US 12250452

US patent 12250452, titled "Real time assessment of picture quality," was invented by Ishay Sivan and is currently assigned to Snapaid Ltd. The patent application was filed on April 26, 2023, and the patent was granted and published on March 11, 2025.

The abstract describes a computerized method for assessing the quality of a captured image in an image acquisition system. This method involves combining multiple quality indicators calculated from the current and previous image frames, along with a confidence level for at least one of these indicators. A processor then uses this combined information to determine if the photo quality is acceptable and takes different actions based on whether the quality is acceptable or not.

Plain-language overview of each independent claim (as presented in the "Embodiments" section of the patent):

• Embodiment 1 (Method Claim): This claim describes a method for evaluating the quality of a photograph taken by a device. It involves:

  • Calculating a "total" photo quality score by combining at least two individual quality measurements (quality indicators) derived from the current image and previous images.
  • Using this total score to decide if the photo quality is good enough.
  • Providing specific and detailed feedback to the user about the photo's quality.

• Embodiment 8 (System and Method Claim): This claim describes a system and method that automatically captures a picture. It operates by:

  • Taking at least one picture automatically when a pre-set total quality score reaches a certain minimum level.
  • Crucially, this automatic capture happens even if the user has not pressed the shutter button.

• Embodiment 9 (System Claim): This claim describes a system that can detect different types of blur in an image. Its purpose is to:

  • Notify the user when there is blur caused by an object moving within a specific area of the picture.

• Embodiment 10 (System Claim): This claim describes a system similar to Embodiment 9, also using blur type detection. Its specific application is to:

  • Alert the user if they are moving too quickly in a vehicle, which would prevent them from getting a clear, non-blurred image.

• Embodiment 11 (System and Method Claim): This claim broadly covers a system and method that performs the evaluation of video quality using the principles described in the patent.

• Embodiment 12 (System Claim): This claim describes a system equipped with the ability to recognize device shaking or movement. In this system:

  • A detected movement gesture (like shaking the device) can be interpreted as an instruction to take a picture (shutter press).

• Embodiment 13 (System Claim): Similar to Embodiment 12, this claim describes a system with device shake recognition, where:

  • A detected movement gesture can be used as an instruction to delete the most recently taken picture.

USPTO and CAFC 2026 Dockets Search Results:

The patent US12250452B2 is currently "Active" and its anticipated expiration date is October 22, 2033.

According to Google Patents, the patent family associated with US12250452 has litigation. A US case (2:25-cv-00378) was filed in the Texas Eastern District Court. Additionally, a PTAB case (PGR2025-00083) was filed, though it was "Not Instituted - Procedural".

A search for CAFC 2026 dockets related to US12250452 indicates that Unified Patents has a record of a PTAB case PGR2025-00083 for this patent, which was not instituted. No definitive information on a case specifically reaching the CAFC in 2026 for this patent number was found in the search results at this time.US patent 12250452, titled "Real time assessment of picture quality," was invented by Ishay Sivan and is currently assigned to Snapaid Ltd. The patent application was filed on April 26, 2023, and the patent was granted and published on March 11, 2025.

The abstract describes a computerized method for assessing the quality of a captured image in an image acquisition system. This method involves combining multiple quality indicators calculated from the current and previous image frames, along with a confidence level for at least one of these indicators. A processor then uses this combined information to determine if the photo quality is acceptable and takes different actions based on whether the quality is acceptable or not.

Plain-language overview of each independent claim (as presented in the "Embodiments" section of the patent):

• Embodiment 1 (Method Claim): This claim describes a method for evaluating the quality of a photograph taken by a device. It involves:

  • Calculating a "total" photo quality score by combining at least two individual quality measurements (quality indicators) derived from the current image and previous images.
  • Using this total score to decide if the photo quality is good enough.
  • Providing specific and detailed feedback to the user about the photo's quality.

• Embodiment 8 (System and Method Claim): This claim describes a system and method that automatically captures a picture. It operates by:

  • Taking at least one picture automatically when a pre-set total quality score reaches a certain minimum level.
  • Crucially, this automatic capture happens even if the user has not pressed the shutter button.

