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 .
Acknowledgment of Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed 07/21/2026 overcomes the following objection(s)/rejection(s):
The objection to the specification has been withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 5 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0056833 A1) in view of Pyle et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2004/0135900 A1) and further in view of Milican et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0139204 A1) and in further view of Mori et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 201/0222687 A1).
As per claim 1, Harris teaches a camera device comprising: a digital camera (fig. 1 el. 102), an outwardly facing light source (“LED”; fig. 1 el. 108 and [0028], [0033], [0034]) that is communicatively coupled to a control unit (fig. 1 el. 108 and 114; [0033], “the processor 114 is communicatively coupled to the plurality of digital cameras 102, the microphone 104, the speaker 106, the plurality of LEDs 108, …”) ; a transceiver communicatively coupled to the control unit (fig. 1 el. 112; fig. 9 and [0032-0033]; “… The processor 114 is communicatively coupled to the plurality of digital cameras 102, the microphone 104, the speaker 106, the plurality of LEDs 108, the electronic storage medium 110, the communication module 112 …”); a non-volatile memory coupled to the control unit (fig. 1 el. 110 and [0031-0033]) and storing a control program, which when executed using the control unit, causes the control unit to execute ([0033] and fig. 1): illuminating the light source ([0034], “… when the light sensor 118 measures an ambient light below a predefined value, the plurality of LEDs 108 illuminate to aid a user’s vision and/or enhance the clarity of the captured data from the plurality of digital cameras 102”); capturing a digital image via the digital camera and soring the digital image in the memory ([0038-0029], [0031-0032] and fig. 1); transmitting the digital image via the transceiver to a networked storage device (fig. 1, fig. 9 and [0083-0085]); deleting the digital image from the memory ([0031]; “.. the storage capacity of the electronic storage medium 110 can be selected such that it can store a desired amount of data and sounds before requiring deletion and/or overwriting of previously stored data/sounds in order to store newly captured data and/or sounds”); and after a time delay, repeating the capturing, storing transmitting, and deleting ([0040-0041] and [0092]). Harris does not explicitly disclose the claimed volatile memory coupled to the control unit; and receiving account verification information via the transceiver; and storing the digital image in the volatile memory; automatically deleting the digital file from the volatile memory as recited in claim 1.
However, Pyle teaches a volatile memory coupled to the control unit (fig. 1 el. 102, 104, 106); and storing the digital image in the volatile memory ([0018-0019]); automatically deleting the digital file from the volatile memory ([0018]; “.. the circular buffer is sized to provide sufficient storage for storing captured sensory data for a period t.sub.B. If sensory data are captured for a period of time longer than t.sub.B, sensory data captured later in time will is written over..”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Pyle with Harris for the benefit of providing improved image capturing and efficient data storage of captured image data.
Harris (modified by Pyle) does not explicitly disclose receiving account verification information via the transceiver.
However, Milican teaches receiving account verification information via the transceiver (fig. 1 and [0077], [0095], “The collected scene data may be stored in the remote server 170 with a designated data storage account identified by an account name or identification”); capturing a digital image via the digital camera and storing the digital image in the volatile memory (fig. 1 el. 121; 153; [0049-0050], [0055], [0069], [0080], [0148]); automatically deleting the digital image from the volatile memory ([0050], [0080], [0151], [0153],”.. the apparatus 100 is to record scene data in a loop and the scene data are kept in the memory 153 of the apparatus 100. The loop time can be set by user so that the scene data older than the loop time are erased or overwritten by new scene data and scene data newer than the loop time are kept”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Milican with Harris (modified by Pyle) for the benefit of providing improved mobile personal safety apparatus.
Although Harris (modified by Pyle and Milican) discloses the transmitted data of the transmissions of the ordered sequence described above (i.e., the first transmission, the second transmission, etc.) includes one or more compressed, encrypted still images [0045], Harris does not explicitly disclose a networked storage device coupled to a server computer to encrypt the digital image using one or more encryption keys that are stored only at the server computer, a host application, networked storage, or a database and not delivered or provided to a user of the camera device; receiving a handshake or validation signal from the server computer specifying that the digital image was completely received.
However, Mori teaches a network storage device coupled to encrypt the digital image using one or more encryption keys that are stored only at the server computer, a host application, networked storage, or a database and not delivered or provided to a user of the camera device (fig. 1, fig. 4, fig. 5, fig. 6 and [0063], [0084-0086]); receiving a handshake or validation signal from the sever computer specifying that the digital image was completely received (fig. 6 and [0095]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Mori with Harris (modified by Pyle and Milica) for the benefit to provide an apparatus and method for encrypting image data, and apparatus and method for decrypting encrypted image data, and image data distribution system, each of which having a higher security level and also earlier handling, [0009].
