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 .
Preliminary Remarks
This is a reply to the amendments filed on 07/29/2026, in which, claims 1, 14, and 16 are amended. Claims 1-16 remain pending in the present application with claims 1, 14, and 16 being independent claims.
When making claim amendments, the applicant is encouraged to consider the references in their entireties, including those portions that have not been cited by the examiner and their equivalents as they may most broadly and appropriately apply to any particular anticipated claim amendments.
Response to Arguments
Regarding the 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(1) rejection to claims 1-2 and 7-16, Applicant's arguments, in light of the recent amendments, have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the §102(a)(1) rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made with Watanabe in view of Shinkai for claims 1-2 and 7-16 (see the 103(a) rejections, infra).
On page 12 of 13, Applicant argues that, “Watanabe et al. fails to disclose or suggest the feature (B) regarding "(the controller,) in response to the input interface receiving the user operation to select two or more cuts in the plurality of cuts constituting the scenario, sets a group including the selected cuts by the user operation". Nor is such feature disclosed or suggested in the other cited references.”
In response, Examiner respectfully points out that Shinkai does teach the newly amended limitation in claim 1. Reference Shinkai does disclose an interface for receiving user operation and the viewfinder disclosed in Shinkai allows the operator to view and edit content data (see Shinkai, paragraph [0201]: “The viewfinder 419 is a display unit for the picture-taking device, configured of a small-size LCD monitor or the like, for example. The viewfinder 419 allows the operator to view picture data being shot or picture data being reproduced. The cameraman can thus view the subject to be shot, monitor the subject while shooting, check the picture data in the content data recorded in the disk 3, and further perform simple editing tasks of the content data, all while viewing the viewfinder”). The shooting cut selecting portion disclosed in Shinkai is used to select multiple cuts in a cut corresponding to the take to be shot, so it can be used to “select two or more cuts in the plurality of cuts constituting the scenario” (see Shinkai, paragraph [0232]: “The shooting cut selecting portion 46 is for selecting from the multiple cuts a cut corresponding to the take to be shot, and is configured of touch-screen buttons, for example. The touch screen buttons are a report selecting button 462, scene selecting button 464, cut selecting button 466, and so forth, for example”). In addition, Shinkai discloses an arrangement can be made wherein the take is assigned to a desired cut or multiple takes can be assigned to desired cuts, so the shot takes are sequentially correlated to imaginary cuts set which is a grouping operation (see Shinkai, paragraph [0236]: “an arrangement may be made wherein the take is assigned to a desired cut immediately following shooting one take, or, wherein multiple takes are assigned to desired cuts all at once following shooting multiple takes, for example, in this case, at the time of shooting for example, an arrangement may be made wherein the scene No. is “0”, and the shot takes are sequentially temporarily correlated to imaginary cuts set such that the cut No. is incremented from “1” each time a take is shot”). Thus, Shinkai does disclose amended limitation of claim1 “in response to the input interface receiving the user operation to select two or more cuts in the plurality of cuts constituting the scenario, sets a group including the selected cuts by the user operation” (see Shinkai, paragraphs [0201], [0232], and [0236]). Therefore, Applicant's arguments are not persuasive.
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 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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watanabe et al. (US 20210352218 A1, hereinafter referred to as “Watanabe”) in view of Shinkai et al. (US 20040103233 A1, hereinafter referred to as “Shinkai”).
Regarding claim 1, Watanabe discloses an electronic device for managing video shooting with a scenario including a plurality of cuts, the electronic device comprising:
a display that displays information (see Watanabe, paragraph [0030]: “The display 105 displays images, a GUI screen forming a GUI (Graphical User Interface), and the like on the basis of the control of the CPU”);
an input interface that inputs a user operation (see Watanabe, paragraph [0031]: “The operating unit 106 is an input device for receiving user operations, and includes an alphanumeric character information input device such as a keyboard, a pointing device such as a mouse or a touch panel, buttons, a dial, a joystick, a touch sensor, a touchpad, and so on”); and
a controller that controls the display according to the user operation input in the input interface (see Watanabe, paragraph [0031]: “Note that a touch panel is an input device that is formed in planar form so as to overlap the display 105 and outputs coordinate information corresponding to a contacted position thereon”), wherein the controller
causes the display to display group information managing video shooting in the group, based on the setting of the group (see Watanabe, paragraph [0059]: “As shown in FIG. 4C, during timeline display, a plurality of image sequences (sequences 431-435) corresponding respectively to a plurality of groups are displayed side by side along a single axis (referred to hereafter as the “time axis”; in this embodiment, a horizontal axis) using a timeline (a main line) 421. The CPU 101 displays selected images, each representing one moving image included in the group corresponding to each sequence, in a plurality of sections on the timeline 421”).
