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 certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/23/2025 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claim is directed to a signal per se.
Examiner suggests adding the term “non-transitory” to overcome the rejection.
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.
Claims 1-4, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Newman et al. US Patent Publication No. 2021/0343316.
Regarding Claim 1, Newman discloses a video processing device comprising:
a memory storing instructions; and
a processor connected to the memory and configured to execute the instructions to [0031]:
acquire a first video [Figure 4 & [0073]; In response to the request, video and associated metadata is accessed 420];
acquire information indicating a time at which an event is detected [0006 & 0033; A given event of interest may be identified based on a given capture time of the given video being within a threshold time of a pre-determined time];
and generate, based on the first video and information indicating a time at which the event is detected [0006 & 0050], a first summary video including a period from a time at which an event satisfying a first condition is detected to a time at which an event satisfying a second condition is detected [0053 & 0059; the video editing module 320 identifies best scenes associated with the identified events of interest for inclusion in a video summary. Each best scene is a video clip, portion, or scene (“video clips” hereinafter), and can be an entire video or a portion of a video. For instance, the video editing module 320 can identify video clips occurring within a threshold amount of time of an identified event of interest (such as 3 seconds before and after the event of interest), within a threshold number of frames of an identified event of interest (such as 24 frames before and after the event of interest), and the like. The amount of length of a best scene can be pre-determined, and/or can be selected by a user].
Regarding Claim 9, Newman discloses a video processing method for causing an information processing device to execute:
acquiring a first video [Figure 4 & [0073]; In response to the request, video and associated metadata is accessed 420];
acquiring information indicating a time at which an event is detected [0006 & 0033; A given event of interest may be identified based on a given capture time of the given video being within a threshold time of a pre-determined time];
and generating a first summary video including a period from a time at which an event satisfying a first condition is detected to a time at which an event satisfying a second condition is detected based on the first video and information indicating a time at which the event is detected [0053 & 0059; the video editing module 320 identifies best scenes associated with the identified events of interest for inclusion in a video summary. Each best scene is a video clip, portion, or scene (“video clips” hereinafter), and can be an entire video or a portion of a video. For instance, the video editing module 320 can identify video clips occurring within a threshold amount of time of an identified event of interest (such as 3 seconds before and after the event of interest), within a threshold number of frames of an identified event of interest (such as 24 frames before and after the event of interest), and the like. The amount of length of a best scene can be pre-determined, and/or can be selected by a user].
Regarding Claim 10, Newman discloses a recording medium having stored therein a video processing program for causing a computer to execute:
a video acquisition process of acquiring a first video [Figure 4 & [0073]; In response to the request, video and associated metadata is accessed 420];
a time acquisition process of acquiring information indicating a time at which an event is detected [0006 & 0033; A given event of interest may be identified based on a given capture time of the given video being within a threshold time of a pre-determined time]; and
a generation process of generating, based on the first video and information indicating a time at which the event is detected [0006 & 0050], a first summary video including a period from a time at which an event satisfying a first condition is detected to a time at which an event satisfying a second condition is detected [0053 & 0059; the video editing module 320 identifies best scenes associated with the identified events of interest for inclusion in a video summary. Each best scene is a video clip, portion, or scene (“video clips” hereinafter), and can be an entire video or a portion of a video. For instance, the video editing module 320 can identify video clips occurring within a threshold amount of time of an identified event of interest (such as 3 seconds before and after the event of interest), within a threshold number of frames of an identified event of interest (such as 24 frames before and after the event of interest), and the like. The amount of length of a best scene can be pre-determined, and/or can be selected by a user].
Regarding Claim 2, Newman discloses a video processing device, wherein the processor is configured to execute the instructions to specify a time at which the event is detected based on at least one of information regarding a sound or information regarding a movement of an object [0050].