As per claim 5, Harris (modified by Pyle, Milican and Mori) as a whole teaches everything as claimed above, see claim 1. Although Harris discloses wherein the control program when executed using the control unit causes the control unit to execute transmitting the digital image via the transceiver to a mobile computing device (fig. 9 and [0032], [0083]), Harris does not explicitly disclose the transceiver comprises a short-range wireless transceiver.
However, Milican teaches wherein the transceiver comprises a short-term wireless transceiver ([0071-0072], “… the transceiver 152 is configured to at least support one or more short-range communication protocols (such as BLE protocol, WiFi, etc.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Milican with Harris (modified by Pyle and Mori) for the benefit of providing improved mobile personal safety apparatus.
As per claim 6, Harris (modified by Pyle, Milican and Mori) as a whole teaches everything as claimed above see claim 5. Although Harris discloses a Bluetooth connection ([0032] and [0083]), Harris does not explicitly disclose wherein the short-range transceiver is a Bluetooth transceiver.
However, Milican teaches wherein the short-range wireless transceiver is a Bluetooth transceiver ([0003],[0072]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Milican with Harris (modified by Pyle and Mori) for the benefit of providing improved mobile personal safety apparatus.
Claim(s) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0056833 A1) in view of Pyle et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2004/0135900 A1), in view of Milican et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0139204 A1) further in view of Mori et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0222687 A1) and further in view of Lorenzetti et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2015/0086175 A1).
As per claim 2, Harris (modified by Pyle, Milican and Mori) as a whole teaches everything as claimed above, see claim 1. In addition, Harris teaches a wearable enclosure that contains the digital camera, the control unit, the transceiver, and the non-volatile memory (figs. 1-5B). Pyle does not explicitly disclose a wearable enclosure that contains the volatile memory.
However, Lorenzetti teaches wherein the camera device further comprises a wearable enclosure that contains volatile memory (fig. 3 el. 305, fig. 6-7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the known teaching of Lorenzetti with Harris (modified by Pyle, Milican and Mori) for the benefit of providing an improved body worn camera.
As per claim 3, Harris (modified by Pyle, Milican, Mori and Lorenzetti) as a whole teaches everything as claimed above. In addition, Harris teaches further comprising, attached to the wearable enclosure (fig. 1-5B), means for attaching the wearable enclosure to appeal or to a human body part (figs. 2-9).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0056833 A1) in view of Pyle et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2004/0135900 A1) further in view of Milican et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0139204 A1) in further of Mori et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0222687 A1) in view of Lorenzetti et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2015/0086175 A1) and Wu et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0109765 A1).
As per claim 4, Harris (modified by Pyle, Milican, Mori and Lorenzetti) as whole teaches everything as claimed above, see claim 3. In addition, Harris teaches wherein the means for attaching comprises a clip ([0008], [0050] and fig. 2-5B el. 290). Although, Harris (modified by Pyle, Milican and Lorenzetti) discloses wherein the means for attaching comprising a clip, Harris does not explicitly disclose the means is a spring clip.
However, Wu teaches the known concept wherein the means for attaching comprises a spring clip ([0008], [0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Wu with Harris (modified by Pyle, Milican and Mori) for the benefit of providing improved wearable body camera that safely, accurately and easily records events during a law enforcement officer’s shift and minimizes the amount of gear that the officer must carry [0004-0005].
Claim(s) 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris et al., (2019/0122531 A1) in view of Pyle et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2004/0135900 A1) further in view of Milican et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0139204 A) and further in view of Mori et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0222687 A1) and in further view of Hsu et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0160018 A1).
As per claim 7, Harris (modified by Pyle, Milican as a whole teaches everything as claimed above, see claim 1. Although Harris discloses wherein the light source comprises one or more light-emitting diodes (LEDs) (fig. 1 el. 108 and [0028], [0033-0034], [0040]), Harris does not explicitly disclose wherein the light source comprises one or more visible light light-emitting diodes (LEDs).
However, Hsu teaches the known concept of wherein the light source comprises one or more visible light light-emitting diodes (LEDs) ([0018-0019], [0022] and fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Hsu with Harris (modified by Pyle and Milican and Mori) for the benefit of providing improved image quality and security.
