DETAIL OFFICE ACTIONS
The United States Patent & Trademark Office appreciates the response filed for the current application that is submitted on 12/01/2025. The United States Patent & Trademark Office reviewed the following documents submitted and has made the following comments below.
Amendment
Applicant submitted amendments on 12/01/2025. The Examiner acknowledges the amendment and has reviewed the claims accordingly.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS(s) dated 10/26/2023 that have been previously considered remain placed in the application file.
Overview
Claims 1-15 are pending in this application and have been considered below.
Claims 1-15 are rejected.
Applicant Arguments:
In regards to the argument on Argument 1, Applicant/s state/s “Amendments and
additions presented in this Response are supported by the originally-filed specification, e.g., paras. [0026]-[0027], [0048]-[0057], and FIG. 2. No new matter is added.” (See Remarks, page 10, paragraph 1).
In regards to the argument on Argument 2, Applicant/s state/s “Gong does not process image data of each image block by using the same target network model ( emphasis added). Therefore, using different image processing models for different image blocks, as disclosed by Gong, is apparently different from "processing image data of each image block by using the target network model to obtain each target image block," therefore, the rejection of 35 U.S.C. 103 should be withdrawn (See Remarks, page 11, paragraph 4).
In regards to the argument on Argument 3, Applicant/s state/s “Therefore, Gong discourages and teaches away from processing the image blocks using a single target network model.” therefore, the rejection of 35 U.S.C. 103 should be withdrawn (See Remarks, page 11, paragraph 4).
In regards to the argument on Argument 4, Applicant/s state/s “Therefore, Gong does not disclose or teach ‘dividing a to-be-processed image into blocks to obtain a plurality of image blocks based on a preset image block alignment rule in a target network model ... and extended areas of adjacent image blocks partially overlap with one another,’ and ‘processing image data of each image block by using the target network model to obtain each target image block,’ as required in claim 1. " therefore, the rejection of 35 U.S.C. 103 should be withdrawn (See Remarks, page 11-12, paragraph 5-1).
In regards to the argument on Argument 5, Applicant/s state/s “Lee fails to cure the deficiencies of Gong. Gong and Lee, combined, still lack the features discussed above. For at least the above reasons, the amended independent claim l is allowable over Gong and Lee. Similarly, amended independent claims 6 and 11, reciting claim features similar to those
recited in claim 1, are also allowable over Gong and Lee for the same reason. Their dependent
claims 2-3, 7-8, and 12-13 are also allowable at least by virtue of dependency.’” therefore, the rejection of 35 U.S.C. 103 should be withdrawn (See Remarks, page 12, paragraph 2-3).
In regards to the argument on Argument 6, Applicant/s state/s “Gong and Lee do not disclose or teach at least the above-quoted elements in amended independent claim 1. Tsuchida was relied on merely for its purported disclosures of other claim elements, not the above-quoted elements recited in amended independent claim 1, and missing from Gong and Lee as explained above. Thus, Tsuchida does not cure the deficiencies of Gong and Lee. Therefore, amended independent claims 1, 6, and 11 are allowable, and dependent claims 4-5, 9-10, and 14-15 are also allowable at least by virtue of dependency.’” therefore, the rejection of 35 U.S.C. 103 should be withdrawn (See Remarks, page 12, paragraph 6).
Examiner’s Responses:
In response to Argument 1, Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 12/01/25, with respect to no new matter being introduced in the amendments, however the examiner respectfully disagrees. Upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made for 2-3, 7-8, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a). See rejection below.
In response to Argument 2, Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 12/01/25, with respect
to the rejection(s) of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn due to the amendment. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made for Claim 1 and its dependent claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 in view of Gong et al (CN 111598796 A (using translation from IP.com) hereafter referred to as Gong) in view of Lee et al (US Patent Publication 2019/0188539 A1 hereafter referred to as Lee) in further view of Wu et al (CN 111598796 A (using translation from espacenet and images from Google translate) hereafter referred to as Wu).
The Examiner finds that Gong teaches on the amended claim language “processing image data of each image block” and “to obtain each target image block” in Claim 1 with the amendment changing the scope of the “target network model”.
Specifically, Gong teaches portioning the image into a plurality of image blocks to be processed in Pg 5 ¶09 and Pg 2 ¶13 and obtaining the target image block in Pg 2 ¶11 and Pg 5 ¶09-¶10 and Pg 9 ¶05. Applicant argues that “using different image processing models for different image blocks, as disclosed by Gong, is apparently different from "processing image data of each image block by using the target network model to obtain each target image block," as recited in claim 1, However, the Examiner interprets that Gong teaches the main concept of a method for processing image blocks to obtain a target image block, the additional details of the function and characteristics of the main concepts as stated above by the applicant in the amendments is taught by Wu in the details of the rejection below. The Examiner will maintain prior art Gong and details of the rejection are below.
In response to Argument 3, Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 12/01/25, with respect
to the rejection(s) of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn due to the amendment. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made for Claim 1 and its dependent claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 in view of Gong et al (CN 111598796 A (using translation from IP.com) hereafter referred to as Gong) in view of Lee et al (US Patent Publication 2019/0188539 A1 hereafter referred to as Lee) in further view of Wu et al (CN 111598796 A (using translation from espacenet and images from Google translate) hereafter referred to as Wu).
The Examiner finds that Gong teaches on the amended claim language “processing image blocks” in Claim 1 with the amendment changing the scope of the “target network model”.
Specifically, Gong teaches processing image blocks in Pg 9 ¶10 and Pg 2 ¶05 and Pg 12 ¶01. Applicant argues that “Therefore, Gong discourages and teaches away from processing the image blocks using a single target network model” as recited in claim 1, However, the Examiner interprets that Gong teaches the main concept of a method for processing image blocks to obtain a target image block, the additional details of the function and characteristics of the main concepts as stated above by the applicant in the amendments is taught by Wu in the details of the rejection below. Additionally the applicant argues there is a single target network model however this limitation is not reflected in the claims. The opinion in In re Hiniker Co., 47 USPQ2d 1523 (Fed. Cir. 1998) stated "...the name of the game is the claim. See Giles Sutherland Rich, Extent of Protection and Interpretation of Claims--American Perspectives , 21 Int'l Rev. Indus. Prop.& Copyright L. 497, 499 (1990) (“The U.S. is strictly an examination country and the main purpose of the examination, to which every application is subjected, is to try to make sure that what each claim defines is patentable. To coin a phrase, the name of the game is the claim.”)." The Examiner will maintain prior art Gong and details of the rejection are below.