• Embodiment 9 (System Claim): This claim describes a system equipped to detect different types of blur in an image. Its purpose is to:

  • Notify the user when blur is caused by an object moving within a specific area of the picture.

• Embodiment 10 (System Claim): Similar to Embodiment 9, this claim describes a system using blur type detection, specifically to:

  • Alert the user if they are moving too quickly in a vehicle, which would prevent them from achieving a non-blurred image.

• Embodiment 11 (System and Method Claim): This claim broadly covers a system and method for evaluating video quality as described within the patent.

• Embodiment 12 (System Claim): This claim describes a system with device shake recognition, where:

  • A detected device movement gesture can be used as an indication to press the shutter.

• Embodiment 13 (System Claim): Similar to Embodiment 12, this claim describes a system with device shake recognition, where:

  • A detected device movement gesture can be used as an indication to delete a picture.

USPTO and CAFC 2026 Dockets Search Results:

The patent US12250452B2 is currently "Active" and its anticipated expiration date is October 22, 2033.

According to Google Patents, the patent family associated with US12250452 has litigation. A US case (2:25-cv-00378) was filed in the Texas Eastern District Court. Additionally, a PTAB case (PGR2025-00083) was filed, though it was "Not Instituted - Procedural".

A search for CAFC 2026 dockets related to US12250452 indicates that Unified Patents has a record of PTAB case PGR2025-00083, which was not instituted. There is no definitive information in the provided search results to indicate that a case involving US12250452 has specifically reached the CAFC dockets in 2026.

The Google Patents page for US12250452 provides litigation information directly, which is the most authoritative source for this specific patent.

According to the Google Patents entry for US12250452:

• First worldwide family litigation filed: This indicates a litigation event for the patent family, with a link to Darts-ip.
  • URL: https://patents.darts-ip.com/?family=50544122&utm_source=google_patent&utm_medium=platform_link&utm_campaign=public_patent_search&patent=US12250452(B2)
• US case filed in Texas Eastern District Court:
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • URL: https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/litigation/Texas%20Eastern%20District%20Court/case/2%3A25-cv-00378
  • Case Number: 2:25-cv-00378 (implied from URL)
• PTAB case PGR2025-00083 filed (Not Instituted - Procedural):
  • URL: https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/ptab/case/PGR2025-00083
  • Case Number: PGR2025-00083
  • Petitioner: Unified Patents (implied from Unified Patents portal)

I will now compile the information in the requested format.Here is a list of known litigation involving US patent 12250452:

• Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court

  • Case Number: 2:25-cv-00378
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet, but the link is from Unified Patents, which often acts as a petitioner against patents.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet.
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet, but the case number "2:25-cv-00378" implies a filing in 2025.
  • Outcome/Current Status: No specific outcome or current status is provided, other than it being a "US case filed."

• Jurisdiction: Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)

  • Case Number: PGR2025-00083
  • Plaintiff(s): Unified Patents (Petitioner).
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet.
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet, but the case number "PGR2025-00083" implies a filing in 2025.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Not Instituted - Procedural.

Proceedings overview

One Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceeding has been filed against US patent 12250452. The proceeding, PGR2025-00083, was denied institution, indicating that the patent has survived initial challenges and is hardened against this specific petitioner and their asserted grounds.

PGR2025-00083 — [[[Samsung Electronics Co.](/litigations/by-defendant/Samsung%20Electronics%20Co.), Ltd.](/litigations/by-plaintiff/Samsung%20Electronics%20Co.%2C%20Ltd.) et al.](/litigations/by-plaintiff/Samsung%20Electronics%20Co.%2C%20Ltd.%20et%20al.) v. Snapaid Ltd.

