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
Regarding claim 1, applicant’s argument is Metcalfe does not disclose determine a white point of the background; map entries based on the white point to one-dimensional look-up tables; and, perform trilinear interpolation based on the mapped data.
In response: Metcalfe discloses determine a white point of the background (e.g., In the absence of a user- selected highlight color, identified background pixels may be driven towards "pure white," by default (i.e., L*a*b*=255, 128, 128, respectively), referred to herein as white point mapping. In one embodiment, the default background adjustment may be based upon the "background strength" of a pixel (as opposed to being fully labeled/classified as "background" versus "non-background"), in a similar manner to the grayscale mapping method, paragraph 38);
map entries based on the white point to one-dimensional look-up tables; and, perform trilinear interpolation based on the mapped data (e.g., As illustrated in FIG. 14, when white point mapping is selected as the mode to be used for some or all of the image pixels, the input L*, a*, b* values 72 for these pixels may be processed by the white point mapping component 180. At 210, a difference value ΔL is computed by subtracting the input L* value from the maximum L* value (L.sub.max) of 255. Similarly, at 212 and 214, difference values Δa and Δb are computed by subtracting the input a* (resp. b*) value from the maximum a* value (a.sub.max*, resp. b.sub.max*) of 128, paragraph 103, figure 14).
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.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Metcalfe et al. (Metcalfe) (US 2022/0084211 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Metcalfe discloses an image processing system (e.g., FIG. 1 illustrates an exemplary image processing device 10, paragraph 47) comprising:
at least one processor (e.g., processor device 34, figure 1); and
at least one memory wherein the memory has instructions stored thereon that, when executed by the processor (e.g., memory device 30, instructions 32, figure 1), cause the system to:
receive input RGB image data (e.g., The image adjustment unit 12 receives an original digital image 16, such as a scanned image, in a first (input) color space, such as RGB, paragraph 47);
convert the input RGB image data to L*a*b* image data (e.g., The image adjustment unit 12 converts the original image 16 to a second color space, in particular, a luminance-chrominance color space, such as L*a*b*, paragraph 47);
process background of the L*a*b* image data (e.g., in which image adjustments are made to form an adjusted digital image 18. The adjustments may include background adjustment. The image adjustment unit 12 may convert the adjusted digital image 18 to an output digital image 20 in a third (output) color space, in which the output device 14 operates, such as CMYK, paragraph 47);
determine a white point of the background (e.g., In the absence of a user- selected highlight color, identified background pixels may be driven towards "pure white," by default (i.e., L*a*b*=255, 128, 128, respectively), referred to herein as white point mapping. In one embodiment, the default background adjustment may be based upon the "background strength" of a pixel (as opposed to being fully labeled/classified as "background" versus "non-background"), in a similar manner to the grayscale mapping method, paragraph 38); and
perform trilinear interpolation based on the mapped data (e.g., FIG. 4 illustrates background level determination by trilinear interpolation, paragraph 18).
Metcalfe disclose map entries based on the white point to a look-up tables (e.g., As illustrated in FIG. 14, when white point mapping is selected as the mode to be used for some or all of the image pixels, the input L*, a*, b* values 72 for these pixels may be processed by the white point mapping component 180. At 210, a difference value ΔL is computed by subtracting the input L* value from the maximum L* value (L.sub.max) of 255. Similarly, at 212 and 214, difference values Δa and Δb are computed by subtracting the input a* (resp. b*) value from the maximum a* value (a.sub.max*, resp. b.sub.max*) of 128, paragraph 103, figure 14).
Since Metcalfe disclosing In another embodiment, suited to direct highlight mapping, the background level 100 or average background level 108 may be thresholded or used to access a look up table, which generates a binary yes or no decision as to whether the pixel is classed as background or not, paragraph 81. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention Metcalfe also discloses including one-dimensional look-up tables.