In response to Argument 4, Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 12/01/25, with respect
to the rejection(s) of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn due to the amendment. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made for Claim 1 and its dependent claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 in view of Gong et al (CN 111598796 A (using translation from IP.com) hereafter referred to as Gong) in view of Lee et al (US Patent Publication 2019/0188539 A1 hereafter referred to as Lee) in further view of Wu et al (CN 111598796 A (using translation from espacenet and images from Google translate) hereafter referred to as Wu).
The Examiner finds that Gong teaches on the amended claim language “dividing a to-be-processed image into blocks to obtain a plurality of image blocks” and “processing image data of each image block” in Claim 1 with the amendment changing the scope of the “target network model and extended areas of adjacent image blocks partially overlap with one another” and “by using the target network model to obtain each target image block”.
Specifically, Gong teaches dividing to be processed image into blocks in Pg 9 ¶01, Pg 4 ¶07, Pg 5 ¶09, and Fig 4. Gong also specifically teaches processing the image data of the blocks in Pg 12 ¶07 and Pg 9 ¶06. Applicant argues that “Therefore, Gong does not disclose or teach ‘dividing a to-be-processed image into blocks to obtain a plurality of image blocks based on a preset image block alignment rule in a target network model ... and extended areas of adjacent image blocks partially overlap with one another,’ and ‘processing image data of each image block by using the target network model to obtain each target image block,’ as required in claim 1.” as recited in claim 1, However, the Examiner interprets that Gong teaches the main concept of a method for processing image blocks to obtain a target image block, the additional details of the function and characteristics of the main concepts as stated above by the applicant in the amendments is taught by Wu in the details of the rejection below. The Examiner will maintain prior art Gong and details of the rejection are below.
In response to Argument 5, Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 12/01/25, with respect
to the rejection(s) of claims 1, 6, and 11 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn due to the amendment. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made for Claim 1, 6 and 11 and its dependent claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 in view of Gong et al (CN 111598796 A (using translation from IP.com) hereafter referred to as Gong) in view of Lee et al (US Patent Publication 2019/0188539 A1 hereafter referred to as Lee) in further view of Wu et al (CN 111598796 A (using translation from espacenet and images from Google translate) hereafter referred to as Wu).
The Examiner finds that Lee teaches on the amended claim language “extracting target effective image areas” and “in respective target image blocks separately” in Claim 1 with the amendment changing the scope of the “target network model”.
Specifically, Lee teaches extracting an effective area of the image areas in each target image block in ¶0134 and ¶0088. Applicant argues that “Lee fails to cure the deficiencies of Gong. Gong and Lee, combined, still lack the features discussed above.”. However, the Examiner interprets that Lee teaches the concept of extracting effective target areas in each of the image blocks, the additional details of the function and characteristics of the main concepts as stated above by the applicant in the amendments is taught by Gong and Wu in the details of the rejection below. The Examiner will maintain prior art Lee and details of the rejection are below.
In response to Argument 6, Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 12/01/25, with respect
to the rejection(s) of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn due to the amendment. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made for Claim 1 and its dependent claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 in view of Gong et al (CN 111598796 A (using translation from IP.com) hereafter referred to as Gong) in view of Lee et al (US Patent Publication 2019/0188539 A1 hereafter referred to as Lee) in further view of Wu et al (CN 111598796 A (using translation from espacenet and images from Google translate) hereafter referred to as Wu).
The Examiner finds that Gong and Lee teaches on the amended claim language in Claim 1 and Tsuchida teaches on the claim language in the dependent claims.
Applicant argues that “Tsuchida does not cure the deficiencies of Gong and Lee. Therefore, amended independent claims 1, 6, and 11 are allowable, and dependent claims 4-5, 9-10, and 14-15 are also allowable at least by virtue of dependency.”. However, the Examiner interprets that Gong and Lee and Wu teaches the main concept in Claim 1 and, the additional details of the function and characteristics of the main concepts in the as stated above by the applicant in the dependent claims is taught by Tsuchida in the details of the rejection below. The Examiner will maintain prior art Tsuchida and details of the rejection are below.
Claim Interpretation
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.
Under MPEP 2143.03, "All words in a claim must be considered in judging the patentability of that claim against the prior art." In re Wilson, 424 F.2d 1382, 1385, 165 USPQ 494, 496 (CCPA 1970). As a general matter, the grammar and ordinary meaning of terms as understood by one having ordinary skill in the art used in a claim will dictate whether, and to what extent, the language limits the claim scope. Language that suggests or makes a feature or step optional but does not require that feature or step does not limit the scope of a claim under the broadest reasonable claim interpretation. In addition, when a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art. See, e.g., Fresenius USA, Inc. v. Baxter Int’l, Inc., 582 F.3d 1288, 1298, 92 USPQ2d 1163, 1171 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
Claim 6 recite “or ” then listing “a memory having a computer program or an instruction
stored thereon”. Since “or” is disjunctive, any one of the elements found in the prior art is sufficient to reject the claim. While citations have been provided for completeness and rapid prosecution, only one element is required. Because, on balance, it appears the disjunctive interpretation enjoys the most specification support and for that reason the disjunctive interpretation (one of A, B OR C) is being adopted for the purposes of this Office Action. Applicant’s comments and/or amendments relating to this issue are invited to clarify the claim language and the prosecution history.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 2-3, 7-8, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 2 recites “…non-image block …”. Applicant identifies paragraphs [0026]-[0027], [0048]-[0057], and FIG. 2. in the specification of the instant application to support the amendments. However, the recited paragraphs fail to describe in a meaningful way Applicant’s amendment for “non-image block”. Paragraphs ¶0043, ¶0045, ¶0073, and ¶0087 of the specification there is description of "non-central image block". Therefore the amended limitation of “non-image block” is not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one of ordinary skill in the art that the inventors, at the time the application was files, had possession of the claimed invention. Analogous claim 7 and 12 are similarly rejected. Claim 3, dependent on claim 2, Claim 8, dependent on claim 7, and Claim 13, dependent on claim 12 are rejected because of their dependencies.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102
and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
Claims 1-3, 6-8, and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Gong
et al (CN 111598796 A (using translation from IP.com) hereafter referred to as Gong) in view of Lee et al (US Patent Publication 2019/0188539 A1 hereafter referred to as Lee) in further view of Wu et al (CN 111598796 A (using translation from espacenet and images from Google translate) hereafter referred to as Wu).
