`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMlVHSSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria1 Virginia 22313-1450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`
`
`
`
`15/366,557
`
`12/01/2016
`
`TSUTOMU MUKAI
`
`PANDP0171USD
`
`9290
`
`09/22/2017 —MARK D. SARALINO (PAN) m
`
`7590
`51921
`
`
`V ‘AUX’ GARY C
`RENNER, OTTO, BOIS SELLE & SKLAR, LLP
`1621 EUCLID AVENUE
`19TH FLOOR
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`CLEVELAND, OH 44115
`
`2662
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`09/22/2017
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e—mail address(es):
`
`ipdocket @rennerott0.c0m
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Applicant(s)
`Application No.
` 15/366,557 MUKAI ET AL.
`
`
`AIA (First Inventor to File)
`Art Unit
`Examiner
`Office Action Summary
`
`
`GARY c. VIEAUX $2213 2662
`-- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING DATE OF
`THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR1. 136( a).
`after SIX () MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1 .704(b).
`
`In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`
`Status
`
`1)IZI Responsive to communication(s) filed on 9/7/2017.
`El A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2b)|:l This action is non-final.
`2a)|Z| This action is FINAL.
`3)I:I An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)|:| Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)IZI Claim(s) His/are pending in the application.
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`is/are allowed.
`6)I:I Claim(s)
`7)|Z| Claim(s)_1-7is/are rejected.
`8)|:I Claim(s)_ is/are objected to.
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`9)I:I Claim((s)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`hit
`:/'/\W¢W.LISI>I‘.0. ovI’ atentS/init events/
`
`
`
`iindex.‘s or send an inquiry to PPI-iieedback{®usgtc.00v.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)IZI The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)|Xl The drawing(s) filed on 12/1/2016is/are: a)I:I accepted or b)lX| objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`12)I:| Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)I:l All
`
`b)|:l Some” c)I:l None of the:
`
`1.I:I Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.|:l Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.|:| Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`
`
`3) D Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`1) D Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date.
`.
`.
`4) I:I Other'
`2) I] InformatIon DIsclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL—326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20170918
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/366,557
`
`Page 2
`
`Art Unit: 2662
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined
`
`under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Amendment
`
`The Amendment, filed September 9, 2017, has been received and made of
`
`record.
`
`In response to the Non-Final Office Action dated June 21, 2017, the title and
`
`claims 1, 2 and 4 have been amended.
`
`1O
`
`15
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`Regarding the objection to the drawings, Applicant states that figure 1 has been
`
`amended to correctly identify the “card slot”, element 190. However, an amended
`
`figure has not been found to have been submitted with the amendment. Therefore, the
`
`outstanding objection to the drawings will be maintained.
`
`Regarding the objection to the title, Applicant has amended the title. However,
`
`the title should be more clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are
`
`directed. Therefore, the outstanding objection to the title is maintained. A suggested
`
`title is provided in the objection, m.
`
`Regarding the 35 U.S.C. 112 rejection to claims 1-7, Applicant has amended the
`
`20
`
`claims to properly address the first three rejections. Therefore, these rejections are
`
`withdrawn. However, regarding the rejections relating to the recitation of sufficient
`
`structure, Applicant has not been found to directly address this issue or provide proper
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/366,557
`
`Page 3
`
`Art Unit: 2662
`
`amendments to cure them. Claim 1 and claims 2—7 are not found to clearly recite
`
`sufficient structure performing the recited functionality; creating confusion regarding the
`
`metes and bounds of the claimed subject matter. Please see the rejection, infra.
`
`Regarding the 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection to claims 1-7, Applicant's arguments have
`
`been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
`
`Drawings
`
`The drawings are objected to because figure 1, element 190 incorrectly labels
`
`card slot as “caed slot”. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d)
`
`1O
`
`are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any
`
`amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the
`
`immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The
`
`figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If
`
`a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the
`
`15
`
`replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered
`
`and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the
`
`drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the
`
`renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date
`
`of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or
`
`20
`
`“New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`If the changes are not accepted by the
`
`examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in
`
`the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/366,557
`
`Page 4
`
`Art Unit: 2662
`
`Specification
`
`The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly
`
`indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
`
`The following title is suggested: IMAGING DEVICE WHICH OBTAINS STILL IMAGES
`
`FROM CAPTURED VIDEO IN A SECOND VIDEO MODE HAVING GREATER IMAGE QUALITY
`
`THAN A FIRST VIDEO MODE
`
`1O
`
`15
`
`20
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 1 12(b)
`
`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 1-7 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 pre-AlA the
`
`applicant regards as the invention.
`
`Regarding claim 1, the independent claim, from which claims 2-7 depend and
`
`inherit all limitations therefrom, recites the limitation “wherein a bracket capturing...”
`
`without reciting specific structure to perform the recited functionality; a situation that
`
`25
`
`creates confusion regarding the elements of an apparatus claim. "[A]pparatus claims
`
`cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch &
`
`Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQZd 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/366,557
`
`Page 5
`
`Art Unit: 2662
`
`Regarding claims 2—7, these apparatus claims do not recite sufficient structure to
`
`perform the functionality for the material recited in each of the claims, creating confusion
`
`regarding the metes and bounds of the material recited. "[A]pparatus claims cover what
`
`a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909
`
`F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
`
`Regarding claim 3, the claim recites the limitation "the capture setting conditions"
`
`in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
`
`The claims will be examined as best understood and to the extent possible in
`
`1O
`
`light of the above indefinite language.