Regarding claim 2, Metcalfe discloses wherein the system is further caused to: conduct post-process weighting (e.g., in other embodiments, a larger number of surrounding pixels may be considered. In some embodiments, different weights may be applied to surrounding pixels, e.g., depending on their closeness to the given pixel, paragraph 80).
Regarding claim 3, Metcalfe discloses wherein the system is further caused to: adjust background (e.g., the optional averaging component 92 (FIG. 3) adjusts the background level 100 of a given pixel, output by the background level determination component 90, to take into account the background levels 100 of a set of local (e.g., surrounding) pixels, paragraph 80).
Regarding claim 4, Metcalfe discloses wherein processing background comprises collecting a histogram of the L*a*b* image data (e.g., In the absence of a user-selected highlight color, identified background pixels may be driven towards "pure white," by default (i.e., L*a*b*=255, 128, 128, respectively), referred to herein as white point mapping, paragraph 38).
Regarding claim 5, Metcalfe discloses wherein processing background comprises analyzing the histogram of the L*a*b* image data to determine a background color value (e.g., The image adjustment unit 12 converts the original image 16 to a second color space, in particular, a luminance-chrominance color space, such as L*a*b*, in which image adjustments are made to form an adjusted digital image 18. The adjustments may include background adjustment, paragraph 47).
Regarding claim 6, Metcalfe discloses wherein processing background comprises processing or adjusting pixels based on proximity of a pixel value to the determined background color value (e.g., a background adjustment component which, for each of a plurality of pixels of an input image computes adjusted color values, as a function of at least one of: (a) a background adjustment factor computed for the respective pixel, and (b) a background class derived from the computed background adjustment factor. The background adjustment factor is a function of a background strength of the pixel and a luminance strength of the pixel. Memory also stores an image output component outputs an output image derived from the adjusted color values for the plurality of pixels. A processor implements the background adjustment component and image output component, paragraph 11).
Regarding claim 7, claim 7 is an image processing method claim with limitations similar of limitations of claim 1. Therefore, claim 7 is rejected as set forth above as claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, claim 8 is an image processing method claim with limitations similar of limitations of claim 2. Therefore, claim 8 is rejected as set forth above as claim 2.
Regarding claim 9, claim 9 is an image processing method claim with limitations similar of limitations of claim 3. Therefore, claim 9 is rejected as set forth above as claim 3.
Regarding claim 10, claim 10 is an image processing method claim with limitations similar of limitations of claim 4. Therefore, claim 10 is rejected as set forth above as claim 4.
Regarding claim 11, claim 11 is an image processing method claim with limitations similar of limitations of claim 5. Therefore, claim 11 is rejected as set forth above as claim 5.
Regarding claim 12, claim 12 is an image processing method claim with limitations similar of limitations of claim 6. Therefore, claim 12 is rejected as set forth above as claim 6.
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 is a non-transitory computer readable medium claim with limitations similar of limitations of claim 1. Therefore, claim 13 is rejected as set forth above as claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, claim 14 is a non-transitory computer readable medium claim with limitations similar of limitations of claim 2. Therefore, claim 14 is rejected as set forth above as claim 2.
Regarding claim 15, claim 15 is a non-transitory computer readable medium claim with limitations similar of limitations of claim 3. Therefore, claim 15 is rejected as set forth above as claim 3.
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 is a non-transitory computer readable medium claim with limitations similar of limitations of claim 4. Therefore, claim 16 is rejected as set forth above as claim 4.
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 is a non-transitory computer readable medium claim with limitations similar of limitations of claim 5. Therefore, claim 17 is rejected as set forth above as claim 5.
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 is a non-transitory computer readable medium claim with limitations similar of limitations of claim 6. Therefore, claim 18 is rejected as set forth above as claim 6.
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 is an image processing system claim with limitations similar of limitations of claim 1. Therefore, claim 19 is rejected as set forth above as claim 1.
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 QUANG N VO whose telephone number is (571)270-1121. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7AM-4PM, EST.
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, Mohammad K Ghayour can be reached at 571-272-3021. 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.
/QUANG N VO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2683
Prosecution Insights