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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 07/27/2026 has been entered. No claims have been added or cancelled. No claims have been amended. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 2-6, filed 07/27/2026, with respect to the 102 and 103 rejections have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
With respect to item 1 of Applicant’s remarks, in response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., a local connection point positioned close to the camera) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). The claim language does not define claim limitation “an edge server” and therefore it can be interpreted as Kale’s server, regardless of which services it provides or how it provides them.
With respect to item 2 of Applicant’s remarks, the claim language requires a buffer memory device arranged between a motion picture camera and an edge server. Kale explicitly states video data from a digital camera can be temporally stored in removable storage device (141) before being retrieved by server (107) per paragraph [0050] as cited by the rejection of claim 1. In terms of data transfer the data is transferred first to the removable storage device before being transferred to server. In a data transmission path the removable storage device is arranged between the camera and the server as required by the claims. The fact the storage is removable and is inserted into the camera does not change the data transmission path of the video.
With respect to item 3 of Applicant’s remarks, the rejection of claim 1 cites server 107 as the edge server and removable storage device 141 as the buffer memory device comprising a non-volatile data memory. As explained in the response to item 2 above, the removable storage device in a data transmission path is arranged between digital camera 131 and server 107.
For these reasons, the rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final rejection mailed 04/27/2026 are maintained.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 5-7, 9, 12, 13, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kale et al. US 2022/0070407 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Kale discloses a method for recording camera image data on an edge server (methods related to video surveillance as a service) [abstract], comprising the steps:
recording a scene by a motion picture camera and generating camera image data that represent the scene by the motion picture camera (digital camera 131) [FIG. 2], and
transmitting the camera image data to the edge server (server 107) [FIG. 2],
wherein, in a data transmission path (communications network 109) [FIG. 2] from the motion picture camera to the edge server, a buffer memory device comprising a non-volatile data memory is arranged between the motion picture camera and the edge server (removable storage device 141) [FIG. 2]
wherein the camera image data are first written to the data memory of the buffer memory device and the camera image data written to the data memory are then transmitted from the buffer memory device to the edge server (the processing device (103) can temporally store video data into media (143) of the removable storage device (141) for retrieval by the server (107) [0052].
Regarding claim 5, Kale addresses all of the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above.
Kale discloses the buffer memory device is mechanically coupled to the edge server (server (107) can store the video data) [0046].
Regarding claim 6, Kale addresses all of the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above.
Kale further discloses the camera image data are transmitted at least one of: to the buffer memory device via an Ethernet connection (Ethernet interface) [0112]; or from the buffer memory device to the edge server via a PCI Express (Peripheral Component Interconnect Express).
Regarding claim 7, Kale addresses all of the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above.
Kale discloses wherein the buffer memory device has a control device, wherein the control device comprises at least one of a smart network interface card, an FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Array) or an ASIC (Application-Specific Integrated Circuit) (ASIC…FPGA) [0101].
Regarding claim 9, Kale addresses all of the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above.
Kale discloses the camera image data are encrypted by the buffer memory device (encryption operations; server (107) uses its private key to decrypt the video data retrieved from the digital camera (131) and/or the removable storage device (141)) [0039; 0060].
Regarding claim 12, Kale addresses all of the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above.
Kale discloses the camera image data are transmitted from the buffer memory device to the edge server and wherein the camera image data are processed at the buffer memory device, wherein the processed camera image data are transmitted to an output device (virtual camera agent (113) uses not only the processing power of the processing device (117) of the removable storage device (103) [0054].
Regarding claim 13, Kale addresses all of the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above.
Kale discloses the camera image data are transmitted from the edge server to a cloud-based data memory device (the server (107) can provide the video data for viewing by an authorized user over the communications network (109) [0046].