As per claim 8, Harris (modified by Pyle, Milican and Mori) as a whole teaches everything as claimed above, see claim 1. Harris does not explicitly disclose wherein the light source comprises one or more static visible light LEDs, one or more colored LEDs, and one or more infrared (IR) spectrum LEDs.
However, Hsu teaches wherein the light source comprises one or more static visible light LEDs, one or more colored LEDs, and one or more infrared (IR) spectrum LEDs ([0018-0019], [0022] and fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Hsu with Harris (modified by Pyle, Milican and Mori) for the benefit of providing improved image quality and security.
Claim(s) 9-10, 13, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0056833 A1) in view of Pyle et al., (2004/0135900) and in view of Osorio (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0104000 A1) and Mori et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0222687 A1).
As per claim 9, Harris teaches a distributed computing system comprising: a camera device (fig. 1 el. 100) comprising a digital camera (fig. 1 el. 102), an outwardly facing light source (fig. 1 el. 108; and [0033-0034]) that is communicatively coupled to a control unit (fig. 1 el. 108 and 114 and [0028], [0033-0034]), a transceiver communicatively coupled to the control unit (fig. 1, fig. 9), a first memory coupled to the control unit (fig. 1 el. 110), memory coupled to the control unit and storing a control program which, when executed using the control unit, cause the control unit to execute (fig. 1 and [0031], [0033]); illuminating the light source (fig. 1 el. 108 and [0033-0034]); capturing a digital image via the digital camera (fig. 1 and [0028-0029] and storing the digital image ([0029] and fig. 1); transmitting the digital image transceiver to a mobile computing device ([0045], [0083-0084] and fig. 9); deleting the digital image from memory ([0031]); and after a time delay, repeating the capturing, storing, transmitting and deleting ([0040-0041] and [0092]); and a mobile app ([0009], [0084-0085]) comprising one or more first sequence of instructions configured to store in a first non-transitory computer-readable storage media of the mobile computing device ([0009], [0084] and fig. 9), when executed using the mobile computing device, cause the mobile device to execute: receiving the digital image in a second memory of the mobile computing device ([0084-0085] and fig. 9-10); in response to receiving the digital image, transmitting the digital image via a cellular radiotelephone data transceiver of the mobile computing device and over a data communication network to a server computer (fig. 9 and [0083-0085]). Harris does not explicitly disclose a short-range transceiver communicatively coupled to the control unit, claimed first volatile memory coupled to the control unit, storing the digital image in the first volatile memory; and deleting the digital file from the first volatile memory, a second volatile memory of the mobile computing device; and deleting the digital image from the second volatile memory.
However, Pyle teaches a first volatile memory (fig. 1 el. 104, 106) coupled to the control unit (fig. 102); and storing the digital image in the first volatile memory ([0018-0019]); deleting the digital image from the first volatile memory ([0018]; “.. the circular buffer is sized to provide sufficient storage for storing captured sensory data for a period t.sub.B. If sensory data are captured for a period of time longer than t.sub.B, sensory data captured later in time will is written over..”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Pyle with Harris for the benefit of providing improved image capturing and efficient data storage of captured image data.
Although Harris (modified by Pyle) discloses a memory of the mobile computing device ([0084], [0086]), Harris (modified by Pyle) does not explicitly disclose a second volatile memory of the mobile computing device; and deleting the digital image from the second volatile memory.
However, Osorio teaches the known concept of a second volatile memory of the mobile computing device (fig. 1 el. 120 and [0024-0025]); and deleting the digital image from the second volatile memory (abstract, [0005-0006], [0009], [0024-0025], [0030-0031]; “de-allocating the volatile memory space at the termination of the session. The de-allocation of the volatile memory space may cause the digitally stored image to be erased from the volatile memory space”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Osorio with Harris (modified by Pyle) for the benefit of providing improved and efficient system stability.
Harris (modified by Pyle and Osorio) as a whole does not explicitly disclose the claimed short-range transceiver communicatively coupled to the control unit, transmitting the digital image via the short-range transceiver to a mobile computing device, as recited in claim 9.
However, Milican teaches the claimed short-range transceiver communicatively coupled to the control unit ([0016-0017], [0071-0072] and fig. 1), transmitting the digital image via the short-range transceiver to a mobile computing device (fig. 1 and [0071-0072]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Milican with Harris (modified by Pyle and Osorio) for the benefit of providing improved mobile personal safety apparatus.