Regarding Claim 1, Gong teaches an image processing method (Gong, Abs, discloses a
image processing method), comprising:
dividing a to-be-processed image into blocks to obtain a plurality of image blocks (Gong
Pg 5 ¶09 disclose partitioning an image into a plurality of image blocks to be processed), wherein each image block comprises an effective image area and an extended area (Gong Pg 6 ¶01 discloses different models being used to process different areas of the image blocks);
processing image data of each image block (Gong Pg 9 ¶06 discloses the to be
processed image being processed based on an image processing model corresponding to a target image category) to obtain each target image block (Gong Pg 5 ¶09 disclose partitioning an image into a plurality of image blocks to be processed);
combining the target effective image areas (Gong Pg 12 ¶01-¶02 discloses fusing the
image block together based on weights) to generate a target image (Gong Pg 13 ¶01 discloses the image blocks being fused iteratively to form an output image).
Gong does not explicitly teach extracting target effective image areas in each target image block separately.
Lee is in the same field of image processing. Further, Lee teaches extracting target effective image areas (Lee ¶0134, ¶0088 discloses preforming extraction of a gradient in an image) in each target image block separately (Lee ¶0134, ¶0088 discloses performing gradient extraction on each image block as an input).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Gong by incorporating targeting a specific area of the image, determining a storage location, and a central block and the arrangement of the blocks as taught by Lee, to make an invention that can preserve or enhance the image data information in each image block depending on the target; thus, one of ordinary skilled in the art would be motivated to combine the references since an object of the present invention is to develop a technology capable of performing flexible image processing and improving an image processing speed. (Lee, ¶0013).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Gong and Lee in combination do not explicitly disclose based on a preset image block alignment rule in a target network model and extended areas of adjacent image partially overlap with one another by using the target network model.
Wu is in the same field of same field of image processing for improving image quality. Further, Wu teaches based on a preset image block alignment rule (Wu Pg 7 ¶06 and Pg 4 ¶13 discloses the blocks being stitched in the order of the blocks according to the block order ) in a target network model (Wu Pg 1 ¶05 and Pg 1 ¶07-¶08 disclose a mosaic prediction method that is a trained model that segments and performs block prediction on the images, not matter the stitching method) and extended areas of adjacent image (Wu Pg 1 ¶07 and Figure 1 disclose adjacent blocks overlapping blocks with area outside of the center area) partially overlap with one another (Wo Figure 1 and Pg 1 ¶07 and Pg 4 ¶13 disclose the blocks partially overlapping) by using the target network model (Wu Pg 1 ¶05 and Pg 1 ¶07-¶08 disclose a mosaic prediction method that is a trained model that segments and performs block prediction on the images, not matter the stitching method).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Gong in view of Lee by incorporating a preset block alignment rule in the network and the extended areas of the images overlapping with one another as well as non-image blocks a plurality of blocks as taught by Wu, to make an invention that can enhance the quality of the image using the surrounding image block features; thus, one of ordinary skilled in the art would be motivated to combine the references since an object of the present invention is to reduce the splicing trace problem inside the image splicing, the method further and then discarded because the original outer edge to the expansion prediction, it is possible to improve the original outer edge prediction result (Wu, Pg 3 ¶14).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 2, Gong in view of Lee in view of Wu teaches the image processing
method according to claim 1, wherein before processing the image data of each image block by using the target network model (Gong Pg 9 ¶06 discloses the to be processed image being processed based on an image processing model corresponding to a target image category) to obtain each target image block (Gong Pg 5 ¶09 disclose partitioning an image into a plurality of image blocks to be processed), the method further comprises:
determining a storage location of the image data (Lee ¶0017-¶0019, discloses storing the image data based on the correlation of the image block to other image block vectors) of each image block in a memory (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory) corresponding to the target network model based (Gong Pg 9 ¶06 discloses the to be processed image being processed based on an image processing model corresponding to a target image category) on a location of each image block in the to-be- processed image (Gong Pg 11 ¶08 discloses different areas of the image have different requirements for processing); and
storing image data (Lee ¶0017-¶0019, discloses storing the image data based on the correlation of the image block to other image block vectors) of a central image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory) around a center of the central image block (Lee Fig 8B discloses 5 being the central block as all other blocks are located around it), and storing the image data (Lee ¶0017-¶0019, discloses storing the image data based on the correlation of the image block to other image block vectors) of each non-image (Wu Pg 5 ¶05 disclose discarding the edge image blocks and only retaining the core image blocks for the image) block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory) along a target boundary of each non-central image block separately (Lee Fig 8A discloses how boundaries separate each image block from the central and how the blocks are denoted with numbers), wherein the plurality of image blocks (Wu Fig 1 disclose a plurality of image blocks where the central image block is surrounded by other image blocks) comprise one central image block and a plurality of non-central image blocks (Gong Figure 4 discloses how the image block is divided into multiple pieces and there is one central block in the middle), and a boundary in which a boundary of an effective area of each image block overlaps a boundary of the image block (Gong Fig 4 discloses a boundary of the image that is effective or wanted as can been seen by the dark line in the image reproduced below) is considered as the target boundary (Gong Fig 4, Pg 4 ¶07, Pg 8 ¶12-13 discloses a boundary of the image that is effective or wanted as can been seen by the dark line in the image reproduced below as the target of the image needing to be output).See rationale for Claim 1, its parent claim.
