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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 03/25/2025 and 01/05/2026 are in compliance with the provisions on 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 10-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 08/05/2026.
Applicant's election with traverse of Species 6 in the reply filed on 08/05/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that “Species 1-8 are closely related to one another in that they employ the same common framework in which configuration values set through the setting application of the present disclosure are provided to the camera application. Species 1-8 merely differ in the types of settings to which the common framework is applied. Accordingly, Species 1-8 do not require searches in different fields of technology or different search strategies.”.
This is not found persuasive because the species are independent or distinct and because the claims to the different species recite the mutually exclusive characteristics of such species. Species I sets forth functions related to capturing HDR images, Species II sets forth functions related to processing sharpness of the image, Species III sets forth functions related to settings based on changing the lens of the camera, Species IV sets forth functions related to changing the shot mode of the camera, Species V sets forth functions related to changing the number of images captured based on a timer, Species VI sets forth functions related to a quick shot function identifying a range of a number of images to be captured according to illuminance, Species VII sets forth functions related to a camera termination procedure, and Species VIII sets forth functions related to displaying a preview image to an external device using an HDMI setting. These species are not obvious variants of each other based on the current record and would require searches in different fields of technology or different search strategies.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 1-9 and 16-20 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.
Claim 1 recites “the setting corresponding to the setting menu” in lines 13-14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner notes claim 1, lines 8-10 recites “display a user interface of the first software application including setting menus respectively corresponding to settings related to a shot via the camera”. However, it is unclear if “the setting corresponding to the setting menu” is referring to a setting of the “settings related to a shot via the camera”.
Claim 1 recites “the setting adjusted” in line 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear what “the setting” is referring to and claim language does not perform a step of adjusting a/the setting.
Claims 2-9 are rejected as being dependent on claim 1.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the N second images" in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the M second images" in line 15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 7-9 are rejected as being dependent on claim 6.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the camera" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 16 recites “the setting corresponding to the setting menu” in lines 8-9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner notes claim 16, lines 3-5 recites “displaying a user interface of the first software application including setting menus respectively corresponding to settings related to a shot via the camera”. However, it is unclear if “the setting corresponding to the setting menu” is referring to a setting of the “settings related to a shot via the camera”.
Claim 16 recites “the setting adjusted” in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear what “the setting” is referring to and claim language does not perform a step of adjusting a/the setting.
Claims 17-19 are rejected as being dependent on claim 16.
Claim 20 recites “the setting corresponding to the setting menu” in lines 10-11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner notes claim 20, lines 6-7 recites “display a user interface of the first software application including setting menus respectively corresponding to settings related to a shot via the camera”. However, it is unclear if “the setting corresponding to the setting menu” is referring to a setting of the “settings related to a shot via the camera”.
Claim 20 recites “the setting adjusted” in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear what “the setting” is referring to and claim language does not perform a step of adjusting a/the setting.
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 –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yin (CN 113596331 A, Translation provided).
Regarding claim 1, Yin teaches an electronic device (Yin, Fig. 12) comprising:
a camera (Yin, Page 4, lines 39-40, “In one example of the present application, the first photographing application may be a system camera…”);
memory including one or more storage media storing instructions (Yin, Fig. 12, memory 1209, Page 8, Line 45); and
one or more processors including processing circuitry (Yin, Fig. 12, processor 1210, Page 8, Line 45),
wherein the instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to (Yin, Page 3, Lines 10-12):
in response to an execution of a first software application for setting of the camera, display a user interface of the first software application including setting menus respectively corresponding to settings related to a shot via the camera (Yin, Fig. 5, Page 5, Lines 40-59, The first software application is the first shooting program. In response to a long press on the first software application (execution of a first software application), a setting menu (preview interface for a second application) is displayed in the first software application.),
identify a user input received with respect to a setting menu from among the setting menus (Yin, Fig. 5, Page 5, Lines 40-54),
based on the user input, identify a value for the setting corresponding to the setting menu (Yin, Fig. 5, Page 5, Lines 40-54, “shooting effect parameters”), and
based on executing a second software application in a foreground state (Yin, Page 5, Lines 2-5, 40-44 and 51-59, The shooting programs are controlled “one by one” according to a sequence. “Controlling the second shooting application program corresponding to the first control to shoot based on the set shooting effect parameters” is interpreted as the second shooting application program being in the foreground state since it is the current process of the camera.),
obtain an image by using the camera driven based on the setting adjusted according to the value (Yin, Page 5, Lines 40-44 and 51-59).
