8DETAILED 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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on December 30, 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. Accordingly, the IDS has been considered by the examiner and placed in the file.
Claim Interpretation
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. BRIs for particular claim terms are provided herein. Should Applicant believe that these interpretations are inaccurate, Applicant should point to the portions of the specification that provide a basis for different interpretations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The previous rejection of claims 1-17 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite is withdrawn in view of the amendment to claims 1 and 9, which overcomes the rejection.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on December 15, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the limitation of claims 1 and 9 of "the weighting factor depending on a statistical distribution of luminance values in an histogram of the current image between a maximum luminance value and the target luminance value" is not taught by Guermoud. Specifically, Applicant argues that Guermoud's weighting factor does not depend on a statistical distribution of luminance values in a histogram of the current image between a maximum luminance value and the target luminance value.
The examiner disagrees. In Guermoud, the weighting factor is based on TH1 and TH2 (para. [0019]). TH1 is based on the statistical distribution of the pixel luminance values of the histogram shown in Fig. 5 because TH1 is determined based on the luminance values of the histogram in accordance with the relationship given by equation 4. Specifically, TH1 is determined to be a point on the horizontal axis of the histogram corresponding to a pixel having lowest luminance value of a predetermined percentage of the pixels (e.g., 5%) having luminance values that range from the maximum luminance value of 255 to this lowest luminance value. This lowest luminance value is selected as TH1.
Therefore, the value of TH1 does depend on the statistical distribution of luminance values between this lowest luminance value, which corresponds to the target luminance value of claims 1 and 9, and the maximum luminance value of the histogram. Since the weighting factor depends at least in part on the value of TH1 (para. [0019]), the weighting factor depends, at least in part, on the statistical distribution of luminance values between this lowest luminance value, which corresponds to the target luminance value in claims 1 and 9, and the maximum luminance value of the histogram (e.g., 255).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 8, 9, 16, 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Published European Application No. EP 3503019 A1 to Guermoud et al. (hereinafter referred to as “Guermoud et al.”).
Regarding claim 1, Guermoud et al. discloses a method for converting a current image in a standard dynamic range into an output image in a high dynamic range (para. [0032]: “[t]he present invention concerns a method for inverse tone mapping of an image I that is a SDR (or LDR) image. The image I is for example an image extracted from a video content received by an electronic device including an image processing device. The inverse tone mapping applied to the SDR image I converts said SDR image I into an HDR image I' that can be displayed by the HDR display in the expanded luminance range”), the method comprises:
obtaining a current image (the SDR or LDR image I is the current image);
obtaining an initial gain function of a first inverse tone mapping function (Fig. 2, step S1, paras. [0035]-[0042], the “predetermined expansion map” Ei(p) issued at sub step S12 constitutes the first inverse tone mapping function; see also page 21 of the present disclosure characterizing the first inverse tone mapping function of Guermoud et al. as having an “initial gain function” G(Y’));
obtaining a target luminance value (para. [0051] of Guermoud et al., the target luminance value corresponds to a first luminance threshold value TH1, which “is a luminance value ensuring that a predetermined percentage of the pixels of the image I have luminance values higher than said first threshold luminance value TH1”); and
responsive to at least a pixel of the current image with a luminance value at least equal to the target luminance value having an expanded value resulting from an application of the first inverse tone mapping function to the current image higher than a target expanded luminance value, applying a second inverse tone mapping function to the current image to obtain the output image (para. [0051] of Guermoud et al. teaches that the target expanded luminance value corresponds to a luminance threshold value TH2, which is “a luminance value of a pixel p of the image I that is tone mapped into a target maximal value of expanded luminance using the predetermined expansion map E(p)”; para. [0060] of Guermoud et al. teaches that after TH1 and TH2 have been determined, a test is performed to determine whether or not the second inverse tone mapping function, which corresponds to the corrected mapping function given by equation 2 of Guermoud et al., should be applied; the test comprises comparing TH1 to TH2 and applying the second inverse tone mapping function in response to determining that TH1>TH2, as explained in para. [0060] of Guermoud et al.), the second inverse tone mapping function corresponding to the first inverse tone mapping function in which the gain function has been replaced by a modified gain function (see page 21 of the present disclosure, lines 6-8, stating that Guermoud et al. teaches using a modified gain function in the second inverse tone mapping function that is a modification of the initial gain function of Guermoud et al.), the modified gain function being a function derived from the initial gain function in which a gain provided by the initial gain function is attenuated by an attenuation function (see page 21 of the present disclosure, lines 7-9, stating that Guermoud et al. teaches that the modified gain function is derived from the initial gain function in which the gain provided by the initial gain function is attenuated by an attenuation function), said attenuation function being an increasing function of luminance values weighted by a weighting factor controlling a strength of the attenuation (see page 21 of the present disclosure, lines 9-11 stating that Guermoud et al. teaches that the attenuation function is an increasing function of luminance values weighted by a weighting factor controlling a strength of the attenuation; see also Guermoud et al., para. [0048] discussing the attenuation function being an increasing function of weighted luminance values), the weighting factor depending on a statistical distribution of luminance values in an histogram of the current image between a maximum luminance value and the target luminance value (para. [0019] of Guermoud et al. teaches that the weighting factor is based on the first and second luminance value thresholds TH1 and TH2, respectively; Fig. 5 of Guermoud et al. shows a histogram that is used to determine the first luminance threshold value TH1 according to equation 4 of Guermoud et al.; TH1 is based on the statistical distribution of the pixel luminance values of the histogram shown in Fig. 5 because TH1 is determined based on the luminance values of the histogram in accordance with the relationship given by equation 4; specifically, TH1 is determined to be a point on the horizontal axis of the histogram corresponding to a pixel having lowest luminance value of a predetermined percentage of the pixels (e.g., 5%) having luminance values that range from the maximum luminance value of 255 to this lowest luminance value; this lowest luminance value is selected as TH1; therefore, the value of TH1 depends on the statistical distribution of luminance values between this lowest luminance value, which corresponds to the target luminance value of claim 1, and the maximum luminance value of the histogram; it follows that since the weighting factor depends at least in part on the value of TH1, the weighting factor depends, at least in part, on the statistical distribution of luminance values between this lowest luminance value, which corresponds to the target luminance value in claim 1, and the maximum luminance value of the histogram (e.g., 255));
otherwise, responsive to no pixel of the current image with a luminance value at least equal to the target luminance value having an expanded value resulting from an application of the first inverse tone mapping function to the current image higher than a target expanded luminance value, applying the first inverse tone mapping function to the current image to obtain the output image (In Guermoud et al., the first inverse tone mapping is applied in response to a determination that the expanded value does not exceed the target expanded luminance value TH2, as explained in para. [0024]: “the correcting step is executed only if the condition that said first luminance threshold value is superior to said second luminance threshold value is satisfied”, which means, otherwise the first inverse tone mapping function is applied).
