Patent 10944901

Prior art

Earlier patents, publications, and products that may anticipate or render the claims unpatentable.

Active provider: Google · gemini-2.5-flash

Prior art

Earlier patents, publications, and products that may anticipate or render the claims unpatentable.

✓ Generated

To identify the most relevant prior art for US patent 10944901, I will examine the patent citations listed in the patent document itself. The patent mentions several prior art documents in its "BACKGROUND" section. I will then provide the requested details for each.

Here's an analysis of the prior art cited in US10944901:

Prior Art References and Analysis:

  1. US 2013/0155474 A1

    • Full Citation: US 2013/0155474 A1 to Silverstein et al.
    • Publication/Filing Date: Publication date: June 20, 2013. The corresponding application, U.S. application Ser. No. 13/328,007, was filed on December 16, 2011.
    • Brief Description: This patent describes providing feedback to a user of a mobile device prior to capturing an image, specifically of a paper document. The feedback includes instructions for adjusting measured parameters. Parameter values can be combined into a group threshold or overall quality score, and the image is only captured if this score exceeds a defined threshold. It explicitly mentions suggesting the user hold the camera steadier if blurriness is detected due to motion.
    • Potential Anticipated Claims (under 35 U.S.C. § 102):
      • Claim 1: This reference appears to anticipate several elements of Claim 1, particularly the computing of quality indicators, combining them into a total quality score to determine acceptability, and taking differential action (capturing the image only if the threshold is met). The feedback mechanism ("instructions for adjusting at least one measured parameter" and "suggest that the user hold the camera steadier") also aligns with providing detailed photo quality feedback. The concept of using quality indicators to control the capturing apparatus (by enabling/disabling capture based on a threshold) is present.
      • Claim 16: The system described would involve sensors (to measure parameters), a processing component (to combine parameter values into a quality score), decision-making (determining if quality is acceptable based on the score), and action initiation (capturing the image or providing feedback).
      • Claim 17: As it describes a method, it would inherently be implementable by a computer program product.

  2. WO 2006/040761 A1 / US 2007/0195174 A1

    • Full Citation: WO 2006/040761 A1 (published April 20, 2006) and US 2007/0195174 A1 (published August 23, 2007) by Gotsman et al.
    • Publication/Filing Date: WO 2006/040761 A1: publication date April 20, 2006. US 2007/0195174 A1: publication date August 23, 2007, filed February 16, 2006.
    • Brief Description: These documents describe a system where an interface module defines scene dynamics (e.g., image motion speed, subject motion speed) and allows setting relative weights for these attributes in computing a total image grade.
    • Potential Anticipated Claims (under 35 U.S.C. § 102):
      • Claim 1: The concept of computing multiple quality indicators (scene dynamics like motion speed), combining them into a total quality indicator ("total image grade"), and allowing for adjustable weights is directly anticipated.
      • Claim 16: A system that processes image data to determine scene dynamics and applies weights to compute a grade would be relevant.

  3. US 2009/0278958 A1

    • Full Citation: US 2009/0278958 A1 to Katayama et al.
    • Publication/Filing Date: Publication date: November 12, 2009. The corresponding application, U.S. application Ser. No. 12/460,917, was filed on July 23, 2009.
    • Brief Description: This patent describes scoring a current base image based on scores given to previously captured base images to avoid redundant calculations.
    • Potential Anticipated Claims (under 35 U.S.C. § 102):
      • Claim 1: The use of "previous image frames" data in computing quality indicators is directly addressed.
      • Claim 16: A system that utilizes previously captured image data for scoring is relevant.

  4. U.S. Pat. No. 7,362,354

    • Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 7,362,354 to Silverstein et al.
    • Publication/Filing Date: Granted April 22, 2008. Filed January 18, 2005.
    • Brief Description: While the full text is not provided in the prompt, this patent is cited in the "BACKGROUND" section of US10944901 as conventional technology. Without further details on its specific teachings, a definitive statement about its anticipatory nature is difficult. However, given the context of US10944901, it is likely related to image quality assessment or feedback systems.

