DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Acknowledgement is made of Applicant’s claim of priority from the US provisional application 63/347,686 filed on 06/01/2022.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office Action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant’s submission filed on January 05, 2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because the claim recites “…determine based on the sizes of the variable-sized groupings of the lines; and supply the mapping …” should be “…determine based on the sizes of the variable-sized groupings of the lines;
Appropriate corrections are required.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments of independent claims 1, 8, and 15, which has altered the scope of the claims of the instant application, has necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this office action with respect to claims of the instant application. Accordingly, in response to Applicant’s arguments that are merely directed to the amended portion of the claims, new analyses have been presented below, which make Applicant’s arguments moot.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation 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. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpretated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Because the claim limitations use a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are, “the pre-processing component to write…” “the lens distortion correction component to read …” in claims 4-6, 11-13, and 15-20.
Because of these claim limitations being interpretated under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bellows et al. (US 10,547,849 B1), in view of Wu et al. (US 2017 /0330306 A1), and in further view of Mody et al. (US 2021/0326050 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Bellows teaches “A system (Bellows column 8 line 24-26 "system 100, according to the inventive concepts disclosed herein, further includes a CPU/Controller 114, a memory 116 and a DC sub-system 118"), comprising:
a processor in communication with an image processing subsystem (Bellows column 9 lines 51-54 "DC sub-system 118 may be communicatively coupled to the image/video source 102, the transmitter/receiver (e.g., transceiver) 104, the display 108, the CPU/Controller 114, and the memory 116"), wherein the processor is configured to:
identify a context of an input image (Bellows column 3 lines 50-67 and column 4 line 1 "during operation of the system or apparatus, the adjustment occurring due to input parameters that are subject to change. For example, scene input parameters may depend on a number of external factors (lighting, noise conditions, proximity to landmarks/features, depth parameters, or combinations thereof) and configuration input parameters may depend on aspects of the system configuration (e.g., lens type, viewing angle, collection optics, or combinations thereof)") captured by an imaging system, wherein the input image comprises lines of pixels that form a distorted representation of a scene (Bellows column 7 lines 65-66 "image processing system 100 configured to implement distortion correction includes an image/video source 102");
identify, based on the context of the input image (Bellows column 7 lines 47-49 "The SMT can be adapted in real-time to tune the correction function based on scene input parameters and configuration input parameters"), (Bellows column 12 lines 49-61 " The ADDR_INT block 136 may direct the processor 130 to retrieve first mapping values ( e.g., flow control parameters) for a row, and then retrieve second mapping values ( e.g., pixel coordinate values) for that row. For instance, referring now to FIG. 9, the flow control parameter values [0 ... 16] may be obtained for row 8, and the values [8 ... 24] for row 16. This means that output row 8 will use pixels from input rows O to 16, and output row 16 will use pixels from input rows 8 to 24. These flow control parameters tell the PIXEL_INT block 138 (as discussed below) a number of input rows required to be valid in the buffer 132 in order to process a respective output row to produce output data 142 "), wherein a size of each of the variable-sized groupings varies based on how many of the lines the image processing subsystem uses to produce each block row of an output image based on the mapping (Bellows column 12 lines 57-61 “These flow control parameters tell the PIXEL_INT block 138 (as discussed below) a number of input rows required to be valid in the buffer 132 in order to process a respective output row to produce output data 142 ")” and column 7 lines 36-39 "a dynamically configurable data structure (e.g., SMT) to provide input image mapping values from which distortion correction values (e.g., flow control parameters, pixel coordinates, and pixel intensities) are interpolated"),
Bellows is not relied on to teach “a mapping of variable-sized groupings”, and “wherein the size of each of the variable- sized groupings further varies based on an available capacity of the buffer, and wherein the memory ranges in the buffer are determined based on the sizes of the variable-sized groupings of the lines; and supply the mapping to the image processing subsystem; and the image processing subsystem comprising a pre-processing component and a lens distortion correction component, wherein the image processing subsystem is configured to: receive the mapping from the processor; instruct the pre-processing component to write the variable-sized groupings of the input image to corresponding ones of the memory ranges in the buffer; and instruct the lens distortion correction component to read the variable-sized groupings from the corresponding ones of the memory ranges to produce the block rows of the output image.”
