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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 7/1/2026 has been entered.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-11, filed 7/1/2026, with respect to 35 U.S.C.101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 1-21 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-3, 6, 7, 10-18, 20 and 21, 35 U.S.C 102 and Tamura have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. New references have been used to for the teachings specifically argued by applicant.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-3, 6, 10, 11, 14 and 21, 35 U.S.C 103 Rhee and Shmunk have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 14, filed 7/1/2026, with respect to 35 U.S.C. 103 and claims 4 and 5 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claims 4 and 5 has been withdrawn. While these claims not separately argued there the new grounds of rejection does not apply to these claims.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 8 9 and 19, 35 U.S.C 103 and Tamura and Schepelmann or Taguchi have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-9 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bertheau US 20140023266 A1.
Re claim 1 Bertheau discloses A method comprising convolving image signal intensity values associated with at least a portion of pixel locations in an image frame with kernel coefficients to provide an output image signal intensity value mapped to an output pixel location in the image frame, thereby providing a filtered output image (see paragraph 32 and 33 note that the image of each color plane is convolved with and edge detection matrix [corresponding to the filter kernel]),
kernel coefficients comprising part of a filter kernel to be applied to image signal intensity values for pixels in a first region of the at least a portion of pixel locations in the image frame are selected from a set of coefficient values (see paragraph 26 note that different edge detection matrices (kernels) may be used for detecting edges in the image) such that a same coefficient value is to be applied to image signal intensity values of multiple pixel locations in the first region (see paragraph 26 note that many of the edge detection kernels have pixel locations with the same coefficient value see for example the Prewitt kernel) having a same pixel color and within the same color (see paragraph 33 note that the matrix may be applied to each color component separately)
applying a further convolution operation to at least some of the image signal intensity values using a further kernel to generate a further output signal representing detected edges in the image frame (see paragraph 32 and 33 note that each color component of read green and blue image is convolved with a filter); and combining the filtered output image with the further output signal to generate a combined output signal having information regarding the detected edges (see paragraph 33 note that each color plane image is convolved with an edge detection kernel used to generate a new image [combined filtered output image], note the new image is a result of edge detection and therefore will be an output of detected edges).
Re claim 2 Bertheau discloses pixel locations in the first region are mapped to the same coefficient value of the set of coefficient values based, at least in part, on full- granularity coefficient values computed for the pixel locations in the first region (see paragraph 26 note that the edge detection kernel has a weight for each pixel in the window and as such is full granularity i.e. has a coefficient for each pixel location in the window).
Re claim 3 Bertheau discloses wherein the same coefficient value is computed based, at least in part, on full-granularity coefficient values including at least some of the full-granularity coefficient values computed for the pixel locations. (see paragraph 26 note that the edge detection filter kernels have a weight for each pixel in the window and as such is full granularity see paragraph 23 note that a same pixel value occurs in multiple locations of the filter).
Re claim 6 Bertheau discloses the same coefficient value is selected to be applied to the image signal intensity values of the multiple pixel locations based, at least in part, a location of the first region relative to the output pixel location (see paragraph 26 note that for example the Laplace kernel the filter value are vertically and horizontally symmetric about the center pixels meaning that pixel the same distance from the center pixel [the output location] will have the same value alternatively the Prewitt kernel has three regions comprising columns of the filter which each the same value )
Re claim 7 Bertheau discloses wherein the first region is peripheral to a second region the at least a portion of pixel locations in the image frame, the second region containing the output pixel location. (see also paragraph 26 the Prewitt operator and the Laplace operator for example and the first region could be for example all of the coefficients pixels with a value of 1, in the Laplace operator or the coefficients with 1 in the Prewitt operator the second region could include center pixel of each operator which corresponds to the output pixel)
Re claim 8 Bertheau discloses wherein: the first region is at a vertical periphery to the second region; a single kernel coefficient is applied to image signal intensity values of multiple pixel locations in the first region extending in a vertical direction; and kernel coefficients are applied with full granularity in a horizontal dimension (see paragraph 36 note that the vertical Prewitt convolution kernel has the same coefficient in vertical columns and different values in the horizontal direction ).
Re claim 9 Bertheau discloses wherein: the first region is at a lateral periphery to the second region; a single kernel coefficient is applied to image signal intensity values of multiple pixel locations in the first region extending in a horizontal direction; and kernel coefficients are applied with full granularity in a vertical dimension (see paragraph 26 note that the 8 connected Laplace convolution kernel has the same coefficient in horizontal direction for the first row and different values in the vertical direction of the second column).