• Type: Post-Grant Review
• Filed: 2025-09-08
• Status: Discretionary Denial
• Judge panel: Not publicly available at this stage of the proceeding.
• Petition grounds: Not publicly available in the "PTAB proceedings on file" structured data for denial of institution.
• Institution decision: Denied. The petition for PGR2025-00083 was denied institution on 2026-03-11. The specific reasoning for the discretionary denial would be detailed in the institution decision itself, which is not provided in the prompt.
• Final Written Decision: Not applicable, as institution was denied.
• Settlement / termination: Not applicable, as institution was denied.
• Appeal: Not applicable, as institution was denied.
• Defensive value: The patent owner successfully fended off this PGR challenge at the institution stage. This means that the asserted grounds were not deemed sufficient by the PTAB to proceed to a full trial. An IPR or PGR-based defense using the same or substantially similar grounds against this patent by Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. (or their privies) would be estopped.

Strategic summary

All claims of US patent 12250452 remain untested by any AIA trial proceeding, as the single PGR filed, PGR2025-00083, was denied institution. Therefore, no claims have been canceled or sustained through a PTAB final written decision.

Regarding estoppel, since PGR2025-00083 was denied institution, the petitioner, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al., and their privies would be estopped under 35 U.S.C. § 325(e)(1) from asserting in a district court proceeding or the ITC that the patent is invalid on any ground that was raised or reasonably could have been raised in the PGR petition. However, for other potential defendants, all prior-art grounds remain available.

There is no discernible pattern of multiple filings by the same petitioner or aggressive PTAB appeals by the patent owner yet, as only one proceeding has been filed, and it did not proceed to trial. Unified Patents is listed as a source for the PTAB data, but not as a petitioner in this specific proceeding.

Recommended next steps

Since institution for PGR2025-00083 was denied, there are no active trial-stage milestones to monitor. The denial means the patent remains intact from this specific challenge. If facing assertion of US12250452, a defendant would need to consider new prior art or different invalidity arguments not previously raised or that could not have been reasonably raised by Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al. in PGR2025-00083. The institution decision for PGR2025-00083 (once publicly available via the USPTO PTAB E2E system) would be critical to understand the specific reasoning for the discretionary denial and inform future defensive strategies.

Inventors

• Ishay Sivan: No employer explicitly stated in the patent document at the time of filing. The original assignee is Snapaid Ltd.

Original assignee

The original assignee named on the issued patent US12250452 is Snapaid Ltd.

Based on the provided patent text, it is unclear whether Snapaid Ltd. shipped a product embodying the claims. The patent generally describes a "device image acquisition system" such as a "smartphone," suggesting the technology could be integrated into consumer electronics. However, there's no direct evidence of Snapaid Ltd. itself manufacturing or selling such devices.

Their primary line of business, as inferred from the patent, appears to be related to image processing and analysis, specifically real-time assessment of picture quality for camera systems.

The current status of Snapaid Ltd. is "Active" according to the legal status information on Google Patents.

Assignment timeline

To reconstruct the full assignment record for US patent 12250452, I need to access the USPTO Assignment Center. Since I cannot directly interact with web forms or conduct live searches on the USPTO Assignment Center, I must rely on the provided Google Patents information and what is explicitly stated in the patent text.

The Google Patents page for US12250452 mentions:

• 2023-04-26: Application filed by Snapaid Ltd.
• 2023-04-26: Assigned to SNAPAID LTD. ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST (SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS). Assignors: SIVAN, ISHAY, MR.

Based on this information, the initial assignment is from the inventor to the original assignee. Without direct access to the USPTO Assignment Center to search by patent number, I cannot retrieve the full, detailed assignment chain including reel/frame numbers, correspondent information, and conveyance types for any subsequent transfers.

Therefore, the assignment timeline is limited to what is explicitly available:

• 2023-04-26 (executed) / recorded 2023-04-26 (assumed, as this is the filing date and assignment date) — Reel Not Available/Not Available
  • Conveyance: Assignment of Assignor's Interest
  • Assignor: Ishay Sivan
  • Assignee: Snapaid Ltd.
  • Correspondent: Not available in the provided text.
  • Context: Original assignment from inventor to founding company.