However, Wu teaches “a mapping of variable-sized groupings (Wu paragraph [0030] "The non corrected distorted image is buffered in the memory. To perform correction, according to a section and the distortion map, a corresponding block of data required by the section is retrieved from the memory. The amount of each block of data is smaller than or equal to the memory capacity of the corresponding memory block")” and
“wherein the size of each of the variable- sized groupings further varies based on an available capacity of the buffer, and wherein the memory ranges in the buffer are determined based on the sizes of the variable-sized groupings of the lines (Wu paragraph [0030] "In step S620, a plurality of blocks of data of the distorted image is retrieved from a memory. The non corrected distorted image is buffered in the memory. To perform correction, according to a section and the distortion map, a corresponding block of data required by the section is retrieved from the memory. The amount of each block of data is smaller than or equal to the memory capacity of the corresponding memory block. Further, because distortion levels of the blocks are different, the sizes of different blocks of data required for correcting the individual blocks are also different"); and
supply the mapping to the image processing subsystem (Wu paragraph [0024] "The correction circuit 210 retrieves a block of data from a memory block of the buffer 206 according to the memory configuration, and generates a part of the corrected image according to the block of data. In continuation of the above example, when the memory controller 204 writes the 10 blocks of data required for correcting one horizontal line to the 10 corresponding memory blocks in the buffer 206, the correction circuit 210 reads these blocks of data from the buffer 206 according to the memory addresses recorded in the memory configuration, and performs the correction process according to the distortion map. More specifically, the correction circuit 210 re-orders the pixels in the distorted image according to the distortion map to restore these pixels to corresponding positions in the corrected image. Similarly, during the process of re-ordering the pixels, interpolation may be performed when necessary. After the correction circuit 210 respectively corrects the 10 sections shown in FIG. 5, the distorted curve 312 may be ideally corrected to the horizontal line 304"); and
the image processing subsystem comprising a pre-processing component and a lens distortion correction component (Wu paragraph [0025] "the memory controller 204, the buffer 206, the allocation circuit 208 and the correction circuit 210 are located within the same integrated circuit, whereas the memory 202 is outside the integrated circuit. In another embodiment, the memory 202, the memory controller 204, the buffer 206, the allocation circuit 208 and the correction circuit 210 may be located in the same integrated circuit. The allocation circuit 208 may be implemented by one or multiple processors in conjunction with software, and the memory configuration may be stored in a flash memory"), wherein the image processing subsystem is configured to:
receive the mapping from the processor (Wu paragraph [0024] "The correction circuit 210 retrieves a block of data from a memory block of the buffer 206 according to the memory configuration, and generates a part of the corrected image according to the block of data");
(Wu paragraph [0030] "In step S620, a plurality of blocks of data of the distorted image is retrieved from a memory. The non corrected distorted image is buffered in the memory. To perform correction, according to a section and the distortion map, a corresponding block of data required by the section is retrieved from the memory. The amount of each block of data is smaller than or equal to the memory capacity of the corresponding memory block"); and
(Wu paragraph [0032] "In step S640, a block of data is retrieved from a memory block of the buffer, and a part of the corrected image is generated according to the block of data. After the block of data is obtained from the buffer, pixels in the block of data are re-ordered according to the distortion map to correct a part of the distorted image, so as to obtain a part of the corrected image corresponding the block of data. Because the distortion map contains resolution limitations, interpolation is performed on the distortion map during the process of re-ordering the pixels when necessary").”
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention of the instant application to combine an image distortion correction system as taught by Bellows to include dynamic sized groupings of data into a buffer as taught by Wu.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been that there is a need in the field of medical imaging to achieve improved CT imaging results, " It is an object of the present invention to provide a distorted image correcting apparatus and method capable of reducing the usage amount of a buffer without affecting the correction capability, so as to increase the utilization efficiency of the buffer as well as reducing the usage amount of system resources and power consumption" as noted by the Wu disclosure in paragraph 5.
The combination of Bellows and Wu is not relied on to teach “instruct the pre-processing component to write the variable-sized groupings of the image to corresponding ones of the memory ranges in the buffer; and instruct the lens distortion correction component to read the variable-sized groupings from the corresponding ones of the memory ranges to produce the block rows of the output image.”