Claims 16 and 20 are rejected for the same reasons as claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, Yin teaches the electronic device of claim 1 (see claim 1 analysis),
wherein the setting menu provides a plurality of candidate values allocated based on a capability of the camera related to the setting (Yin, Fig. 5, Page 5, Lines 40-54),
wherein the user input is an input representing to select a candidate value from among the plurality of the candidate values as the value (Yin, Fig. 5, Page 5, Lines 40-54, “shooting effect parameters”), and
wherein the plurality of the candidate values are provided from the second software application to the first software application (Yin, Fig. 5, Page 5, Lines 40-54).
Claim 17 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 2.
Regarding claim 3, Yin teaches the electronic device of claim 2 (see claim 2 analysis), wherein the plurality of the candidate values are provided from the second software application executed in a background state in response to executing the first software application to the first software application (Yin, Fig. 5, Page 5, Lines 40-54, The second software application is in the background state when it is not shooting.).
Claim 18 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 3.
Regarding claim 4, Yin teaches the electronic device of claim 3 (see claim 3 analysis), wherein the instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
in response to the identification of the value, provide the value from the first software application to the second software application (Yin, Fig. 5, Page 5, Lines 48-54); and
adjust the setting according to the value by using the second software application executed in the background state (Yin, Page 5, Lines 40-44 and 51-59, The settings of the second software application are adjusted while the software application executed in the background state.).
Claim 19 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 4.
Regarding claim 5, Yin teaches the electronic device of claim 4 (see claim 4 analysis), wherein the value is at least temporarily stored with respect to the second software application for the adjustment of the setting (Yin, Page 5, Lines 44-59, The values are set before their use during shooting by the second shooting application. Therefore, the values must be at least temporarily stored.).
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) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yin (CN 113596331 A, Translation provided) in view of Izaki (US 2019/0109982 A1).
Alternatively, regarding claim 5, Yin teaches the electronic device of claim 4 (see claim 4 analysis). However, Yin does not explicitly state wherein the value is at least temporarily stored with respect to the second software application for the adjustment of the setting.
In reference to Izaki, Izaki teaches wherein a value is at least temporarily stored with respect to a camera application for adjustment of a setting (Izaki, Paragraphs 0052-0054).
These arts are analogous since they are both related to adjusting parameters of an imaging device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the invention of Yin with the explicit teaching of storing adjusted values of a camera application as seen in Izaki since it is a known method of saving adjusted parameter values for capturing an image and would provide similar and expected results. That is, by storing the shooting effect parameters changed by the fifth input (Yin, Page 5, Lines 44-59), the limitation “wherein the value is at least temporarily stored with respect to the second software application for the adjustment of the setting” is met.
Claim(s) 6-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yin (CN 113596331 A, Translation provided) in view of Hamamura et al. (US 2007/0229699 A1) in view of Izaki (US 2019/0109982 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Yin teaches the electronic device of claim 1 (see claim 1 analysis), wherein the setting menu corresponds to a setting for obtaining a first image in response to a user input for a shot item displayed in a user interface of the second software application (Yin, Page 5, Lines 40-44 and 51-59),
wherein the instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to:
in response to a touch input for the shot item in the user interface of the second software application, capture the first image (Yin, Page 5, Lines 40-44 and 51-59).
However, Yin does not teach wherein the setting menu corresponds to a setting identifying a number of second images used for obtaining a first image in response to a user input for a shot item displayed in a user interface of the second software application, wherein the instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to: in response to a touch input for the shot item in the user interface of the second software application, identify a state of an environment related to a shot via the camera executed based on the touch input, based on the state, identify a range of the number of second images executed based on the touch input, based on the value representing to enable the setting, obtain the first image by synthesizing the N second images obtained via the camera, and based on the value representing to disable the setting, obtain the first image by synthesizing the M second images obtained via the camera, and wherein the N is less than the M.
