DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
The objection to claim 6 is withdrawn.
The rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) are withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed December 29th, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues (paraphrasing) that Kemeny does not disclose that a window frame and a lid are switchable between each other (Remarks, page 7) nor does Fischer (Remarks, page 8). However, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
In this case, Yang et al. discloses positioning a camera device (camera 21) and a lid of a powder charging port at different ends of the mixing vessel (V-shaped hopper 1) as shown below:
PNG
media_image1.png
878
1280
media_image1.png
Greyscale
While Yang et al. does not expressly disclose the camera device is fixed to a window frame, the camera device would require a window having support structure which comprises “a frame” for mounting the window and/or camera in order to photograph the powder mixture (Yang et al., powder coating, Abstract) in the mixing vessel. Otherwise, the camera lens would be in direct contact with the powder which would presumably reduce or prohibit the ability to photograph the powder during the process (Yang et al., para. [0012]) and Taniguchi teaches a powder mixing system with a window (window 35, para. [0007]) where a camera (frame 74 with image acquisition unit 4) is mounted to the system at the window (Fig. 3). It is also noted that Merrill et al. teaches a window (window 116) and window frame (mounting face 114) for a spectrometer (which is analogous to a camera in that it provides data based on wavelengths of light) mounted on a port of a mixer (Merrill et al., Fig. 1). Thus, the person of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to mount a camera with a window frame on one end of the V-shaped mixing vessel (Yang et al., shown above) in the device of Kemeny for photographing powder in a mixing process.
While the teaching of Yang et al. does not expressly disclose the camera and lid are switchable, the camera and lid would be switchable by making the mixing vessel symmetric (having identical end port geometry such that the window frame and lid are switchable due to the identical geometry) as taught by Fisher (the device is symmetric, Fig. 1, being constructed from a single cylinder, col. 4, lines 16-30) in order to simplify manufacture of the V-shaped mixing vessel (Fischer, col. 4, lines 16-30). It is noted that the mixer of Kemeny also appears to be symmetrical (Fig. 1B). Thus, the person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use symmetrical construction resulting in the window frame and lid being switchable between ports having identical geometry and the argument is not persuasive.
The Applicant argues that the device would not realize the advantage of being able to switch the camera to the other side where space is limited (Remarks, page 8). The Examiner respectfully notes that the fact that the inventor has recognized another advantage which would flow naturally from following the suggestion of the prior art cannot be the basis for patentability when the differences would otherwise be obvious. See Ex parte Obiaya, 227 USPQ 58, 60 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1985). Again, the device would have the capability to switch the camera between ports by following the teaching of Fischer in making the mixing vessel symmetrical with ports on opposite sides having the same geometry as discussed above. Thus, the argument is not persuasive.
The Applicant argues that (paraphrasing) the combination of references does not disclose or suggest the claimed structure which is shown in Figs. 1-2 where wireless transmission is used to communicate between the image photographing device (camera) and the computer and where the computer has a function of detecting that the image photographing device is located at a predetermined position under the mixing vessel and the computer estimates the mixing state based on the acquired image (Remarks, pages 9-10). The Examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Kemeny teaches acquiring the image when the window (window 110) is located at the bottom (i.e. when the powder is on the window, col. 4, line 5) where the computer estimates the mixing state (uniformity, Abstract) based on the acquired image (col. 4, line 65 – col. 5, line 13). Similarly, Merrill et al. teaches a spectrometer (which is analogous to a camera) is mounted at a port on a mixing vessel (mixing bin 100) at a window (input window 116) and wherein the spectrometer device rotates with the mixing vessel (para. [0007], Fig. 1B) and Merrill et al. further teaches the computer has a function of detecting that the spectrometer (spectrometer 110) is located at a predetermined position under the mixing vessel (the system has an accelerometer 118 which is used to collect measurements to determine when the material has fallen onto the window 116 and to record the readings in the data recorder which may be a wirelessly connected computer, pars. [0008] and [0011], where substance 10 would fall onto the window when the mixing vessel is inverted and the spectrometer is positioned under the mixing vessel as shown in the center position of Fig. 1B) and Merrill et al. also teaches communication with the computer (data recorder 122) via wireless transmission (wireless transmitter 124, Fig. 1A). Thus, it would have been obvious to acquire the image with the attached camera when the camera is located under the mixing vessel and the powder is in its closest proximity to the camera in order to achieve the clearest image of the powder and to use wireless transmission to eliminate the need for wires (which would become entangled using an attached camera that rotates, such as the camera 21 of Yang et al., shown above) and the argument is not persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kemeny (US 8967851) in view of Fischer (US 2514126), Yang et al. (previously attached translation of CN 107998950A), Taniguchi (previously attached translation of JP 2019060805A), Merrill et al. (US 20070188753), Minamide (Applicant provided translation of JP H06300682A), Satake (Applicant provided JP 2005230703), Naini (US 20110170786) and Tsukishima (Applicant provided translation of JP 2018072158).
