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 § 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 1-14 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.
Claim 1 recites, “one or more processors executing the instructions to: receive a plurality of second movies (1) from a movie recording apparatus …; generate a third movie by editing based on the received second movie (2).” According to (1), there are a plurality of received second movies. It is not clear which of the plurality of the received second movies in (1), “the received second movie” in (2) refers to.
Claim 1 is therefore 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.
Claims 2-7 depend on claim 1 thus are rejected due to the rejected feature inherited from claim 1.
Claim 7 further recites “the transmission order (3) is transmitted …” It is not clear which of the transmission orders previously recited the “the transmission order” in (3) refers to.
Claim 7 is therefore also 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 for this additional reason.
Similarly, claim 8 recites, “a plurality of second movies”(4) and “… to generate a third movie by editing based on the second movie (5).” It is not clear which of the plurality of second movies in (4) “the second movie” in (5) refers to.
Claim 8 is therefore 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.
Claims 9-13 depend on claim 8 thus are rejected due to the rejected feature inherited from claim 8.
Claim 14 is rejected for the same reason as discussed in claim 1 above.
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 1-6 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seong (US 2024/0364779 A1 – hereinafter Seong) and Urabe et al. (US 2020/0073546 A1 – hereinafter Urabe).
Regarding claim 1, Seong discloses an information processing apparatus (Fig. 7; [0074] – a mobile device 700) comprising: one or more memories storing instructions (Fig. 7; [0077]; [0079] – memory 750 storing instructions of applications 753); and one or more processors executing the instructions (Fig. 7; [0077] – processor 730 executing the instructions of applications 753) to: receive a plurality of second movies from a movie recording apparatus configured to record a plurality of first movies ([0096] – receiving proxy video files from a cloud server, which is a movie recording apparatus configured to record a plurality of original video files as further described at least in [0070]-[0073] and Figs. 6A-6B), wherein each of the plurality of first movies corresponds to one of the plurality of second movies and an image quality of the second movie is lower than an image quality of the first movie (Figs. 6A-6B; [0046]-[0047] – each of the original video files corresponds to one of the plurality of proxy video files, which has lower quality than the high-quality of the corresponding original video file); generate a third movie by editing based on the received second movie ([0096]-[0097] – generating a modified proxy video file).
However, Seong does not disclose the one or more processors executing the instructions to transmit information indicating a state of the editing to the movie recording apparatus; and to receive the first movie in accordance with transmission orders determined based on the transmitted information.
Urabe discloses one or more processors executing the instructions (Fig. 3 – one or more processors 201 in terminal device 200 executes instructions stored in memory 205) to transmit information indicating a state of an editing to a movie recording apparatus ([0112] – transmitting an edit list to a movie recording apparatus 100 as further shown in Fig. 1); and to receive a first movie in accordance with transmission orders determined based on the transmitted information ([0112] – edited first movie is transmitted from the movie recording apparatus 100 to terminal device 200 in transmission orders defined in the edit list as shown in Fig. 2, i.e. the first movie is transmitted in a following order, frames 1-3, 13-17, and 28-29 defined by the edit list as shown in Fig. 8 and further described in at least [0057]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Urabe into the apparatus taught by Seong to reduce time required for the transmission and reception of data (Urabe: [0118]).
Regarding claim 2, Seong in view of Urabe also discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the third movie is generated by using the second movie selected from the plurality of the second movies and the transmitted information includes information indicating the second movie which is used for generating the third movie ([0097] – a modified proxy video file is generated by using a corresponding proxy video file from the plurality of the proxy video files and the transmitted information includes information indicating a corresponding proxy video file so that its original video file can be identified in view of Urabe disclosing the transmitted information as edit list in [0112]).
The motivation for incorporating the teachings of Urabe into the apparatus has been discussed in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 3, Seong in view of Urabe also discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the transmitted information includes information indicating the second movie which was used before but is disused for the third movie ([0097] – including information indicating the proxy video file so that its original video file can be identified, and the proxy video file is disused for the modified proxy video file, i.e. the modified proxy video file has been generated and the proxy video file is no longer needed – in view of Urabe disclosing the transmitted information as edit list in [0112]).