PNG
media_image1.png
306
704
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Gong Figure 4 (using translated image from Google Translate)
Regarding Claim 3, Gong in view of Lee in view of Wu teaches the image processing
method according to claim 2, wherein when the to-be-processed image is divided into 9 image blocks that are arranged in three rows and three columns (Lee Fig 8B and ¶0151 discloses dividing the image into 9 blocks with 3 columns and three rows), storing the image data (Lee ¶0017-¶0019, discloses storing the image data based on the correlation of the image block to other image block vectors) of the central image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory) around the center of the central image block (Lee Fig 8B discloses 5 being the central block as all other blocks are located around it), and storing (Lee ¶0017-¶0019, discloses storing the image data based on the correlation of the image block to other image block vectors) of each image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory) along the target boundary of each non-central image block (Lee Fig 8A discloses how boundaries separate each image block from the central and how the blocks are denoted with numbers) separately comprises:
along an upper boundary and a left boundary of a first image block in the first row and the first column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "1"), storing image data of the first image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory);
along an upper boundary of a second image block in the first row and the second column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "2"), storing image data of the second image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory);
along an upper boundary and a right boundary of a third image block in the first row and the third column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "3"), storing image data of the third image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory);
along a left boundary of a fourth image block in the second row and the first column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "4"), storing image data of the fourth image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory);
around a center of a fifth image block in the second row and the second column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "5"), storing image data of the fifth image block, wherein the fifth image block (Lee Fig 8B discloses 5 being the central block) is the central image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory);
along a right boundary of a sixth image block in the second row and the third column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "6"), storing image data of the sixth image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory);
along a lower boundary and a left boundary of a seventh image block in the third row and the first column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "7"), storing image data of the seventh image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory);
along a lower boundary of an eighth image block in the third row and the second column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "8"), storing image data of the eighth image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory); and
along a lower boundary and a right boundary of a ninth image block in the third row and the third column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "9"), storing image data of the ninth image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory). See rationale for Claim 1, its parent claim.
PNG
media_image2.png
367
408
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Lee Figure 8B
Regarding Claim 6, Gong teaches an electronic device (Gong Pg 8 ¶02 discloses an
electronic device), comprising a processor (Gong Pg 5 ¶18 discloses an electronic device comprising a processor); and
memory having a computer program or an instruction stored thereon (Gong Pg 5 ¶18 discloses a memory for storing executable instructions), wherein the computer program or the instruction, when executed by the processor (Gong Pg 5 ¶18 discloses preforming an image processing method through executable instructions), causes the processor to perform operations (Gong Pg 5 ¶18 discloses preforming a processor preforming image processing method through executable instructions) comprising:
dividing a to-be-processed image into blocks to obtain a plurality of image blocks (Gong Pg 5 ¶09 disclose partitioning an image into a plurality of image blocks to be processed), wherein each image block comprises an effective image area and an extended area (Gong Pg 6 ¶01 discloses different models being used to process different areas of the image blocks);
processing image data of each image block (Gong Pg 9 ¶06 discloses the to be processed image being processed based on an image processing model corresponding to a target image category) to obtain each target image block (Gong Pg 5 ¶09 disclose partitioning an image into a plurality of image blocks to be processed);
combining the target effective image areas (Gong Pg 12 ¶01-¶02 discloses fusing the image block together based on weights) to generate a target image (Gong Pg 13 ¶01 discloses the image blocks being fused iteratively to form an output image).
Gong does not explicitly teach extracting target effective image areas in each target image block separately.
Lee is in the same field of image processing. Further, Lee teaches extracting target effective image areas (Lee ¶0134, ¶0088 discloses preforming extraction of a gradient in an image) in each target image block separately (Lee ¶0134, ¶0088 discloses performing gradient extraction on each image block as an input).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Gong by incorporating targeting a specific area of the image, determining a storage location, and a central block and the arrangement of the blocks as taught by Lee, to make an invention that can preserve or enhance the image data information in each image block depending on the target; thus, one of ordinary skilled in the art would be motivated to combine the references since an object of the present invention is to develop a technology capable of performing flexible image processing and improving an image processing speed. (Lee, ¶0013).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Gong and Lee in combination do not explicitly disclose based on a preset image block alignment rule in a target network model and extended areas of adjacent image partially overlap with one another by using the target network model.
Wu is in the same field of same field of image processing for improving image quality. Further, Wu teaches based on a preset image block alignment rule (Wu Pg 7 ¶06 and Pg 4 ¶13 discloses the blocks being stitched in the order of the blocks according to the block order ) in a target network model (Wu Pg 1 ¶05 and Pg 1 ¶07-¶08 disclose a mosaic prediction method that is a trained model that segments and performs block prediction on the images, not matter the stitching method) and extended areas of adjacent image (Wu Pg 1 ¶07 and Figure 1 disclose adjacent blocks overlapping blocks with area outside of the center area) partially overlap with one another (Wo Figure 1 and Pg 1 ¶07 and Pg 4 ¶13 disclose the blocks partially overlapping) by using the target network model (Wu Pg 1 ¶05 and Pg 1 ¶07-¶08 disclose a mosaic prediction method that is a trained model that segments and performs block prediction on the images, not matter the stitching method).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Gong in view of Lee by incorporating a preset block alignment rule in the network and the extended areas of the images overlapping with one another as well as non-image blocks a plurality of blocks as taught by Wu, to make an invention that can enhance the quality of the image using the surrounding image block features; thus, one of ordinary skilled in the art would be motivated to combine the references since an object of the present invention is to reduce the splicing trace problem inside the image splicing, the method further and then discarded because the original outer edge to the expansion prediction, it is possible to improve the original outer edge prediction result (Wu, Pg 3 ¶14).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 7, Gong in view of Lee in view of Wu teaches the electronic device
according to claim 6, wherein before processing the image data of each image block by using the target network model (Gong Pg 9 ¶06 discloses the to be processed image being processed based on an image processing model corresponding to a target image category) to obtain each target image block (Gong Pg 5 ¶09 disclose partitioning an image into a plurality of image blocks to be processed), the method further comprises:
determining a storage location of the image data (Lee ¶0017-¶0019, discloses storing the image data based on the correlation of the image block to other image block vectors) of each image block in a memory (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory) corresponding to the target network model based (Gong Pg 9 ¶06 discloses the to be processed image being processed based on an image processing model corresponding to a target image category) on a location of each image block in the to-be- processed image (Gong Pg 11 ¶08 discloses different areas of the image have different requirements for processing); and
storing image data (Lee ¶0017-¶0019, discloses storing the image data based on the correlation of the image block to other image block vectors) of a central image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory) around a center of the central image block (Lee Fig 8B discloses 5 being the central block as all other blocks are located around it), and storing the image data (Lee ¶0017-¶0019, discloses storing the image data based on the correlation of the image block to other image block vectors) of each non-image (Wu Pg 5 ¶05 disclose discarding the edge image blocks and only retaining the core image blocks for the image) block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory) along a target boundary of each non-central image block separately (Lee Fig 8A discloses how boundaries separate each image block from the central and how the blocks are denoted with numbers), wherein the plurality of image blocks (Wu Fig 1 disclose a plurality of image blocks where the central image block is surrounded by other image blocks) comprise one central image block and a plurality of non-central image blocks (Gong Figure 4 discloses how the image block is divided into multiple pieces and there is one central block in the middle), and a boundary in which a boundary of an effective area of each image block overlaps a boundary of the image block (Gong Fig 4 discloses a boundary of the image that is effective or wanted as can been seen by the dark line in the image reproduced below) is considered as the target boundary (Gong Fig 4, Pg 4 ¶07, Pg 8 ¶12-13 discloses a boundary of the image that is effective or wanted as can been seen by the dark line in the image reproduced below as the target of the image needing to be output).
