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 .
Notice to Applicant
This office action is in response to amendment filed on 05/26/2026.
Limitations appearing inside of {} are intended to indicate the limitations not taught by said prior art(s)/combinations.
Claims 1-11, and 15-20 are pending in the application.
Response to Amendments
The Amendment filled 05/26/2026 in response to Non-Final Office Action mailed 02/27/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 15, 17, and 20 have been amended.
Claims 12-14 have been newly canceled. Rejections under 35 USC §102 and §103 have been withdrawn in light of amended claims.
Response to Arguments/Remarks
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Information Disclosure Statement
No Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) was filed; therefore, no applicant-submitted references were considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the temperature information at the timing at which the shift of the black balance is detected" in line 19. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this instance of “temperature information” limitation in the claims.
Claim 1 recites the limitation:
“wherein the at least one of the information regarding the white balance or the information regarding the static black balance includes the information regarding the static black balance, and the information regarding the static black balance includes a static offset amount calculated at a timing different from a timing at which the shift of the black balance is detected and temperature information at the different timing”.
It is unclear what is meant by the “the information regarding the static black balance includes the information regarding the static black balance”. How are the first (original) and second (“includes”) instances of “the information regarding the static black balance” different? Is the third instance of “the information regarding the static black balance” referring to the first (original) or the second (“includes”)? Due to antecedent basis, all instances of the limitation “the information regarding the static black balance” are considered the same.
Claims 17 and 20 are similarly analyzed as they recite the same claim limitation.
Claims 2-11, 15-16, and 18-19 are rejected as they depend from rejected claims.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 7-10, 15, 17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Iketani: (Iketani et al., JP2006314616A) in view of “Matsumoto” (Matsumoto et al., US 5291276 A).
Regarding claim 1, Iketani teaches An image processing apparatus comprising:
at least one processor (an endoscope processor; Iketani,¶[0007]); and
a memory coupled to the at least one processor, the memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor (A ROM (not shown) is connected to the black balance adjustment circuit 32; Iketani, ¶[0047]), cause the at least one processor to
detect a shift of black balance in an input image (in the black balance adjustment circuit 32, it is determined whether or not to perform black balance adjustment of the first adjusted image signal; Iketani, ¶[0099]),
acquire at least one of information regarding white balance to be applied to the input image or information regarding static black balance (step S301, white balance adjustment is performed based on the R and B gains stored or held in the gain and shift amount calculation processing; Iketani,¶[0113]),
wherein the at least one of the information regarding the white balance or the information regarding the static black balance includes the information regarding the static black balance (interpretation: information regarding the static black balance is the information regarding the static black balance), and {the information regarding the static black balance includes a static offset amount calculated at a timing different from a timing at which the shift of the black balance is detected and temperature information at the different timing,
acquire temperature information at the timing at which the input image is captured,}
calculate a correction value for correcting the shift of the black balance based on at least one of the information regarding the white balance or the information regarding the static black balance in a case in which the shift of the black balance is detected (R and B signal shift amounts stored or held in the gain and shift amount calculation processing; Iketani, ¶[0114]),
{wherein the correction value includes a dynamic offset amount calculated based on a difference between the temperature information at the timing at which the shift of the black balance is detected and a reference temperature corresponding to the temperature information at the different timing}, and
adjust the shift of the black balance in accordance with the calculated correction value (In step S302, black balance adjustment is performed based on the R and B signal shift amounts stored or held in the gain and shift amount calculation processing; Iketani, ¶[0114]),
{wherein the shift of the black balance is adjusted by adding both the static offset amount and the dynamic offset amount to the input image}.
Iketani does not explicitly disclose the limitations of “temperature information” and “dynamic offset”:
the information regarding the static black balance includes a static offset amount calculated at a timing different from a timing at which the shift of the black balance is detected and temperature information at the different timing,
acquire temperature information at the timing at which the input image is captured,
wherein the correction value includes a dynamic offset amount calculated based on a difference between the temperature information at the timing at which the shift of the black balance is detected and a reference temperature corresponding to the temperature information at the different timing
wherein the shift of the black balance is adjusted by adding both the static offset amount and the dynamic offset amount to the input image.
However Matsumoto, a similar field of endeavor of black-level adjustment, teaches
the information regarding the static black balance includes a static offset amount calculated at a timing different from a timing at which the shift of the black balance is detected and temperature information at the different timing (Samples of the digital luminance output signal produced by luminance digital signal processor 22 are obtained by register 29 at preselected times, and system controller 11 generates black level control data, gain control data, and color temperature control data as a function of such luminance samples (i.e., static offset amount); Matsumoto, [Col 7:31-34]. Matsumoto is interpreted as teaching the limitation because the information necessary for generating black-level control data and color temperature control data are included in the samples of digital luminance output signal),
acquire temperature information at the timing at which the input image is captured (when the video camera images a color bar test chart, proper gain control data, black level control data, color temperature adjustment data, white balance control data and hue adjustment control data are generated by system controller 11 in response to the digital luminance and chroma data derived from the imaged color bar test chart; Matsumoto, [Col 10:39-45]),
wherein the correction value includes a dynamic offset amount calculated based on a difference between the temperature information at the timing at which the shift of the black balance is detected and a reference temperature corresponding to the temperature information at the different timing (color temperature samples obtained by register 29 are supplied to system controller 11 which calculates the difference between these sampled color temperature levels and reference color temperature levels … to provide color temperature adjustment; Matsumoto, [Col 8:42-64]).
