`
`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
`
`
`
`
`
`15/366,430
`
`12/01/2016
`
`TSUTOMU MUKAI
`
`PANDP0171USB
`
`6113
`
`OMS/2017 —MARK D. SARALINO (PAN) m
`
`7590
`51921
`
`
`V ‘AUX’ GARY C
`RENNER, OTTO, BOISSELLE & SKLAR, LLP
`1621 EUCLID AVENUE
`19TH FLOOR
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`CLEVELAND, OH 44115
`
`2662
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`06/15/2017
`
`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.
` 15/366,430 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 12/1/2016.
`El A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2b)|ZI This action is non-final.
`2a)|:l 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) fl is/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| CIaim(s)_1-4is/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
`I/'/\WII‘IN.USOIO. 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 12/1/2017is/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)IXI Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)IZl All
`
`b)|:l Some” c)I:l None of the:
`
`1.IXI 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) E Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date.
`.
`.
`4) I:I Other'
`2) E 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 20170610
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/366,430
`
`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.
`
`5
`
`Priority
`
`Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C.
`
`119(a)-(d). The certified copy of Japanese patent application number 2014-154197,
`
`filed in Japan on July 29, 2015, has been received and made of record.
`
`10
`
`Information Disclosure Statement
`
`The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted December 1, 2016,
`
`December 2, 2016, March 3, 2017 and March 15, 2017 are in compliance with the
`
`provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and is being considered by the Examiner.
`
`15
`
`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)
`
`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
`
`20
`
`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
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/366,430
`
`Page 3
`
`Art Unit: 2662
`
`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
`
`“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.
`
`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.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 1 12
`
`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 1-4 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-AIA the
`
`applicant regards as the invention.
`
`1O
`
`15
`
`20
`
`25
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/366,430
`
`Page 4
`
`Art Unit: 2662
`
`Regarding claim 1, the independent claim, from which claims 2-4 depend and
`
`inherit all limitations therefrom, recites the limitation "automatically sets... to a set value
`
`more suitable for recording a still image than in the first video mode." “More suitable” is
`
`a subjective term that implies a personal preference or interpretation and is not a term
`
`with defined parameters or limits; as what one skilled in the art may consider “more
`
`suitable” may differ greatly from what another skilled in the art considers “more
`
`suitable,” or even merely “suitable.”
`
`Regarding claim 1, the independent claim, from which claims 2-4 depend and
`
`inherit all limitations therefrom, recites the limitation “s set value” in line Y’. Glairn t else
`
`10
`
`recites the lii‘nltetieh “s set value” in line it.
`
`lt is unclear train the claim whether the set
`
`value of line 7 is intended is he the same set value of line "i i, er is intended id be 3
`
`different set value, Further, it is unclear which (if the “a set value“ instances that ”the
`
`set value” at line 113 is intended is be referenced by antecedent basis. Finally, “a set
`
`value” is else recited in line 14, causing additlenal ccnlusien regarding antecedent
`
`15
`
`constructs fer ”set value.” This lack ef clarity causes the claim te he indefinite for failing
`
`to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a
`
`joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
`
`Regarding claim 1, the independent claim, from which claims 2-4 depend and
`
`inherit all limitations therefrom, recites the limitation “a set value” in several locations.
`
`20
`
`The claims set a singular set value, i.e.,"set a set value... in each of the @ video
`
`mode... and second video modes", but then changes that singular value "automatically
`
`sets the set value... in the second video mode to a set value more suitable. .
`
`It is
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/366,430
`
`Page 5
`
`Art Unit: 2662
`
`unclear from the claim if the “set value” associated with the first video mode changes
`
`when the set value of the second video mode is automatically set or even if the value
`
`associated with the first video mode is the same value as the second video mode. The
`
`claim, as currently written, creates confusion regarding a singular value applied to
`
`multiple modes, and whether that singular “a set value” can represent two distinct
`
`values, one for each mode. This confusion may be alleviated by looking to the
`
`disclosure and employing similar language, e.g., “image quality (resolution) is set to a
`
`value...” (U.S. Publication at [0071]), instead of a language relating to a singular “set
`
`value.”