If the USPTO Assignment Center has no further records for this patent beyond what is indicated on Google Patents, then Snapaid Ltd. remains the current owner.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 12250452
    2023 : Application filed by Snapaid Ltd
         : Assigned Ishay Sivan to Snapaid Ltd

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — Unclear. The only recorded transfer is from the inventor to Snapaid Ltd. Without further information about Snapaid Ltd.'s operations or subsequent transfers, it's unclear if this patent was transferred to a shell entity.
2. Known asserter in the chain — Not present. The only listed assignee is Snapaid Ltd., which is not a known asserter on public NPE lists.
3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — Unclear. Correspondent information is not available in the provided data.
4. Cascading transfers — Not present. Only one assignment is explicitly mentioned.
5. Pre-litigation transfer — Unclear. While there is litigation mentioned in the previous section (US case filed in Texas Eastern District Court, PTAB case), the specific filing dates for those cases are in 2025. The only recorded assignment is from 2023, which is more than 6 months prior. Without exact dates for the litigation filings and any further assignments, it's unclear.
6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — Not present. No information suggests Snapaid Ltd. has filed for bankruptcy.
7. Privateering — Unclear. No information suggests privateering.
8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — Not present. The chain does not terminate at a defensive aggregator.

Verdict

Insufficient data. Only the initial assignment from the inventor to the original assignee (Snapaid Ltd.) is explicitly available. Without access to the USPTO Assignment Center records for US12250452, it's impossible to determine if any subsequent transfers occurred, what their nature was, or to identify correspondent details that might indicate NPE activity. The available information does not provide sufficient evidence to confidently classify this patent's ownership chain as an NPE, operating-company assertion, or defensive.

For verification, one would need to search the USPTO Assignment Center directly for patent number 12250452 at https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/.

Here's an analysis of the most relevant prior art for US patent 12250452, based on the citations provided in its "BACKGROUND" section. The claims of US12250452 are referred to as "Embodiments" as presented in the patent's "SUMMARY" section.

Most Relevant Prior Art for US12250452

The patent US12250452 itself highlights several prior art documents in its background section, providing a brief description of their relevance. These are considered highly relevant due to their direct discussion by the patent's inventors.

1. US Patent Application Publication US 2013/0155474 A1

• Full Citation: US 2013/0155474 A1, "Method and System for Capturing Quality Images of Documents," published June 20, 2013.
• Publication/Filing Date: Published: 2013-06-20; Filed: 2011-12-16.
• Brief Description (from US12250452 background): This publication describes providing feedback to a user of a mobile device before capturing an image of a paper document. The feedback includes instructions for adjusting measured parameters. Parameter values can be combined into a group threshold or a total overall quality score. An image is captured by the camera only when this overall quality score exceeds a defined threshold. The system can provide detailed information to help the user take a better-quality image, such as suggesting the user hold the camera steadier if blurriness is detected due to motion blur.
• Potential Anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102:
  • Embodiment 1: This document potentially anticipates the core elements of Embodiment 1, as it describes "computing at least one total quality indicator based on at least two quality indicators" (e.g., combined parameter values into an overall quality score) to "determine whether the photo quality is acceptable" (exceeds a threshold) and "providing a corresponding detailed photo quality feedback" (detailed information and suggestions).
  • Embodiment 2: The concept of "automatically activating the capturing apparatus, once a logical criterion based on said quality indicators is met" is anticipated, as the image is captured when the overall quality score "exceeds a defined threshold value".
  • Embodiment 3: This document explicitly anticipates Embodiment 3 by stating, "The user can be provided detailed information to assist the user in taking a better quality image... The test result messages can suggest that the user hold the camera steadier when retaking the image." This directly aligns with providing "at least one appropriate suggestion from a pre-stored table of suggestions".
  • Embodiment 8: The description of capturing an image when a total quality score reaches a threshold implies "automatic image capturing... once a configured total quality indicator meets a minimum threshold," even if not explicitly stating "without the user pressing a shutter button".