Although Harris (modified by Pyle, Osorio and Milican) discloses the transmitted data of the transmissions of the ordered sequence described above (i.e., the first transmission, the second transmission, etc.) includes one or more compressed, encrypted still images, [0045], Harris does not explicitly disclose a server computer configured to encrypt, in response to the receiving, the digital image using one or more encryption keys that are stored only at the server computer, a host application, networked storage, or a database and not delivered or provided to a user of the camera device or to the mobile app.
However Mori teaches a server computer configured to encrypt, in response to the receiving, the digital image using one or more encryption keys that are stored only at the server computer, a host application, networked storage, or a database and not delivered or provided to a user of the camera device or to the mobile app (fig. 1, fig. 4, fig. 5, fig. 6 and [0063], [0084-0086]), [0095]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate teachings of Mori with Harris (modified by Pyle, Osorio and Milican) for the benefit to provide an apparatus and method for encrypting image data, and apparatus and method for decrypting encrypted image data, and image data distribution system, each of which having a higher security level and also earlier handling, [0009].
As per claim 10, Harris (modified by Pyle, Osorio, Milican and Mori) as a whole teaches everything as claimed above, see claim 9. In addition, Harris teaches wherein a second non-transitory computer-readable storage medium communicatively coupled to the server computer (fig. 9 and [0083-0084])) and storing one more second sequences of instructions which, when executed using the server, cause the server computer to execute receiving the digital image from the mobile computing device, encrypting the digital image, and storing the digital image in a storage device after encrypting (fig. 9 and [0045], [0048]). Harris does not explicitly disclose encrypting the digital image using the one or more encryption keys.
However, Mori teaches encrypting the digital image using the one or more encryption keys (fig. 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teachings of Mori with Harris (modified by Pyle, Osorio and Milican) to provide an apparatus and method for encrypting image data, and apparatus and method for decrypting encrypted image data, and image data distribution system, each of which having a higher security level and also earlier handling, [0009].
As per claim 13, Harris (modified by Pyle, Osorio, Milican and Mori) as a whole teaches everything as claimed above, see claim 9. In addition, Harris teaches wherein the short-range transceiver is a Bluetooth transceiver ([0032]).
As per claim 16, Harris (modified by Pyle, Osorio, Milican and Mori ) as whole teaches everything as claimed above, see claim 9. In addition, Harris teaches wherein the non-volatile memory coupled to the control unit, when executed using the control unit, causes the control unit to execute receiving account verification information via the transceiver ([0077], [0095] and fig. 1, 9-10).
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0056833 A1) in view of Pyle et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2004/0135900 A1) in view of Osorio et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0104000 A1) in view of Mori et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0222687 A1) and further in view of Lorenzetti et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2015/0086175 A1).
As per claim 11, Harris (modified Pyle, Osorio, Milican and Mori) as a whole teaches everything as claimed above, see claim 9. In addition, Harris teaches wherein the camera device further comprises a wearable enclosure that contains the digital camera, the control unit, the short-range transceiver, and the non-volatile memory (figs. 2-9). Harris (modified by Pyle, Osorio and Milican) as a whole does not explicitly disclose wherein the camera device further comprises a wearable enclosure that contains the first volatile memory.
However, Lorenzetti teaches wherein the camera device further comprises a wearable enclosure that contains the first volatile memory (fig. 3 el. 305, fig. 6-7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the known teaching of Lorenzetti with Harris (modified by Pyle, Osorio, Milican and Mori) for the benefit of providing an improved body worn camera.
As per claim 12, Harris (modified by Pyle, Osorio, Mori and Lorenzetti) as a whole teaches everything as claimed above, see claim 11. In addition, Harris teaches wherein the camera device further comprises, attached to the wearable enclosure, means for attaching the wearable enclosure to apparel or to a human body part (figs. 2-9).
Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0056833 A1) in view of Pyle et al., (2004/0135900) and in view of Osorio (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0104000 A1) in view of Milican et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0139204 A1) in view of Mori et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0222687 A1) and further in view of Hsu et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0160018 A1).
As per claim 14, Harris (modified by Pyle, Osorio, Milican and Mori) as a whole teaches everything as claimed above, see claim 9. Harris does not explicitly disclose wherein the light source comprises one or more visible light LEDs.
However, Hsu teaches the known concept of wherein the light source comprises one or more visible light LEDs ([0018-0019], [0022]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Hsu with Harris (modified by Pyle, Osorio, Milican ad Mori) for the benefit of providing improved image quality and security.