Regarding claim 1, Kemeny discloses a powder (particles, col. 11, line 34, ketoprofen, talc, lactose, etc., col. 10, lines 57-61) mixing system (with mixing chamber 102, col. 3, line 32) as shown below:
PNG
media_image2.png
417
751
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Kemeny discloses the system comprises a mixing vessel (mixing chamber 102, Fig. 1B) provided with a rotating shaft (axis 104 coupled to motor 106, Fig. 1B) for mixing a powder mixture of multiple kinds of powder (such as ketoprofen, talc, lactose, etc., col. 10, lines 57-61, mixed with other ingredients such as excipients, col. 1, line 36, as shown in different mixing degrees in Fig. 2A with light color indicating higher concentration of an API such as ketoprofen with other ingredients in the mixture, col. 6, lines 13-19); a rotating machine (actuator/motor 106) for rotating the mixing vessel by means of the rotating shaft; an image photographing device (camera 114) for acquiring an image (image of the blend, abstract) of the powder mixture in a mixing process; and a computer (computer 118, col. 4, lines 65-66), wherein the mixing vessel includes a window (imaging window 110) through which the image of the powder is photographed (col. 3, lines 53-56); the computer has a function of detecting that the mixing vessel is located at a predetermined position (position encoder 142 communicates with computer 118, Fig. 1B, and monitors the rotation position where a position marker 144 and a proximity sensor 146 may also be used, col. 9, lines 9-16, in order to slow rotation when imaging window 110 is aligned with the camera, col. 4, lines 14-26, or halt rotation, col. 5, line 37, col. 15, line 1); the image photographing device (camera 114) acquires the image of the powder mixture through the window (imaging window 110) of the mixing vessel (chamber 102, Fig. 1B) located at the predetermined position (the position where the camera is aligned with the window: rotation is slowed to capture the image as the window aligns with the camera, col. 4, line 23-27, col. 10, lines 62-67); and the computer estimates a mixing state of the powder mixture based on the acquired image of the powder (col. 4, line 65 – col. 5, line 13).
Kemeny discloses a window frame (metal plate structure with gasket, col. 7, lines 33-36), but Kemeny does not expressly disclose a window frame including the window of the mixing vessel, and a lid of a powder charging port disposed on the mixing vessel are detachably attached to different ends of the mixing vessel and are switchable between each other.
However, Fischer teaches a similar mixing device (Fig. 1, shown below) and Fischer discloses that lids of powder charging ports (cover plates 34) disposed on the mixing vessel are detachably attached (col. 2, lines 35-36) to different ends of the mixing vessel (shown below) and are switchable between each other (shown to be identical and Fischer teaches using symmetrical construction (the device being fabricated from a single cylinder to simplify assembly, col. 4, lines 16-30).
PNG
media_image3.png
399
859
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Kemeny wherein the lids of the powder charging port are switchable between each other.
The person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to use symmetrical dimensions for the mixing chamber to simplify construction (Fischer, col. 4, lines 26-28).
The above-cited references do not expressly disclose the window frame and a lid of the charging port are detachably attached to different ends of the mixing vessel and are switchable.
However, Fischer shows that the material in the vessel will congregate at the various ends of the vessel as it rotates (Fig. 3 and Fig. 4, shown above). Thus, it would seem an image acquired at one of the charging ports or an image acquired at the outlet port would produce an equivalent outcome and Yang et al. discloses a similar mixing device (Fig. 1) and teaches placing the camera at a charging port location (camera 22, Fig. 4) as shown below:
PNG
media_image4.png
495
1309
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Further, Taniguchi teaches a powder mixing system (mixing particulate matter, abstract) with a window (window 35, para. [0007]) where a camera (frame 74 with image acquisition unit 4) is mounted to the system at the window (Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Kemeny by locating the window frame at a charging port and attaching a camera thereto (Yang et al., shown above) wherein the window frame including the window of the mixing vessel, and a lid of a powder charging port disposed on the mixing vessel are detachably attached to different ends of the mixing vessel and are switchable between each other (the charging ports being sized identically as taught by Fischer).