wherein the shift of the black balance is adjusted by adding both the static offset amount and the dynamic offset amount to the input image (the input video signal supplied to digital signal processor 20 … Samples of the digital luminance output signal produced by luminance digital signal processor 22 are obtained by register 29 at preselected times (i.e., during image capture), and system controller 11 generates black level control data, gain control data and color temperature control data as a function of such luminance samples; Matsumoto, [Col 7:26-27]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include static offset amount and temperature information at the different timing as taught by Matsumoto to the invention of Iketani. The motivation to do so would be to obtain information to generate proper control data.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include acquiring temperature information as taught by Matsumoto to the invention of Iketani. The motivation to do so would be to utilize the color temperature contributing to offset in order to establish the proper black level.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include calculate difference between color temperature levels and reference color temperature levels as taught by Matsumoto to the invention of Iketani. The motivation to do so would be to determine the change in the color temperature in order to inform corrections.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include adding the static and dynamic offset amounts as taught by Matsumoto to the invention of Iketani. The motivation to do so would be to account for the changes in black-levels as well as color temperature.
Claim 17 is similarly analyzed as analogous claim 1.
Claim 20 is similarly analyzed as analogous claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Iketani and Matsumoto teaches the image processing apparatus according to claim 1. Iketani further teaches wherein the information regarding white balance includes at least one of a shift of the white balance, a correction amount of the white balance, and a white balance gain (step S301, white balance adjustment is performed based on the R and B gains stored or held in the gain and shift amount calculation processing; ¶[0113]).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Iketani and Matsumoto teaches the image processing apparatus according to claim 1. Iketani further teaches wherein the instructions cause the at least one processor to acquire information regarding an imaging environment of the input image (An optical image of a subject formed by reflected light from the subject irradiated with illumination light is received by the image sensor 41; ¶[0039]), and
the correction value is calculated based on the information regarding the imaging environment in a case in which the shift of the black balance is detected (When it is determined that the black balance adjustment is performed, the black balance adjustment of the first adjusted image signal is performed; ¶[0046]).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Iketani and Matsumoto teaches the image processing apparatus according to claim 1. Iketani further teaches wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to perform control to shift white balance of an image in accordance with information regarding the white balance (The white balance adjustment circuit 31 performs white balance adjustment of the original image signal. In the balance adjustment mode described later, the white balance adjustment circuit 31 calculates an R gain (second color gain) and a B gain (third color gain) for white balance adjustment. ;¶[0043])
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Iketani and Matsumoto teaches the image processing apparatus according to claim 7. Iketani further teaches wherein the white balance is controlled based on the shift of the black balance (After the black balance adjustment is completed, the process proceeds to step S203. In step S203, it is confirmed whether or not the normal observation is terminated. If not, the process returns to step S200; the white balance is adjusted in step 201 (¶0086)).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Iketani and Matsumoto teaches the image processing apparatus according to claim 1. Iketani further teaches wherein the shift of the black balance is detected by detecting at least one of a signal for each color output from a sensor, which captures the input image, in a case in which the sensor is shielded from light, or a sensor gain, a shutter speed, and an iris aperture value in a case in which the input image is captured, a temperature of an imaging device that captures the input image, an operating time of the imaging device, a temperature in an imaging environment, an illuminance in the imaging environment, and an amount of infrared light in the imaging environment (When the calculation of the gain is finished, illumination light irradiation is stopped, and no light enters the image sensor 41. The original image signal generated in this state is an original image signal that is optically black, and is a signal that can be separated into RGB signals having a luminance value of zero for adjusting the black balance; ¶[0067]).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Iketani and Matsumoto teaches the image processing apparatus according to claim 9. Iketani further teaches wherein a larger shift of the black balance is detected as a sensor gain when capturing the input image increases, as the shutter speed decreases, as the iris aperture value becomes closer to an open value, as the temperature of the imaging device capturing the input image increases, as the operating time of the imaging device increases, as the temperature in the imaging environment increases, as the illuminance in the imaging environment decreases, or as the amount of infrared light in the imaging environment increases (The black balance adjustment circuit 32 determines whether the R gain exceeds the second color threshold or whether the B gain exceeds the third color threshold. If any of the gains exceeds the threshold value, it is determined to perform black balance adjustment on the first adjusted image signal; Iketani, ¶[0048]).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Iketani and Matsumoto teaches the image processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the different timing is at least one of a timing at which a user performs calibration, a timing at which an imaging device capturing the input image is started up, a predetermined time, or a timing at which the imaging device is adjusted during manufacturing (Iketani teaches that the camera is turned on step 100 and the gains are calculated steps 103 and stored step 104. After an image is acquired step 106, the shift in gains are calculated step 107. The different times are before and after the image is acquired; Iketani, ¶¶[0078]-[0083]).
