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
Limitations appearing inside of {} are intended to indicate the limitations not taught by said prior art(s)/combinations.
Claims 1-20 are pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 7-10, 12, 13, 15, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Iketani, JP2006314616A.
Regarding claim 1, Iketani teaches An image processing apparatus comprising:
at least one processor (an endoscope processor; ¶[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; ¶[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; ¶[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; ¶[0113]),
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, 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; ¶[0114]).
Claim 17 is similarly analyzed as analogous claim 1.
Claim 20 is similarly analyzed as analogous claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, Iketani 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, Iketani 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, Iketani 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, Iketani 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, Iketani 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, Iketani 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 12, Iketani teaches the image processing apparatus according to claim 1. Iketani further teaches wherein the information regarding the static black balance is information detected at a timing different from a timing at which the shift of the black balance is detected (Iketani teaches that the static balance is detected at step 104 and shift is detected at step 106 which are different time points; “step S104, it is determined whether the R gain exceeds the second color threshold or the B gain exceeds the third color threshold. [0082] When both the R and B gains are below the threshold value, the R and B signal shift amounts are set to 0 (i.e., no shifting indicates static balance); ¶¶[0081]-[0082]; and next step S106, the image sensor 41 is driven again to generate an original image signal, and the process proceeds to step S107. In step S107, an R signal shift amount and a B signal shift amount are calculated; ¶[0083]).
Regarding claim 13, Iketani teaches the image processing apparatus according to claim 12. Iketani further teaches wherein the information regarding the static black balance includes information regarding at least one of a shift of the static black balance detected at the different timing and temperature information at the different timing (The tone correction value (i.e. offset, or static black balance, per Specification ¶[0182])is composed of an R signal correction shift amount for adjusting the redness of the image and a B signal correction shift amount for adjusting the blueness of the image; Iketani, ¶[0104]).
Regarding claim 15, Iketani teaches the image processing apparatus according to claim 12, 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]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 3, 5, 6, 11, 18, 19are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iketani in view of Hung et al., US 20230360178 A1.
Regarding claim 3, Iketani 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]). Iketani 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 invention of Iketani. The motivation to do so would be to improve the image acquired at a transition between bright and dark scenes.
Regarding claim 5, Iketani teaches the image processing apparatus according to claim 4. Iketani 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 invention of Iketani. 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, Iketani 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). Iketani 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, Iketani teaches the image processing apparatus according to claim 1. Iketani 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 invention of Iketani. 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.
Claim14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iketani in view of “Kishida”, JP 200486031 A.
Regarding claim 14, Iketani teaches the image processing apparatus according to claim 13. Iketani does not explicitly disclose wherein the correction value is calculated in accordance with the temperature information and the shift of the static black balance which are detected at the different timing.
However, Kishida, a similar field of endeavor of black balance correction, teaches wherein the correction value is calculated in accordance with the temperature information (black balance correction corresponding to the color temperature of illumination can be performed; Kishida, ¶[0102]) and
the shift of the static black balance which are detected at the different timing (The black balance detection unit 39 calculates an offset value for correction from the average value of each color of the image data in the designated area 1001, and outputs the calculated offset value to the offset setting unit 38; Kishida, ¶[0075]).
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 corresponding to color temperature and shift of black balance as taught by Kishida to the invention of Iketani. The motivation to do so would be to account for the impact of color temperature due to illumination of the sample as well as any shift in black balance that may have occurred.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iketani in view of “Ikeda”, JP2004236190A.
Regarding claim 16, Iketani teaches the image processing apparatus according to claim 1. Iketani 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 invention of Iketani. 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Akahane, US 20180025476 A1, would have been relied upon for teaching setting priority of a gradation value.
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