Re claim 13 Bertheau discloses selecting between and/or among multiple modes to convolve the image signal intensity values associated with the at least a portion of pixel locations in the image frame (see paragraph 26 note that multiple different filter may be selected corresponding to the multiple modes ), the multiple modes to convolve including at least a first mode comprising application of the same coefficient value to image signal intensity values of the multiple pixel locations in the first region (see paragraph 26 note for example the Prewitt filter has multiple pixel locations with the same coefficient).
Re claim 14 Bertheau discloses wherein the same coefficient value is selected to be a reduced granularity coefficient value or a reduced precision value based, at least in part, on a location of the first region relative to the output pixel location (see paragraph 26 note that a chosen filter may have symmetrical properties so filter elements in symmetrical locations have the same value for example a center column may have a coefficient value of zero in the Prewitt or Sobel filter)
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.
Claim(s) 10-12 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bertheau US 20140023266 A1 in view of Tamura US 2019/0050967.
Re claim 10 Bertheau does not expressly disclose wherein convolving image signal intensity values associated with pixel locations in the first region comprises: summing image signal intensity values associated with two or more pixel locations in the first region; multiplying the summed image signal intensity values by the same coefficient value to compute a product; and determining the output image signal intensity value based, at least in part, on the computed product Tamura discloses wherein convolving image signal intensity values associated with pixel locations in the first region comprises: summing image signal intensity values associated with two or more pixel locations in the first region (see paragraph 53 -61 note that in the equation of paragraph 61 pixels with identical coefficients are summed then multiplied by the same value); multiplying the summed image signal intensity values by the same coefficient value to compute a product (see paragraph 53 -61 note that in the equation of paragraph 61 pixels with identical coefficients are summed then multiplied by the same value); and determining the output image signal intensity value based, at least in part, on the computed product. (see paragraph 53 -61 note that in the equation of paragraph 61 pixels with identical coefficients are summed then multiplied by the same value, this equation represents generating the output convolved value). The motivation to combine is it is made possible to suppress the operation cost (in the case of a hardware circuit, multiplier) (see paragraph 54). The examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art could have easily used the operation computational process of Tamura to speed up the calculations of Bertheau. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Bertheau and Tamura to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Re claim 11 Bertheau does not expressly disclose mapping image signal intensity values for at least some pixel locations in a second region of the image frame to a single image signal intensity value; multiplying the single image signal intensity value by a coefficient value selected from the set of coefficient values to compute a product; and determining the output image signal intensity value based, at least in part on the computed product Tamura discloses mapping image signal intensity values for at least some pixel locations in a second region of the image frame to a single image signal intensity value see paragraph 53 and equation 5 in particular in this case the pixel values of the 4 corners of the filter are all mapped to the sum of those values, then the sum of those values is multiplied by the filter coefficient which is the same for all the values); multiplying the single image signal intensity value by a coefficient value selected from the set of coefficient values to compute a product see paragraph 53 and equation 5 in particular in this case the pixel values of the 4 corners of the filter are all mapped to the sum of those values, then the sum of those values is multiplied by the filter coefficient which is the same for all the values) ; and determining the output image signal intensity value based, at least in part on the computed product (see paragraph 53 and 54 note that output of the convolution is based in part on the sum of values.) The motivation to combine is it is made possible to suppress the operation cost (in the case of a hardware circuit, multiplier) (see paragraph 54). The examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art could have easily used the operation computational process of Tamura to speed up the calculations of Bertheau. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Bertheau and Tamura to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Re claim 12 Bertheau does not expressly disclose wherein mapping the image signal intensity values comprises averaging the image signal intensity values. Tamura discloses wherein mapping the image signal intensity values comprises averaging the image signal intensity values. (see paragraph 45 note that an average processing is performed on original pixels prior to the smoothing processing this will affect the summation i.e. single values calculated in paragraph 53) The examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art could have easily used the operation computational process of Tamura to speed up the calculations of Bertheau. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Bertheau and Tamura to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Re claim 21 Bertheau discloses An apparatus comprising: medium; one or more processors coupled to the medium, the one or more processors to (see paragraph 53 and 54 “computer program product, comprising at least one sequence of instructions stored and readable by a processor and which, once read by this processor, causes steps b), c) and d) of the method as described above to be carried out. In one particular embodiment, the product can be a computer-readable medium containing the computer program product”): convolve image signal intensity values associated with at least a portion of pixel locations in an image frame with kernel coefficients to provide an output image signal intensity value mapped to an output pixel location in the image frame, thereby providing a filtered output image (see paragraph 32 and 33 note that the image of each color plane is convolved with and edge detection matrix [corresponding to the filter kernel] ),
kernel coefficients comprising part of a filter kernel to be applied to image signal intensity values for pixels in a first region of the at least a portion of pixel locations in the image frame are selected from a set of coefficient values (see paragraph 26 note that different edge detection matrices (kernels) may be used for detecting edges in the image) such that a same coefficient value is to be applied to image signal intensity values of multiple pixel locations in the first region (see paragraph 26 note that many of the edge detection kernels have pixel locations with the same coefficient value see for example the Prewitt kernel) having a same pixel color and within the same color (see paragraph 33 note that the matrix may be applied to each color component separately)
applying a further convolution operation to at least some of the image signal intensity values using a further kernel to generate a further output signal representing detected edges in the image frame (see paragraph 32 and 33 note that each color component of read green and blue image is convolved with a filter); and combining the filtered output image with the further output signal to generate a combined output signal having information regarding the detected edges (see paragraph 33 note that each color plane image is convolved with a edge detection kernel used to generate a new image [combined filtered output image], note the new image is a result of edge detection and therefore will be an output of detected edges).