The motivation for incorporating the teachings of Urabe into the apparatus has been discussed in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 4, Seong in view of Urabe also discloses the information apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the one or more processors further execute the instructions (Urabe: Fig. 3 – one or more processors 201 in terminal device 200 executes instructions stored in memory 205) to detect a change in a state of editing, and in a case where the change is detected, information is transmitted (Urabe: [0116]-[0117]; Fig. 9 – changes detected as the user performs an input on a decision button, information indicating state of editing, i.e. edit list, is transmitted to imaging device 100).
The motivation for incorporating the teachings of Urabe into the apparatus has been discussed in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 5, Seong in view of Urabe also discloses the information apparatus according to claim 4, wherein the one or more processors further execute the instructions to generate editing information to manage the state of the editing, and in a case where a character indicating editing is added in the editing information, the change is detected (Urabe: Figs. 8A-8B – in a case where a character indicating adding in-points and out-points in the edit list, the change is detected when the user acts on the decision button as further described at least in [0116]).
The motivation for incorporating the teachings of Urabe into the apparatus has been discussed in claim 4 above.
Regarding claim 6, Seong in view of Urabe also discloses the information apparatus according to claim 5, wherein in a case where an updated state maintained in the editing information for a predetermined period of time, the change is detected (Urabe: Fig. 9; [0116]-[0117] – in a case where an updated state maintained in the editing information for a period of time starting at the time the update is entered and ending at the time when the user acts on the decision button).
The motivation for incorporating the teachings of Urabe into the apparatus has been discussed in claim 4 above.
Claim 14 is rejected for the same reason as discussed in claim 1 above.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seong and Urabe as applied to claims 1-6 and 14 above, and further in view of Nakamura et al. (US 2005/0025454 A1 – hereinafter Nakamura).
Regarding claim 7, see the teachings of Seong and Urabe as discussed in claim 1 above, in which Urabe also discloses the one or more processors further execute the instructions to determine the transmission orders of the first movie based on the state of the editing, and the transmission order is transmitted to the movie recording apparatus as the transmitted information so that the movie recording apparatus transmits the first movie in accordance with the determined transmission orders ([0112] – edited first movie is transmitted from the movie recording apparatus 100 to terminal device 200 in transmission orders defined in the edit list as shown in Fig. 2, i.e. the first movie is transmitted in a following order, frames 1-3, 13-17, and 28-29 defined by the edit list as shown in Fig. 8 and further described in at least [0057]).
However, Seong and Urabe do not disclose the transmission orders of the first movies.
Nakamura discloses one or more processors further execute instructions to determine transmission orders of first movies based on a state of editing ([0083] – one or more processors of an editing terminal device determines sending orders of cut video and specifies the order in an edit list) so that the movie recording apparatus transmits the first movies in accordance with the determined transmission orders ([0152]; Fig. 4 – the server sends out the clips in sequence to cache units 151 to 15n).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Nakamura into the apparatus taught by Seong and Urabe to allow the user to generate an edited movie comprising portions of multiple first movies arranged in predetermined orders, thus enhancing the editing capability of the apparatus.
Claims 8-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Urabe, Seong, and Nakamura.
Regarding claim 8, Urabe discloses a movie recording apparatus comprising: one or more memories storing instructions (Fig. 1; [0040] – ROM storing program instructions); and one or more processors executing the instructions (Fig. 1; [0040] -[0041] – control unit 101) to: record a plurality of first movies ([0047]; Fig. 1 – recording a plurality of first movies captured by optical imaging system 102 and stored on storage 107); generate a plurality of second movies, wherein each of the plurality of first movies corresponds to one of the plurality of second movies and an image quality of the second movie is lower than an image quality of the first movie ([0053] – moving image creating unit 112 generates a low-quality and smaller-size video as proxy video files); transmit the plurality of second movies to an information processing apparatus ([0079] – transmitting proxy video files to a terminal device 200 as shown in Fig. 3); receive information indicating a state of the editing from the information processing apparatus ([0112] – receiving an edit list from the terminal device 200); to determine transmission orders of first movies based on received information ([0112] – determining the transmission orders defined in the edit list as shown in Fig. 2, i.e. the first movie is transmitted in a following order, frames 1-3, 13-17, and 28-29 defined by the edit list as shown in Fig. 8 and further described in at least [0057]); and transmit the first movie to the information processing apparatus in accordance with the determined transmission orders ([0112] – transmitting edited first movie to terminal device 200 in transmission orders defined in the edit list as shown in Fig. 2, i.e. the first movie is transmitted in a following order, frames 1-3, 13-17, and 28-29 defined by the edit list as shown in Fig. 8 and further described in at least [0057]).