Regarding Claim 3, Newman discloses a video processing device, wherein the processor is configured to execute the instructions to specify a type of an affair based on the first video; and specify a third condition based on a type of the affair [0037; the type of activity being performed by the user while the video was captured (e.g., snowboarding, mountain biking, etc.), the time and data at which the video was captured, or the type of camera 130 used by the user].
Regarding Claim 4, Newman discloses a video processing device, wherein the processor is configured to execute the instructions to generate the first summary video when an event satisfying the third condition is detected in the first video [0051; activity identifier module 335 aggregates metadata for a plurality of videos associated with an activity and identifies metadata patterns based on the aggregated metadata. As used herein, “tagging” a video with an activity refers to the association of the video with the activity. Activities tagged in videos can be used as a basis to identify best scenes in videos (as described above), and to select video clips for inclusion in video summary templates (as described below)].
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.
Claims 5-6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Newman et al. US Patent Publication No. 2021/0343316 in view of Hugosson US Patent Publication No. 2012/0014659.
Regarding Claim 5, Newman discloses the video processing device according to claim 1 but fails to disclose generating the first summary video including a period from a time at which imaging of the first video is started to a time at which the event satisfying the second condition is detected.
In an analogous art, Hugosson discloses a video processing device, wherein in a case where the first video is a video in which imaging is started from a time later than a time at which the event satisfying the first condition is detected, the processor is configured to execute the instructions to generate the first summary video including a period from a time at which imaging of the first video is started to a time at which the event satisfying the second condition is detected [Figure 6A & [0006]].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Newman and Hugosson, before the effective filing date of the invention, in order to enable the camera to record different events without recording duplicate video frames, even when the event requires recording of pre-event video frames [Hugosson 0007].
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Newman and Hugosson discloses the video processing device, wherein in a case where the first video is a video in which imaging is ended at a time before a time at which the event satisfying the second condition is detected, the processor is configured to execute the instructions to the generation means is configured to generate the first summary video including a period from a time at which the event satisfying the first condition is detected to a time at which imaging of the first video is ended [Hugosson 0071-0073].
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Newman and Hugosson discloses the video processing device, wherein the processor is configured to execute the instructions to generate the first summary video by deleting a video of a period satisfying a fourth condition from the first video [Hugosson [0076, 0087]].
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Newman et al. US Patent Publication No. 2021/0343316 in view of Koch et al. US Patent Publication No. 2021/0306607.
Regarding Claim 7, Newman discloses the video processing device of claim 1 but fails to disclose generating a third summary video including the first summary video and the second summary video.
In an analogous art, Koch discloses a video processing device, wherein the processor is configured to execute the instructions to acquire a second video; generate a second summary video including a period from a time at which an event satisfying the first condition is detected to a time at which an event satisfying the second condition is detected based on the second video and information indicating a time at which the event is detected; and generate a third summary video including the first summary video and the second summary video [Figure 3].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Newman and Koch, before the effective filing date of the invention, in order to allow the server to combine (e.g., concatenate) the pertinent video segments together into a single video stream (e.g., summary video) [Koch 0028].
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Titus et al. US Patent Publication No. 2010/0026802- A video surveillance system is set up, calibrated, tasked, and operated. The system extracts video primitives and extracts event occurrences from the video primitives using event discriminators. The extracted video primitives and event occurrences may be used to create and define additional video analytic rules. The system can undertake a response, such as an alarm, based on extracted event occurrences.
Aghdasi et al. US Patent Application No. 2015/0356996 - A method of summarizing events in a video recording includes evaluating at least one video recording to identify event that violate at least one rule. The method further includes excerpting a fragment of the at least one video recording. The fragment contains a depiction of the event. The method also includes causing the fragment to be included in a summary video recording. The rules may relate to a threshold amount of motion in a physical space being recorded in the at least one received video recording, or a threshold duration of motion in a physical space being recorded in the at least one received video recording.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAHAR A RIAZ whose telephone number is (571)270-3005. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am to 5 pm.
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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at 571-272-3982. 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.
/SAHAR AQIL RIAZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424
Prosecution Insights