Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/409,988

IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS, IMAGE PICKUP APPARATUS, IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD, AND STORAGE MEDIUM

Non-Final OA §101§102
Filed
Jan 11, 2024
Examiner
DESIRE, GREGORY M
Art Unit
2676
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Canon Kabushiki Kaisha
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
91%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 91% — above average
91%
Career Allow Rate
983 granted / 1085 resolved
+28.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+5.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
13 currently pending
Career history
1098
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
22.4%
-17.6% vs TC avg
§103
28.2%
-11.8% vs TC avg
§102
31.3%
-8.7% vs TC avg
§112
3.7%
-36.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1085 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §102
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite acquire a size of an object area in first image data, acquire characteristic data on an optical system according to the size of the object area and generate a second image data by applyin. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because acquiring a size of an object area in first image data and acquiring characteristic data on an optical system according to the size of the object area is a form of detection, at a conceptual level, could be performed by a human in the mind given a first image. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because there are no particular machine tie or transformation. Generating a second image is not claimed as a particular machine having a specific architecture that meaningfully constrains the abstract processing. The image generation processing manipulates information and does not effect a transformation of a physical article. Therefore, the judicial exceptions recited in the claims are not integrated into a practical application under the 2019 PEG. The additional elements - generic memory, processor, database, acquisition of size and characteristic data using known techniques, object detection and beautification technology—are well-understood, routine, and conventional (WURC) in the field of image processing and detection. Therefore, claims 1–17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claims are directed to the judicial exceptions of a mental processes and do not integrate the exceptions into a practical application nor recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the exceptions. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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)(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 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sato (9,900,523). Regarding apparatus claim 1, method claim 16 and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium claim 17, Sato discloses, Acquire a size of an object area in first image data (note fig. 2 block SA7 and col. 5 lines 62- col. 6 lines 7, lines cite acquiring size of face area, examiner interpret as object area), Acquire characteristic data on a characteristic of an optical system according to the size of the object area (note col. 5 lines 7-15, lines describe soft focus image aberration of a dedicated lens, examiner interprets aberration as characteristic of an optical system) Generate second image data by applying the characteristic data to the first image data (note fig. 2, block SA9, generating mask image data examiner interprets as second image data, mask image generated from the image of face area, previous soft focus image include aberration of lens) Regarding claim 2, Processor is configured to generate the second image data by performing image processing for the first image data using the characteristic data corresponding to the characteristic of the optical system. Regarding apparatus claim 2 Sato discloses, generate the second image data by performing image processing for the first image data using the characteristic data corresponding to the characteristic of the optical system (note fig. 2, block SA9, generating mask image data examiner interprets as second image data, mask image generated from the image of face area, previous soft focus image include aberration of lens, characteristic of the optical system). Regarding claim 3 Sato discloses, Wherein the first image data is raw image data (note fig 2, block SA9, as specification describe raw image as image generated by characteristic of the optical system). Regarding claim 4 Sato disclose, Wherein the first image data is video signal data (note col. 2 lines 50-55, digital camera). Regarding claim 5 Sato discloses, Wherein the object area is a face area (note fig. 2 block SA7 and col. 5 lines 62- col. 6 lines 7, lines cite acquiring size of face area Regarding claim 6 Sato discloses, Wherein the processor is configured to detect the face area from the first image data (note col. 5 lines 65- col. 6 lines 3, lines cite face detection section in detecting face area). Regarding claim 7 Sato discloses, Wherein the processor is configured to acquire the object area from at least one of a focus position, zoom magnification, a focal length of the optical system, a pixel pitch of an image sensor, or the effective number of pixels of the image sensor (note col 10 lines 52- col. 11 lines 5, acquire object area from focal length cited). Regarding claim 8 Sato discloses, Wherein the processor is configured to calculate the size of the object area based on at least one of the number of output pixels of an image sensor, an enlargement rate and reduction rate of the first image data (note col. 6 lines 47-57 cites pixel and enlargement, col. 9 lines 37-45 cites pixel reduction area). Regarding claim 9 Sato discloses, Wherein the size of the object area is a size of a processing area of the processor col. 5 lines 62- 67, lines cite acquiring size of face area, examiner interpret as object area) Regarding claim 10 Sato discloses, Wherein the size of the object area is a ratio of an entire size of the first image data (note col. 8 lines 49-63, cites size and ratio). Regarding claim 11 Sato discloses, Wherein the processor is configured to acquire the characteristic data by interpolating a plurality of characteristic parameters stored in the memory according to the size of the object area (note col. 13 lines 26-30, adding blurring effect). Regarding claim 12 Sato discloses, Wherein the processor is configured to acquire the characteristic data by enlarging or reducing a characteristic parameter stored in the memory according to the size of the object area (note col. 8 lines 1-9, lines cite reducing processing load as soft focus processing is reduced). Regarding claim 13 Sato discloses, Wherein the characteristic of the optical system is an aberration characteristic (note col. 5 lines 7-15, lines describe soft focus image aberration of a dedicated lens, aberration as characteristic of an optical system) Regarding claim 14 Sato discloses, Wherein in a case where the size of the object area is a first size, the processor is configured to acquire the characteristic data in which bokeh is smaller than in a case where the size of the object area is a second size that is larger than the first size (note col. 7 lines 26-34, defocus effect examiner interprets bokeh is smaller case second size larger than the first size). Regarding claim 15 Sato discloses, Image processing apparatus according to claim 1 (note fig. 1, block 2 and col. 5 lines 55-60, control section includes CPU); and an image sensor configured to output first image data (note fig. 1 block 1 and col. 5 lines 50-55, digital camera outputs an image). Related Prior Art Imai (10,861,140) Acquire characteristic data on a characteristic of an optical system according to the measurement of the object area (note col. 6 lines 62 – col. 7 lines 5) Zhang et al (12,505,652) Acquire characteristic data on a characteristic of an optical system according to the size of the object area (note col. 4 lines 35-45) Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GREGORY M DESIRE whose telephone number is (571)272-7449. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6:30am-3:00pm. 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, Henok Shiferaw can be reached at 571-272-4637. 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. G.D. December 26, 2025 /GREGORY M DESIRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2676
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 11, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 26, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §102
Mar 24, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596346
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR INFORMATION-ASSISTED SENSOR REGISTRATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597094
ACTIVE DEPTH SENSING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593753
AGRICULTURAL CUTTING SYSTEM AND CUT-POINT METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591060
Color Depth Integration Method, Receiver, and Light Detection and Ranging Apparatus Thereof
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586238
ESTIMATING AND TRANSMITTING OBJECTS CAPTURED BY A CAMERA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
91%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+5.5%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1085 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month