However, Mody teaches “instruct the pre-processing component to write the variable-sized groupings of the image to corresponding ones of the memory ranges in the buffer (Mody Fig 5. and paragraph [0035] "the HTS 410: 1) schedules reads/writes 524 between the local memory 432 and the image processing pipeline 520; 2) schedules reads/writes 534 between the local memory 432 and the PTE") ; and
instruct the lens distortion correction component to read the variable-sized groupings from the corresponding ones of the memory ranges to produce the block rows of the output image (Mody paragraph [0035] "the HTS 410: 1) schedules reads/writes 524 between the local memory 432 and the image processing pipeline 520; 2) schedules reads/writes 534 between the local memory 432 and the PTE").”
PNG
media_image1.png
682
915
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Mody Fig. 5
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention of the instant application to combine an image distortion correction system with dynamic sized groupings of data as taught by Bellows and Wu to components of the integrated circuit for reading and writing mapped input image for an undistorted output image as taught by Mody.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been that "By using local memory 432 for PTE input operations instead of or in combination with the external memory 404, the amount of external memory bandwidth that is dedicated to PTE input operations is reduced. This use of the local memory 432 improves latency of the external memory 404 for other operations. There is also the possibility of costs savings for the external memory 404" as noted by the Mody disclosure in paragraph 0031.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the disclosure of Bellows and Wu with the Mody disclosure to obtain the invention as specified in claim 15 as there is a reasonable expectation of success and/or because doing so merely combines prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Claim 1 recites a method with steps corresponding to the system elements
recited in claim 15. Therefore, the recited steps of claim 1 are mapped to the
proposed combination in the same manner as the corresponding elements of system
claim 15. Additionally, the rationale and motivation to combine the Bellows, Wu, and Mody references, presented in rejection of claim 15 apply to claim 1.
Claim 8 recites a computer readable storage medium including computer executable instructions corresponding to the elements of the system recited in claim 15. Therefore, the recited instructions of the computer readable storage medium of claim 8 are mapped to the proposed combination in the same manner as the corresponding elements of the system claim 15. Additionally, the rationale and motivation to combine Bellows, Wu, and Mody presented in rejection of claim 15, apply to claim 8.
Consider claim 16 (similarly claim 2 and claim 9), the combination Bellows, Wu, and Mody discloses “the system of claim 15, wherein the mapping further comprises correlations between the block rows of the output image and corresponding ones of the memory ranges in the buffer (Bellows column 12 lines 50-58 "direct the processor 130 to retrieve first mapping values ( e.g., flow control parameters) for a row, and then retrieve second mapping values ( e.g., pixel coordinate values) for that row. For instance, referring now to FIG. 9, the flow control parameter values [0 ... 16] may be obtained for row 8, and the values [8 ... 24] for row 16. This means that output row 8 will use pixels from input rows O to 16, and output row 16 will use pixels from input rows 8 to 24").”
Consider claim 17 (similarly claim 3 and claim 10), the combination of Bellows, Wu, and Mody discloses “the system of claim 15, wherein the block rows of the output image form an undistorted representation of the scene (Mody Fig. 3 and paragraph [0026] "the remapping provided by the PTE operations removes or reduces the lens distortion").”
PNG
media_image2.png
940
763
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Mody Figure 3
The proposed combination as well as the motivation for Bellows, Wu, and Mody references presented in the rejection of claim 15, apply to claim 17 and are incorporated herein by reference. Thus, the system recited in claim 17 is met by Bellows, Wu, and Mody.
Consider claim 4 (similarly claim 11), the combination of Bellows, Wu, and Mody teaches “the method of claim 2, wherein the image processing subsystem comprises an image pre-processing component configured to write pixel data of the variable-sized groupings to the memory ranges in the buffer and a lens distortion correction component configured to read the pixel data from the memory ranges (Mody Fig 5. and paragraph [0035] "the HTS 410: 1) schedules reads/writes 524 between the local memory 432 and the image processing pipeline 520; 2) schedules reads/writes 534 between the local memory 432 and the PTE") to produce the block rows of the output image (Mody Fig. 7 and paragraph [0045] "At block 708, the bounding boxes are retrieved from the local memory to perform PTE operations that remap a perspective of the image").”
PNG
media_image3.png
451
563
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Mody Fig. 7
The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining Bellows, Wu, and Mody references presented in the rejection of claim 15, apply to claim 4 and are incorporated herein by reference. Thus, the method recited in claim 4 is met by Bellows, Wu, and Mody.