Regarding claim 1, Watanabe discloses all the claimed limitations with the exception of sets, in response to the input interface receiving the user operation to select two or more cuts in the plurality of cuts constituting the scenario, a group including the selected cuts by the user operation.
Shinkai from the same or similar fields of endeavor discloses sets, in response to the input interface receiving the user operation (see Shinkai, paragraph [0201]: “The viewfinder 419 is a display unit for the picture-taking device, configured of a small-size LCD monitor or the like, for example. The viewfinder 419 allows the operator to view picture data being shot or picture data being reproduced. The cameraman can thus view the subject to be shot, monitor the subject while shooting, check the picture data in the content data recorded in the disk 3, and further perform simple editing tasks of the content data, all while viewing the viewfinder”) to select two or more cuts in the plurality of cuts constituting the scenario (see Shinkai, paragraph [0232]: “The shooting cut selecting portion 46 is for selecting from the multiple cuts a cut corresponding to the take to be shot, and is configured of touch-screen buttons, for example. The touch screen buttons are a report selecting button 462, scene selecting button 464, cut selecting button 466, and so forth, for example”), a group including the selected cuts by the user operation (see Shinkai, paragraph [0236]: “an arrangement may be made wherein the take is assigned to a desired cut immediately following shooting one take, or, wherein multiple takes are assigned to desired cuts all at once following shooting multiple takes, for example, in this case, at the time of shooting for example, an arrangement may be made wherein the scene No. is “0”, and the shot takes are sequentially temporarily correlated to imaginary cuts set such that the cut No. is incremented from “1” each time a take is shot”).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings as in Shinkai with the teachings as in Watanabe. The motivation for doing so would ensure the system to have the ability to use system and method disclosed in Shinkai to use viewfinder as an interface for receiving user operation; to select from the multiple cuts a cut corresponding to the take to be shot; and to assign multiple takes to desired cuts all at once following shooting multiple takes thus setting to select two or more cuts in the plurality of cuts constituting the scenario in response to the input interface receiving the user operation and setting a group including the selected cuts by the user operation in order to set the group including plurality of cuts so that it is possible to easily manage video shooting across a plurality of cuts in a scenario.
Regarding claim 2, the combination teachings of Watanabe and Shinkai as discussed above also disclose the electronic device according to claim 1, wherein the controller manages a common video with the cuts within the group in the plurality of cuts, based on the setting of the group (see Watanabe, paragraph [0054]: “when moving image capture is started in response to the receipt of a touch operation on the retake key 405, the moving image is captured as a moving image of the same group as the moving image captured immediately prior thereto. Thus, a plurality of moving images belonging to the same group can be recognized as a plurality of moving images of the same scene”).
The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 3, the combination teachings of Watanabe and Shinkai as discussed above also disclose the electronic device according to claim 1, wherein the group includes at least one set of cuts for continuing video shooting in the plurality of cuts (see Shinkai, paragraph [0311]: “the picture-taking device 40 continues the picture-taking and recording process until there is further instruction from the cameraman. Upon the cameraman performing operations to end the picture taking, the picture-taking device 40 ends shooting of the subject, and stops recording the content data. This series of picture-taking processing, from the beginning of picture-taking to the end thereof, makes up one take”).
The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 4, the combination teachings of Watanabe and Shinkai as discussed above also disclose the electronic device according to claim 3, wherein the controller causes the input interface to receive the user operation to set at least one set of cuts in the group, to manage a video shot in association with the at least one set of cuts in the group information (see Shinkai, paragraph [0055]: “the project-making terminal 10 is capable of generating production instruction information based on input by a staff member in the project-making and planning team, and writing the production instruction information in an appropriate space in the aforementioned planning sheet meta data that has been created. This production instruction information is information for instructing the other teams regarding the contents to produce for the picture program, and are created corresponding to the scenario of the picture program planned as described above”).