PNG
media_image1.png
306
704
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Gong Figure 4 (using translated image from Google Translate)
Regarding Claim 8, Gong in view of Lee in view of Wu teaches the electronic device
according to claim 7, wherein when the to-be-processed image is divided into 9 image blocks that are arranged in three rows and three columns (Lee Fig 8B and ¶0151 discloses dividing the image into 9 blocks with 3 columns and three rows) , storing the image data (Lee ¶0017-¶0019, discloses storing the image data based on the correlation of the image block to other image block vectors) of the central image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory) around the center of the central image block (Lee Fig 8B discloses 5 being the central block as all other blocks are located around it), and storing (Lee ¶0017-¶0019, discloses storing the image data based on the correlation of the image block to other image block vectors) of each image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory) along the target boundary of each non-central image block (Lee Fig 8A discloses how boundaries separate each image block from the central and how the blocks are denoted with numbers) separately comprises:
along an upper boundary and a left boundary of a first image block in the first row and the first column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "1") , storing image data of the first image block(Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory) ;
along an upper boundary of a second image block in the first row and the second column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "2"), storing image data of the second image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory);
along an upper boundary and a right boundary of a third image block in the first row and the third column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "3"), storing image data of the third image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory);
along a left boundary of a fourth image block in the second row and the first column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "4"), storing image data of the fourth image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory);
around a center of a fifth image block in the second row and the second column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "5"), storing image data of the fifth image block, wherein the fifth image block (Lee Fig 8B discloses 5 being the central block) is the central image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory);
along a right boundary of a sixth image block in the second row and the third column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "6") , storing image data of the sixth image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory);
along a lower boundary and a left boundary of a seventh image block in the third row and the first column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "7") , storing image data of the seventh image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory);
along a lower boundary of an eighth image block in the third row and the second column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "8"), storing image data of the eighth image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory); and
along a lower boundary and a right boundary of a ninth image block in the third row and the third column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "9"), storing image data of the ninth image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory). See rationale for Claim 6, its parent claim.
PNG
media_image2.png
367
408
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Lee Figure 4B
Regarding Claim 11, Gong teaches a non-transitory computer readable storage medium (Lee
¶0244 discloses a non-transitory storage medium)storing a computer program or an instruction that (Gong Pg 5 ¶18 discloses a memory for storing executable instructions), when executed by a processor, causes the processor to perform operations (Gong Pg 5 ¶18 discloses preforming a processor preforming image processing method through executable instructions) comprising:
dividing a to-be-processed image into blocks to obtain a plurality of image blocks (Gong Pg 5 ¶09 disclose partitioning an image into a plurality of image blocks to be processed), wherein each image block comprises an effective image area and an extended area (Gong Pg 6 ¶01 discloses different models being used to process different areas of the image blocks);
processing image data of each image block (Gong Pg 9 ¶06 discloses the to be processed image being processed based on an image processing model corresponding to a target image category) to obtain each target image block (Gong Pg 5 ¶09 disclose partitioning an image into a plurality of image blocks to be processed);
combining the target effective image areas (Gong Pg 12 ¶01-¶02 discloses fusing the image block together based on weights) to generate a target image (Gong Pg 13 ¶01 discloses the image blocks being fused iteratively to form an output image).
Gong does not explicitly teach extracting target effective image areas in each target image block separately.
Lee is in the same field of image processing. Further, Lee teaches extracting target effective image areas (Lee ¶0134, ¶0088 discloses preforming extraction of a gradient in an image) in each target image block separately (Lee ¶0134, ¶0088 discloses performing gradient extraction on each image block as an input).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Gong by incorporating targeting a specific area of the image, determining a storage location, and a central block and the arrangement of the blocks as taught by Lee, to make an invention that can preserve or enhance the image data information in each image block depending on the target; thus, one of ordinary skilled in the art would be motivated to combine the references since an object of the present invention is to develop a technology capable of performing flexible image processing and improving an image processing speed. (Lee, ¶0013).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Gong and Lee in combination do not explicitly disclose based on a preset image block alignment rule in a target network model and extended areas of adjacent image partially overlap with one another by using the target network model.
