CONTROL APPARATUS AND CONTROL METHOD FOR SAME

DETAILED ACTION *Note in the following document: -1. Texts in italic bold format are limitations quoted either directly or conceptually from claims/descriptions disclosed in th-e instant application. 2. -Texts in regular italic format are quoted directly from cited reference or Applicant’s arguments. 3. Te-xts with underlining are added by the Examiner for emphasis. 4. Te-xts with 5. Acronym “PHOSITA” stands for “Person Having Ordinary Skill In The Art”. 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 Objections Claim 8-11 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 8/9/10/11 recites the control apparatus being configured to … (line 7/7/8/8). However only a control apparatus control method earlier in those claims and a control apparatus control method does not inherently include a control apparatus. 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. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. 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 limitation(s) is/are: the image capturing device having a tracking function for tracking and capturing … in Claim 1/7/8/9/10/11; an output unit that outputs one or more crop videos in Claim 5; the control apparatus being configured to be capable of setting … in Claim 8/9/10/11. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/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 § 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 (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 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 2024/0397196 A1) in view of Yuji (JP 2010/199666 A). Regarding Claim 1, Wang discloses a control apparatus that controls an image capturing device (Fig.12: notice cameras 1-N (1350), the image capturing device having a tracking function for tracking and capturing a video of a subject ([0005]: By implementing the method according to the first aspect, the electronic device may identify the objects in the image collected by the camera, and select a focus tracking object from the objects, namely, a protagonist), and a crop function for generating a crop video obtained by cropping the captured video and cutting out a partial region from the captured video ([0032]: By implementing the method according to the first aspect, in some embodiments, the method further includes: When the second object is included, the focus tracking module crops the image displayed in the first window from the image to be sent for display), and the control apparatus comprising: a processor (Fig.12 Processor 1); and a memory containing instructions (Fig.12 Internal memory 129) that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to: set, to the image capturing device, a target position in the captured video within which the subject is to stay in the tracking function (Fig.1C and [0083]: When displaying the user interface shown in FIG. 1B, the terminal 100 may detect a user operation performed on any selection box. In response to the operation, the terminal 100 may determine an object corresponding to the selection box as a protagonist. For example, referring to a user interface shown in FIG. 1C, the terminal 100 may detect a user operation performed on the selection box 122. In response to the operation, the terminal 100 may determine the person 2 corresponding to the selection box 122 as a protagonist. Also see [0005]: By implementing the method according to the first aspect, the electronic device may identify the objects in the image collected by the camera, and select a focus tracking object from the objects, namely, a protagonist); PNG media_image1.png 518 822 media_image1.png Greyscale cause a display unit to display a graphical user interface (GUI) for receiving at least one of a setting of the target position (see Fig.1C above, GUI of receiving the at least one of a setting of the target position), wherein, in the displaying, a first GUI component is displayed on the display unit (Fig.1D notice the target position 142). Wang discloses cropping out the targeted object ([0028]: By implementing the method according to the first aspect, in some embodiments, the image that includes the second object and that is displayed in the first window is cropped based on the image displayed in the preview window) and displaying it in a small window as shown in Fig.1D. Wang further discloses In some examples, a display location of the small window may be further adjusted based on a location of the protagonist in the preview window, to avoid blocking the protagonist in the preview window 113. Further, the terminal 100 may further adjust a location and a size of the small window based on a user operation ([0094]). PNG media_image2.png 467 645 media_image2.png Greyscale Wang discloses tracking and cropping out a target object and displaying the cropped image in a picture-in-picture form. As shown in Fig.1D. Wang further discloses displaying a first GUI related to the position of the target object (Fig.1C). But Wang fails to disclose cause a display unit to display a graphical user interface (GUI) for receiving a setting of the crop region; cause a display unit to display a graphical user interface (GUI) for receiving a setting of the crop region and wherein, in the displaying, a second GUI component that respectively indicate the crop region are displayed on the display unit. However Yuji, in the same field of endeavor, teaches or suggests cutting out a partial area of parent screen and displaying the cropped out image in picture-in-picture format (p.3 sixth paragraph: a partial area of the parent screen designated by the user is cut out from the parent screen, enlarged and reduced, and assigned to the child screen. Also see Fig.2 PNG media_image3.png 241 280 media_image3.png Greyscale ). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention using graphical user interface (GUI) to accept user’s instruction had been already known to a PHOSITA as showed by Wang (Fig.1C). Therefore it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching of Yuji into that of Wang and to include the limitation of cause a display unit to display a graphical user interface (GUI) for receiving a setting of the crop region; cause a display unit to display a graphical user interface (GUI) for receiving a setting of the crop region and wherein, in the displaying, a second GUI component that respectively indicate the crop region are displayed on the display unit in order to allow a viewer to observe and select the interested object in an appropriate cropping size. Regarding Claim 2, Wang modified by Yuji teaches or suggests wherein, in the displaying, the first GUI component and the second GUI component are superimposed and displayed on the captured video (Wang Fig.1C and Yuji Fig.3: the sub-screen setting unit 5D and p.3 sixth paragraph: wherein, in the displaying, the first GUI component and the second GUI component are superimposed and displayed on the captured video). Regarding Claim 3, Wang modified by Yuji further teaches or suggests wherein the instructions further cause the processor to obtain, from the image capturing device, a captured image captured by the image capturing device, a setting of the target position set to the image capturing device, and a setting of the crop region set to the image capturing device, and in the displaying, the first GUI component is displayed based on the obtained setting of the target position, and the second GUI component is displayed based on the obtained setting of the crop region (refer to Wang’s Fig.1C and Yuji’s Fig.2) Regarding Claim 4, Wang modified by Yuji further teaches or suggests wherein, in the displaying, moving and/or transforming of the first GUI component is received in a first setting mode for receiving a setting of the target position, and moving and/or transforming of the second GUI component is received in a second setting mode for receiving a setting of the crop region (see Wang Fig.2C and [0111]: After starting recording a video, the terminal 100 may further provide a protagonist switching service. Referring to the user interface shown in FIG. 2C, at the 5th second after video recording is started, the terminal 100 may detect a user operation performed on the selection box 121. The operation may be referred to as a user operation of protagonist switching. In response to the operation, the terminal 100 may set the person 1 corresponding to the selection box 121 as a protagonist. In this case, the person 2 previously set as the protagonist is no longer the protagonist). PNG media_image4.png 398 638 media_image4.png Greyscale Regarding Claim 5, Wang modified by Yuji further teaches or suggests wherein the crop function is capable of generating a plurality of crop videos each obtained by cutting out a different partial region from the captured video, the image capturing device comprises an output unit that outputs one or more crop videos included in the plurality of crop videos, in the obtaining, output information relating to a crop video being output from the output unit is further obtained, and in the displaying, the second GUI component is displayed based on only a setting of a crop region corresponding to the crop video indicated by the output information (Yuji Fig.2: notice the plurality of cutting out regions). PNG media_image3.png 241 280 media_image3.png Greyscale Regarding Claim 6, Wang discloses after detecting a user operation performed on the SOLO CUT mode 1154, to enable a SOLOCUT mode shooting function. The user operation performed on the SOLO CUT mode 1154 is, for example, an operation of tapping the SOLO CUT mode 1154. In response to the operation, the terminal 100 may execute an algorithm corresponding to the SOLO CUT mode, to enter a SOLO CUT mode shooting scenario, referring to FIG. 1B ([0076]). PNG media_image5.png 516 409 media_image5.png Greyscale Therefore Wang teaches or suggests wherein the instructions further cause the processor to receive a first designation relating to whether or not the first GUI component is to be displayed in the GUI, and a second designation relating to whether or not the second GUI component is to be displayed in the GUI, and in the displaying, a determination of whether or not to display the first GUI component in the GUI is made based on the first designation, and a determination of whether or not to display the second GUI component in the GUI is made based on the second designation (the first/second designation is mapped to the user’s operation on the SOLO CUT mode button 1154. Wang teaches after receiving the detection of the user’s operation performed on the SOLO CUT mode 1154, related GUI is displayed). Regarding Claim 7, Wang discloses a control apparatus that controls an image capturing device (Fig.12: notice cameras 1-N (1350), the image capturing device having a tracking function for tracking and capturing a video of a subject ([0005]: By implementing the method according to the first aspect, the electronic device may identify the objects in the image collected by the camera, and select a focus tracking object from the objects, namely, a protagonist), and a crop function for generating a crop video obtained by cropping the captured video and cutting out a partial region from the