Consider claim 5 (similarly claim 12), the combination of Bellows, Wu, and Mody discloses “the method of claim 4, further comprising instructing the image pre-processing component to write the pixel data to the corresponding memory ranges (Mody paragraph [0045] "At block 704, bounding boxes are created for a target row of blocks of an image based on the determined block size and a memory size of a local memory. At block 706, the bounding boxes are stored in the local memory").”
The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining Bellows, Wu, and Mody references presented in the rejection of claim 15, apply to claim 5 and are incorporated herein by reference. Thus, the method recited in claim 5 is met by Bellows, Wu, and Mody.
Consider claim 6 (similarly claim 13), the combination of Bellows, Wu, and Mody discloses “the method of claim 5, further comprising instructing the lens distortion correction component to read the pixel data from the corresponding memory ranges to produce the block rows of the output image (Mody [0045] "At block 708, the bounding boxes are retrieved from the local memory to perform PTE operations that remap a perspective of the image").”
The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining Bellows, Wu, and Mody references presented in the rejection of claim 15, apply to claim 6 and are incorporated herein by reference. Thus, the method recited in claim 6 is met by Bellows, Wu, and Mody.
Consider claim 18 (similarly claim 7 and claim 14), the combination of Bellows, Wu, and Mody discloses “the system of claim 15, wherein the context of the image comprises one or more of properties of a lens that captured the image, a perspective of the image, and a resolution of the image (Bellows column 4 lines 17-48 "These input values may include, but are not limited to, type of lens ( e.g., concave, convex, positive meniscus, negative meniscus, or combinations thereof), parameters related to the lens ( e.g., focal length, refractive index, radius of curvature, thickness, optical axis, number, or combinations thereof), a magnification factor, a type of aberration experienced by the system (e.g., spherical comatic, chromatic, barrel, pincushion, field curvature, or combinations thereof), presence or absence of an optical filter, type of optical filter, parameters related to the optical filter (e.g., transmitted wavelength, blocked wavelength, or combinations thereof), light emitting elements (e.g., light emitting diodes (LEDs), infrared light emitters, lasers, or combinations thereof), type of system power ( e.g., battery supplied, alternating current (AC), direct current (DC), solar, or combinations thereof), amount of available power, power requirements of system components or processes, type of optical system ( e.g., 2D camera or 3D camera), type of photosensor ( e.g., charge-coupled device (CCD) or complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor (CMOS) device for capturing light) or combinations thereof […] These input values may include, but are not limited to, lighting, noise conditions, landmarks or features, proximity to landmarks or features, object tracking values (e.g., position, speed, linear acceleration, or combinations thereof), or combinations thereof").”
Consider claim 19, the combination of Bellows, Wu, and Mody discloses “the system of claim 15, wherein the variable-sized groupings comprise a first subset of the lines of the pixels corresponding to a first block row of the output image and a second subset of the lines of the pixels corresponding to a second block row of the output image (Mody paragraph [0026] "Relative to the first image 302, the second image 332 removes or reduces the effect of lens distortion on the image. In the second image 332, blocks 314B are remapped versions of blocks 314A, blocks 318B are remapped versions of blocks 318A, blocks 320B are remapped versions of blocks 320A, and blocks 322B are remapped versions of blocks 322A").”
The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining Bellows, Wu, and Mody references presented in the rejection of claim 15, apply to claim 19 and are incorporated herein by reference. Thus, the system recited in claim 19 is met by Bellows, Wu, and Mody.
Consider claim 20, the combination of Bellows, Wu, and Mody discloses “The system of claim [[19]]15, wherein the size of each of variable-sized groupings further varies based on a pixel density of a corresponding portion of the input image (Wu paragraph [0030] "The noncorrected distorted image is buffered in the memory. To perform correction, according to a section and the distortion map, a corresponding block of data required by the section is retrieved from the memory. The amount of each block of data is smaller than or equal to the memory capacity of the corresponding memory block. Further, because distortion levels of the blocks are different, the sizes of different blocks of data required for correcting the individual blocks are also different")
The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining Bellows, Wu, and Mody references presented in the rejection of claim 15, apply to claim 20 and are incorporated herein by reference. Thus, the system recited in claim 20 is met by Bellows, Wu, and Mody.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASPREET KAUR whose telephone number is (571)272-5534. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30 am - 5:30 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, Amandeep Saini can be reached at (571)272-3382. 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.
/JASPREET KAUR/Examiner, Art Unit 2662
/AMANDEEP SAINI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2662
Prosecution Insights