Wu is in the same field of same field of image processing for improving image quality. Further, Wu teaches based on a preset image block alignment rule (Wu Pg 7 ¶06 and Pg 4 ¶13 discloses the blocks being stitched in the order of the blocks according to the block order ) in a target network model (Wu Pg 1 ¶05 and Pg 1 ¶07-¶08 disclose a mosaic prediction method that is a trained model that segments and performs block prediction on the images, not matter the stitching method) and extended areas of adjacent image (Wu Pg 1 ¶07 and Figure 1 disclose adjacent blocks overlapping blocks with area outside of the center area) partially overlap with one another (Wo Figure 1 and Pg 1 ¶07 and Pg 4 ¶13 disclose the blocks partially overlapping) by using the target network model (Wu Pg 1 ¶05 and Pg 1 ¶07-¶08 disclose a mosaic prediction method that is a trained model that segments and performs block prediction on the images, not matter the stitching method).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Gong in view of Lee by incorporating a preset block alignment rule in the network and the extended areas of the images overlapping with one another as well as non-image blocks a plurality of blocks as taught by Wu, to make an invention that can enhance the quality of the image using the surrounding image block features; thus, one of ordinary skilled in the art would be motivated to combine the references since an object of the present invention is to reduce the splicing trace problem inside the image splicing, the method further and then discarded because the original outer edge to the expansion prediction, it is possible to improve the original outer edge prediction result (Wu, Pg 3 ¶14).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 12, Gong in view of Lee in view of Wu teaches the non-transitory computer
readable storage medium according to claim 11, wherein before processing the image data of each image block by using the target network model (Gong Pg 9 ¶06 discloses the to be processed image being processed based on an image processing model corresponding to a target image category) to obtain each target image block (Gong Pg 5 ¶09 disclose partitioning an image into a plurality of image blocks to be processed), the method further comprises:
determining a storage location of the image data (Lee ¶0017-¶0019, discloses storing the image data based on the correlation of the image block to other image block vectors) of each image block in a memory (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory) corresponding to the target network model based (Gong Pg 9 ¶06 discloses the to be processed image being processed based on an image processing model corresponding to a target image category) on a location of each image block in the to-be- processed image (Gong Pg 11 ¶08 discloses different areas of the image have different requirements for processing); and
storing image data (Lee ¶0017-¶0019, discloses storing the image data based on the correlation of the image block to other image block vectors) of a central image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory) around a center of the central image block (Lee Fig 8B discloses 5 being the central block as all other blocks are located around it), and storing the image data (Lee ¶0017-¶0019, discloses storing the image data based on the correlation of the image block to other image block vectors) of each non-image (Wu Pg 5 ¶05 disclose discarding the edge image blocks and only retaining the core image blocks for the image) block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory) along a target boundary of each non-central image block separately (Lee Fig 8A discloses how boundaries separate each image block from the central and how the blocks are denoted with numbers), wherein the plurality of image blocks (Wu Fig 1 disclose a plurality of image blocks where the central image block is surrounded by other image blocks) s comprise one central image block and a plurality of non-central image blocks (Gong Figure 4 discloses how the image block is divided into multiple pieces and there is one central block in the middle), and a boundary in which a boundary of an effective area of each image block overlaps a boundary of the image block (Gong Fig 4 discloses a boundary of the image that is effective or wanted as can been seen by the dark line in the image reproduced below) is considered as the target boundary (Gong Fig 4, Pg 4 ¶07, Pg 8 ¶12-13 discloses a boundary of the image that is effective or wanted as can been seen by the dark line in the image reproduced below as the target of the image needing to be output). See rationale for Claim 11, its parent claim.
PNG
media_image1.png
306
704
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Gong Figure 4 (using translated image from Google Translate)
Regarding Claim 13, Gong in view of Lee in view of Wu teaches the non-transitory computer
readable storage medium according to claim 12, wherein when the to-be-processed image is divided into 9 image blocks that are arranged in three rows and three columns (Lee Fig 8B and ¶0151 discloses dividing the image into 9 blocks with 3 columns and three rows), storing the image data (Lee ¶0017-¶0019, discloses storing the image data based on the correlation of the image block to other image block vectors) of the central image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory) around the center of the central image block (Lee Fig 8B discloses 5 being the central block as all other blocks are located around it), and storing (Lee ¶0017-¶0019, discloses storing the image data based on the correlation of the image block to other image block vectors) of each image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory) along the target boundary of each non-central image block (Lee Fig 8A discloses how boundaries separate each image block from the central and how the blocks are denoted with numbers) separately comprises:
along an upper boundary and a left boundary of a first image block in the first row and the first column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "1"), storing image data of the first image block(Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory);
along an upper boundary of a second image block in the first row and the second column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "2"), storing image data of the second image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory);
along an upper boundary and a right boundary of a third image block in the first row and the third column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "3") , storing image data of the third image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory);
along a left boundary of a fourth image block in the second row and the first column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "4"), storing image data of the fourth image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory);
around a center of a fifth image block in the second row and the second column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "5"), storing image data of the fifth image block, wherein the fifth image block (Lee Fig 8B discloses 5 being the central block) is the central image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory);
along a right boundary of a sixth image block in the second row and the third column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "6"), storing image data of the sixth image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory);
along a lower boundary and a left boundary of a seventh image block in the third row and the first column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "7"), storing image data of the seventh image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory);
along a lower boundary of an eighth image block in the third row and the second column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "8"), storing image data of the eighth image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory); and
along a lower boundary and a right boundary of a ninth image block in the third row and the third column (Lee Figure 8B discloses the image block divided up into smaller image blocks and the corresponding block would be labeled "9"), storing image data of the ninth image block (Lee ¶0019 discloses each image block going into the memory). See rationale for Claim 11, its parent claim.
PNG
media_image2.png
367
408
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Lee Figure 8B
Claims 4-5, 9-10, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Gong in view of Lee in view of Wu in further view of Tsuchida et al. (US Patent Publication US 2015/0161478 A1 hereafter referred to as Tsuchida).
Regarding Claim 4, Gong in view of Lee in view of Wu teaches the image processing
method according to claim 1, wherein combining the target effective image areas (Gong Pg 12 ¶01-¶02 discloses fusing the image block together based on weights) to generate a target image (Gong Pg 13 ¶01 discloses the image blocks being fused iteratively to form an output image) comprises:
determining a location of each target effective image area based (Lee ¶0017-¶0019, discloses storing the image data based on the correlation of the image block to other image block vectors) on a location of each image block in the to-be-processed image (Lee Fig 8A discloses the location of each image block in the preprocessed image);
for each pixel in a part (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels having value) in which any two adjacent to-be-combined target effective image areas overlap (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion),
of the two to-be-combined target effective image areas (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion), determining a target pixel value (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels having value),
and a pixel value (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels having value) of the pixel in the two to-be-combined target effective image areas (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion); and
adjusting each pixel (Lee ¶0069, discloses the amount of pixels being changed) in the overlapping part (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position) to a corresponding target pixel value (Lee ¶0016 discloses a target pixel value), so as to complete combination of the two to-be-combined target effective image area (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion).