The person of ordinary skill in that art would have been motivated to arrange the system wherein the image photographing device is fixable to the window frame (Kemeny, metal plate structure with gasket, col. 7, lines 33-36, Taniguchi, window 35, para. [0007]) in order to position the image photographing device closer to the powder mixture to better facilitate capturing mixture details in the image and to locate the window frame with a camera at a charging port (Yang et al., camera 22, shown above) in order to simplify installation of the camera. The person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make the mixing vessel symmetrical wherein the window frame and a charging port lid are switchable in order to simplify construction of the vessel (Fischer, col. 4, lines 26-28).
The combined teaching of the above-cited references disclose wherein the image photographing device is fixed to the window frame (Taniguchi, window 35, para. [0007]) and is rotatable with the mixing vessel (Yang et al., camera 22, Fig. 1 and Fig. 4 and shown above for claim 1).
Kemeny does not disclose the image photographing device is communicable with the computer through wireless transmission.
However, Merrill et al. also teaches a mixing device (such as for API/pharmaceuticals, abstract) for powder (para. [0013]) wherein a detector device (spectrometer) is mounted at a port to a mixing vessel (mixing bin 100) at a window (input window 116) and wherein the detector device rotates with the mixing vessel (para. [0007], Fig. 1B) and is communicable with the computer (data recorder 122) via wireless transmission (wireless transmitter 124, Fig. 1A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Kemeny wherein the image photographing device is communicable with the computer through wireless transmission.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to configure the image photographing device for rotation with the mixing vessel in order to position the photographing device close to the powder mixture to facilitate capturing mixture details in the image while tracking progress of the mixing (Merrill et al., confirm degree of blending, para. [0003]) during operation. The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use wireless transmission in order to prevent entanglement of wires.
Kemeny does not disclose the computer has a function of detecting that the image photographing device is located at a predetermined position under the mixing vessel.
However, Merrill et al. who is relied upon to teach a detector which rotates with the mixing vessel and transmits to a computer via wireless transmission as discussed above, further teaches the computer has a function of detecting that the detector (spectrometer 110) is located at a predetermined position under the mixing vessel (the system has an accelerometer 118 which is used to collect measurements to determine when the material has fallen onto the window 116 and to record the readings in the data recorder which may be the wirelessly connected computer, pars. [0008] and [0011], where substance 10 would fall onto the window when the mixing vessel is inverted and the detector is positioned under the mixing vessel as shown in the center position of Fig. 1B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Kemeny wherein the computer has a function of detecting that the image photographing device is located at a predetermined position under the mixing vessel where the image photographing device acquires the image of the powder mixture through the window of the mixing vessel located at the predetermined position.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to detect when the image photographing device is located at a predetermined position under the mixing vessel in order to ensure that the powder has fallen onto the window so that a clear image of the mixing state can be obtained.
Kemeny does not expressly disclose the acquired image includes RGB color information.
However, Kemeny discloses a visible (“VNIR”) spectrum camera may be used (col. 15, lines 35-41) and Minamide teaches a method for determining the degree of mixing of a powder using a digital RGB color (red, green, blue also being visible spectrum) image (claim 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Kemeny by using RGB color information.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to utilize an RGB image in order to achieve high accuracy (Minamide, para. [0016]).
Kemeny does not expressly disclose the computer converts RGB color information of the image of the powder mixture into HSV color information or CIE-L*a*b* color information or extracting a pixel position of a specific powder in the image of the powder mixture.
However, Satake discloses a method which is analogous art at least because it is pertinent to the problem of analyzing images of granular material (claim 1) and Satake teaches the use of RGB color information (claim 1) wherein the computer (CPU 13) converts RGB color information of the overall image (each pixel data of red, blue, and green, claim 1) into CIE-L*a*b* color information (RGB info is represented by L*a*b color system, claim 1), extracts a pixel position in the overall image of the granular material based on the CIE-L*a*b* color information (the pixel data is extracted to determine if pixel data are within a threshold. Para. [0003]). Further, Naini teaches a system which is analogous art at least because it is pertinent to the problem of analyzing images of granular material (identifying and characterizing particles within an image, abstract) where RGB color information of the overall image is converted to HSV color information and a pixel position in the overall image is extracted based on the HSV color information (para. [0052]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Kemeny wherein the computer converts RGB color information of the image of the powder mixture into HSV color information or CIE-L*a*b* color information and extracts a pixel position of a specific powder in the image of the powder mixture based on the HSV color information or the CIE-L*a*b* color information.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to generate pixels using RGB information to achieve high accuracy (Minamide, para. [0016]) and to convert RGB information into HSV color information or CIE-L*a*b* color information in order to obtain more accurate results (Naini, para. [0073], Satake, para. [0004]).
