DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Notice of Preliminary Amendment
2. The Examiner acknowledges the amended claims filed on 06/03/2025.
- Claims 1-20 have been cancelled.
- Claims 21-29 have been added.
Priority
3. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of documents required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 05/05/2025 and 06/17/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and were considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
5. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
6. Claim 21 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5-6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,323,705.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they are both claiming substantially the same features.
Note the following similarities between the application claims and the patent claims.
Instant Application No. 19/198,792
US Patent 12,323,705
Claim 21
An imaging system including a mobile body and an imaging device, comprising a processor,wherein the processor is configured to:
acquire movement information regarding a position of the mobile body, and
vary a shutter speed of the imaging device in accordance with the movement information.
Claim 1
A control method used in a system including a moving body and an imaging apparatus, the method comprising:
an acquisition step of acquiring factor information, including movement information related to the moving body, via the imaging apparatus;
an adjustment step of adjusting a position of a moving mechanism that moves an image sensor or an imaging lens provided in the imaging apparatus, based on the factor information; an imaging step of imaging a subject by using the image sensor after the adjustment step is executed; and a correction step of correcting a shake applied to the image sensor or the imaging lens by using the moving mechanism in a case in which the imaging step is executed, wherein the adjustment step includes increasing a movable distance of the image sensor or of the imaging lens in a case in which the correction step is executed, as compared to a distance before the adjustment step is executed.
Claim 5
The control method according to claim 1, further comprising: a setting step of setting an imaging condition of the imaging apparatus based on the factor information.
Claim 6
The control method according to claim 5, wherein the imaging condition is a shutter speed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
7. 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.
8. 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)(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.
9. Claims 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Uchida et al. (US-PGPUB 2022/0294962).
Regarding claim 21, Uchida discloses an imaging system including a mobile body and an imaging device (An information processing system 8 includes an imaging apparatus 14, an image processing apparatus 10, apparatus 12 and apparatus 16. The information processing system 8 is incorporated in a movable unit such as the head-mounted display 100; see figs. 1, 4 and paragraphs 0041, 0024, 0020), comprising a processor (Image processing apparatus 10; see fig. 4),
wherein the processor is configured to:
acquire movement information regarding a position of the mobile body (Motion information 60 is acquired from the IMU sensor provided on the head-mounted display 100; see paragraphs 0034, 0036), and
vary a shutter speed of the imaging device in accordance with the movement information (Exposure time 64 is determined on the basis of the acquired motion information 60; see paragraph 0034. Exposure time (shutter speed); see paragraph 0028. The exposure time is set long if the head-mounted display 100 stays still or moves at a low speed to such an extent as not to cause a motion blur problem, and the exposure time is set short if the head-mounted display 100 moves at a medium or high speed to such an extent as to cause a motion blur problem; see paragraph 0034).
Regarding claim 22, Uchida discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). In addition, Uchida discloses the movement information includes information relating to a speed or an acceleration of the mobile body (The motion information 60 is at least either an angular speed or acceleration measured by the IMU sensor; see paragraphs 0036, 0034, 0043).
Regarding claim 23, Uchida discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 22). In addition, Uchida discloses the processor is configured to shorten the shutter speed as the speed or the acceleration increases (The exposure time is set short if the head-mounted display 100 moves at a medium or high speed; see paragraph 0034. The parameter control section 30 can change the exposure time such that the higher the speed is, the shorter the exposure time is; see paragraph 0050 and claim 3 of Uchida).
Regarding claim 24, Uchida discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 22). In addition, Uchida discloses the processor is configured to set the shutter speed to be shorter than a preset value determined based on imaging conditions when the speed is equal to or greater than a predetermined speed (The parameter control section 30 reduces the exposure time if the speed of the head-mounted display 100 exceeds a threshold and sets the exposure time back to its original time if the speed drops to or below the threshold again; see paragraphs 0049, 0034, 0050, 0062 and claim 2 of Uchida).