  5. WO 2003/069559 A1

    • Full Citation: WO 2003/069559 A1 to Gotsman et al.
    • Publication/Filing Date: Published August 21, 2003.
    • Brief Description: Similar to US 7,362,354, the full text is not provided. As a cited reference in the "BACKGROUND", it likely deals with aspects of image processing or quality assessment.

  6. U.S. Pat. No. 7,688,379

    • Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 7,688,379 to Ben-Ezra et al.
    • Publication/Filing Date: Granted March 30, 2010. Filed September 2, 2005.
    • Brief Description: No full text provided. Cited in "BACKGROUND". Likely relates to image quality assessment.

  7. US 2009/0263028 A1

    • Full Citation: US 2009/0263028 A1 to Kawakita et al.
    • Publication/Filing Date: Published October 22, 2009. Filed April 14, 2009.
    • Brief Description: No full text provided. Cited in "BACKGROUND". Likely relates to image quality assessment.

  8. US 2006/0017820 A1

    • Full Citation: US 2006/0017820 A1 to Kageyama et al.
    • Publication/Filing Date: Published January 26, 2006. Filed July 21, 2005.
    • Brief Description: No full text provided. Cited in "BACKGROUND". Likely relates to image quality assessment.

  9. US 2006/0056835 A1

    • Full Citation: US 2006/0056835 A1 to Funaya.
    • Publication/Filing Date: Published March 16, 2006. Filed September 14, 2005.
    • Brief Description: No full text provided. Cited in "BACKGROUND". Likely relates to image quality assessment.

  10. U.S. Pat. No. 8,125,557

    • Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 8,125,557 to Gotsman et al.
    • Publication/Filing Date: Granted February 28, 2012. Filed May 28, 2008.
    • Brief Description: No full text provided. Cited in "BACKGROUND". Likely relates to image quality assessment.

  11. WO 2011/148212 A2

    • Full Citation: WO 2011/148212 A2 to Liu et al.
    • Publication/Filing Date: Published December 1, 2011.
    • Brief Description: No full text provided. Cited in "BACKGROUND". Likely relates to image quality assessment.

  12. U.S. Pat. No. 7,920,727

    • Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 7,920,727 to Gotsman et al.
    • Publication/Filing Date: Granted April 5, 2011. Filed September 28, 2007.
    • Brief Description: No full text provided. Cited in "BACKGROUND". Likely relates to image quality assessment.

  13. U.S. Pat. No. 8,040,382

    • Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 8,040,382 to Gotsman et al.
    • Publication/Filing Date: Granted October 18, 2011. Filed March 1, 2010.
    • Brief Description: No full text provided. Cited in "BACKGROUND". Likely relates to image quality assessment.

Summary of Anticipation:

Based on the descriptions provided in US10944901's "BACKGROUND" section, the prior art references US 2013/0155474 A1, WO 2006/040761 A1 / US 2007/0195174 A1, and US 2009/0278958 A1 appear to be highly relevant and potentially anticipate various aspects of claims 1, 16, and 17 of US10944901.

  • US 2013/0155474 A1 broadly anticipates the core concept of computing quality indicators, combining them for acceptability, taking differential action (like automatic capture based on a threshold), and providing feedback to improve image quality.
  • WO 2006/040761 A1 / US 2007/0195174 A1 specifically anticipate the use of multiple QIs, combining them into a total grade, and utilizing adjustable weights, which are key features of US10944901's approach to combining QIs.
  • US 2009/0278958 A1 directly addresses the use of "previously captured base images" for scoring, which is a component of Claim 1 ("previous image frames").

For the other listed patents (U.S. Pat. No. 7,362,354; WO2003069559; U.S. Pat. No. 7,688,379; US20090263028; US20060017820; US20060056835; U.S. Pat. No. 8,125,557; WO2011148212; U.S. Pat. No. 7,920,727; US20130155474; U.S. Pat. No. 8,040,382), without access to their full text or more detailed summaries, a precise determination of their anticipatory scope against specific claims of US10944901 is not possible. However, as they are cited as "conventional technology constituting background to certain embodiments of the present invention," it can be inferred that they disclose elements related to image processing and quality assessment that form the general field of the invention.

Generated 5/23/2026, 6:47:37 PM