the corresponding limitations between a representative claim and a patent claim.
Present Application Claims
Patent claims
1. A method comprising: receiving a video comprising a plurality of image frames including a first object of interest and a second object of interest; determining, based on the plurality of image frames, a first motion associated with the first object of interest; determining, based on the plurality of image frames, a second motion associated with the second object of interest; and determining that the first motion and the second motion correspond to a conjoined motion.
1. A method comprising: receiving a machine-learning model trained to detect a specified motion using a plurality of videos, wherein each of the videos have at least one frame labeled as a moment of perception of the specified motion; identifying an object-of-interest depicted in an input video; detecting, with respect to a sequence of frames of the input video, a motion of the object-of-interest; determining that the motion of the object-of-interest is the specified motion; and classifying, using the trained machine-learning model, one of the frames of the input video as the moment of perception of the specified
14. The method of claim 1, further comprising: identifying a second object-of-interest depicted in an input video; detecting, with respect to a sequence of frames of the input video, a second motion of the second object-of-interest; determining that the second motion of the second object-of-interest is a specified second motion; and classifying, using the trained machine-learning model, one of the frames of the input video as a second moment of perception of the specified motion.
15. The method of claim 14, wherein the first motion and the second motion are both parts of a conjoined motion.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,816,876. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the present claims are either anticipated by or obvious variants of the patent claims. In particular, the following table shows the corresponding limitations a representative claim and a patent claim.
Present Application Claims
Patent claims
1. A method comprising: receiving a video comprising a plurality of image frames including a first object of interest and a second object of interest; determining, based on the plurality of image frames, a first motion associated with the first object of interest; determining, based on the plurality of image frames, a second motion associated with the second object of interest; and determining that the first motion and the second motion correspond to a conjoined motion.
1. A method comprising: receiving an input video comprising a plurality of image frames including an object of interest; determining, based on the plurality of image frames, a motion associated with the object of interest; and classifying, using a machine-learning model, the plurality of image frames to identify one of the plurality of image frames that indicates detection of the determined motion.
7. The method of claim 1, further comprising: identifying a second object of interest depicted in the input video; detecting, with respect to a sequence of frames of the input video, a second motion of the second object of interest; determining that the second motion of the second object of interest is a specified second motion; and classifying, using the machine-learning model, one of the frames of the input video as detection of the specified second motion.
8. The method of claim 7, wherein the motion and the second motion are both parts of a conjoined motion.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHUOC TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7399. 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, Vu Le can be reached on 571-272-7332. 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.
/PHUOC TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2668