Regarding claim 16, Kale discloses a data processing device (devices) [abstract] for processing camera image data that are generated by a motion picture camera during a motion picture recording and that represent a recorded scene (digital camera 131) [FIG. 2], said data processing device comprising
an edge server (server 107) [FIG. 2] that is configured to receive the camera image data and to forward the received camera image data to systems arranged downstream (the server (107) can provide the video data for viewing by an authorized user over the communications network (109) [0046]., and
a buffer memory device comprising a non-volatile data memory (removable storage device 141) [FIG. 2], wherein the buffer memory device has a data connection to the edge server and an interface for establishing a camera data connection with the motion picture camera (communications network 109) [FIG. 2], wherein the buffer memory device is configured to write camera image data that are transmitted to the interface to the data memory and to transmit camera image data that are written to the data memory to the edge server (the processing device (103) can temporally store video data into media (143) of the removable storage device (141) for retrieval by the server (107) [0052].
Regarding claim 17, Kale addresses all of the features with respect to claim 16 as outlined above.
Kale discloses the buffer memory device has a control device, wherein the control device comprises at least one of a smart network interface card, an FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Array) or an ASIC (Application-Specific Integrated Circuit) (ASIC…FPGA) [0101].
Regarding claim 18, Kale addresses all of the features with respect to claim 16 as outlined above.
Kale discloses the data memory of the buffer memory device is replaceable (removable storage device 141) [FIG. 2].
Regarding claim 19, Kale addresses all of the features with respect to claim 16 as outlined above.
Kale discloses the buffer memory device has at least a second data memory or wherein at least two buffer memory devices are connected to the edge server (main memory 405, removable storage device 141) [FIG. 6].
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.
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 2, 11, 14, 15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kale in view of Saxena et al. US 2022/0417302 A1, hereafter Saxena.
Regarding claim 2, Kale addresses all of the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above.
Kale further discloses the camera image data comprise image data that represent respective images of the scene (scene as in the digital camera input (151)) [0063].
However, Kale fails to explicitly disclose as well as at least one of audio data or metadata that are related to the recording.
Saxena, in an analogous environment, discloses the camera image data comprise image data that represent respective images of the scene as well as at least one of audio data or metadata that are related to the recording (video data 320.1, video metadata 320.2) [FIG. 3].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include image metadata, as disclosed by Saxena, with the invention disclosed by Kale, the motivation being including data descriptive of video data features [0077].
Regarding claim 11, Kale addresses all of the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above.
However, Kale fails to explicitly disclose the camera image data are transmitted to the edge server via two parallel data transmission paths.
Saxena, in an analogous environment, discloses the camera image data are transmitted to the edge server via two parallel data transmission paths (VaaS server 130 may be configured to receive video streams from all connected cameras in parallel) [0035].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for two motion picture cameras in parallel, as disclosed by Saxena, with the invention disclosed by Kale, the motivation being reliability [0005].
Regarding claim 14, Kale addresses all of the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above.
However, Kale fails to explicitly disclose camera image data of at least two motion picture cameras are simultaneously transmitted to the edge server, wherein the camera image data of the at least two motion picture cameras are transmitted to the same buffer memory device and wherein the buffer memory device comprises a respective data memory for writing in the camera image data of a respective motion picture camera; or wherein each of the motion picture cameras is connected to a respective associated buffer memory device and the camera image data of a respective motion picture camera are written to the data memory of the associated buffer memory device.
Saxena, in an analogous environment, discloses camera image data of at least two motion picture cameras are simultaneously transmitted to the edge server (cameras 110 may include internet protocol (IP) cameras configured to encode their respective video streams and stream them over network 102 to VaaS server 130) [0025],
wherein the camera image data of the at least two motion picture cameras are transmitted to the same buffer memory device and wherein the buffer memory device comprises a respective data memory for writing in the camera image data of a respective motion picture camera (cameras 110 may include internet protocol (IP) cameras configured to encode their respective video streams and stream them over network 102 to VaaS server 130) [0025]; or wherein each of the motion picture cameras is connected to a respective associated buffer memory device and the camera image data of a respective motion picture camera are written to the data memory of the associated buffer memory device.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for two motion picture cameras, as disclosed by Saxena, with the invention disclosed by Kale, the motivation being reliability [0005].
Regarding claim 15, Kale addresses all of the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above.
Kale fails to explicitly discloses the motion picture camera is configured by the edge server on a connection to the edge server.