The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 5, the combination teachings of Watanabe and Shinkai as discussed above also disclose the electronic device according to claim 3, wherein when the input interface receives the user operation to set multiple sets of cuts each including different cuts in the group, the controller manages respective videos each shot in association with each set of cuts in the group information (see Shinkai, paragraph [0155]: “the take meta data TM is correlated with a cut in the cut hierarchical level along with the content data, by the take correlation information (the item “take meta data file name”) within the above-described program meta data PM. For example, the take meta data TM 1 is correlated with the cut identified by program ID “P20002-10”, report ID “A20002-1001”, scene No. “1”, and cut No. “1”. Here, the take meta data TM is correlated with this cut along with the video file 1 and the low-res file 1 as well. Further, the take meta data TM2 is also correlated with this cut. In this way, multiple sets of take meta data TM can be correlated to a single cut. Conversely, one set of the take meta data TM can be correlated to multiple cuts”).
The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 6, the combination teachings of Watanabe and Shinkai as discussed above also disclose the electronic device according to claim 3, wherein when the input interface receives the user operation to set a single cut that is not included in the at least one set of cuts in the group, the controller manages the video shot in association with the single cut in the group information (see Shinkai, paragraph [0146]: “in the event that NG is input, this means that the content data of the take is not to be used. In the event that multiple takes are correlated to one cut, as a rule, only one take is assigned OK, and the rest are NG. In this way, the OK/NG information serves as information for selecting the one take to be used from the takes correlated to the cut”).
The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 7, the combination teachings of Watanabe and Shinkai as discussed above also disclose the electronic device according to claim 1, wherein the controller
causes the input interface to acquire rating information indicating a user rating of a video shot in association with a cut selected from the plurality of cuts (see Watanabe, paragraph [0115]: “The CPU 101 may attach a rating (a degree of importance) to a captured moving image in response to an operation in the touchpad area 402 (an operating unit for changing the AF position) after moving image capture is stopped”), and
manages the video and the rating information in association with the set of cuts in a case where the selected cut is included in the set of cuts (see Watanabe, paragraph [0115]: “the CPU 101 may display a display item corresponding to the rating on the timeline display in association with the thumbnail image. Thus, the user can easily distinguish between moving images of high importance and moving images of low importance, and as a result, timeline editing can be performed more easily”).
The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 8, the combination teachings of Watanabe and Shinkai as discussed above also disclose the electronic device according to claim 7,
wherein the controller generates management data according to the rating information, the management data managing a priority order in which video information is arranged on an editing screen for editing a plurality of videos associated with the plurality of cuts, the video information indicating each video (see Watanabe, paragraph [0115]: “the CPU 101 may display a display item corresponding to the rating on the timeline display in association with the thumbnail image. Thus, the user can easily distinguish between moving images of high importance and moving images of low importance, and as a result, timeline editing can be performed more easily”), wherein the management data manages the video associated with the cuts per the group (see Watanabe, paragraph [0102]: “even when the number of moving images captured in retakes becomes large, the moving images are managed as moving images of the same group, and therefore, even when a large number of moving image files are recorded, it is easy to determine subsequently the moving image files that were acquired as retakes of the same scene, with the result that an editing operation can be performed without confusion”).
The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 9, the combination teachings of Watanabe and Shinkai as discussed above also disclose the electronic device according to claim 1, wherein the controller generates management data collectively managing videos associated with the cuts within the group in the plurality of cuts (see Watanabe, paragraph [0057]: “the group ID is attached as the attribute information of the moving image file and the group of moving images is managed using the group ID, but the method for managing a group of moving images is not limited thereto. For example, management information (a table or the like) that indicates a correspondence relationship between the moving image (the file name, a file ID, or the like) and the group (a group name, the group ID, or the like) and is independent of the moving image may be recorded/updated, and the group of moving images may be managed using this management information”).