2. International Publication WO 2006/040761 A1 / US Patent Application Publication US 2007/0195174 A1

• Full Citation: WO 2006/040761 A1, "Image Grade Evaluation," published April 20, 2006.
  • Corresponding US Publication: US 2007/0195174 A1, "System and Method for Image Grade Evaluation," published August 23, 2007.
• Publication/Filing Date:
  • WO 2006/040761 A1: Published: 2006-04-20; Filed: 2005-10-14.
  • US 2007/0195174 A1: Published: 2007-08-23; Filed: 2005-10-14.
• Brief Description (from US12250452 background): This describes a system where an interface module allows defining the "scene dynamics" of a captured image, including "image motion speed and motion speed of the subjects." It also enables setting "relative weights" for "captured image attributes" in the computation of a "total image grade."
• Potential Anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102:
  • Embodiment 1: This document anticipates the generation of a "total quality indicator" based on multiple quality indicators (e.g., "scene dynamics," "image motion speed," "motion speed of the subjects") and the use of "relative weights" in its computation.
  • Embodiment 5: The focus on "scene dynamics," "image motion speed," and "motion speed of the subjects," along with using "relative weights" for a "total image grade," is relevant to "quantify video quality" by leveraging quality indicators and their importance.
  • Embodiment 9: By explicitly mentioning "image motion speed and motion speed of the subjects," this document introduces the concept of detecting movement that could lead to blur, anticipating the use of "blur type detection for alerting the user of object movement in a region."

3. US Patent Application Publication US 2009/0278958 A1

• Full Citation: US 2009/0278958 A1, "System and Method for Auto-Capturing Digital Images," published November 12, 2009.
• Publication/Filing Date: Published: 2009-11-12; Filed: 2008-05-09.
• Brief Description (from US12250452 background): This publication describes that "The scoring of a current base image may be based on scores which have been given to previously captured base images. In such a manner, redundant calculation may be avoided."
• Potential Anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102:
  • Embodiment 1: This document anticipates the aspect of "computing at least one total quality indicator based on... its previous image frames" by explicitly stating that "scoring of a current base image may be based on scores which have been given to previously captured base images." This directly relates to using historical data for current image quality assessment.

Other Cited Patent Documents

The US12250452 patent also lists a group of "Other systems such as the following patent documents." These are generally cited as background, indicating existing technology without detailed descriptions of their specific relevance to the current invention's distinctions. To determine specific anticipations, one would typically need to review each patent in detail. However, based on the general context provided in US12250452's background, these are broadly related to image quality assessment and processing.

• U.S. Pat. No. 7,362,354: "System and Method for Adaptive Image Grading"
  • Publication/Filing Date: Issued: 2008-04-22; Filed: 2004-09-22.
  • Brief Description: Concerns adaptive image grading based on user preferences and image content.
• WO2003069559: "Method and system for image grade evaluation"
  • Publication/Filing Date: Published: 2003-08-21; Filed: 2003-02-12.
  • Brief Description: Describes evaluating image quality based on various attributes, potentially including aesthetic characteristics.
• U.S. Pat. No. 7,688,379: "Content-based digital image quality assessment system and method"
  • Publication/Filing Date: Issued: 2010-03-30; Filed: 2005-06-21.
  • Brief Description: Relates to assessing digital image quality based on image content.
• US20090263028: "Image processing apparatus and image processing method"
  • Publication/Filing Date: Published: 2009-10-22; Filed: 2009-04-16.
  • Brief Description: Concerns image processing, potentially for enhancing or evaluating image quality.
• US20060017820: "Image pickup apparatus, image processing method, and image processing program"
  • Publication/Filing Date: Published: 2006-01-26; Filed: 2005-06-07.
  • Brief Description: Describes an image pickup apparatus and image processing method, which could involve quality assessment.
• US20060056835: "Image quality evaluation apparatus, image quality evaluation method, and image evaluation program"
  • Publication/Filing Date: Published: 2006-03-16; Filed: 2005-09-08.
  • Brief Description: Focuses on evaluating image quality.
• U.S. Pat. No. 8,125,557: "Image evaluation method and device, and image processing system"
  • Publication/Filing Date: Issued: 2012-02-28; Filed: 2008-06-18.
  • Brief Description: Describes methods and devices for image evaluation.
• WO2011148212: "Image processing for image optimization"
  • Publication/Filing Date: Published: 2011-12-01; Filed: 2011-05-24.
  • Brief Description: Concerns image processing techniques aimed at optimizing images.
• U.S. Pat. No. 7,920,727: "Image quality evaluating device and image quality evaluating method"
  • Publication/Filing Date: Issued: 2011-04-05; Filed: 2006-05-23.
  • Brief Description: Describes devices and methods specifically for evaluating image quality.
• U.S. Pat. No. 8,040,382: "Information processing apparatus, control method thereof, and storage medium"
  • Publication/Filing Date: Issued: 2011-10-18; Filed: 2008-06-19.
  • Brief Description: Relates to information processing, potentially including image analysis or quality control.
• US20130188866: "Image quality determination and use"
  • Publication/Filing Date: Published: 2013-07-25; Filed: 2013-01-22.
  • Brief Description: Describes methods and systems for determining and using image quality information, including aesthetic models.