Claims 3, 5, 6, 11, 18, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iketani in view of Matsumoto, and further in view of “Hung” (Hung et al., US 20230360178 A1).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Iketani and Matsumoto teaches the image processing apparatus according to claim 1. Iketani further teaches disclose wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to determine whether there is an influence of {infrared} light on the input image , and the correction value is calculated based on whether there is an influence of {infrared} light on the input image in a case in which the shift of the black balance is detected (signal processing circuit 30 detects the amount of received light of the captured image; ¶[0035]). The combination does not explicitly disclose influence of infrared light.
However Hung, a similar field of endeavor of adapt image capture and rendering of a combined IR and visible light signal, teaches wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to determine whether there is an influence of infrared light on the input image (the scene detection value may be based on a ratio of the average intensity of IR to the average intensity of visible light; Hung, ¶[0024]), and
the correction value is calculated based on whether there is an influence of infrared light on the input image (in addition to using the scene detection value to determine an amount of infrared correction (e.g., how much IR signal to subtract from measurements for visible light pixels), the scene detection value and/or amount of infrared correction may be used to dynamically determine a white balance correction factor, a color correction factor, a color saturation factor, and so on; Hung, ¶[0024]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include quantifying the infrared light influence on the image as taught by Hung to the combined invention of Iketani and Matsumoto. The motivation to do so would be to improve the image acquired at a transition between bright and dark scenes.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Iketani and Matsumoto teaches the image processing apparatus according to claim 4. The combination does not explicitly disclose wherein the information regarding the imaging environment includes a color temperature of a light source in the imaging environment.
However, Hung teaches wherein the information regarding the imaging environment includes a color temperature of a light source in the imaging environment (white balance takes into account the “color temperature” of a light source; Hung, ¶[0061]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include color temperature as taught by Hung to the combined invention of Iketani and Matsumoto. The motivation to do so would be to better estimate the white balance relative warmth or coolness of white light similar to how the human eye perceives an appropriate white in an image.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Iketani and Matsumoto teaches the image processing apparatus according to claim 4. Iketani teaches wherein the information regarding the imaging environment includes an amount of {infrared} light in the imaging environment (signal processing circuit 30 detects the amount of received light of the captured image; ¶[0035]; and white balance gains ¶[0043] and black balance gains ¶[0045] are calculated). The combination does not explicitly disclose amount of infrared light in the imaging environment.
However, Hung teaches wherein the information regarding the imaging environment includes an amount of infrared light in the imaging environment (the scene detection value may be based on a ratio of the average intensity of IR to the average intensity of visible light; Hung, ¶[0024]).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Iketani and Matsumoto teaches the image processing apparatus according to claim 1. The combination does not explicitly disclose wherein the instructions cause the at least one processor to set a priority of a gradation value, and the correction value is calculated in accordance with the priority of the gradation value.
However, Hung teaches wherein the instructions cause the at least one processor to set a priority of a gradation value, and the correction value is calculated in accordance with the priority of the gradation value (FIG. 3 is an example lookup table 300 (i.e., priority of gradation value) usable for determining one or more quantities 308 (e.g., corresponding to quantities 110 of FIG. 1); Hung ¶[0060]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include priority of a gradation value as taught by Hung to the combined invention of Iketani and Matsumoto. The motivation to do so would be to index each particular scene detection value (e.g., ratio) which can correspond to one or more enumerated quantities, such as a specified IR subtraction factor, white balance correction factor, color correction factor and/or color saturation factor, etc., for the scene detection value.
Claim 18 is similarly analyzed as analogous claim 3.
Claim 19 is similarly analyzed as analogous claim 4.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iketani in view of Matsumoto, and further in view of “Ikeda” (JP2004236190A).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Iketani and Matsumoto teaches the image processing apparatus according to claim 1. The combination does not explicitly disclose wherein the correction value for correcting the shift of the black balance is calculated in accordance with the type of sensor that captures the input image.
However, Ikeda, a similar field of endeavor of correcting black balance of digital image devices, teaches wherein the correction value for correcting the shift of the black balance is calculated in accordance with the type of sensor that captures the input image (a black level correction value storage unit that stores a black level correction value group of image signals previously captured with at least two or more types of photographing sensitivities; Ikeda, ¶[0070]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include black balance correction depending upon sensor type as taught by Ikeda to the combined invention of Iketani and Matsumoto. The motivation to do so would be because the linearity of the optical-electric signal output characteristics may be specific to the imaging element.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, 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).
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 CHANDHANA PEDAPATI whose telephone number is (571) 272-5325. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am-6pm (ET).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chan Park can be reached at 571-272-7409. 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.
/CHANDHANA PEDAPATI/Examiner, Art Unit 2669 /CHAN S PARK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2669
Prosecution Insights