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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 2-13 are currently pending with claim 1 being previously cancelled.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/11/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Independent claims 2, 6 and 10 recite “tracking an object within a range”. Applicant’s disclosure teaches an “imaging range” (see, ¶0016) of an imaging apparatus and an “object trackable range” (see, ¶0018). Paragraph [0018] further teaches the “object trackable range” being substantially expanded corresponding to controlling a zoom factor, a direction, a position, or the like of an imaging apparatus (i.e., an imaging range of the imaging apparatus). It is unclear if the claimed “range” is an imaging range of the imaging apparatus or an “object trackable range”. The dependent claims fail to correct the issue and are subsequently rejected based on their dependency upon the independent claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 2, 4-6, 8-10 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mentese et al. (US 20160171330 A1, hereinafter Mentese).
Concerning claims 2, 6, and 10, Mentese teaches a camera controlling apparatus comprising:
at least one memory storing instructions (¶0121); and
at least one processor (¶0121) configured to execute the instructions to perform operations comprising:
tracking an object within a range, wherein a size of the range is variable in a frame captured by a camera (fig. 4: any one of boundaries one, two, three, or four; ¶0068: tracking a target object within one or more boundary limitations in a frame); and
controlling the camera to pan or tilt to display the object at a center of the frame (¶0009; ¶0068: keeping the subject target towards the center of the user's camera frame), in response to detecting the object at a predetermined position within the range, wherein the predetermined position is more distant from a center of the range as the size of the range gets larger (¶0068: Parameters used to set one or more boundary limitations on the target object allow for more aggressive correction depending on how from the center the object is detected. Each boundary edge corresponds to a predetermined position and the predetermined position is more distant from the center as the boundary gets larger).
Concerning claims 4, 8, and 12, Mentese further teaches wherein the object includes a vehicle (¶0008: another car).
Concerning claims 5, 9, and 13, Mentese further teaches wherein the object includes a person (¶0008: person).
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 3, 7 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mentese et al. (US 20160171330 A1) in view of Iyer et al. (US 20200082555 A1, hereinafter Iyer).
Concerning claims 3, 7, and 11, Mentese teaches the limitations of claims 1, 6, and 10. Not explicitly taught is wherein the operations further comprise adjusting the size of the range based on an allocatable size of a resource for image processing.
Iyer, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches identifying an increase in the level of utilization of the resource and reducing the size of each of the one or more ROIs (regions of interest) (¶0013). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Iyer into the Mentese invention in order to avoid reaching a maximum resource utilization level (Iyer, ¶0013).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES M ANDERSON II whose telephone number is (571)270-1444. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10AM-6PM.
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, BRIAN PENDLETON can be reached at 571-272-7527. 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.
/James M Anderson II/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425
Prosecution Insights