10. Claims 21-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Matsui et al. (US-PGPUB 2024/0155233).
Regarding claim 21, Matsui discloses an imaging system including a mobile body and an imaging device (An imaging system 1 is located on an upper surface of the vehicle 3. The imaging system 1 includes an imaging device 11, a blur correction device 13, and a storage 15. Imaging system disposed on a moving body, the imaging system including: an imaging device; see fig. 1 and paragraphs 0028-0029, 0007), comprising a processor (Processor, controllers 27, 33; see paragraphs 0105, 0029, 0030),
wherein the processor is configured to:
acquire movement information regarding a position of the mobile body (The controller 33 acquires the movement velocity V1 of the vehicle 3 from the velocity detector 3a; see paragraph 0067), and
vary a shutter speed of the imaging device in accordance with the movement information (The controller 33 calculates the maximum exposure time Tmax from the movement velocity V1. The maximum exposure time Tmax reduces according as the movement velocity of the vehicle 3 increases; see paragraphs 0067-0070, 0076).
Regarding claim 22, Matsui discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 1). In addition, Matsui discloses the movement information includes information relating to a speed or an acceleration of the mobile body (The controller 33 acquires the movement velocity V1 of the vehicle 3 from the velocity detector 3a. The vehicle 3 includes a velocity detector 3a that detects the movement velocity of the vehicle 3; see paragraphs 0067; see paragraphs 0067, 0027).
Regarding claim 23, Matsui discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 22). In addition, Matsui discloses the processor is configured to shorten the shutter speed as the speed or the acceleration increases (The controller 33 calculates the maximum exposure time Tmax from the movement velocity V1. The maximum exposure time Tmax reduces according as the movement velocity of the vehicle 3 increases; see paragraphs 0067-0070, 0076).
Regarding claim 24, Matsui discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 22). In addition, Matsui discloses the processor is configured to set the shutter speed to be shorter than a preset value determined based on imaging conditions when the speed is equal to or greater than a predetermined speed (The controller 33 calculates the maximum exposure time Tmax from the movement velocity V1. The maximum exposure time Tmax reduces according as the movement velocity of the vehicle 3 increases; see paragraphs 0067-0070, 0076).
Regarding claim 25, Matsui discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 22). In addition, Matsui discloses the movement information includes information relating to a distance between the imaging device and a subject (The subject distance is a distance from a principal point of the lens 23 arranged between the object (hole 5b) to be imaged as the subject and the imaging element 25, to the object (hole 5b) to be imaged. The subject distance is a value measured by a distance meter during image capturing; see paragraph 0049).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. Claims 25-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uchida in view of Naing et al. (US-PGPUB 2018/0309919).
Regarding claim 25, Uchida discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 21). However, Uchida does not expressly disclose the movement information includes information relating to a distance between the imaging device and a subject.
On the other hand, Naing discloses the movement information includes information relating to a distance between the imaging device and a subject (The camera 302 can be a mounted camera or be part of a wearable device, automobile and drone; see paragraph 0052. The exposure times of the RGB sensor and the NIR sensor can be set based on different conditions. The NIR sensor exposure time is set short when the target object and the NIR sensor are in close proximity. The RGB sensor exposure time is set short when the target object and the RGB sensor are in close proximity and the lighting condition is good; see Table 1 and paragraphs 0027-0028).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Uchida and Naing to provide the movement information includes information relating to a distance between the imaging device and a subject for the purpose of improving image quality by dynamically adjusting the exposure time in accordance to a plurality of imaging conditions.
Regarding claim 26, Uchida and Naing disclose everything claimed as applied above (see claim 25). However, Uchida fails to disclose the processor is configured to shorten the shutter speed as the distance becomes shorter.
Nevertheless, Naing discloses the processor is configured to shorten the shutter speed as the distance becomes shorter (The exposure times of the RGB sensor and the NIR sensor can be set based on different conditions. The NIR sensor exposure time is set short when the target object and the NIR sensor are in close proximity. The RGB sensor exposure time is set short when the target object and the RGB sensor are in close proximity and the lighting condition is good; see Table 1 and paragraphs 0027-0028).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Uchida and Naing to provide the processor is configured to shorten the shutter speed as the distance becomes shorter for the purpose of improving image quality by dynamically adjusting the exposure time in accordance to a plurality of imaging conditions.