Saxena, in an analogous environment, discloses the motion picture camera is configured by the edge server on a connection to the edge server (camera interface 136) [FIG. 1].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for camera interface configuration, as disclosed by Saxena, with the invention disclosed by Kale, the motivation being reliability [0005].
Regarding claim 20, Kale addresses all of the features with respect to claim 16 as outlined above.
However, Kale fails to explicitly disclose a configuration of the motion picture camera is stored on the edge server, wherein the edge server is configured, on a connection of the motion picture camera to the interface of the buffer memory device, to transmit the configuration to the motion picture camera.
Saxena, in an analogous environment, discloses a configuration of the motion picture camera is stored on the edge server, wherein the edge server is configured, on a connection of the motion picture camera to the interface of the buffer memory device, to transmit the configuration to the motion picture camera (camera interface 136) [FIG. 1].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for camera interface configuration, as disclosed by Saxena, with the invention disclosed by Kale, the motivation being reliability [0005].
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kale in view of Mestman et al. US 11,283,685 B1, hereafter Mestman.
Regarding claim 3, Kale addresses all of the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above.
However, Kale fails to explicitly disclose the camera image data are written to the data memory of the buffer memory device at a data rate of at least 10 Gbit per second or at least 25 Gbit per second or at least 80 Gbit per second.
Mestman discloses the camera image data are written to the data memory of the buffer memory device at a data rate of at least 10 Gbit per second or at least 25 Gbit per second or at least 80 Gbit per second (10/100, 10,100,100 Gigabit Ethernet; 25Gb…40b) [column 5, lines 19-20; column 16, lines 40-45].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use specific data transfer rates, as disclosed by Mestman, with the invention disclosed by Kale, the motivation being adequate bandwidth [column 16, line 65].
Regarding claim 4, Kale addresses all of the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above.
Kale fails to explicitly disclose the data memory of the buffer memory device provides a storage capacity of at least 1 TB (terabyte).
Mestman, in an analogous environment, discloses the data memory of the buffer memory device provides a storage capacity of at least 1 TB (terabyte) (providing terabytes to petabytes of storage data) [column 8, line 43].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use specific storage capacity, as disclosed by Mestman, with the invention disclosed by Kale, the motivation being minimize latency [column 9, line 26].
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kale in view of Dreier et al. US 12,001,355 B1, hereafter Dreier.
Regarding claim 8, Kale addresses all of the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above.
However Kale fails to discloses a write access for writing the camera image data to the data memory of the buffer memory device is prioritized over a readout of the camera image data from the data memory of the buffer memory device for transmitting the camera image data to the edge server.
Dreier, in an analogous environment, discloses a write access for writing the camera image data to the data memory of the buffer memory device is prioritized over a readout of the camera image data from the data memory of the buffer memory device for transmitting the camera image data to the edge server (transfers can be requested and received in various orders, internal operations to process the write can complete in various orders…with reads (and perhaps in conjunction with reads) natural orders od operations can be used to prioritize which part of a write request are allocated memory and are requested first) [column 60, lines 14-20].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use write priority, as disclosed by Dreier, with the invention disclosed by Kale, the motivation being higher throughput [column 60, line 25].
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kale in view of Sakai US 2006/0158518 A1, hereafter Sakai.
Regarding claim 10, Kale addresses all of the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above.
However, Kale fails to explicitly disclose the completeness of the transmission of the camera image data to at least one of the buffer memory device or to the edge server is checked.
Sakai, in an analogous environment, discloses the completeness of the transmission of the camera image data to at least one of the buffer memory device or to the edge server is checked (the image pickup 101 which detect that the connection is cut checks a progress state…to recognize that the transfer of all the data is not complete) [0101].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use progress checking, as disclosed by Sakai, with the invention disclosed by Kale, the motivation being to detect transfer errors [0101].
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEFAN GADOMSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-5701. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 12-8PM EST.
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, Jay Patel can be reached at 571-272-2988. 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.
STEFAN GADOMSKI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2485
/STEFAN GADOMSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2485
