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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the applicant's communication filed on 02/06/2024. In virtue of this communication, claims 1-18 filed on 02/06/2024 are currently pending in the instant application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information Disclosure statement (IDS) form PTO-1449, filed on 02/21/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosed therein was considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 02/06/2024 have been reviewed by Examiner and they are acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 15, while the claim is directed to a module claim, it is not clear whether the claim limitation includes claim 1 method steps or is an addition to those steps. Please clarify what are the claim limitations, and the metes and bounds of the claimed invention as it is not clear.
Regarding claim 16, while the claim is directed to a network claim, it is not clear whether the claim limitation includes claim 1 method steps or is an addition to those steps. Please clarify what are the claim limitations, and the metes and bounds of the claimed invention as it is not clear.
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.
I) Claims 1-15, 17 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Independent Claims 1, 15,17, and 18 recite “applying dual branches in a complementary manner for capturing low-frequency features and high-frequency features from the compressed image”, “extracting the high-frequency features by a high-frequency depth-wise convolution (HFDC) with zero-mean kernels”, and “fusing the low-frequency features and the high-frequency features by a low-high-attention module (LHAM) by adaptively allocating the importance of the branches among channels.”
Step 1:
With regard to Step 1, the instant claims are directed to an apparatus, a method, a transformer, and a non-transitory computer-readable medium, all among the statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A — Prong 1:
With regard to Step 2A — Prong 1, for example in method Claim 1, the limitations “applying dual branches in a complementary manner for capturing low-frequency features and high-frequency features from the compressed image”, “extracting the high-frequency features by a high-frequency depth-wise convolution (HFDC) with zero-mean kernels”, and “fusing the low-frequency features and the high-frequency features by a low-high-attention module (LHAM) by adaptively allocating the importance of the branches among channels.”, as recited, is a method that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation as a mathematical concept . Nothing in the claim steps preclude the limitations from practically being performed as a mathematical relationship. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonably interpretation covers performance of the limitation as a mathematical relation but for the recitation of a generic components, then it falls within the "Mathematical relationship" grouping of the abstract idea, which include concepts performed in Mathematical concept, including applying, extracting, and fusing. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea. In addition, the additional components recited in independent Claims 15,17, and 18, i.e., a memory, a processor, and a non-transitory computer-readable medium are simply generic computing components, accordingly, these independent claims include the above- described abstract idea.
Step 2A — Prong 2:
The 2019 PEG defines the phrase “integration into a practical application’ to require an additional element or a combination of additional elements in the claim
to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception. In the instant case, the additional elements in the claims do not apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims only recite additional elements using a computer, a memory, a processor, or a non-transitory Computer-readable medium, for instance, that includes to perform the recited elements/functions/steps. These computing components in all are recited at high-level of generality and there are no other recited additional limitations in the claims. Accordingly, these additional steps/element do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it is a field-of-use limitation that does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Therefore, independent Claims 1, 15, 17, and 18 recite an abstract idea.
Step 2B:
Because the claims fail under Step 2A, the claims are further evaluated under Step 2B. The claims herein do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because as discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into practical application, the additional element of using a computer, a memory, a processor, or a non-transitory computer- readable medium to execute programming instructions to perform the step amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic apparatus component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic apparatus component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Further, with regard to dependent Claims 2-14 viewed individually, these additional elements are under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitation in the mind and do not provide meaningful limitations to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application of the abstract idea such that the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Accordingly, Claims 1-15, 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
II) Regarding claims 15 and 16 the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) 15 and 16 do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because while the claim recites of steps or acts to be performed, a statutory “process” under 35 U.S.C 101 must(1) be tied to a particular machine, or (2) transform underlying subject matter (such as an article or material) to a different state or thing. See page 10 of In Re Bilski 88 USPQ2d 1385. The claims comprise “ a low-high frequency transformer (LHFT) module” in claim 15, and “ a hierarchical U-shaped encoder-decoder network” in claim 16, both adapted to (certain functionality). Applicant’s specification does not limit to be directed only towards hardware. They appear to be directed towards software per se, and therefore do not qualify as a statutory process.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAGHAYEGH AZIMA whose telephone number is (571)272-1459. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:30-6:30.
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, Vincent Rudolph can be reached at (571)272-8243. 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.
/SHAGHAYEGH AZIMA/ Examiner, Art Unit 2671
Prosecution Insights