Regarding claim 27, Uchida and Naing disclose everything claimed as applied above (see claim 25). However, Uchida the processor is configured to set the shutter speed to be shorter than a preset value determined based on imaging conditions when the distance is equal to or less than a predetermined distance.
On the other hand, Naing discloses the processor is configured to set the shutter speed to be shorter than a preset value determined based on imaging conditions when the distance is equal to or less than a predetermined distance (The exposure times of the RGB sensor and the NIR sensor can be set based on different conditions. The NIR sensor exposure time is set short when the target object and the NIR sensor are in close proximity. The RGB sensor exposure time is set short when the target object and the RGB sensor are in close proximity and the lighting condition is good. In macro image capture, “close” can relate to distances under one foot. In some embodiments, “close” can be within one meter; see Table 1 and paragraphs 0027-0028).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Uchida and Naing to provide the processor is configured to set the shutter speed to be shorter than a preset value determined based on imaging conditions when the distance is equal to or less than a predetermined distance for the purpose of improving image quality by dynamically adjusting the exposure time in accordance to a plurality of imaging conditions
14. Claims 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uchida in view of Ramsay (US Patent 9,571,741).
Regarding claim 28, Uchida discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 21). However, Uchida does not expressly disclose the processor is configured to: acquire focal length information relating to a focal length of the imaging device and shorten the shutter speed as the focal length becomes longer toward a telephoto side.
On the other hand, Ramsay discloses the processor is configured to: acquire focal length information relating to a focal length of the imaging device, and shorten the shutter speed as the focal length becomes longer toward a telephoto side (The camera can be attached to a moving vehicle; see col. 6, lines 25-27. Detected motion of the camera can be used to determine the shutter speed based on the amplitude of the detected motion and the focal length of the lens, where a longer focal length corresponds to a shorter shutter speed; see col. 7, lines 5-15; col. 6, lines 61-63 and col. 8, lines 38-49).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Uchida and Ramsay to provide the processor is configured to: acquire focal length information relating to a focal length of the imaging device and shorten the shutter speed as the focal length becomes longer toward a telephoto side for the purpose of effectively eliminating blurring because the effect of camera movement on motion blur is more apparent at higher focal lengths (see col. 6, lines 61-63).
Regarding claim 29, Uchida discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 21). However, Uchida does not expressly disclose the processor is configured to: acquire focal length information relating to a focal length of the imaging device, and set the shutter speed to be shorter than a preset value determined based on imaging conditions when the focal length is equal to or greater than a predetermined focal length.
Nevertheless, Ramsay discloses the processor is configured to: acquire focal length information relating to a focal length of the imaging device and set the shutter speed to be shorter than a preset value determined based on imaging conditions when the focal length is equal to or greater than a predetermined focal length (Detected motion of the camera can be used to determine the shutter speed based on the amplitude of the detected motion and the focal length of the lens, where a longer focal length corresponds to a shorter shutter speed. The motion profile would be used as a key to the look-up table, along with a value describing the focal length of the camera; see col. 7, lines 5-15; col. 6, lines 61-63 and col. 8, lines 38-49).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Uchida and Ramsay to provide the processor is configured to: acquire focal length information relating to a focal length of the imaging device, and set the shutter speed to be shorter than a preset value determined based on imaging conditions when the focal length is equal to or greater than a predetermined focal length for the purpose of effectively eliminating blurring because the effect of camera movement on motion blur is more apparent at higher focal lengths (see col. 6, lines 61-63).
15. Claims 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsui in view of Naing.
Regarding claim 26, Matsui discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 25). However, Matsui does not expressly disclose the processor is configured to shorten the shutter speed as the distance becomes shorter.
Nevertheless, Naing discloses the processor is configured to shorten the shutter speed as the distance becomes shorter (The exposure times of the RGB sensor and the NIR sensor can be set based on different conditions. The NIR sensor exposure time is set short when the target object and the NIR sensor are in close proximity. The RGB sensor exposure time is set short when the target object and the RGB sensor are in close proximity and the lighting condition is good; see Table 1 and paragraphs 0027-0028).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Matsui and Naing to provide the processor is configured to shorten the shutter speed as the distance becomes shorter for the purpose of improving image quality by dynamically adjusting the exposure time in accordance to a plurality of imaging conditions.