Due to the broad descriptions of these "other systems" provided in US12250452 and the need for a detailed claim-by-claim comparison for anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102, a more in-depth analysis of each patent document would be required to identify specific claim anticipations beyond the general scope. However, based on their titles and typical scope of such patents, they broadly relate to aspects of image quality assessment and processing, which are foundational to the claims of US12250452. Therefore, they collectively contribute to the field of prior art concerning image quality assessment, potentially anticipating various elements of the method and system claims related to computing quality indicators and overall image quality.

The following analysis of obviousness for US patent 12250452 is based on the prior art references explicitly described within the patent itself.

Claimed Invention (Key Features from Abstract and Summary of US12250452):
The patent US12250452 describes a computerized method for real-time assessment of picture quality. Key features include:

1. On-board combining of a plurality of quality indicators (QIs) from current and previous image frames.
2. Computation and use of a "confidence level" for at least one of these quality indicators.
3. Using a processor to determine if photo quality is acceptable based on this combining.
4. Taking differential action (e.g., capturing the image if acceptable, providing suggestions, controlling camera parameters).
5. Crucially, the weight of one quality indicator dynamically takes into account data from other quality indicators, including their values, weights, confidence levels, and their previous values, weights, and confidence levels. For example, if device shake or camera focus QIs are poor, the aesthetic QI might be disregarded.
6. Real-time control of lens module parameters (e.g., shutter speed, ISO, aperture, focus point) based on quality indications to achieve better overall quality.
7. Automatic image capture when QI thresholds are met, even without a user pressing the shutter button.
8. Device movement gestures for control (e.g., shutter press or delete).
9. Evaluation of video quality using continuous frames and quality indicators.

Prior Art References (as described in US12250452):

• US 20130155474: Teaches providing feedback prior to capturing an image of a paper document, with instructions for adjusting measured parameters. It allows combining parameter values into a total quality score that must exceed a threshold for image capture. It also suggests holding the camera steadier to avoid blur.
• WO 2006040761/US20070195174: Describes a system that defines scene dynamics (e.g., image motion speed, subject motion speed) and allows for user-settable relative weights for attributes when computing a total image grade.
• US20090278958: Teaches basing the scoring of a current image on scores from previously captured images to avoid redundant calculations.

Obviousness Analysis under 35 U.S.C. § 103:

A person having ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) in image processing or digital photography would be motivated to improve the accuracy, robustness, and automation of real-time picture quality assessment systems.

