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 .
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/01/2025 was filed on or after the effective filing date of the instant application on 04/01/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
In this instant application, the claimed subject matters of “an augmented reality module that detects and conveys digital information on real-world objects observed through the front camera and the rear camera of the mobile device” and “wherein the augmented reality feature conveys digital information regarding real-world objects observed through the front camera and the rear camera” in claim 1 and claim 11; and the claimed subject matter of “wherein upon detecting a real-world object, the augmented reality module is activated and when requested to do so, reveals information regarding the real-world object to be displayed on a screen of the mobile device during the live video stream” in claim 9 and claim 18, are not described in the original filed specification.
Because the subject matters in the original filed claims are treated as a part of the original filed specification, it is required to add claimed subject matters as indicated above into the specification.
It is noted that the specification also does not describe in detail information showing in Figure 1 and Figure 2.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1 and 11 recite “simultaneous stream…” which should be amended to –simultaneously stream--.
Other dependent claims are objected the same.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are: “a dual-camera module”, “an augmented reality module”, and “a live chat module” in claim 1 and claim 11.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim limitations “a dual-camera module”, “an augmented reality module”, and “a live chat module” in claim 1 and claim 11 invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claims 1-20 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 limitations “the same present time” in line 4, "the video feed" in line 10, and “the augmented reality feature” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitations “the same present time” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Other dependent claims are rejected the same.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Libin et al (US 11792355) in view of Beauchamp (US 2023/0360346).
Regarding claim 1, Libin discloses a system that facilitates live video streaming and real-time interaction within a mobile application comprising:
a dual-camera module to simultaneous stream video from a front camera and a rear camera of a mobile device at the same present time (Figure 1; Col 2 lines 39-43, Col 6 lines 25-28 and Col 8 lines 14-42 for synchronously recording and streaming videos from front and back cameras of a mobile phone of a presenter in real-time); and
a live chat module enabling a real-time interaction during a live video streaming
session between a user of the mobile device and viewers of the live video stream; the system utilizes the dual-camera module to access the video feed from the front camera and rear camera, and the live chat module creates a live chat session during a simultaneous streaming of the front camera video feed and the rear camera video feed (Figures 3-4; Col 2 lines 24-34, Col 6 lines 21-31 and Col 8 line 43 through Col 9 line 23 for sharing and streaming immersive video presentations capturing from the front and back cameras to other participants and allowing users to interact).
Libin discloses conveying the immersive video presentations observed through the front camera and the rear camera of the mobile device and replacing or augmenting the presenters images in the immersive video presentations (Col 6 lines 21-61), but is silent about an augmented reality module that detects and conveys digital information on real-world objects observed through the camera.
Beauchamp discloses an augmented reality module that detects and conveys digital information on real-world objects observed through the camera of the mobile device (¶ [0009], and ¶ [0044]-[0051]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Libin system with the teaching of Beauchamp, so to create an AR experience for users in the benefits of enhancing user viewing experience.
Claims 2-5 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Libin et al (US 11792355) in view of Beauchamp (US 2023/0360346) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Matiossian (US 2021/0297604).
Regarding claim 2, Libin in view of Beauchamp discloses the system as discussed in the rejection of claim 1. The combined system is silent about access to the front camera of the mobile device, the rear camera of the mobile device, and a microphone of the mobile device is requested by the dual-camera module via the mobile device's native camera Application Program Interface.
Matiossian discloses accessing to the front camera of the mobile device, the rear camera of the mobile device, and a microphone of the mobile device is requested by the dual-camera module via the mobile device's native camera Application Program Interface (¶ [0017]-[0020], ¶ [0031] and ¶ [0049]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Libin in view of Beauchamp system with the teaching of Matiossian, so to provide an alternative way of accessing components using API as a matter of engineering choices.
Regarding claim 3, Libin in view of Beauchamp and further in view of Matiossian discloses the system as discussed in the rejection of claim 2. The combined system further discloses wherein the request to access the microphone of the mobile device is granted to the dual-camera module allowing the microphone to record sounds accompanying a video recorded by the front camera and the rear camera (taught by Matiossian; ¶ [0017]-[0020] and ¶ [0044]-[0047]).
Regarding claim 4, Libin in view of Beauchamp and further in view of Matiossian discloses the system as discussed in the rejection of claim 3. The combined system further discloses wherein the request to access the front camera and the rear camera of the mobile device is granted to the dual-camera module (taught by Libin; Col 2 lines 24-67), and the system simultaneously activates the front camera, the rear camera, and the microphone (taught by Matiossian; ¶ [0017]-[0020] and ¶ [0044]-[0047]).
Regarding claim 5, Libin in view of Beauchamp and further in view of Matiossian discloses the system as discussed in the rejection of claim 4. The combined system further discloses wherein a video stream from the front camera and a video stream from the rear camera is initialized and prepared for real-time processing (taught by Libin; Col 6 lines 21-61 and Col 9 lines 1-35; and taught by Matiossian; ¶ [0017], ¶ [0023] and ¶ [0048]).