Bertheau does not expressly disclose a memory device for storing the program. Tamura discloses a memory device for storing the program (see paragraph 92 “The storage medium may include, for example, one or more of a hard disk, a random-access memory (RAM), a read only memory (ROM), a storage of distributed computing systems, an optical disk (such as a compact disc (CD), digital versatile disc (DVD), or Blu-ray Disc (BD)™), a flash memory device, a memory card, and the like”). One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily replaced the medium of Bertheau with the medium of Tamura and the results (the computer program is stored in the memory) would have been predictable. The memory and the computer readable medium server the same function in both reference of merely storing the computer program. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Bertheau and Tamura.
Claim(s) 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hel-OR US 2005/0031222 in view of Tamura US 2019/0050967 in further view of Kim et al “Detection and correction of purple fringing using color desaturation in the xy chromaticity diagram and the gradient information” Image and Vision Computing Volume 28, Issue 6, June 2010, Pages 952-964.
Re claim 15 Hel-Or discloses A method comprising:; convolving image signal intensity values associated with the plurality of pixel locations in the portion of the image frame by applying one or more kernel coefficients comprising part of a filter kernel (see paragraph 62 and 63 note that that demosaicing is performed by filtering pixel wherein the same weight is applied to pixels of the same color ), wherein the convolving forms at least part of a demosaicing algorithm (see paragraph 62 and 63 note that that demosaicing is performed by filtering pixel wherein the same weight is applied to pixels of the same color )wherein same weights are applied within a same region of the filter kernel and having a same pixel color (see paragraph 62 and 63 note that that demosaicing is performed by filtering pixel wherein the same weight is applied to pixels of the same color )
Hel-Or does not expressly discloses
mapping original image signal intensity values of a plurality of pixel locations in a portion of an image frame to a single image signal intensity value to be representative of the pixel locations in an augmented portion of the image frame
convolving image signal intensity values associated with the plurality of pixel locations in the augmented portion of the image frame by applying one or more kernel coefficients comprising part of a filter kernel to the single image signal intensity value,
the single image signal intensity value corresponding to original signal intensity values within a same region of the filter kernel and having a same pixel color.
mapping original image signal intensity values of a plurality of pixel locations in a portion of an image frame to a single image signal intensity value to be representative of the pixel locations in an augmented portion of the image frame (see paragraph 53 and equation 5 in particular in this case the pixel values of the 4 corners of the filter are all mapped to the sum of those values, then the sum of those values is multiplied by the filter coefficient which is the same for all the values); and convolving image signal intensity values associated with the plurality of pixel locations in the augmented portion of the image frame by applying one or more kernel coefficients to the single image signal intensity value (see paragraph 53 and equation 5 in particular in this case the pixel values of the 4 corners of the filter are all mapped to the sum of those values, then the sum of those values is multiplied by the filter coefficient which is the same for all the values during the convolution operation)
the single image signal intensity value corresponding to original signal intensity values within a same region of the filter kernel (see paragraph 53 and equation 5 in particular in this case the pixel values of the 4 corners of the filter are all mapped to the sum of those values, then the sum of those values is multiplied by the filter coefficient which is the same for all the values, the region corresponds to the window of the filter). and having a same pixel color (see paragraph 40 “The processing explained here is performed independently for each of the three signals of RGB, but here, for simplification of explanation, a specific one color, for example, red is explained as an example.” Note that the filtering is performed independently for each color and therefore all the pixels will be of one-color plane e.g. red).