In reference to Hanamura et al. (hereafter referred as Hanamura), Hanamura teaches to a setting identify a number of second images used for obtaining a first image in response to a user input for a shot item (Hanamura, Fig. 5, Paragraphs 0061-0065),
wherein the instructions that, when executed by one or more processors individually or collectively, cause an electronic device (Hanamura, Fig. 2, CPU 128) to:
in response to an input for the shot item, identify a state of an environment related to a shot via a camera executed based on the input (Hanamura, Fig. 4, Step S116, Paragraph 0048-0049 and 0055),
based on the state, identify a range of the number of second images executed based on the input (Hanamura, Fig. 4, Step S120, Paragraphs 0050-0051),
based on a shutter speed to enable the setting, obtain the first image by synthesizing the N second images obtained via the camera (Hanamura, Fig. 5(c), Paragraph 0065, Performing the low shutter speed mode is considered enabling the low shutter speed mode.) and
based on the shutter speed to disable the setting, obtain the first image by synthesizing the M second images obtained via the camera, and wherein the N is less than the M (Hanamura, Fig. 5(b), Paragraph 0063, Performing the high shutter speed mode is considered disabling the low shutter speed mode.).
These arts are analogous since they are both related to imaging devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the invention of Yin with the shooting mode as seen in Hanamura to maintain a desired number of photographed images per second or a desired frame rate while ensuring sufficient exposure of a subject (Hanamura, Paragraph 0003). Further, the limitation “wherein the setting menu corresponds to a setting identifying a number of second images used for obtaining a first image in response to a user input for a shot item displayed in a user interface of the second software application, wherein the instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors individually or collectively, cause the electronic device to: in response to a touch input for the shot item in the user interface of the second software application” is met by controlling the shooting modes through application interfaces of Yin.
However, the combination of Yin and Hanamura does not teach based on the value representing to enable the setting, obtain the first image by synthesizing the N second images obtained via the camera, and based on the value representing to disable the setting, obtain the first image by synthesizing the M second images obtained via the camera.
In reference to Izaki, Izaki teaches based on the user input, identifying a value for the setting corresponding to the setting menu; wherein the value is a value for shutter speed (Izaki, Paragraphs 0051-0052).
These arts are analogous since they are all related to imaging devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the combination of Yin and Hanamura with the teaching of allowing a user to select the shutter speed as seen in Izaki to allow the user to further control parameters of the device. Further, the limitations “based on the value representing to enable the setting, obtain the first image by synthesizing the N second images obtained via the camera, and based on the value representing to disable the setting, obtain the first image by synthesizing the M second images obtained via the camera” are met since the value may be a value for the shutter speed.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Yin, Hanamura and Izaki teaches the electronic device of claim 6 (see claim 6 analysis). However, the combination of Yin, Hanamura and Izaki does not teach further comprising: a sensor, wherein the state of an environment related to the shot is identified based on the sensor.
In further reference to Izaki, Izaki teaches a sensor, wherein the state of an environment related to the shot is identified based on the sensor (Izaki, Fig. 2, AE sensor 17, Paragraph 0019).
These arts are analogous since they are all related to imaging devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify the combination of Yin, Hanamura and Izaki with the AE sensor as seen in Izaki since it is a known sensor for determining exposure settings and would provide similar and expected results for performing automatic exposure.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Yin, Hanamura and Izaki teaches the electronic device of claim 7 (see claim 7 analysis), wherein the sensor is an illuminance sensor, and wherein the environment related to the shot includes an illuminance surrounding the electronic device (Izaki, Fig. 2, AE sensor 17, Paragraph 0019).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Yin, Hanamura and Izaki teaches the electronic device of claim 8 (see claim 8 analysis), wherein the identifying of the range of the number of second images executed based on the touch input comprises:
identifying a first range of the number of second images when the illuminance is less than a threshold illuminance (Hanamura, Fig. 5(c), Paragraph 0065, Low SS mode is used for low illuminance. The threshold illuminance is the illuminance for entering Low SS mode.), and
identifying a second range of the number of second images when the illuminance is greater than or equal to the threshold illuminance, and wherein the first range of the number of second images is higher than the second range of the number of second images (Hanamura, Fig. 5(b), Paragraph 0063-0064, High SS mode is used for high illuminance.).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WESLEY JASON CHIU whose telephone number is (571)270-1312. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 8am-4pm.
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.
/WESLEY J CHIU/Examiner, Art Unit 2639
/TWYLER L HASKINS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2639
Prosecution Insights