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 Interpretation
Claim(s) 1-20 do not use “means for” (or “step for”) language, or generic placeholders for "means” coupled with functional language without recitation of sufficient structure for carrying out the claimed functions and therefore do not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 –
Claim(s) 12 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ono (US 6,133,941).[claim 12]
Regarding claim 12, Ono discloses a camera (Figure 1, 11a/11d) configured to
generate first image data corresponding to a first region from entire image data in accordance with a first request from a device (e.g. Figure 12, capture image using control parameters specified in first request),
generate second image data corresponding to a second region from the entire image data in accordance with a second request from the device (e.g. Figure 12, capture image using updated control parameters in second request),
transmit first data comprising the first image data to the device (Figures 5 and 12; returning first image data in accordance with format of Figure 5 in response to capturing of image for first request), and
transmit second data comprising the second image data to the device (Figures 5 and 12; returning second image data in accordance with format of Figure 5 in response to capturing of image for second request),
wherein the first request comprises first identification information and the first data comprises second identification information corresponding to the first identification information (Figure 4B and 5A; camera control request includes first identification information 1116-1118 corresponding to camera control parameters and returns an image including second identification information, i.e. attribute information 1223, for the image generated in response to the request).
Note that the claim as written does not define what the first identification information include or identify, nor does the claim define how the first and second identification information correspond to each other.[claim 14]
Regarding claim 14, Ono discloses wherein the first identification information is stored in the first image data (Figure 5A; note that the attribute information is part of the returned video data).
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) 1-3, 5, 7, 8, 12 and 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka et al. (US 2022/0239825 A1) in view of Heisse et al. (US 2025/0150721 A1).[claim 1]
Regarding claim 1, Tanaka discloses system (Figures 1, 2 and 8) comprising:
a device (Figure 1, 200; Figure 8; Figure 14, 4); and
a camera connected to the device through a wired or wireless connection (Figure 1, 100, DL/CL/CCI; Figure 2; Figure 14, 3), wherein
the device is configured to perform operations comprising
transmitting to the camera, a first request that causes the camera to transmit image data corresponding to a first region in an imaging region of the camera and a second request that causes the camera to transmit image data corresponding to a second region in the imaging region (Figure 8, 223/223A; Figure 3, ROI1, ROI2; requests to capture first and second ROIs in image 111; Figure 14, Cam CPU 41 sending image capturing parameters to camera 3), and
the camera is configured to perform operations comprising
generating first image data corresponding to the first region from entire image data corresponding to the imaging region and transmitting first data comprising the first image data to the device, in accordance with the first request (Figure 3; capture of ROI1 and transmission to device 200; see also Figure 14), and
generating second image data corresponding to the second region from the entire image data and transmitting second data comprising the second image data to the device, in accordance with the second request (Figure 3; capture of ROI2 and transmission to device 200; see also Figure 14), and
the operations performed by the device comprise outputting a synthesized image comprising a first image based on the first image data in the received first data and a second image based on the second image data in the received second data (Figure 2, 147; Figure 14, HDR RENDERING SECTION 42; note that while the embodiment of Figure 2 describes the camera synthesizing the image, the alternative embodiment teaches performing HDR image combining using the device 4).
However, Tanaka does not teach alternately sending the first and second requests.