Kemeny discloses calculating the mixing degree using a pixel number of the specific powder (Kemeny, col. 5, lines 4-5, col. 6, lines 35-39) and insomuch as Kemeny does not explicitly disclose calculating the mixing degree using a single divided image derived from dividing the image of the powder mixture; Tsukishima teaches a method for determining uniformity of a mixture (abstract) such as comprising powder (page 3, seventh paragraph) and further teaches calculating a mixing degree (blending ratio, Abstract, uniformity, page 3, second paragraph) where a single divided image derived from dividing the image of the powder mixture is used (Fig. 1 shows the overall image is divided into nine smaller images or “inspection regions” which are extracted for evaluating uniformity where one or more of the regions may be used, page 3, last paragraph – page 4, first paragraph, where the uniformity evaluation calculation determines whether or not to further mix, page 4, 5th paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Kemeny wherein a mixing degree is calculated using a pixel number of the specific powder existing in a single divided image derived from dividing the image of the powder mixture.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to divide the image into inspection regions in order to efficiently process the image to evaluate the mixing degree.
Kemeny discloses wherein the mixing is allowed to be terminated when a difference from a precedingly calculated mixing degree becomes equal to or smaller (Kemeny, settling to a value, col. 13, lines 11-12 ) than a predetermined value (Kemeny, such as set by technician, col. 12, lines 51-55, or settling to a value, col. 13, lines 11-12).
Regarding claim 6, Kemeny discloses a powder (particles, col. 11, line 34, ketoprofen, talc, lactose, etc., col. 10, lines 57-61) mixing method (with mixing chamber 102, col. 3, line 32) for a powder mixing system as shown above for claim 1.
Kemeny discloses the system includes a mixing vessel (mixing chamber 102, Fig. 1B) provided with a rotating shaft (axis 104 coupled to motor 106, Fig. 1B) for mixing a powder mixture of multiple kinds of powder (such as ketoprofen, talc, lactose, etc., col. 10, lines 57-61, mixed with other ingredients such as excipients, col. 1, line 36, as shown in different mixing degrees in Fig. 2A with light color indicating higher concentration of an API such as ketoprofen with other ingredients in the mixture, col. 6, lines 13-19); a rotating machine (actuator/motor 106) for rotating the mixing vessel by means of the rotating shaft; an image photographing device (camera 114) for acquiring an image (image of the blend, abstract) of the powder mixture in the powder mixing method; and a computer (computer 118, col. 4, lines 65-66).
Kemeny discloses a window frame (metal plate structure with gasket, col. 7, lines 33-36), but Kemeny does not expressly disclose a window frame including the window of the mixing vessel, and a lid of a powder charging port disposed on the mixing vessel are detachably attached to different ends of the mixing vessel and are switchable between each other.
However, Fischer teaches a similar mixing device (Fig. 1, shown above for claim 1) and Fischer discloses that lids of powder charging ports (cover plates 34) disposed on the mixing vessel are detachably attached (col. 2, lines 35-36) to different ends of the mixing vessel (shown above for claim 1) and are switchable between each other (shown to be identical and Fischer teaches using symmetrical construction (the device being fabricated from a single cylinder to simplify assembly, col. 4, lines 16-30).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Kemeny wherein the lids of the powder charging port are switchable between each other.
The person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to use symmetrical dimensions for the mixing chamber to simplify construction (Fischer, col. 4, lines 26-28).
The above-cited references do not expressly disclose the window frame and a lid of the charging port are detachably attached to different ends of the mixing vessel and are switchable.
However, Fischer shows that the material in the vessel will congregate at the various ends of the vessel as it rotates (Fig. 3 and Fig. 4, shown above for claim 1). Thus, it would seem an image acquired at one of the charging ports or an image acquired at the outlet port would produce an equivalent outcome and Yang et al. discloses a similar mixing device (Fig. 1) and teaches placing the camera at a charging port location (camera 22, Fig. 4) as shown above for claim 1.