The motivation to combine is it is made possible to suppress the operation cost (in the case of a hardware circuit, multiplier) (see paragraph 54). The examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art could have easily used the operation computational process of Tamura to speed up the calculations. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Hel-Or and Tamura to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Hel-or and Tamura do not expressly disclose
detecting a region of the image frame comprising an image signal intensity value with a measured error associated with the demosaicing algorithm exceeding a threshold and processing a portion of image signals representing the region of the image frame to desaturate the region of the image frame;
Kim discloses detecting a region of the image frame comprising an image signal intensity value with a measured error associated with the demosaicing algorithm exceeding a threshold (see section 4.2 note that purple fringing is detected based on gradient above a threshold) and processing a portion of image signals representing the region of the image frame to desaturate the region of the image frame (see abstract note that areas of purple fringing are corrected using desaturation); The motivation to combine is to detect fringe artifacts see abstract. One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily used Kim correct fringe artifacts in the combination of Kim and Hel-Or. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Hel-Or Tamaru and Kim to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Re claim 16 Hel- Or further does not disclose determining the single image signal intensity value based, at least in part, on an average of the original image signal intensity values. Tamura further discloses determining the single image signal intensity value based, at least in part, on an average of the original image signal intensity values. ((see paragraph 53 note that representative image values are selected and summed to generate single summed value) The motivation to combine is it is made possible to suppress the operation cost (in the case of a hardware circuit, multiplier) (see paragraph 54). The examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art could have easily used the operation computational process of Tamura to speed up the calculations. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Hel-Or Tamaru and Kim to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Re claim 17 Hel- Or further does not disclose determining the single image signal intensity value based, at least in part, on selection of a representative image signal intensity value from among the original image signal intensity values. Tamura discloses determining the single image signal intensity value based, at least in part, on selection of a representative image signal intensity value from among the original image signal intensity values. (see paragraph 53 note that representative image values are selected and summed to generate single summed value) The motivation to combine is it is made possible to suppress the operation cost (in the case of a hardware circuit, multiplier) (see paragraph 54). The examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art could have easily used the operation computational process of Tamura to speed up the calculations. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Hel-Or Tamaru and Kim to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Re claim 18 Hel-Or further discloses kernel coefficients to be applied to image signal intensity values for pixels in the augmented portion of the image frame are selected from a set of coefficient values such that a same coefficient value is to be applied to image signal intensity values of multiple pixel locations in the augmented portion of the image frame. (see paragraph 62 and 63 note that the same coefficients are applied to each pixel value for each different kernel).
Re claim 19 Hel-Or discloses wherein: the image frame comprises a multi-color channel image frame; and the plurality of pixel locations in the augmented portion of the image frame are dis- contiguous and associated with a same color channel (see paragraph 62 and 63 and figure 11 and paragraph 1 note each location has one color value and demosaicing is performed by filtering pixels of the same color).
Re claim 20 Hel-Or discloses one or more kernel coefficients are applied to the single image signal intensity value responsive to a mode configured at runtime (see paragraph 62 and 63 note that different filters are used depending on which color is being interpolated and where). Hel-Or further does not disclose wherein the original image signal intensity values of the plurality of pixel locations are mapped to the single image signal intensity value. Tamura discloses wherein the original image signal intensity values of the plurality of pixel locations are mapped to the single image intensity (see paragraph 53 and equation 5 in particular in this case the pixel values of the 4 corners of the filter are all mapped to the sum of those values, then the sum of those values is multiplied by the filter coefficient which is the same for all the values,) The motivation to combine is it is made possible to suppress the operation cost (in the case of a hardware circuit, multiplier) (see paragraph 54). The examiner notes that one of ordinary skill in the art could have easily used the operation computational process of Tamura to speed up the calculations. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Hel-Or Tamaru and Kim to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 5 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Re claim 4 Lee US 2020/0372340 discloses wherein the same coefficient value is computed as an average of the full-granularity coefficient values (see paragraph 64 using an average of constituent weight parameter). However, it would not be obvious to combine Lee with Bertheau because Lee is related to neural network coefficient values.
RE claim 5 Edso US2024/0062063 discloses wherein the pixel locations in the first region are mapped to the same coefficient value based, at least in part, on an association of the full-granularity coefficient values with a range of values including the same coefficient value (see paragraph 48 note that coefficients are given the same value by “binning” i.e all the elements in the bin [i.e. range] are given the same value.) However, it would not be obvious to combine Lee with Bertheau because Edso is related to neural network coefficient values.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN T MOTSINGER whose telephone number is (571)270-1237. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM.
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, Chineyere Wills-Burns can be reached at (571) 272-9752. 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.
/SEAN T MOTSINGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2673
Prosecution Insights