Regarding claim 27, Matsui discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 25). However, Matsui does not expressly disclose the processor is configured to set the shutter speed to be shorter than a preset value determined based on imaging conditions when the distance is equal to or less than a predetermined distance.
On the other hand, Naing discloses the processor is configured to set the shutter speed to be shorter than a preset value determined based on imaging conditions when the distance is equal to or less than a predetermined distance (The exposure times of the RGB sensor and the NIR sensor can be set based on different conditions. The NIR sensor exposure time is set short when the target object and the NIR sensor are in close proximity. The RGB sensor exposure time is set short when the target object and the RGB sensor are in close proximity and the lighting condition is good. In macro image capture, “close” can relate to distances under one foot. In some embodiments, “close” can be within one meter; see Table 1 and paragraphs 0027-0028).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Matsui and Naing to provide the processor is configured to set the shutter speed to be shorter than a preset value determined based on imaging conditions when the distance is equal to or less than a predetermined distance for the purpose of improving image quality by dynamically adjusting the exposure time in accordance to a plurality of imaging conditions
16. Claims 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsui in view of Ramsay.
Regarding claim 28, Matsui discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 21). However, Matsui does not expressly disclose the processor is configured to: acquire focal length information relating to a focal length of the imaging device and shorten the shutter speed as the focal length becomes longer toward a telephoto side.
On the other hand, Ramsay discloses the processor is configured to: acquire focal length information relating to a focal length of the imaging device, and shorten the shutter speed as the focal length becomes longer toward a telephoto side (The camera can be attached to a moving vehicle; see col. 6, lines 25-27. Detected motion of the camera can be used to determine the shutter speed based on the amplitude of the detected motion and the focal length of the lens, where a longer focal length corresponds to a shorter shutter speed; see col. 7, lines 5-15; col. 6, lines 61-63 and col. 8, lines 38-49).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Matsui and Ramsay to provide the processor is configured to: acquire focal length information relating to a focal length of the imaging device and shorten the shutter speed as the focal length becomes longer toward a telephoto side for the purpose of effectively eliminating blurring because the effect of camera movement on motion blur is more apparent at higher focal lengths (see col. 6, lines 61-63).
Regarding claim 29, Matsui discloses everything claimed as applied above (see claim 21). However, Matsui does not expressly disclose the processor is configured to: acquire focal length information relating to a focal length of the imaging device, and set the shutter speed to be shorter than a preset value determined based on imaging conditions when the focal length is equal to or greater than a predetermined focal length.
Nevertheless, Ramsay discloses the processor is configured to: acquire focal length information relating to a focal length of the imaging device and set the shutter speed to be shorter than a preset value determined based on imaging conditions when the focal length is equal to or greater than a predetermined focal length (Detected motion of the camera can be used to determine the shutter speed based on the amplitude of the detected motion and the focal length of the lens, where a longer focal length corresponds to a shorter shutter speed. The motion profile would be used as a key to the look-up table, along with a value describing the focal length of the camera; see col. 7, lines 5-15; col. 6, lines 61-63 and col. 8, lines 38-49).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Matsui and Ramsay to provide the processor is configured to: acquire focal length information relating to a focal length of the imaging device, and set the shutter speed to be shorter than a preset value determined based on imaging conditions when the focal length is equal to or greater than a predetermined focal length for the purpose of effectively eliminating blurring because the effect of camera movement on motion blur is more apparent at higher focal lengths (see col. 6, lines 61-63).
Citation of Pertinent Art
17. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Yasuda et al. (US-PGPUB 2021/0006721) discloses the effect of shift blur increases when the shooting time is long, or the effect of shift blur decreases when the capturing time is short. The lens system control unit 15 acquires the distance to the main object based on the distance map and, when the distance is shorter than a predetermined distance, uses the output of the shift blur calculation unit described in FIGS. 9A to 9C, or does not use it when the distance is longer than the predetermined distance.
Contact Information
18. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CYNTHIA CALDERON whose telephone number is (571)270-3580. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM-5:00 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, TWYLER HASKINS can be reached at (571)272-7406. 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.
/CYNTHIA CALDERON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2639 08/18/2026
Prosecution Insights