Further, Taniguchi teaches a powder mixing system (mixing particulate matter, abstract) with a window (window 35, para. [0007]) where a camera (frame 74 with image acquisition unit 4) is mounted to the system at the window (Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Kemeny by locating the window frame at a charging port and attaching a camera thereto (Yang et al., shown above for claim 1) wherein the window frame including the window of the mixing vessel, and a lid of a powder charging port disposed on the mixing vessel are detachably attached to different ends of the mixing vessel and are switchable between each other (being sized identically as taught by Fischer).
The person of ordinary skill in that art would have been motivated to arrange the system wherein the image photographing device is fixable to the window frame (Kemeny, metal plate structure with gasket, col. 7, lines 33-36, Taniguchi, window 35, para. [0007]) in order to position the image photographing device closer to the powder mixture to better facilitate capturing mixture details in the image and to locate the window frame with a camera at a charging port (Yang et al., camera 22, shown above) in order to simplify installation of the camera. The person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to make the mixing vessel symmetrical wherein the window frame and a charging port lid are switchable in order to simplify construction of the vessel (Fischer, col. 4, lines 26-28).
The combined teaching of the above-cited references disclose wherein the image photographing device is fixed to the window frame (Taniguchi, window 35, para. [0007]) and rotatable with the mixing vessel (Yang et al., camera 22, Fig. 1 and Fig. 4 and shown above for claim 1).
Kemeny does not disclose the image photographing device is communicable with the computer through wireless transmission.
However, Merrill et al. also teaches a mixing device (such as for API/pharmaceuticals, abstract) for powder (para. [0013]) wherein a detector device (spectrometer 110) is mounted at a port to a mixing vessel (mixing bin 100) at a window (input window 116) and wherein the detector device rotates with the mixing vessel (para. [0007], Fig. 1B) and is communicable with the computer (data recorder 122) via wireless transmission (wireless transmitter 124, Fig. 1A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Kemeny wherein the image photographing device is communicable with the computer through wireless transmission.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to configure the image photographing device for rotation with the mixing vessel in order to position the photographing device close to the powder mixture to facilitate capturing mixture details in the image while tracking progress of the mixing (Merrill et al., confirm degree of blending, para. [0003]) during operation. The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use wireless transmission in order to prevent entanglement of wires.
Kemeny does not disclose detecting that the image photographing device is located at a predetermined position under the mixing vessel.
However, Merrill et al. who is relied upon to teach a detector which rotates with the mixing vessel and transmits to a computer via wireless transmission as discussed above further teaches the computer has a function of detecting that the detector (spectrometer 110) is located at a predetermined position under the mixing vessel (the system has an accelerometer 118 which is used to collect measurements to determine when the material has fallen onto the window 116 and to record the readings in the data recorder which may be wirelessly connected to a computer, pars. [0008] and [0011], where substance 10 would fall onto the window when the mixing vessel is inverted and the detector positioned under the mixing vessel as shown in the center position of Fig. 1B).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Kemeny wherein the powder mixing method comprises the step of detecting, by the computer, when the image photographing device is located at a predetermined position under the mixing vessel.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to detect when the image photographing device is located at a predetermined position under the mixing vessel in order to ensure that the powder has fallen onto the window so that a clear image of the mixing state can be obtained.
Kemeny does not expressly disclose acquiring a digital RGB color image.
However, Kemeny discloses a visible (“VNIR”) spectrum camera may be used (col. 15, lines 35-41) and Minamide teaches a method for determining the degree of mixing of a powder using a digital RGB color (red, green, blue also being visible spectrum) image (claim 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Kemeny wherein the method includes the step of acquiring, by an image photographing device, a digital RGB color image of the powder mixture in the mixing process when the image photographing device is detected to be located at the predetermined position.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to utilize an RGB image in order to achieve high accuracy (Minamide, para. [0016]).
The combined teachings of the above-cited references disclose extracting by the computer an image of a specific powder from the digital RGB color image (Minamide, claim 1) of the powder mixture including multiple powder materials (Kemeny, col. 4, line 65 – col. 5, line 8) and calculating a mixing degree based on an image of the powder mixture (Kemeny, col. 5, line 9-22).