The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 10, the combination teachings of Watanabe and Shinkai as discussed above also disclose the electronic device according to claim 1, in response to shooting of the video associated with the cut included in the group, the controller provides information indicating the group in metadata of the video (see Watanabe, paragraph [0113]: “the CPU 101 may display a predetermined display item on the timeline display in association with the thumbnail image of the moving image to which the predetermined metadata are attached. Thus, the user can easily distinguish between a moving image in which an image capture mistake was made and other moving images, and as a result, timeline editing can be performed more easily”).
The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 11, the combination teachings of Watanabe and Shinkai as discussed above also disclose the electronic device according to claim 1,
further comprising a memory that stores management information managing a video associated with each of the plurality of cuts in the scenario (see Watanabe, paragraph [0057]: “moving images may be recorded in a separate folder for each group, and the group of moving images may be managed using the folder in which the moving images are recorded. The CPU 101 may perform only one of a plurality of types of control for implementing the plurality of management methods described above, or may perform two or more of the plurality of types of control”),
wherein the controller manages a relation between the video and the group in the management information (see Watanabe, paragraph [0057]: “management information (a table or the like) that indicates a correspondence relationship between the moving image (the file name, a file ID, or the like) and the group (a group name, the group ID, or the like) and is independent of the moving image may be recorded/updated, and the group of moving images may be managed using this management information”).
The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 12, the combination teachings of Watanabe and Shinkai as discussed above also disclose the electronic device according to claim 1,
further comprising a communication interface that communicates data with an imaging apparatus for shooting a video (see Watanabe, paragraph [0124]: “an image capture apparatus main body and may also be applied to a control apparatus that communicates with an image capture apparatus (including a network camera) by wired or wireless communication in order to control the image capture apparatus remotely”),
wherein the controller manages the video shot with the imaging apparatus by data communication via the communication interface (see Watanabe, paragraph [0124]: “a live view image captured by the image capture apparatus may be received by wired or wireless communication and displayed on the control apparatus side”).
The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 13, the combination teachings of Watanabe and Shinkai as discussed above also disclose the electronic device according to claim 1,
further comprising an image sensor that captures a subject image to generate image data (see Watanabe, paragraph [0033]: “The camera unit 112 is a camera unit constituted by an imaging element (an image sensor) or the like, which is formed from a CCD, a CMOS, or the like that converts an optical image into an electric signal”),
wherein the controller manages a video including the image data generated by the image sensor (see Watanabe, paragraph [0033]: “Display image data captured by the camera unit 112 and image-processed by the image processing unit 104 are displayed by the display 105. By converting digital signals captured by the camera unit 112, converted by the A/D converter, and stored in the memory 102 into analog signals using a D/A converter and then successively transferring the resulting analog signals to the display 105 in order to be displayed thereon, live view display (LV display) can be performed. A live view can be displayed in an image capture standby state for static images, an image capture standby state for moving images, and while recording a moving image, and a captured object image is displayed substantially in real time”).
The motivation for combining the references has been discussed in claim 1 above.
Claim 14 is rejected for the same reasons as discussed in claim 1 above.
Claim 15 is rejected for the same reasons as discussed in claim 14 above. In addition, the combination teachings of Watanabe and Shinkai as discussed above also disclose a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a program that causes the controller to execute the video management method according to claim 14 (see Watanabe, paragraph [0052]: “This processing is realized by the CPU 101 by expanding a program recorded in the nonvolatile memory 103 in the memory 102 and executing the program”).
Claim 16 is rejected for the same reasons as discussed in claims 1 and 2 above. In addition, the combination teachings of Watanabe and Shinkai as discussed above also disclose a controller that generates information on the video shooting according to the user operation input in the input interface (see Watanabe, paragraph [0031]: “Note that a touch panel is an input device that is formed in planar form so as to overlap the display 105 and outputs coordinate information corresponding to a contacted position thereon”).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NIENRU YANG whose telephone number is (571)272-4212. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10AM-6PM EST.
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, THAI TRAN can be reached at 571-272-7382. 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.
NIENRU YANG
Examiner
Art Unit 2484
/NIENRU YANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2484
/THAI Q TRAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2484
Prosecution Insights