Appeal 2007-0017
Application 10/074,179
Issue 2: Does Ina disclose "computing a face quality figure of merit
for the captured image"?
Arguments
The Examiner finds that the controller 92/100 of Ina computes a "face
quality of merit" which is the face quality of the images in Figure 14 (Final
Rejection 6).
Appellant argues that Ina does not disclose "computing a face quality
figure of merit for the captured image." It is argued that a "face quality
figure of merit" is described in the Specification as a number of different
attributes of a face detected in the captured image which are computed in the
camera (Br. 13). Appellant argues that the "smiley" face representation of
the subject image 28 in Figure 14 is merely a representation of any possible
subject matter and is not intended to indicate that the subject image 28
constitutes a face because Ina never directly discusses images of faces
(Br. 14). It is argued that the Examiner fails to clearly define how the term
"face quality figure of merit" is interpreted or what the Examiner considers
to correspond to this term (Br. 15).
The Examiner responds that the controller 100 and processor 92
compute the first and second exposure time intervals 146, 148 in Figure 10
and combine the first and second images 128, 130 to determine the "face
quality figure of merit," which the Examiner considers to be the blurred
image 134 in Figure 14 (Answer 11-12).
8
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013