`
`The claims will be examined as best understood and to the extent possible in
`
`light of the above indefinite language.
`
`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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Japanese Patent Publication No. 2006-0942530 to Satodate in view of U.S. Patent
`
`Publication No. 2003/0118329 to Obrador, in view of U.S. Patent Publication No.
`
`2010/0295966 to Furlan, in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2010/0231735 to Burian
`
`et al (hereinafter “Burian”).
`
`10
`
`15
`
`20
`
`25
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/366,430
`
`Page 6
`
`Art Unit: 2662
`
`Regarding claim 1, Satodate teaches an imaging device comprising an imaging
`
`unit that generates image data (fig. 3, element 120) from optical information input
`
`through an optical system unit (fig. 3, element 118), an image processor that performs a
`
`predetermined process to the image data generated by the imaging unit (fig. 3, element
`
`130; [0033]), a controller (fig. 3, element 112) that controls at least one of the optical
`
`system unit, the imaging unit, and the image processor so as to generate video data
`
`([0030]), and a display unit (fig. 3, elements 110; [0031]), wherein the controller controls
`
`the video capturing in each of a first video mode ([0046]) and a second video mode
`
`([0047]), and wherein the display unit displays images of the video data recorded in the
`
`1O
`
`second video mode ([0049]-[0050]), and wherein the still image of the video data
`
`recorded in the second video mode is selected by a selection operation ([0049]-[0050]).
`
`Satodate, however, has not been found by the Examiner to expressly disclose the
`
`controller controlling at least one of the optical system unit, the imaging unit, and the
`
`image processor based on a set value relating to video capturing so as to generate
`
`15
`
`video data, wherein the controller sets a set value relating to the video capturing in each
`
`of a first video mode and a second video mode, automatically sets the set value relating
`
`to the video capturing in the second video mode to a set value more suitable for
`
`recording a still image than in the first video mode, and displays a display indicating the
`
`second video mode on the display unit at least one of during setting to the second video
`
`20
`
`mode, during recording in the second video mode, and during displaying a video
`
`recorded in the second video mode.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/366,430
`
`Page 7
`
`Art Unit: 2662
`
`Nevertheless, Obrador teaches capturing video at low resolution and capturing a
`
`high resolution still image during low resolution video capture in response to user input
`
`([0015]-[0016]).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
`
`effective date of the claimed invention to have employed the teachings of Obrador as
`
`the second video mode as taught by Satodate, resulting in an imaging device with a
`
`controller that sets a set value relating to the video capturing in each of a first video
`
`mode and a second video mode (low resolution value, e.g. '329 [0015]), and the set
`
`value relating to the video capturing in the second video mode is automatically set to a
`
`set value more suitable for recording a still image than in the first video mode (high
`
`1O
`
`resolution at still image capture, e.g. '329 [0015]), and providing the advantage of higher
`
`resolution still images in the second video mode.
`
`Further to this, Furlan teaches the specifics of a controller (fig. 2, element 230;
`
`[0023]) that controls at least one of the imaging unit (fig. 2, element 210; [0023]) and the
`
`image processor ([0023]) based on a set value relating to video capturing so as to
`
`15
`
`generate video data in which a high resolution still image is captured during low
`
`resolution video capture ([0023] and [0025]).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to have
`
`employed the controller as taught by Furlan with the imaging device as taught by
`
`Satodate and Obrador as a way of expressly implementing the functionality via a
`
`20
`
`controller/processor.
`
`Finally, controlling a display to display indications or information relating to
`
`camera modes or functionality are well-known in the camera art. For example, Burian
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/366,430
`
`Page 8
`
`Art Unit: 2662
`
`teaches selection of a video capture mode on a touch screen display, as well as
`
`displaying that a video capture session is ongoing and displaying an indication that still
`
`image capture is enabled to be displayed on the display ([0039]-[0040]).