`
`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:
`
`15
`
`20
`
`25
`
`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.
`
`Claim 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2015/0015774 to Sugie.
`
`Regarding claim 1, Sugie teaches an imaging device comprising an imaging unit
`
`(fig. 1, element 105) that generates image data from optical information input through an
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/366,557
`
`Page 6
`
`Art Unit: 2662
`
`optical system unit (fig. 1, element 101), an image processor (fig. 1, element 121) that
`
`performs a predetermined process to the image data generated by the imaging unit
`
`([0027-36]), and a controller (fig. 1, element 131) that controls ([0043]) at least one of
`
`the optical system unit, the imaging unit ([0033]), and the image processor based on
`
`a video capture setting relating to video capturing so as to generate video data ([0027-
`
`36]), wherein the controller has at least a first video mode and a second video mode
`
`([0054], normal video mode or HDR video mode), each of which generates the video
`
`data, whereby in the first video mode (e.g., fig. 3, step S102, normal video mode), video
`
`is captured in accordance with a first video capture setting (step 8103), in the second
`
`1O
`
`video mode (e.g., fig. 3, step S112, HDR video mode), video is captured in accordance
`
`with a second video capture setting (HDR mode setting provides steps S119 and S120),
`
`and the second video capture setting being more suitable for recording a still image that
`
`the first video capture setting (High Dynamic Range is more suitable than without due to
`
`the wider dynamic range provided), and wherein the controller in the second video
`
`15
`
`mode automatically sets the video capture setting to the second video capture setting
`
`so that image quality of a still image generated from a captured video taken during
`
`video capture in the second video mode is greater than image quality of a still
`
`image generated from a captured video taken during video capture In the first video
`
`mode (fig. 3, step S112, HDR exposure program provides greater image quality),
`
`20
`
`wherein a bracket capturing that creates a plurality of image data by changing at least
`
`one of capturing setting conditions is performed at a time of recording in the second
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/366,557
`
`Page 7
`
`Art Unit: 2662
`
`video mode (fig. 3, steps 8112-8123; HDR mode captures a plurality of images at
`
`different exposures).
`
`Regarding claim 2, Sugie teaches all of the limitations of claim 2 (see the 35
`
`U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 1, w) including teaching wherein while performing the
`
`bracket capturing, the recording in the second video mode is performed from start to
`
`end of a video recording (fig. 3, e.g. S100, START, 8114-8123 loop, S124 END; also
`
`see 35 U.S.C. 112 rejection, supra, regarding lack of structural element recited for
`
`performing the functionality)..
`
`Regarding claim 3, Sugie teaches all of the limitations of claim 3 (see the 35
`
`1O
`
`U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 1, m) including teaching wherein at least one of the
`
`capturing setting conditions is at least one of an exposure value (fig. 3, steps S119,
`
`8120; also see 35 U.S.C. 112 rejection, supra, regarding lack of structural element
`
`recited for performing the functionality).
`
`Regarding claim 4, Sugie teaches all of the limitations of claim 4 (see the 35
`
`15
`
`U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 1, m) including teaching wherein the bracket capturing
`
`is performed at the time of recording in the second video mode (fig. 3, HDR mode; also
`
`see 35 U.S.C. 112 rejection, supra, regarding lack of structural element recited for
`
`performing the functionality).
`
`Regarding claim 5, Sugie teaches all of the limitations of claim 5 (see the 35
`
`20
`
`U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 1, m) including teaching wherein the bracket capturing
`
`is performed in a GOP (group of picture) (fig. 3, steps S119 and 8120, group of 2
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/366,557
`
`Page 8
`
`Art Unit: 2662
`
`images; also see 35 U.S.C. 112 rejection, supra, regarding lack of structural element
`
`recited for performing the functionality).
`
`Regarding claim 6, Sugie teaches all of the limitations of claim 6 (see the 35
`
`U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 1, m) including teaching wherein when the video data
`
`acquired by the bracket capturing is reproduced ([0044]), only | image in a GOP (group
`
`of picture) is reproduced (fig. 3, step S121, HDR composite is interpreted to be labeled
`
`an “| image”, and only those image would be produced, as only composite images
`
`created).
`
`Regarding claim 7, Sugie teaches all of the limitations of claim 7 (see the 35
`
`1O
`
`U.S.C. 102 rejection of claim 1, m) including teaching wherein when the video data
`
`acquired by the bracket capturing is reproduced frame by frame, images other than I
`
`image in a GOP (group of picture) are displayed (fig. 3, step 8121, a first HDR
`
`composite is interpreted to be labeled the “l image”, so other images, other than the l
`
`image would be displayed; [0044]).
`
`15
`
`Conclusion
`
`Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in
`
`this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP
`
`§ 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37
`
`20
`
`CFR1.136(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
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/366,557
`
`Page 9
`
`Art Unit: 2662
`
`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
`
`extension fee 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 date of this final action.
`
`Contact
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`1O
`
`examiner should be directed to GARY C. VIEAUX whose telephone number is
`
`(571 )272—731 8. The examiner can normally be reached on IFW.
`
`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
`
`15
`
`(AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
`
`supervisor, Roberto Velez can be reached on 571 -272—8597. The fax phone number for
`
`the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the
`
`20
`
`Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for
`
`published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
`
`Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only.
`
`