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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 11, 13, 15, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Holzer et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 2021/0227195), hereinafter referenced as Holzer.
Regarding claim 1, Holzer discloses a method comprising: at a device including a display, an image sensor, non-transitory memory and one or more processors: receiving a request that specifies a desired cinematic experience for an environment (figure 2 exhibits step 202 in which a request for a cinematic video creation is received as disclosed at paragraph 40); obtaining sensor data that indicates environmental characteristics of the environment and camera parameters of a set of one or more cameras (figure 3 exhibits steps 306 and 308 in which sensor data about the environment, such as depth data, and parameters, including the motion of the cameras, are obtained as disclosed at paragraphs 57-60); determining, based on the environmental characteristics and the camera parameters, a target cinematic shot that provides the desired cinematic experience (figure 3 exhibits step 312 in 33); and displaying a cinematic shot guide for capturing the target cinematic shot (figure 13 exhibits step 1314 in which an AR guide including a trajectory is output to the display as disclosed at paragraph 164).
Regarding claim 4, Holzer discloses the method of claim 1, in addition, Holzer discloses wherein determining the target cinematic shot comprises determining a camera placement location (paragraph 179 teaches that the position and orientation of the camera can be determined).
Regarding claim 5, Holzer discloses the method of claim 1, in addition, Holzer discloses wherein determining the target cinematic shot comprises determining a camera trajectory for a moving camera (figure 13 exhibits step 1314 in which an AR guide including a trajectory is output to the display as disclosed at paragraph 164).
Regarding claim 6, Holzer discloses the method of claim 1, in addition, Holzer discloses wherein determining the target cinematic shot comprises determining a camera parameter value (paragraph 123 teaches determining a compression style with variable compression).
Regarding claim 7, Holzer discloses the method of claim 6, in addition, Holzer discloses wherein determining the camera parameter value comprises determining one or more of an exposure time, an aperture setting, an ISO setting value, a white balance setting, a focus mode, a frame rate for video, an image stabilization setting, compression level and flash intensity (paragraph 123 teaches determining a compression style with variable compression).
Regarding claim 8, Holzer discloses the method of claim 1, in addition, Holzer discloses where displaying the cinematic shot guide comprises overlaying a set of virtual objects onto the environment in order to guide a user of the device in capturing the target cinematic shot (figure 13 exhibits step 1316 in which an AR guide including virtual objects displayed on a live view image is output to the display as disclosed at paragraph 172).
Regarding claim 9, Holzer discloses the method of claim 1, in addition, Holzer discloses capturing the target cinematic shot as a user follows the cinematic shot guide (figure 13 exhibits step 1318 in which the cinematic shot is captured as disclosed at paragraph 173).
Regarding claim 11, Holzer discloses the method of claim 1, in addition, Holzer discloses wherein the sensor data comprises image data or depth data that indicates dimensions of the environment (paragraph 109 teaches that depth data from depth images is input, the depth data would indicate dimensions of the environment even if said dimensions haven’t been calculated).
Regarding claim 13, Holzer discloses the method of claim 1, in addition, Holzer discloses wherein the sensor data comprises image data or depth data that indicates obstructions in the environment (paragraph 109 teaches that depth data from depth images is input, the depth data would indicate dimensions of the environment even if said dimensions haven’t been detected).
Regarding claim 15, Holzer discloses the method of claim 1, in addition, Holzer discloses wherein the environment includes a physical environment or a virtual environment (figure 2 shows obtaining image data of a physical environment).
Regarding claim 18, Holzer discloses a device comprising: one or more processors (paragraph 216 discloses a processor); an image sensor (paragraph 217 discloses an image sensor); a display (paragraph 217 discloses a display); a non-transitory memory (figure 18 exhibits memory 1803 which stores program instructions as disclosed at paragraph 228); and one or more programs stored in the non-transitory memory (figure 18 exhibits memory 1803 which stores program instructions as disclosed at paragraph 228), which, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the device to: receive a request that specifies a desired cinematic experience for an environment (figure 2 exhibits step 202 in which a request for a cinematic video creation is received as disclosed at paragraph 40); obtain sensor data that indicates environmental characteristics of the environment and camera parameters of a set of one or more cameras (figure 3 exhibits steps 306 and 308 in which sensor data about the environment and parameters including the motion of the cameras are obtained as disclosed at paragraphs 57-60); determine, based on the environmental characteristics and the camera parameters, a target cinematic shot that provides the desired cinematic experience (figure 3 exhibits step 312 in 33); and display a cinematic shot guide for capturing the target cinematic shot (figure 13 exhibits step 1314 in which an AR guide including a trajectory is output to the display as disclosed at paragraph 164).
Claim 19, a non-transitory memory storing one or more programs, corresponds to and is analyzed the same as the method of claim 1 (figure 18 exhibits memory 1803 which stores program instructions as disclosed at paragraph 228).
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 2, 12 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holzer in view of Newmann et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 2019/0208124), hereinafter referenced as Newmann.
Regarding claim 2, Holzer discloses the method of claim 1, however, Holzer fails to disclose wherein determining the target cinematic shot comprises selecting the target cinematic shot from a set of predefined cinematic shots associated with corresponding environmental characteristic values and camera parameter values.
Newmann is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Newmann teaches an imaging system wherein the motivation of providing a user with options which are appropriate for the scene being captured would have prompted a predictable variation of Holzer by applying Newmann’s known principal of selecting the target cinematic shot from a set of predefined cinematic shots associated with corresponding environmental characteristic values and camera parameter values (paragraph 62 teaches selecting a cinematic shot from a set of cinematic shots that are associated with environmental characteristics, such as lighting, and camera parameter values, such as the motion of the camera).