Heisse discloses a similar camera system where a single camera is used to capture first and second ROIs (Figure 1) and further teaches alternately sending capture requests for each ROI to the camera using a control device to cause alternating output for first and second ROI images (Figure 2; Paragraphs 0040-0042). The system of Heisse allows a single camera to capture multiple ROI images with different settings.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to provide alternating requests for the first and second ROI images to that the first and second ROI images may be alternately output using different camera settings.[claim 2]
Regarding claim 2, Tanaka discloses wherein
the first request comprises first identification information and the first data comprises second identification information corresponding to the first identification information (Figures 3, ROI coordinates and lengths corresponding to ROI request information/coordinates as sent in Figure 8, 223 and Figure 14), and
the operations performed by the device comprise
arranging the first image at a first position in the synthesized image based on the received first data comprising the second identification information (Figures 10 and 15; ROI1 arranged at corresponding coordinates in HDR image), and
arranging the second image at a second position in the synthesized image based on the received second data not comprising the second identification information (Figures 10 and 15; ROI2 arranged at corresponding coordinates in HDR image 111).[claim 3]
Regarding claim 3, Tanaka discloses the first request comprises first identification information (Figures 3, 8 and 14; ROI coordinates) and the first data comprises second identification information corresponding to the first identification information (Figure 3; ROI coordinates embedded in header),
the second request comprises third identification information different from the first identification information (Figures 3, 8 and 14; ROI coordinates) and the second data comprises fourth identification information corresponding to the third identification information and different from the second identification information (Figure 3; ROI coordinates embedded in header, and
the operations performed by the device comprise arranging the second image at a second position in the synthesized image based on the received second data comprising the fourth identification information (Figures 10 and 15; ROI2 arranged at corresponding coordinates in HDR image 111).[claim 5]
Regarding claim 5, Tanaka discloses wherein
each of the first identification information and the third identification information is one of two values (Figures 3 and 8; ROI coordinates including X and Y coordinates).[claim 7]
Regarding claim 7, Tanaka discloses wherein the first identification information is stored in the first image data (Figure 3; storage of identification information in header).[claim 8]
Regarding claim 8, Tanaka discloses the first identification information is stored in data in the first image data, the data corresponding to an image at an edge in the first region (Figure 3; storage of identification information in header; note that the image of the ROI corresponds to an edge of the ROI in each direction of the boundary of the ROI).[claims 12 and 14]
Regarding claims 12 and 14, see the rejection of claims 1 and 7 above.[claim 15]
Regarding claim 15, see the rejection of claim 1 above and note that Tanaka in view of Heisse discloses a device connected to the camera as claimed.[claims 16 and 17]
Regarding claims 16 and 17, see the rejection of claims 2 and 3 above.[claims 18-20]
Claims 18-20 are method claims corresponding to apparatus claims 1-3. Therefore, claims 18-20 are analyzed and rejected as previously discussed with respect to claims 1-3.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4, 6, 9-11 and 13 is 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.[claim 4]
Regarding claim 4, the prior art does not teach or reasonably suggest the system according to claim 3, wherein the first identification information and the third identification information are set irrelevant to which region in the imaging region the camera is caused to transmit image data corresponding to.
While Tanaka teaches first and third identification information, this information is not set irrelevant to the regions as required.[claims 6 and 13]
Regarding claims 6 and 13, the prior art does not teach or reasonably suggest the camera according to claim 2 or 12, wherein the first identification information is stored in a header defined under USB video class (UVC) standard.
While USB video class headers are known in the prior art (see USB video class standard v. 1.5), the headers as defined in the standard do not include first identification information as required in the claim. [claim 9]
Regarding claim 9, the prior art does not teach or reasonably suggest the system according to claim 1, wherein
the first request comprises a request for setting image data corresponding to the first region in the imaging region as image data in data the camera is caused to transmit,
the second request comprises a request for setting image data corresponding to the second region in the imaging region as image data in data the camera is caused to transmit, and
the operations performed by the camera comprise transmitting data comprising the set image data in accordance with a third request that causes the camera to transmit data including image data.
While Tanaka teaches first and second requests for setting ROI, the prior art does not teach an additional third requires as required.[claims 10 and 11]
Regarding claims 10 and 11, the prior art does not teach or reasonably suggest the system according to claim 1, wherein
the operations performed by the device comprise transmitting a fourth request for setting an image size of the image data the camera is caused to transmit, before transmission of the first request and the second request, and
the first request and the second request comprise no request for changing the image size.
While Tanaka discloses first and second requests, the prior art does not teach an additional fourth request and first and second request not related to image size as required.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references show similar systems/methods for requesting capture of areas of a scene:
Lee US 11,736,792 B2
Zhan et al. US 2020/0412981 A1
Siminoff et al. US 2018/0227507 A1
Kim et al. US 2018/0103195 A1
Adachi US 2015/0326777 A1
Masuda et al. US 2013/0176444 A1
Ezoe et al. US 2012/0026344 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY J HENN whose telephone number is (571)272-7310. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday ~10-6.
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, Twyler Haskins can be reached at (571) 272-7406. 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.
/Timothy J Henn/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2639
Prosecution Insights