`
`It would have
`
`been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed
`
`invention to have configured the control of Satodate, Obrador and Furlan with the
`
`functionality as taught by Burian, resulting in displaying a display indicating a second
`
`video mode on the display unit at least one of during setting to the second video mode
`
`([0039] — [0040]) and during recording in the second video mode ([0039]-[0040]), as a
`
`way to alert a user to the specific mode the device is in, with particular note to alerting a
`
`1O
`
`user to the ability to capture a still image concurrent with the video recording.
`
`Regarding claim 2, Satodate, Obrador, Furlan and Burian teach all the limitations
`
`of claim 2 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 1, m) including teaching wherein
`
`the recording in the second video mode is performed from start to end of a video
`
`recording (e.g., ‘253 — [0047]).
`
`15
`
`20
`
`Regarding claim 3, Satodate, Obrador, Furlan and Burian teach all the limitations
`
`of claim 3 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 1, m) except for being found by
`
`the Examiner to expressly disclose wherein the controller displays a display indicating
`
`the second video mode using a message on the display unit during setting to the
`
`second video mode.
`
`Nevertheless, Burian is found to teach providing an indication relating to setting
`
`of a mode relating to still image capture concurrent with video recording ([0039]-[0042]),
`
`such as via selection of a setting option embedded in an options menu (fig. 2a; [0042]),
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/366,430
`
`Page 9
`
`Art Unit: 2662
`
`as well as found to teach providing messages when an error arises (‘735 — [OO39]-
`
`[OO42]).
`
`In light of these teaching of Burian, it would have been obvious to one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to have
`
`employed a message as an indication relating to the setting of a mode as a way to
`
`express functionality being chosen by way of language instead of a potentially confusing
`
`or unfamiliar icon.
`
`"A person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known
`
`options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is
`
`likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense" KSR
`
`International Co. v. Te/ef/eX Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
`
`Regarding claim 4, Satodate, Obrador, Furlan and Burian teach all the limitations
`
`of claim 4 (see the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 1, m) including teaching wherein
`
`the controller displays a display indicating the second video mode using an icon on the
`
`display unit during recording in the second video mode (‘735 — [OO39]-[OO40]) or during
`
`reproducing a video recorded in the second video mode.
`
`1O
`
`15
`
`Examiner’s Note
`
`The Examiner cites particular figures, paragraphs, columns and line numbers in
`
`the reference(s), as applied to the claims above. Although the particular citations are
`
`representative teachings and are applied to specific limitations within the claims, other
`
`20
`
`passages, internally cited references, and figures may also apply.
`
`In preparing a
`
`response, it is respectfully requested that the Applicant fully consider the references, in
`
`their entirety, as potentially disclosing or teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/366,430
`
`Page 10
`
`Art Unit: 2662
`
`well as fully consider the context of the passage as taught by the reference(s) or as
`
`disclosed by the Examiner.
`
`Conclusion
`
`The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
`
`applicant's disclosure.
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2013/0107070 to Hsu et al teaches two video modes,
`
`each mode having at least a different resolution.
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2003/0031469 to Hirai teaches two video modes,
`
`10
`
`one mode including high quality images.
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 2009/0158315 to Bendall et al teaches embedding
`
`high quality images in a video stream when a button is pressed.
`
`U.S. Patent Publication No. 8,373,700 to Terada et al teaches displaying
`
`selectable video modes on a display.
`
`15
`
`20
`
`Contact
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`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
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/366,430
`
`Page 11
`
`Art Unit: 2662
`
`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, 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
`
`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.
`
`10
`
`For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should
`
`you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic
`
`Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a
`
`USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information
`
`system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272—1000.
`
`15
`
`/GARY C VIEAUX/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2662
`
`