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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 have bene previously presented.
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 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogasawara, U.S. Patent No 11,216,907 (hereinafter Ogasawara) in view of Chou et al., U.S. Patent No 11,024,012 (hereinafter Chou).
Regarding Claim 1, Ogasawara teaches a system (Col. 5, Lines 40-57, Fig. 4, Embodiment 1; Col. 15, Lines 24-39, Fig. 9, Embodiment 2; Col. 19, Lines 3-10) comprising:
an electronic display (Col. 15, Lines 24-39, Fig. 4, Fig. 9, head-mounted display 100) configured to display an image frame (display image 70), the image frame having a plurality of resolutions based on display image data (Col. 9, Lines 40-47), wherein the image frame is divided into a plurality of regions having respective resolutions of the plurality of resolutions (Col. 6, Lines 65-67, Col. 7 Lines 1-11, resolution controlling section 54); and
image processing circuitry (Col. 5, Lines 7-26, Col. 5, Lines 58-63, Fig. 3, internal circuit of image generating apparatus 10; Col. 5, Lines 40-57, Fig. 4, image generating apparatus 10; Col. 15, Lines 24-39, Col. 15, Lines 40-44, Fig. 9, image generating apparatus 200; Col. 15, Lines 54-60) configured to generate the display image data based on multi-resolution image data of the image frame (Col. 4, Lines 13-19; Col. 16, Lines 29-38), wherein generating the display image data comprises: adjusting the enhancement to be applied to the portion of the multi-resolution image data based on boundary data associated with locations of boundaries between the plurality of regions (Col. 10, Lines 38-49, image analyzing apparatus; Col. 13, Lines 27-33; Col. 15, Lines 6-9; Col. 16, Lines 29-38).
Ogasawara fails to teach:determining an enhancement to be applied to a portion of the multi-resolution image data.
However, Chou further teaches a system (Col. 5, Lines 46-63; Fig. 1, electronic device 10; Col. 20, Lines 24-31) comprising an electronic display (display 12) and image processing circuitry (image processing circuitry 27) determining an enhancement to be applied to a portion of the multi-resolution image data (Col. 19, Lines 54-67).
Ogasawara and Chou are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of image enhancement. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Chou to incorporate the teachings of Ogasawara in order to teach a system determining an enhancement to be applied to a portion of the multi-resolution image data. Doing so would broaden the enhancement of the output, resulting in a higher quality displayed image.
Regarding Claim 2, Ogasawara teaches the system of Claim 1, wherein generating the display image data comprises: applying the adjusted enhancement to the portion of the multi-resolution image data to generate enhanced image data (Col. 11, 56-60); and blending the enhanced image data and additional image data of the image frame (Col. 11, 60-64).
Regarding Claim 3, Ogasawara teaches the system of Claim 2, wherein the additional image data comprises captured image data (Col. 4, Lines 24-26) and the multi-resolution image data comprises rendered graphics image data (Col. 4, Lines 27-34).
Regarding Claim 4, Chou teaches the system of Claim 1, wherein determining the enhancement to be applied to the portion of the multi-resolution image data comprises performing an example-based enhancement (Fig. 20, determine example-based improvement 240), wherein performing the example-based enhancement for a pixel value of the portion of the multi-resolution image data (Col. 18, Lines 13-29) comprises performing a comparison of a first pixel group comprising a first plurality of pixel values including the pixel value (Fig 19, high resolution input 216) and a second pixel group comprising a second plurality of pixel values corresponding to same pixel position of the first plurality of pixel values, wherein (Fig. 19, low resolution input 214) the second plurality of pixel values are generated based at least in part on filtering of the first plurality of pixel values (Fig. 19, filter 218, filtered low resolution input 220).
Regarding Claim 5, Chou teaches the system of Claim 4, wherein the comparison comprises a difference between a first weighted average of a first subset of the first plurality of pixel values of the first pixel group and a second weighted average of a second subset of the second plurality of pixel values of the second pixel group (Col. 18, Lines 59-63; Fig. 19, comparison and weight sub-block 222).