Gong in view of Lee in view of Wu does not explicitly teach determining a first weight and a second weight corresponding to the pixel based on distances between the pixel and centers wherein the distances are inversely proportional to the first weight and the second weight; corresponding to the pixel based on the first weight, the second weight.
Tsuchida is in the same field of image processing. Further, Tsuchida teaches determining a first weight (Tsuchida ¶0071 discloses calculating a first weight value) and a second weight (Tsuchida ¶0017 discloses calculating a second weight value) corresponding to the pixel based on distances (Tsuchida ¶0054 discloses the weight being calculated using the distance horizontally to the target (center) pixel) between the pixel and centers (Tsuchida ¶0054 discloses the weight being calculated using the distance horizontally and vertically to the target (center) pixel) wherein the distances are inversely proportional to the first weight and the second weight (Tsuchida ¶0054 discloses an equation used to calculate the SAD value in which the distances are a variable and the weights are an output); corresponding to the pixel based on the first weight (Tsuchida ¶0071 discloses calculating a first weight value), the second weight (Tsuchida ¶0017 discloses calculating a second weight value).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Gong in view of Lee in view of Wu by incorporating determining pixel weights based on distance and using these calculations to determine pixel value as taught by Tsuchida, to make an invention that can preserve or enhance the image data information in each image block depending on the target; thus, one of ordinary skilled in the art would be motivated to combine the references since an object of the present invention is to create an image processing unit configured to perform image processing on pixel signals output from the solid-state imaging device. (Tsuchida, ¶0011).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 5, Gong in view of Lee in view of Wu in further view of Tsuchida teaches
the image processing method according to claim 4, wherein determining the target pixel value (Lee ¶0016 discloses a target pixel value) corresponding to the pixel based on the first weight (Tsuchida ¶0071 discloses calculating a first weight value), the second weight (Tsuchida ¶0017 discloses calculating a second weight value), and the pixel value of the pixel (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels having value) in the two to-be-combined target effective image areas (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion) comprises:
calculating a first product of the first weight and a first pixel value (Tsuchida ¶0119- ¶0121 discloses calculating an SAD of the first weight and the target pixel in the 1st block) of the pixel in a to-be- combined first target effective image area ,(Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion) wherein the first weight (Tsuchida ¶0071 discloses calculating a first weight value) is a weight of the pixel in the first target effective image area (Tsuchida ¶0119- ¶0121 discloses calculating an SAD of the first weight and the target pixel in the 1st block);
calculating a second product of the second weight and a second pixel value (Tsuchida ¶0119- ¶0121 discloses calculating an SAD of the second weight and the target pixel in the second target block) of the pixel in a to-be-combined second target effective image area (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion), wherein the second weight (Tsuchida ¶0017 discloses calculating a second weight value) is a weight of the pixel in the second target effective image area (Tsuchida ¶0119- ¶0121 discloses calculating an SAD of the second weight and the target pixel in the second target block); and
determining an average value of the first product and the second product (Gong Pg 12 ¶02 discloses preforming weighted averages on pixel values) as the target pixel value corresponding to the pixel (Lee ¶0016 discloses a target pixel value). See rationale for Claim 4, its parent claim.
Regarding Claim 9, Gong in view of Lee in view of Wu teaches the electronic device
according to claim 6, wherein combining the target effective image areas (Gong Pg 12 ¶01-¶02 discloses fusing the image block together based on weights) to generate a target image (Gong Pg 13 ¶01 discloses the image blocks being fused iteratively to form an output image) comprises:
determining a location of each target effective image area based (Lee ¶0017-¶0019, discloses storing the image data based on the correlation of the image block to other image block vectors) on a location of each image block in the to-be-processed image (Lee Fig 8A discloses the location of each image block in the preprocessed image);
for each pixel in a part (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels having value) in which any two adjacent to-be-combined target effective image areas overlap (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion), of the two to-be-combined target effective image areas (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion), determining a target pixel value (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels having value), and a pixel value (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels having value) of the pixel in the two to-be-combined target effective image areas (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion); and
adjusting each pixel (Lee ¶0069, discloses the amount of pixels being changed) in the overlapping part (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position) to a corresponding target pixel value (Lee ¶0016 discloses a target pixel value), so as to complete combination of the two to-be-combined target effective image area (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion).
Gong in view of Lee in view of Wu does not explicitly teach determining a first weight and a second weight corresponding to the pixel based on distances between the pixel and centers wherein the distances are inversely proportional to the first weight and the second weight); corresponding to the pixel based on the first weight, the second weight.
Tsuchida is in the same field of image processing. Further, Tsuchida teaches determining a first weight (Tsuchida ¶0071 discloses calculating a first weight value) and a second weight (Tsuchida ¶0017 discloses calculating a second weight value) corresponding to the pixel based on distances (Tsuchida ¶0054 discloses the weight being calculated using the distance horizontally to the target (center) pixel) between the pixel and centers (Tsuchida ¶0054 discloses the weight being calculated using the distance horizontally and vertically to the target (center) pixel) wherein the distances are inversely proportional to the first weight and the second weight (Tsuchida ¶0054 discloses an equation used to calculate the SAD value in which the distances are a variable and the weights are an output); corresponding to the pixel based on the first weight (Tsuchida ¶0071 discloses calculating a first weight value), the second weight (Tsuchida ¶0017 discloses calculating a second weight value).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Gong in view of Lee in view of Wu by incorporating determining pixel weights based on distance and using these calculations to determine pixel value as taught by Tsuchida, to make an invention that can preserve or enhance the image data information in each image block depending on the target; thus, one of ordinary skilled in the art would be motivated to combine the references since an object of the present invention is to create an image processing unit configured to perform image processing on pixel signals output from the solid-state imaging device. (Tsuchida, ¶0011).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 10, Gong in view of Lee in view of Wu in further view of Tsuchida teaches the electronic device according to claim 9, wherein determining the target pixel value (Lee ¶0016 discloses a target pixel value) corresponding to the pixel based on the first weight (Tsuchida ¶0071 discloses calculating a first weight value), the second weight (Tsuchida ¶0017 discloses calculating a second weight value), and the pixel value of the pixel (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels having value) in the two to-be-combined target effective image areas (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion) comprises:
calculating a first product of the first weight and a first pixel value (Tsuchida ¶0119- ¶0121 discloses calculating an SAD of the first weight and the target pixel in the 1st block) of the pixel in a to-be- combined first target effective image area, (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion) wherein the first weight (Tsuchida ¶0071 discloses calculating a first weight value) is a weight of the pixel in the first target effective image area (Tsuchida ¶0119- ¶0121 discloses calculating an SAD of the first weight and the target pixel in the 1st block);
calculating a second product of the second weight and a second pixel value (Tsuchida ¶0119- ¶0121 discloses calculating an SAD of the second weight and the target pixel in the second target block) of the pixel in a to-be-combined second target effective image area (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion), wherein the second weight (Tsuchida ¶0017 discloses calculating a second weight value) is a weight of the pixel in the second target effective image area (Tsuchida ¶0119- ¶0121 discloses calculating an SAD of the second weight and the target pixel in the second target block) ; and
determining an average value of the first product and the second product (Gong Pg 12 ¶02 discloses preforming weighted averages on pixel values) as the target pixel value corresponding to the pixel (Lee ¶0016 discloses a target pixel value). See rationale for Claim 9, its parent claim.