As per claim 15, Harris (modified by Pyle, Osorio, Milican and Mori) as a whole teaches everything as claimed above, see claim 9. Harris does not explicitly disclose wherein the light source comprises one or more visible light LEDs, one or more colored LEDs, and one or more infrared (IR) spectrum LEDs.
However, Hsu teaches wherein the light source comprises one or more static visible light LEDs, one or more colored LEDs, and one or more infrared (IR) spectrum LEDs ([0018-0019], [0022] and fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Hsu with Harris (modified by Pyle, Osorio, Milican and Mori) for the benefit of providing improved image quality and security.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0056833 A1) in view of Pyle et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2004/0135900 A1) in view of Osorio et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0104000 A1) in view of Milican et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0139204 A1) in view of Mori et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0222687 A1) and further in view of Haraguchi et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0224373 A1).
As per claim 17, Harris (modified by Pyle, Osorio, Milican and Mori) as a whole teaches everything as claimed above, see claim 9. Although Harris discloses wherein the non-volatile memory coupled to the control unit (fig. 1), Harris does not explicitly disclose when executed using the control unit, causes the control unit to execute, in response to receiving the account verification information, executing the capturing, storing, transmitting, and deleting at the camera device.
Hara teaches wherein the non-volatile memory coupled to the control unit (fig. 3), when executed using the control unit, causes the control unit to execute, in response to receiving account verification information, executing the capturing, storing transmitting, and deleting at the camera device ([0021], [0088]and fig. 6, 8, and 10).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Haraguchi with Harris (modified by Pyle, Osorio, Milican and Mori) for the benefit of providing a wearable camera, a user authentication system, and a user authentication method which efficiently and quickly perform user authentication including setting of a user work schedule that can be changed daily, and support improvement of user work efficiency.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0056833 A1) in view of Pyle et al., (2004/0135900) and in view of Osorio (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0104000 A1) and in view of Milican et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0139204 A1) and further in view of Mori et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0222687 A1) and further in view of Hwang et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0090751 A1).
As per claim 18, Harris (modified by Pyle, Osorio, Milican and Mori) as a whole teaches everything as claimed above, see claim 9. Harris does not explicitly disclose wherein the light source comprises an LED ring light.
However, Hwang teaches wherein the light source comprises an LED ring light ([0016], [0030], [0060]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Hwang with Harris (modified by Pyle, Osorio, Milican and Mori) for the benefit of providing improved image quality, image capturing.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0056833 A1) in view of Pyle et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2004/0135900 A1) and in view of Milican et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0139204 A1) in view of Mori et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0222687 A1) and further in view of Haraguchi et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0224373 A1).
As per claim 19, Harris (modified by Pyle, Milican and Mori) as teaches everything as claimed above, see claim 1. Harris does not explicitly teach wherein the non-volatile memory coupled to the control unit, when executed using the control unit, causes the control unit to execute, in response to receiving the account verification information, executing the capturing, storing transmitting and deleting.
However, Haraguchi teaches wherein the non-volatile memory coupled to the control unit, when executed using the control unit, causes the control unit to execute, in response to receiving the account verification information, executing the capturing, storing transmitting and deleting ([0021], [0088]and fig. 6, 8, and 10).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Haraguchi with Harris (modified by Pyle, Milican and Mori) for the benefit of providing a wearable camera, a user authentication system, and a user authentication method which efficiently and quickly perform user authentication including setting of a user work schedule that can be changed daily, and support improvement of user work efficiency.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harris et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2021/0056833 A1) in view of Pyle et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2004/0135900 A1) and further in view of Milican et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0139204 A1) and further in view of Mori et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0222687 A1) and in view of Hwang et al., (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0090751 A1).
As per claim 20, Harris (modified by Pyle, Milican and Mori) as a whole teaches everything as claimed above, see claim 1. Harris does not explicitly disclose wherein the light source comprises an LED light ring.
However, Hwang teaches wherein the light source comprises an LED light ring (([0016], [0030], [0060]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Hwang with Harris (modified by Pyle, Milican and Mori) for the benefit of providing improved image quality, image capturing. In addition, one would be prompted to substitute the teachings of Hwang with Harris (modified with Pyle, Milican and Mori) for the benefit of providing predictable results of illuminating an environment for image capture.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA PRINCE whose telephone number is (571)270-1821. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-3:30 P.M..
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, Jamie Atala can be reached at 571-272-7384. 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.
JESSICA PRINCE
Examiner
Art Unit 2486
/JESSICA M PRINCE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2486
Prosecution Insights