Regarding Claim 6, Ogasawara teaches the system of Claim 1, wherein the enhancement to be applied to a pixel value of a channel of the portion of the multi-resolution image data comprises (Fig. 11, set resolution S34; Col. 20, Lines 10-48, resolution controlling sections 54, 254).
Regarding Claim 7, Ogasawara teaches the system of Claim 1, wherein adjusting the enhancement to be applied to the pixel value of the portion of the multi-resolution image data comprises interpolating an enhancement factor for the pixel value from a plurality of enhancement scaling factors (Col. 9, Lines 40-48, image forming section 66) and applying the enhancement factor to the enhancement to be applied to the pixel value (Col. 14, Lines 20-30, image generating section 56).
Regarding Claim 8, Chou in view of Ogasawara teaches the system of Claim 7, wherein the plurality of enhancement scaling factors corresponds to a plurality of enhancement grid points disposed at corresponding grid point positions relative to the image frame, the corresponding grid point positions based on the boundary data (Chou, Col. 16, Lines 9-13, Fig. 16, pixel grid 180), wherein interpolation of the enhancement factor is based on a pixel location of the pixel value in relation to the corresponding grid point positions (Ogasawara, Col. 7, Lines 29-32; Col. 11, Lines 41-44; Col. 17, 18-23).
Regarding Claim 9, Chou teaches the system of Claim 1, wherein the multi-resolution image data comprises a chromatic color space format comprising a luma channel (Fig. 18, luma processing sub-block 204, chrominance processing sub-block 206), and wherein determining the enhancement to be applied to the portion of the multi-resolution image data (Fig. 8, enhance luma and chrominance pixel data 80; Fig. 20, determine a chrominance transition enhancement 248) comprises determining a value change for a pixel value of the luma channel of the portion of the multi-resolution image data (Fig. 20, determine a luma transition improvement 244).
Regarding Claim 10, Chou teaches the system of Claim 1, wherein determining the enhancement to be applied to the portion of the multi-resolution image data comprises applying one or more peaking filters to a luma channel of the portion of the multi-resolution image data (Col. 17, Lines 57-67, Col. 18, Lines 1-2, luma transition improvement 208).
Regarding Claim 11, Ogasawara teaches the system of Claim 1, wherein a center region of the plurality of regions is centered about a focal point of a user eye gaze on the electronic display (Col. 7, Lines 12-16), wherein the locations of the boundaries between the plurality of regions are adjustable and based on the focal point (Col. 6, Lines 65-67, Col. 7, Lines 1-11).
Regarding Claim 12, Ogasawara in view of Chou teaches the image processing circuitry (Ogasawara, Col. 15, Lines 24-39; Fig. 9, Embodiment 2, image generating apparatus 200) comprising:
enhancement circuitry configured to (Chou, Col. 6, Lines 66-67, Col. 7, Lines 1-4; Col. 16, Lines 9-13, Fig. 16, pixel grid 180) generate enhancement data indicative of gains to be applied to corresponding pixel values of an image frame of multi-resolution image data (Ogasawara, Col. 7, Lines 60-67, Col. 8, Lines 1-4; Col. 9, Lines 26-29, measurement section 62, gaze point detector; Col. 9, Lines 40-47, image forming section 66; Col. 16, Lines 29-38, image generating section 256, resolution controlling section 254), wherein the image frame is divided into a plurality of regions having respective resolutions of a plurality of resolutions (Ogasawara, Col. 8, Lines 53-57, output section 54; Col. 16, Lines 38-43; Col. 17, 18-23, Fig. 7, image 78, gaze area 80b with the gaze point 76b as a center has the standard resolution, resolution of the area outside of the gaze area 80b is reduced); and blend circuitry configured to adjust the enhancement data based on boundary data associated with locations of boundaries between the plurality of regions (Ogasawara, Col. 11, Lines 60-64).
