PTAB

IPR2018-01799

Samsung Electronics Co Ltd v. FotoNation Ltd

Log In
Key Events
Petition
petition

1. Case Identification

2. Patent Overview

  • Title: Digital Image Processing Utilizing Face Detection Information
  • Brief Description: The ’016 patent relates to methods for digital image processing. The technology involves automatically suggesting or processing enhancements to a digital image by using information gained from identifying and analyzing faces appearing within that image to adjust one or more processing parameters.

3. Grounds for Unpatentability

Ground 1: Claims 1-2 are anticipated by Hara under 35 U.S.C. §102(e).

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Hara (Patent 7,170,633).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Hara, which discloses a portable digital still camera, teaches every limitation of claims 1 and 2. Hara’s camera processes digital images using face detection to achieve proper image characteristics, such as exposure value and color balance, which correspond to the claimed "desired image processing parameters." Petitioner asserted that during a pre-shooting "preparation state," Hara’s camera continuously acquires a "temporally-sequential collection" of images of the same scene. Within this collection, Hara’s scene judger identifies and tracks a main object, which can be a human face. The system then determines default values, such as a predefined average luminance range for the face, and modifies image parameters in a main acquired image to match those defaults. For claim 2, Petitioner argued that Hara’s "thinning" operation, which reduces the number of pixels processed during the preparation state, meets the limitation of using "lower resolution images" for analysis.

Ground 2: Claim 1 is anticipated by Hashimoto under 35 U.S.C. §102(b).

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Hashimoto (Patent 6,072,526).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner contended that Hashimoto, disclosing a portable video camera, teaches all limitations of independent claim 1. Hashimoto’s system obtains a "temporally-sequential collection of two or more images" via its video signal. It performs a person detection routine on this signal, which Petitioner equated to face detection, by identifying a skin-colored portion with a nearly circular outline. This face detection is used to control focus and exposure. The system tracks the detected face across subsequent video frames by comparing the location of the face in a previous frame to a skin-colored portion in the current frame. Petitioner argued that Hashimoto determines default values by retrieving a predefined luminance range (55 IRE to 75 IRE) and modifies parameters like the iris and automatic gain control (AGC) in the main acquired image to ensure the luminance of the face falls within this default range. The resulting modified video signal is then stored.

Ground 3: Claim 2 is obvious over Hashimoto in view of Edanami under 35 U.S.C. §103.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Hashimoto (Patent 6,072,526) and Edanami (Patent 6,297,846).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Hashimoto teaches all elements of claim 1, as established in Ground 2. Dependent claim 2 adds the limitation that the collection of images used for face detection comprises lower resolution images than the main acquired image. Petitioner asserted that while Hashimoto does not explicitly teach this, Edanami supplies the missing element. Edanami, which relates to a display control system for videoconferencing, discloses processing lower-resolution, subsampled images specifically for face detection. This is done to "reduce the computation time" of the detection process, while the final image that is clipped, stored, or displayed is the original, higher-resolution version.
    • Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would combine Edanami's teaching of using subsampled images for face detection with Hashimoto's face-tracking camera system for a clear and predictable benefit: reducing computation time. By performing the computationally intensive face detection and tracking on lower-resolution images, Hashimoto’s system could apply auto-focus and exposure corrections more quickly to the main, high-resolution acquired image. Petitioner argued this combination represents a common-sense application of known techniques to improve system performance.
    • Expectation of Success: A POSITA would have a high expectation of success in making this modification. Both references operate in the same technical field of face detection in video streams, and the practice of using subsampled images to speed up digital image processing was well-known. The combination would yield the predictable result of a more efficient face detection process.

4. Relief Requested

  • Petitioner requests the institution of an inter partes review and cancellation of claims 1 and 2 of Patent 7,574,016 as unpatentable.