Kemeny does not expressly disclose calculating a mixing degree based on an existence probability of the specific powder.
However, Tsukishima teaches a method for determining uniformity of a mixture (abstract) such as comprising powder (page 3, seventh paragraph) and further teaches calculating a mixing degree (blending ratio, abstract, uniformity, page 3, second paragraph) based on an existence probability (page 3, second paragraph) in an image (page 4, sixth paragraph) where mixing is terminated when the mixing degree satisfies a predetermined condition (the uniformity evaluation calculation determines whether or not to further mix, page 4, 5th paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Kemeny wherein the method includes the step of extracting, by the computer, an image of a specific powder from the digital RGB color image (Minamide, claim 1, able to distinguish specific powders in the mixture using their colors, pars. [0008]-[0009]) of the powder mixture, calculating the mixing degree based on an existence probability (Tsukishima, page 3, second paragraph) of the specific powder in the digital RGB color image of the powder mixture and allowing mixing to be terminated when the mixing degree satisfies a predetermined condition (Kemeny, such as set by technician, col. 12, lines 51-55, or settling to a value, col. 13, lines 11-12, Tsukishima, uniformity evaluation calculation determines whether or not to further mix, page 4, 5th paragraph).
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to calculate a mixing degree based on an existence probability in order to achieve stable evaluation indexes (Tsukishima, abstract).
Kemeny does not disclose converting RGB color information to HSV or CIE-L*a*b* color information and extracting a pixel position of the powder mixture in the image of the powder mixture.
However, Satake discloses a method which is analogous art at least because it is pertinent to the problem of analyzing images of granular material (claim 1) and Satake teaches the use of RGB color information (claim 1) wherein the computer (CPU 13) converts RGB color information of the overall image (each pixel data of red, blue, and green, claim 1) into CIE-L*a*b* color information (RGB info is represented by L*a*b color system, claim 1), extracts a pixel position in the image of the granular material based on the CIE-L*a*b* color information (the pixel data is extracted to determine if pixel data are within a threshold, para. [0003]). Further, Naini teaches a system which is analogous art at least because it is pertinent to the problem of analyzing images of granular material (identifying and characterizing particles within an image, abstract) where RGB color information of the overall image is converted to HSV color information and a pixel position in the overall image is extracted based on the HSV color information (para. [0052]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Kemeny wherein the method includes the step of converting by the computer, RGB color information of the digital RGB color image of the powder mixture into HSV color information or CIE-L*a*b* color information and extracting a pixel position of the powder mixture in the digital RGB color image of the powder mixture based on the HSV color information or the CIE-L*a*b* color information.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to generate pixels using RGB information to achieve high accuracy (Minamide, para. [0016]) and to convert RGB information into HSV color information or CIE-L*a*b* color information in order to obtain more accurate results (Naini, para. [0073], Satake, para. [0004]).
Kemeny discloses calculating the mixing degree using a pixel number of the specific powder (Kemeny, col. 5, lines 4-5, col. 6, lines 35-39) and insomuch as Kemeny does not explicitly disclose calculating the mixing degree using a single divided image derived from dividing the RGB color image of the powder mixture; Tsukishima teaches a method for determining uniformity of a mixture (abstract) such as comprising powder (page 3, seventh paragraph) and further teaches calculating a mixing degree (blending ratio, Abstract, uniformity, page 3, second paragraph) where a single divided image derived from dividing the image of the powder mixture is used (Fig. 1 shows the overall image is divided into nine smaller images or “inspection regions” which are extracted for evaluating uniformity where one or more of the regions may be used, page 3, last paragraph – page 4, first paragraph, where the uniformity evaluation calculation determines whether or not to further mix, page 4, 5th paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Kemeny wherein the method includes calculating the mixing degree using a pixel number of the specific powder existing in a single divided image derived from dividing the digital RGB color image of the powder mixture.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to divide the image into inspection regions in order to efficiently process the image to evaluate the mixing degree.
Kemeny discloses allowing the mixing to be terminated when a difference from a precedingly calculated mixing degree becomes equal to or smaller (Kemeny, settling to a value, col. 13, lines 11-12) than a predetermined value (Kemeny, such as set by technician, col. 12, lines 51-55, or settling to a value, col. 13, lines 11-12).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK M MCCARTY whose telephone number is (571)272-4398. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an 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, Claire Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/P.M.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1774
/CLAIRE X WANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1774