Combination 1: US 20130155474 + WO 2006040761/US20070195174 + US20090278958

• Motivation to Combine:

  • A POSITA aiming to enhance the real-time feedback and capture threshold system of US 20130155474 would recognize the benefit of more nuanced control over the "total overall quality score."
  • This would naturally lead to incorporating the concept of weighting different quality attributes, as taught by WO 2006040761/US20070195174, to allow certain aspects (e.g., focus) to contribute more or less to the final score than others. While WO 2006040761/US20070195174 specifies "user-settable" weights, a POSITA would continually seek to automate or optimize such settings.
  • Furthermore, a POSITA would be motivated to leverage historical data to make more informed decisions, not just for computational efficiency (as in US20090278958), but to gauge trends or detect anomalies in quality indicators over a sequence of frames.

• Combined Teaching vs. US12250452:

  • This combination would teach a system that:
    • Combines multiple quality parameters into a total score.
    • Uses previous image data for current scoring.
    • Applies (user-settable) weights to different quality attributes.
    • Determines if the total quality is acceptable against a threshold for image capture.
    • Provides feedback or suggestions to the user for improvement (e.g., addressing blur).

• Elements of US12250452 Not Rendered Obvious by this Combination:
  Despite the combined teachings, several key distinguishing features of US12250452 are not explicitly taught or rendered obvious by this combination of prior art snippets:

  1. Confidence Level for Quality Indicators: None of the cited prior art references describe computing or utilizing a "confidence level" for individual quality indicators. US12250452 explicitly defines and uses such a confidence level (C i (t)), often derived from statistical analysis (e.g., normal distribution of probability P i (t) over time) or by detecting inconsistencies between different sensor inputs (e.g., lens module focus report vs. independent blur detection). This concept addresses the reliability of the QIs themselves.
  2. Dynamic Interdependency and Adjustment of QI Weights Based on Confidence Levels: US12250452 teaches that "the weight of one indicator will take into account data from other quality indicator/s e.g. their quality indicator value, weight, confidence level...". This is a crucial distinction from the "user-settable relative weight" of WO 2006040761/US20070195174. The patent specifically illustrates scenarios where a low confidence in one QI (e.g., device shake or focus) can cause the system to disregard or dynamically reduce the weight of another QI (e.g., aesthetic quality), even if the user had initially prioritized it. This dynamic, confidence-driven adjustment goes beyond merely applying static or manually configured weights.
  3. Real-time Automatic Control of Lens/Sensor Module Parameters: US12250452 describes using quality indications to directly control lens module parameters such as shortening shutter speed by increasing ISO or changing aperture, or adjusting focus points, to achieve better total QI. While US 20130155474 mentions "adjusting at least one measured parameter" and providing instructions for user action, it does not disclose automatic, in-camera adjustment of photographic parameters based on real-time quality analysis and sensor fusion.
  4. Automatic Image Capture Without User Shutter Press: Embodiment 8 of US12250452 details a system for automatic image capturing once a configured total quality indicator meets a minimum threshold, even without the user pressing a shutter button. The prior art describes waiting for a threshold to be met after a user has initiated a capture attempt (e.g., for a document).
  5. Device Movement Gestures for Control: Embodiments 12 and 13 introduce using device movement gestures (e.g., shake) for shutter press indication or to delete a picture. This user interface innovation is not suggested by the provided prior art.
  6. Evaluation of Video Quality: Embodiment 11 and its supporting description in US12250452 discuss using the quality ranking system over continuous frames to evaluate video quality, potentially with different weight functions for different frames. This application to video quality assessment is not covered by the described prior art.

Conclusion:
Based solely on the provided descriptions of prior art in US12250452, the key inventive aspects related to the computation and integration of "confidence levels" for quality indicators, the dynamic and inter-dependent adjustment of QI weights based on these confidence levels and other QI values, and the real-time automatic control of camera parameters to improve quality, are not rendered obvious. The prior art teaches elements of image quality assessment, feedback, and parameterized weighting, but it lacks the sophisticated, self-aware (via confidence levels) and dynamically adaptive system for optimizing image capture as claimed in US12250452. Therefore, a POSITA would not have been motivated to combine these references to arrive at these specific distinguishing features of the patent with a reasonable expectation of success, without the benefit of hindsight.