Regarding claim 11, Libin discloses a system that facilitates live video streaming and real-time interaction within a mobile application comprising:
a dual-camera module to simultaneous stream video from a front camera and a rear camera of a mobile device at the same present time (Figure 1; Col 2 lines 39-43, Col 6 lines 25-28 and Col 8 lines 14-42 for synchronously recording and streaming videos from front and back cameras of a mobile phone of a presenter in real-time); and
a live chat module enabling a real-time interaction during a live video streaming
session between a user of the mobile device and viewers of the live video stream; the system utilizes the dual-camera module to access the video feed from the front camera and rear camera, and the live chat module creates a live chat session during a simultaneous streaming of the front camera video feed and the rear camera video feed (Figures 3-4; Col 2 lines 24-34, Col 6 lines 21-31 and Col 8 line 43 through Col 9 line 23 for sharing and streaming immersive video presentations capturing from the front and back cameras to other participants and allowing users to interact).
Libin discloses conveying the immersive video presentations observed through the front camera and the rear camera of the mobile device and replacing or augmenting the presenters images in the immersive video presentations (Col 6 lines 21-61), but is silent about an augmented reality module that detects and conveys digital information on real-world objects observed through the camera. Libin also silents about access to the front camera of the mobile device, the rear camera of the mobile device, and a microphone of the mobile device is requested by the dual-camera module via the mobile device's native camera Application Program Interface.
Beauchamp discloses an augmented reality module that detects and conveys digital information on real-world objects observed through the camera of the mobile device (¶ [0009], and ¶ [0044]-[0051]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Libin system with the teaching of Beauchamp, so to create an AR experience for users in the benefits of enhancing user viewing experience.
Matiossian discloses accessing to the front camera of the mobile device, the rear camera of the mobile device, and a microphone of the mobile device is requested by the dual-camera module via the mobile device's native camera Application Program Interface (¶ [0017]-[0020], ¶ [0031] and ¶ [0049]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Libin in view of Beauchamp system with the teaching of Matiossian, so to provide an alternative way of accessing components using API as a matter of engineering choices.
Regarding claims 12-14, all limitations of claims 12-14 are analyzed and rejected corresponding to claims 3-5 respectively.
Claims 6-10 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Libin et al (US 11792355) in view of Beauchamp (US 2023/0360346) and further in view of Matiossian (US 2021/0297604) as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Yadav et al (US 2025/0046084).
Regarding claim 6, Libin in view of Beauchamp and further in view of Matiossian discloses the system as discussed in the rejection of claim 5. The combined system is silent about the video streams from the front camera and the rear camera are encoded in real-time, a video stream data is compressed, reducing bandwidth usage.
Yadav discloses the video streams from the front camera and the rear camera are encoded in real-time, a video stream data is compressed, reducing bandwidth usage (¶ [0025]-[0028]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Libin in view of Beauchamp and Matiossian with the teaching of Yadav, so to enhance system with more secure and saving bandwidth usage in content transmission.
Regarding claim 7, Libin in view of Beauchamp and Matiossian and further in view of Yadav discloses the system as discussed in the rejection of claim 6. The combined system further discloses wherein the video stream from the front camera is synchronized with the video stream from the rear camera such that there is no delay experienced when viewing the video streams of the front and rear camera at the same time (taught by Matiossian; ¶ [0032]-[0033]).
Regarding claim 8, Libin in view of Beauchamp and Matiossian and further in view of Yadav discloses the system as discussed in the rejection of claim 7. The combined system further discloses wherein the synchronized live video stream is displayed on a screen of the mobile device (Libin’s Figures 1-5; and Matiossian’s Figures 5-7).
Regarding claim 9, Libin in view of Beauchamp and Matiossian and further in view of Yadav discloses the system as discussed in the rejection of claim 8. The combined system further discloses wherein upon detecting a real-world object, the augmented reality module is activated and when requested to do so, reveals information regarding the real-world object to be displayed on a screen of the mobile device during the live video stream (Beauchamp’s Figures 4-13; ¶ [0009], and ¶ [0044]-[0051]).
Regarding claim 10, Libin in view of Beauchamp and Matiossian and further in view of Yadav discloses the system as discussed in the rejection of claim 8. The combined system further discloses wherein during the live video stream the live chat module activates a live chat window to be incorporated into a display of the live video stream (Libin’s Figures 2-4).
Regarding claims 15-19, all limitations of claims 15-19 are analyzed and rejected corresponding to claims 6-10 respectively.
Regarding claim 20, Libin in view of Beauchamp and Matiossian and further in view of Yadav discloses the system as discussed in the rejection of claim 19. The combined system further discloses wherein the live chat module includes moderation capabilities and interaction highlights (taught by Libin; Col 2 lines 24-61 and Col 9 line48 54 through Col 10 line 48).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GIGI L DUBASKY whose telephone number is (571)270-5686. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:00.
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, Nathan Flynn can be reached at 571-272-1915. 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.
/GIGI L DUBASKY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2421
Prosecution Insights