captured video ([0032]: By implementing the method according to the first aspect, in some embodiments, the method further includes: When the second object is included, the focus tracking module crops the image displayed in the first window from the image to be sent for display), and the control apparatus comprising: a processor (Fig.12 Processor 1); and a memory containing instructions (Fig.12 Internal memory 129) that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to: select a subject to be a tracking target in the tracking function from among a plurality of subjects in the captured video, and set the selected subject to the image capturing device ([0083]: When displaying the user interface shown in FIG. 1B, the terminal 100 may detect a user operation performed on any selection box. In response to the operation, the terminal 100 may determine an object corresponding to the selection box as a protagonist. For example, referring to a user interface shown in FIG. 1C, the terminal 100 may detect a user operation performed on the selection box 122. In response to the operation, the terminal 100 may determine the person 2 corresponding to the selection box 122 as a protagonist. [0150]: According to the shooting method in the SOLO CUT mode provided in this embodiment of this application, in a process of sending and displaying the raw image by the CameraHAL, the CameraHAL may further perform image identification and focus tracking on the raw image, to implement the shooting functions in the SOLO CUT mode shown in FIG. 1A-FIG. 1J, FIG. 2A-FIG. 2I, and FIG. 3A-FIG. 3C); display, on a display unit, a graphical user interface (GUI) for receiving at least (see Fig.1C above, GUI of receiving the at least one of a setting of the target position), wherein, in the displaying, a first GUI component is displayed on the display unit (Fig.1D notice the target 142). Wang discloses cropping out the targeted object ([0028]: By implementing the method according to the first aspect, in some embodiments, the image that includes the second object and that is displayed in the first window is cropped based on the image displayed in the preview window) and displaying it in a small window as shown in Fig.1D. Wang further discloses In some examples, a display location of the small window may be further adjusted based on a location of the protagonist in the preview window, to avoid blocking the protagonist in the preview window 113. Further, the terminal 100 may further adjust a location and a size of the small window based on a user operation ([0094]). PNG media_image2.png 467 645 media_image2.png Greyscale Wang discloses tracking and cropping out a target object and displaying the cropped image in a picture-in-picture form. As shown in Fig.1D. Wang further discloses displaying a first GUI related to the position of the target object (Fig.1C). But Wang fails to disclose set, to the image capturing device, a crop region in the captured video that is to be cut out by the crop function; and display, on a display unit, a graphical user interface (GUI) for receiving . However Yuji, in the same field of endeavor, teaches or suggests cutting out a partial area of parent screen and displaying the cropped out image in picture-in-picture format (p.3 sixth paragraph: a partial area of the parent screen designated by the user is cut out from the parent screen, enlarged and reduced, and assigned to the child screen. Also see Fig.2 PNG media_image3.png 241 280 media_image3.png Greyscale ). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention using graphical user interface (GUI) to accept user’s instruction had been already known to a PHOSITA as showed by Wang (Fig.1C). Therefore it would have been obvious to a PHOSITA before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching of Yuji into that of Wang and to include the limitation of set, to the image capturing device, a crop region in the captured video that is to be cut out by the crop function; and display, on a display unit, a graphical user interface (GUI) for receiving at least one of a selection of the subject and a setting of the crop region, wherein, in the displaying, a first GUI component and a second GUI component respectively indicating the selected subject and the crop region are displayed on the display unit in order to allow a viewer to observe and select the interested object in an appropriate cropping size. Regarding Claim 8, Claim 8 is/are similar to Claim 1 except in the format of method. Therefore the same reason(s) for rejection is/are applied to Claim 1 is/are also applied to Claim 8. Regarding Claim 9, Claim 9 is/are similar to Claim 7 except in the format of method. Therefore the same reason(s) for rejection is/are applied to Claim 7 is/are also applied to Claim 9. Regarding Claim 10, Claim 10 is/are similar to Claim 1 except in the format of non-transitory computer-readable recording medium. Therefore the same reason(s) for rejection is/are applied to Claim 1 is/are also applied to Claim 10. Regarding Claim 11, Claim 11 is/are similar to Claim 7 except in the format of method non-transitory computer-readable recording medium. Therefore the same reason(s) for rejection is/are applied to Claim 7 is/are also applied to Claim 11. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YINGCHUN HE whose telephone number is (571)270-7218. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00 MT. 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, Xiao M Wu can be reached at (571)-272-7761. 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. /YINGCHUN HE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2613