Regarding Claim 13, Chou in view of Ogasawara teaches the image processing circuitry of Claim 12, wherein the blend circuitry is configured to adjust the enhancement data for a pixel of interest based on a pixel location of the pixel relative to an enhancement grid (Chou, Col. 16, Lines 9-13, Fig. 16, pixel grid 180), wherein grid point positions of the enhancement grid are based on the boundary data grid (Ogasawara, Col. 6, Lines 65-67, Col. 7, Lines 1-11).
Regarding Claim 14, Ogasawara in view of Chou teaches the image processing circuitry of Claim 13, wherein adjusting the enhancement data for the pixel of interest comprises: interpolating an enhancement factor for the pixel of interest from a first subset of a plurality of enhancement scaling factors (Ogasawara, Col. 6, Lines 65-67, Col. 7, Lines 1-11; Col. 9, Lines 40-48), wherein the plurality of enhancement scaling factors corresponds to a second subset of a plurality of enhancement grid points of the enhancement grid (Chou, Col. 16, Lines 9-13, Fig. 16, pixel grid 180); and applying the enhancement factor to the enhancement data for the pixel of interest (Chou, Col.19, Lines 54-67, Fig. 18, enhancement block 64, 198 enhanced image data).
Regarding Claim 15, Chou in view of Ogasawara of teaches the image processing circuitry of Claim 14, wherein enhancement grid points of the plurality of enhancement grid points (Chou, pixel grid 180) further from a reference point correspond to lower enhancement scaling factors of the plurality of enhancement scaling factors. (Ogasawara, (Col. 17, 18-23, Fig. 7, image 78, gaze area 80b with the gaze point 76b as a center has the standard resolution, resolution of the area outside of the gaze area 80b is reduced).
Regarding Claim 16, Ogasawara teaches the image processing circuitry of Claim 15, wherein the boundary data is based on the reference point (Fig. 7, gaze point 76b), and wherein the reference point corresponds to a user eye gaze relative to an electronic display (Col. 17, Lines 20-25).
Claims 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ogasawara in view of Zhang et al., U.S. Patent No 8,717,459 (hereinafter Zhang).
Regarding Claim 17, Ogasawara teaches a non-transitory machine-readable medium comprising instructions (Col. 2, Lines 41-47), wherein, when executed by one or more processors (Col. 5, Lines 27-39, Fig. 3, CPU 23), the instructions cause the one or more processors to perform operations or to control image processing circuitry to perform the operations, wherein the operations comprise: determining boundary data associated with locations of boundaries between a plurality of regions that define areas of different content resolutions of an image frame of multi-resolution image data (Col. 6, Lines 65-67, Col. 7, Lines 4-11); and adjusting the enhancement to be applied to the portion of the multi-resolution image data based on the boundary data (Col. 11, Lines 60-64).
Ogasawara fails to teach:determining an enhancement to be applied to a portion of the multi-resolution image data;
However, Zhang teaches a non-transitory machine-readable medium comprising instructions, wherein, when executed by one or more processors (Col. 4, Lines 28-32), the instructions cause the one or more processors to perform operations or to control image processing circuitry to perform the operations, wherein the operations comprise: determining an enhancement to be applied to a portion of the multi-resolution image data (Fig. 3, classifying a scene 300, classify image 304, derived metadata and image intensity).
Ogasawara and Zhang are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of digital scene analysis and processing. Therefore, it would be obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zhang to incorporate the teachings of Ogasawara to provide determining an enhancement to be applied to a portion of the multi-resolution image data. Doing so would enable selective enhancements to applied to enhance relevant portions of the image based on the classification.