In view of the motivations such as providing a user with options which are appropriate for the scene being captured one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Holzer.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 12, Holzer discloses the method of claim 1, however, Holzer fails to disclose wherein the sensor data comprises ambient light data that indicates lighting conditions in the environment.
Newmann is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Newmann teaches an imaging system wherein the motivation of providing a user with options which are appropriate for the scene being captured would have prompted a predictable variation of Holzer by applying Newmann’s known principal of using ambient light data when determining cinematic shots (paragraph 62 teaches selecting a cinematic shot from a set of cinematic shots that are associated with environmental characteristics, such as lighting).
In view of the motivations such as providing a user with options which are appropriate for the scene being captured one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Holzer.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 20, Holzer discloses the non-transitory memory of claim 19, however, Holzer fails to disclose wherein determining the target cinematic shot comprises selecting the target cinematic shot from a set of predefined cinematic shots associated with corresponding environmental characteristic values and camera parameter values.
Newmann is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Newmann teaches an imaging system wherein the motivation of providing a user with options which are appropriate for the scene being captured would have prompted a predictable variation of Holzer by applying Newmann’s known principal of selecting the target cinematic shot from a set of predefined cinematic shots associated with corresponding environmental characteristic values and camera parameter values (paragraph 62 teaches selecting a cinematic shot from a set of cinematic shots that are associated with environmental characteristics, such as lighting, and camera parameter values, such as the motion of the camera).
In view of the motivations such as providing a user with options which are appropriate for the scene being captured one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Holzer.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 3, 10, 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holzer in view of Lew et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 2025/0166665), hereinafter referenced as Lew.
Regarding claim 3, Holzer discloses method of claim 1, however, Holzer fails to disclose wherein determining the target cinematic shot includes selecting a number of cameras to use while capturing the target cinematic shot.
Lew is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Lew teaches an imaging system wherein the motivation of intelligently switching between cameras to capture a video in a desired cinematic style would have prompted a predictable variation of Holzer by applying Lew’s known principal of selecting a number of cameras to use while capturing the target cinematic shot (paragraph 166 discloses determining when to switch between cameras, by determining when to switch and which cameras to use when switching the system is selecting a number of cameras to use).
In view of the motivations such as intelligently switching between cameras to capture a video in a desired cinematic style one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Holzer.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 10, Holzer discloses the method of claim 1, however, Holzer fails to disclose combining shots captured by multiple cameras to create a single video that conforms to the target cinematic shot.
Lew is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Lew teaches an imaging system wherein the motivation of highlighting active participants or adapting layouts to fit the number of attendees would have prompted a predictable variation of Holzer by applying Lew’s known principal of combining shots captured by multiple cameras to create a single video that conforms to the target cinematic shot (paragraph 214 teaches combining shots from a plurality of cameras to create a single coherent video).
In view of the motivations such as highlighting active participants or adapting layouts to fit the number of attendees one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Holzer.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 14, Holzer discloses the method of claim 1, however, Holzer fails to disclose wherein the camera parameters comprise one or more of a number of cameras, moveability of cameras, zoom capability and a field-of-view (FOV) size.
Lew is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Lew teaches an imaging system wherein the motivation of intelligently switching between cameras to capture a video in a desired cinematic style would have prompted a predictable variation of Holzer by applying Lew’s known principal of obtaining the number of available cameras in order to determine which cameras to use (paragraph 166 discloses determining when to switch between cameras, by determining when to switch and which cameras to use when switching the system must know the number of cameras which are available in order to select between the cameras).
In view of the motivations such as intelligently switching between cameras to capture a video in a desired cinematic style one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Holzer.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 16, Holzer discloses the method of claim 1, however, Holzer fails to disclose wherein receiving the request comprises displaying a plurality of potential cinematic experiences and receiving a user input selecting one of the potential cinematic experiences.
Lew is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Lew teaches an imaging system wherein the motivation of allowing a user to quickly choose a cinematic style from available styles would have prompted a predictable variation of Holzer by applying Lew’s known principal of displaying a plurality of potential cinematic experiences and receiving a user input selecting one of the potential cinematic experiences (paragraph 57 discloses displaying a list of cinematic styles from which a user can select).
In view of the motivations such as allowing a user to quickly choose a cinematic style from available styles one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Holzer.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holzer in view of Rifkin et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 2017/0041523), hereinafter referenced as Rifkin.
Regarding claim 17, Holzer discloses the method of claim 1, however, Holzer fails to disclose wherein receiving the request comprises receiving a user prompt that specifies the desired cinematic experience.
Rifkin is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Rifkin teaches an imaging device wherein the motivation of allowing a user to use natural language to configure a camera would have prompted a predictable variation of Holzer by applying Rifkin’s known principal of receiving camera control requests thought a user prompt (figures 1A-1D teach controlling a camera based on user prompts in the form of audio cues as disclosed at paragraph 18). When applying this known technique to Holzer which teaches specifying a desired cinematic experience, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to allow a user to use a user prompt, as taught by Rifkin, to specify the desired cinematic experience.
In view of the motivations such as allowing a user to use natural language to configure a camera one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Holzer.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Citation of Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wan et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 2025/0148658) teaches a method for content generation.
Montgomery et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 2010/0156906) teaches a method for shot generation.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON A FLOHRE whose telephone number is (571)270-7238. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-3:00.
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, Sinh Tran can be reached at 571-272-7564. 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.
JASON A. FLOHRE
Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2637
/JASON A FLOHRE/ Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2637