Regarding Claim 14, Gong in view of Lee in view of Wu teaches the non-transitory computer readable storage medium according to claim 11 wherein combining the target effective image areas (Gong Pg 12 ¶01-¶02 discloses fusing the image block together based on weights) to generate a target image (Gong Pg 13 ¶01 discloses the image blocks being fused iteratively to form an output image) comprises:
determining a location of each target effective image area based (Lee ¶0017-¶0019, discloses storing the image data based on the correlation of the image block to other image block vectors) on a location of each image block in the to-be-processed image (Lee Fig 8A discloses the location of each image block in the preprocessed image);
for each pixel in a part (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels having value) in which any two adjacent to-be-combined target effective image areas overlap (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion), of the two to-be-combined target effective image areas (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion), determining a target pixel value (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels having value), and a pixel value (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels having value) of the pixel in the two to-be-combined target effective image areas(Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion); and
adjusting each pixel (Lee ¶0069, discloses the amount of pixels being changed) in the overlapping part (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position) to a corresponding target pixel value (Lee ¶0016 discloses a target pixel value), so as to complete combination of the two to-be-combined target effective image area (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion).
Gong in view of Lee in view of Wu does not explicitly teach determining a first weight and a second weight corresponding to the pixel based on distances between the pixel and centers wherein the distances are inversely proportional to the first weight and the second weight); corresponding to the pixel based on the first weight, the second weight.
Tsuchida is in the same field of image processing. Further, Tsuchida teaches determining a first weight (Tsuchida ¶0071 discloses calculating a first weight value) and a second weight (Tsuchida ¶0017 discloses calculating a second weight value) corresponding to the pixel based on distances (Tsuchida ¶0054 discloses the weight being calculated using the distance horizontally to the target (center) pixel) between the pixel and centers (Tsuchida ¶0054 discloses the weight being calculated using the distance horizontally and vertically to the target (center) pixel) wherein the distances are inversely proportional to the first weight and the second weight (Tsuchida ¶0054 discloses an equation used to calculate the SAD value in which the distances are a variable and the weights are an output); corresponding to the pixel based on the first weight (Tsuchida ¶0071 discloses calculating a first weight value) , the second weight (Tsuchida ¶0017 discloses calculating a second weight value).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Gong in view of Lee in view of Wu by incorporating determining pixel weights based on distance and using these calculations to determine pixel value as taught by Tsuchida, to make an invention that can preserve or enhance the image data information in each image block depending on the target; thus, one of ordinary skilled in the art would be motivated to combine the references since an object of the present invention is to create an image processing unit configured to perform image processing on pixel signals output from the solid-state imaging device. (Tsuchida, ¶0011).
Thus, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 15, Gong in view of Lee in view of Wu in further view of Tsuchida teaches the non-transitory computer readable storage medium according to claim 14, wherein determining the target pixel value (Lee ¶0016 discloses a target pixel value) corresponding to the pixel based on the first weight (Tsuchida ¶0071 discloses calculating a first weight value), the second weight (Tsuchida ¶0017 discloses calculating a second weight value), and the pixel value of the pixel (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels having value) in the two to-be-combined target effective image areas (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion) comprises:
calculating a first product of the first weight and a first pixel value (Tsuchida ¶0119- ¶0121 discloses calculating an SAD of the first weight and the target pixel in the 1st block) of the pixel in a to-be- combined first target effective image area ,(Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion) wherein the first weight (Tsuchida ¶0071 discloses calculating a first weight value) is a weight of the pixel in the first target effective image area (Tsuchida ¶0119- ¶0121 discloses calculating an SAD of the first weight and the target pixel in the 1st block);
calculating a second product of the second weight and a second pixel value (Tsuchida ¶0119- ¶0121 discloses calculating an SAD of the second weight and the target pixel in the second target block) of the pixel in a to-be-combined second target effective image area (Gong Pg 10 ¶01 discloses the pixels being in the same position being averaged in the fusion), wherein the second weight (Tsuchida ¶0017 discloses calculating a second weight value) is a weight of the pixel in the second target effective image area (Tsuchida ¶0119- ¶0121 discloses calculating an SAD of the second weight and the target pixel in the second target block) ; and
determining an average value of the first product and the second product (Gong Pg 12 ¶02 discloses preforming weighted averages on pixel values) as the target pixel value corresponding to the pixel (Lee ¶0016 discloses a target pixel value). See rationale for Claim 14, its parent claim.
Conclusion
33. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
34. 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.
35. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RACHEL LYNN ROBERTS whose telephone number is (571)272-6413. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 7:30am- 5:00pm. 32. 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. 33. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Oneal Mistry can be reached on 313-446-4912. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. 34. 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.
/RACHEL L ROBERTS/Examiner, Art Unit 2674
/ONEAL R MISTRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2674