Regarding Claim 18, Ogasawara in view of Zhang teaches the non-transitory machine-readable medium of Claim 17. Ogasawara fails to teach the limitation of tone-based enhancement. Zhang teaches the non-transitory medium of Claim 18, wherein determining the enhancement to be applied comprises performing a tone-based enhancement (Col. 4, Lines 28-32), wherein the tone-based enhancement comprises correlating a color tone of the portion of the multi-resolution image data with a type of image content of a plurality of types of image content (Col. 2, Lines 32-37).
Regarding Claim 19, Ogasawara in view of Zhang teaches the non-transitory machine-readable medium of Claim 18. Ogasawara fails to teach the limitation of different types of image content of the plurality of types of image content are associated with different enhancements. Zhang teaches the non-transitory machine-readable medium of Claim 19, wherein different types of image content of the plurality of types of image content are associated with different enhancements (Col. 2, Lines 27-32).
Regarding Claim 20, Ogasawara in view of Zhang teaches the non-transitory machine-readable medium of Claim 17. Ogasawara fails to teach the limitation of adjusting the enhancement to be applied. Zhang teaches the non-transitory medium of Claim 20, wherein the operations comprise adjusting the enhancement to be applied (Zhang, Col. 2, Lines 27-32) based on values of alpha data indicative of how different portions of the multi-resolution image data are to be combined with other image data (Ogasawara, Col. 11, Lines 60-64).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 08/11/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In regards to claim 1, the applicant’s arguments state that nothing in Ogasawara suggests adjusting an enhancement to be applied to a portion of the multi resolution data. However, Ogasawara clearly teaches enhancing a portion of multi resolution data in col. 13 lines 27-33: “…the position or shape of the area having the standard resolution may be adaptively changed corresponding to the direction in which the head is moved. In addition, instead of causing the resolution to differ between the gaze area and the area other than the gaze area, the resolution of the area for which the gazing is desired as the contents of the image may be made higher than that of the other area. For example, in terms of the contents of the game, the resolutions of the area in which the important object is represented, the area in the direction of travel of the user in the virtual world, the central area of the field of view, and the like may be made high.“. In this citation Ogasawara clearly adjusts the resolution of the central gazing area, thereby producing a multi resolution data in which the gazing area resolution is higher than that of the peripheral areas outside the central field of view. Therefore the applicant’s arguments in regards to claim 1 are unpersuasive in view of the teachings of Ogasawara.
In regards to claim 1, the applicant’s arguments state that the Examiner’s interpretation of Ogasawara disclosing “enhancement” is impermissibly broad and inconsistent with the ordinary meaning of the term “enhancement”. However, the teachings of Ogasawara are not inconsistent with the ordinary meaning of the term enhancement because the applicant’s own Specification in [0006] lines 9-11 defines enhancement as merely increasing the resolution of image data, which is clearly taught by Ogasawara in col. 13 lines 27-33. Therefore Ogasawara’s enhancement provided in col. 13 lines 27-33 is analogous to the enhancement recited in claim 1, in which Ogasawara’s enhancement clearly increases the resolution of the gazing area to further enhance the field of view experience. Therefore the applicant’s arguments in regards to claim 1 are unpersuasive in view of the teachings of Ogasawara.
In regards to claim 1, the applicant’s arguments state that Ogasawara does not teach methods resulting in a higher quality displayed image. However, Ogasawara’s enhancement method results in a higher resolution quality image in col. 13 lines 27-33: “…the position or shape of the area having the standard resolution may be adaptively changed corresponding to the direction in which the head is moved. In addition, instead of causing the resolution to differ between the gaze area and the area other than the gaze area, the resolution of the area for which the gazing is desired as the contents of the image may be made higher than that of the other area. For example, in terms of the contents of the game, the resolutions of the area in which the important object is represented, the area in the direction of travel of the user in the virtual world, the central area of the field of view, and the like may be made high.“. Therefore the applicant’s arguments in regards to claim 1 are unpersuasive in view of the teachings of Ogasawara.
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 SAID BROOME whose telephone number is (571)272-2931. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am-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.
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.
/Said Broome/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2612
Prosecution Insights