Regarding claim 8, Guermoud et al. discloses that the target luminance value depends on a predetermined percentage of the pixels of the current image (in Guermoud et al., the target luminance value TH1 depends on a predetermined percentage of the pixels of the current image, para. [0051]: “a first luminance threshold value TH1 that is a luminance value ensuring that a predetermined percentage of the pixels of the image I have luminance values higher than said first threshold luminance value TH1”; see also para. [0054] of Guermoud et al. giving an example in which TH1 depends on 5% of the pixels having values greater than TH1).
Regarding claim 9, to the extent that claim 9 recites limitations that are recited in claim 1, the rejection of claim 1 applies mutatis mutandis to claim 9. The only limitations that are recited in claim 9 that are not also recited in claim 1 is electronic circuitry for performing the steps recited in claim 9, which are also recited in claim 1. Guermoud et al. discloses a device comprising electronic circuitry for performing the steps recited in claims 1 and 9 (paras. [0031] and [0033] and Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 16, the rejection of claim 8 applies mutatis mutandis to claim 16.
Regarding claim 17, the device of Fig. 1 of Guermoud et al. described in, for example, paras. [0031] and [0033] of Guermoud et al., can be a component of an apparatus such as, for example, a television, a set-top box, an HDR display, etc., as disclosed in para. [0031] of Guermoud et al.
Regarding claim 20, Guermoud et al. discloses memory devices for storing computer program instructions for performing the steps recited in claim 1 (para. [0031]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-7 and 10-15 would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter. Regarding claims 2 and 10, these claims recite:
browsing the histogram in descending order of luminance values from the maximum luminance value;
computing an intermediate weighting factor for each browsed luminance value while the browsed luminance value is at least equal to the target luminance value and on a result of an application of the first inverse tone mapping function to the browsed luminance value is at least equal to the target expanded luminance value; and
setting the value of the weighting factor to a value corresponding to a maximum of the computed intermediate weighting factor.
Neither Guermoud et al. nor any of the other prior art of record teach or suggest these limitations.
Claims 3-5 recite allowable subject matter due to their direct or indirect dependencies from claim 2.
Claims 11-13 recite allowable subject matter due to their direct or indirect dependencies from claim 10.
Claims 6 and 14 recite: the current image belongs to a video sequence and the electronic circuitry is also adapted for detecting scene cuts in the video sequence, the weighting factor controlling the strength of the attenuation depending also at least of one other weighting factor controlling the strength of the attenuation computed for another image of the video sequence preceding the current image, no scene cut having been detected between the current image and said another image. Neither Guermoud et al. nor any of the other prior art of record teach or suggest these limitations.
Claims 7 and 15 recite: verifying a monotonicity of a first inverse tone mapping curve obtained with the second inverse tone mapping function and modifying at least one parameter of the second inverse tone mapping function to obtain a monotonous second inverse tone mapping curve when the first inverse tone mapping curve is not monotonous. Neither Guermoud et al. nor any of the other prior art of record teach or suggest these limitations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Publ. Appl. No. 2016/0358319 A1 discloses methods and systems for performing inverse tone mapping in which weights used for tone mapping are assigned based on the statistical luminance distribution of a histogram.
U.S. Pat. No. 11,594,159 B2 discloses display apparatus, a display management module and a method for ambient light compensation are described. The display management module is configured to receive an input video signal comprising a sequence of video frames and to determine whether a current video frame of the sequence of video frames immediately follows a scene change. The display management module is further configured to adjust ambient light compensation applied to the input signal in dependence on the signal indicative of intensity of ambient light only in response to determining that the current video frame of the sequence of video frames immediately follows a scene change.
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 DANIEL J SANTOS whose telephone number is (571)272-2867. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Matt Bella can be reached on (571)272-7778. 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.
/DANIEL J. SANTOS/Examiner, Art Unit 2667
/MATTHEW C BELLA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2667