However, Urabe does not explicitly disclose the information processing apparatus configured to generate a third movie by editing based on the second movie; the one or more processors executing the instructions to determine transmission orders of first movies based on received information; the transmission orders of the first movies; and to transmit the first movies to the information processing apparatus in accordance with the determined transmission orders.
Seong discloses an information processing apparatus configured to generate a third movie by editing based on a second movie ([0096]-[0097] – generating a modified proxy video file).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Seong into the apparatus taught by Urabe to allow the user to easily review the edited movie.
Urabe and Seong do not disclose the one or more processors executing the instructions to determine transmission orders of first movies based on received information; the transmission orders of the first movies; and to transmit the first movies to the information processing apparatus in accordance with the determined transmission orders.
Nakamura discloses the transmission orders of the first movies ([0083] – one or more processors of an editing terminal device determines sending orders of cut video and specifies the order in an edit list); and to transmit the first movies to the information processing apparatus in accordance with determined transmission orders ([0083]; [0130]-[0131]; [0152]; Fig. 4 – a server sends out the clips in sequence to cache units 151 to 15n).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Nakamura into the apparatus taught by Seong and Urabe to allow the user to generate an edited movie comprising portions of multiple first movies arranged in predetermined orders, thus enhancing the editing capability of the apparatus.
Regarding claim 9, Urabe in view of Seong and Nakamura also discloses the movie recording apparatus according to claim 8, in which Nakamura also discloses the transmission orders are determined such that the first movie corresponding to the second movie which is used for generating the third movie is transmitted prior to the first movie corresponding to the second movie which is not used for generating the third movie (Nakamura: [0083]; [0130]-[0131]; [0152]; Fig. 4 – in view of Seong disclosing information indicating which proxy file is used to generate a third movie, based on received edit list, which determines sending orders of cut video clips, a server sends out the clips in sequence to cache units 151 to 15n, thus those video clips referenced in the edit list are transmitted).
The motivation for incorporating the teachings of Nakamura into the apparatus has been discussed in claim 8 above.
Regarding claim 10, Urabe in view of Seong and Nakamura also discloses the movie recording apparatus according to claim 9, in which Nakamura also discloses the one or more processors further execute the instructions to change the transmission orders such that the first movie corresponding to the second movie which was used before but is disused for generating the third movie is transmitted later than the first movie corresponding to the second movie which is used for generating the third movie (Nakamura: [0083]; [0130]-[0131]; [0152]; Fig. 4 – in view of Seong disclosing information indicating which proxy file is used to generate a third movie, when a clip was referenced before, but not currently referenced, thus disused for generating a third movie, it is transmitted later than a clip that is currently referenced, i.e. until it is referenced again).
The motivation for incorporating the teachings of Nakamura into the apparatus has been discussed in claim 8 above.
Regarding claim 11, Urabe in view of Seong and Nakamura also discloses the movie recording apparatus according to claim 9, in which Nakamura also discloses the one or more processors further execute the instructions to change the transmission orders such that the first movie corresponding to the second movie which is used for generating the third movie and on which predetermined editing has been conducted is transmitted prior to the other first movies (Nakamura: [0083]; [0130]-[0131]; [0152]; Fig. 4 – in view of Seong disclosing information indicating which proxy file is used to generate a third movie, a currently referenced clip is transmitted before clips that are referenced later).
The motivation for incorporating the teachings of Nakamura into the apparatus has been discussed in claim 8 above.
Regarding claim 12, see the teachings of Urabe in view of Seong and Nakamura as discussed in claim 8 above. However, Urabe in view of Seong and Nakamura do not explicitly disclose the predetermined editing is editing to add subtitles, or editing to add a BGM.
Editing to subtitles, or editing to add a BGM are well known in the art.
Official Notice is taken that one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate editing to add subtitles or a BGM into the apparatus taught by Seong and Nakamura in order to enhance the editing capability of the apparatus, i.e. having more editing effects on the movies.
Regarding claim 13, Urabe in view of Seong and Nakamura also discloses the movie recording apparatus according to claim 8, wherein the one or more processors further execute the instructions to capture movies for obtaining the first movies ([0041] – capturing movies for obtaining first movies by imaging optical system 102).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNG Q DANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1116. The examiner can normally be reached IFT.
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, Thai Q Tran can be reached at 571-272-7382. 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.
/HUNG Q DANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2484
Prosecution Insights