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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
1. 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 non-obviousness .
Claims 1-4,6,8,10-11, 13-16,18-21,23,27-28 and 30-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Talbert et al. US 20200402207 in view of RAJAB US 20170354358.
Regarding claim 1, Talbert provides for receiving pixel values generated by at least one-color filter array imaging sensor based on light received from a scene that comprises tissue ( see [0045], see “fluorescence imaging is provided to a medical practitioner or computer-implemented program to enable the identification of certain structures or tissues within a body. Such fluorescence imaging data may be overlaid on black-and-white or RGB images to provide additional information and context”, colors in RGB images corresponds to pixel values) , the pixel values comprising pixel values of a plurality of different colors ( see [0045], see RGB colors ); converting the pixel values to a luminance-chrominance color space ( Fig.8 step 818, [0145], see “The process flow 800 continues and an RGB (red-green-blue) image is converted to a YCbCr (luminance-chrominance blue-chrominance red) image at 818.”) , wherein luminance values in the luminance-chrominance color space are generated from pixel values of only one of the plurality of different colors (see [0145],Fig.8, see Green Frame 812a , which directed to step 814 for frame reconstruction, then followed by step 816 for color correction) ; performing at least one image processing procedure in the luminance-chrominance color space ( see [0145],Fig.8, step 820 for edge enhancement); and generating an RGB image of the tissue by converting from the luminance-chrominance color space to an RGB color space ( see [0145], Fig.8 step 822, see “then the YCbCr image is converted back to an RGB image at 822”).
While Talbert provides for “Such fluorescence imaging data may be overlaid on black-and-white or RGB images to provide additional information and context”, in [0045], Talbert does not specifically provide for generating an RGB image of the tissue. RAJAB teaches the above missing limitation of Talbert ( see [0020] of Rajab, see “converting the MHSI to RGB image; and identifying areas of biological tissue that are at a risk for a medical condition”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of Rajab with the system and method of Talber, in order to obtain the claimed invention, by converting the MHSI to RGB image; and identifying areas of biological tissue that are at a risk for a medical condition, a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. MPEP(2143).
Regarding claim 2, Talbert provides for , wherein the pixel values comprise red, green, and blue pixel values ( see [0045], see “Such fluorescence imaging data may be overlaid on black-and-white or RGB images to provide additional information and context”, colors in RGB images corresponds to pixel values).
Regarding claim 3, Talbert provides for, wherein the luminance values are generated from only the green pixel values (see [0145],Fig.8, see Green Frame 812a , which directed to step 814 for frame reconstruction, then followed by step 816 for color correction).
Regarding claim 4, Talbert provides for, wherein at least some of the luminance values are equal to corresponding pixel values of the only one of the plurality of different colors (see [0145],Fig.8, see Green Frame 812a , which directed to step 814 for frame reconstruction, then followed by step 816 for color correction).
Regarding claim 6, Talbert provides for, wherein the light received from the scene comprises reflected light generated by different color illuminators of an illumination system (Fig.1 see light 130, [0087], see “Light source 130 may be comprised of one or more lamps, light-emitting diodes ("LEDs") or other solid state light sources, lasers”).
Regarding claim 8, Talbert provides for, wherein the at least one-color filter array imaging sensor comprises red, green, and blue pixels and the different color illuminators comprise red, green, and blue illuminators ( see “ [0063] As used herein, color sensors or multi spectrum sensors are those sensors known to have a color filter array (CFA) thereon to filter the incoming electromagnetic radiation into its separate components. In the visual range of the electromagnetic spectrum, such a CFA may be built on a Bayer pattern or modification thereon to separate green, red and blue spectrum components of the light”).
Regarding claims 10 and 27 Talbert provides for, wherein the scene is an endoscopic scene ( Fig.19 see endoscope 1906, [0201], see “The endoscope 1906 includes an image sensor 1904 and two filters 1902a, 1902b. It should be appreciated that in alternative embodiments, the system 1900 may include any number of filters, and the number of filters and the type of filters may be selected for a certain purpose e.g., for gathering imaging information of a particular body tissue.
Regarding claims 11 and 28 Talbert provides for, wherein the at least one image processing procedure comprises at least one of sharpening, denoising, feature extraction, and image stabilization ( see [0145],Fig.8, step 820 for edge enhancement).
Regarding claims 13 and 30 Talbert provides for, wherein the at least one-color filter array imaging sensor comprises a Bayer sensor ( see [0205], see “ the image sensor 1904 may include a single image sensor with a plurality of different pixel sensors configured for reading different wavelengths or colors of light, such as a Bayer filter color filter array”).
Regarding claim 14, see the rejection of claim 1. It recites similar limitations as claim 14. Except for a memory, a program stored in the memory for execution by one processor (see “[0098] For purposes of illustration, programs and other executable program components are shown herein as discrete blocks, although it is understood that such programs and components may reside at various times in different storage components of computing device 250 and are executed by processor(s) 252”). Hence it is similarly analyzed and rejected.
Regarding claim 15 Talbert provides for an imager that comprises the at least one-color filter array imaging sensor ( see [0045], see “Such fluorescence imaging data may be overlaid on black-and-white or RGB images to provide additional information and context”).
Regarding claim 16 Talbert provides for, wherein the imager comprises an endoscopic imager ( see “[0012] FIG. 2 is a system for providing illumination to a light deficient environment for endoscopic imaging”).
Regarding claim 18 Talbert provides for ,an illumination system for illuminating the scene ( see [0197], see “The light source 1808 transmits light that may illuminate the surface 1812 in a light deficient environment such as a body cavity. The light 1810 is reflected off the surface 1812 and passes through the filter 1802 before hitting the image sensor 1804”).
Regarding claim 19, Talbert provides for , wherein the pixel values comprise red, green, and blue pixel values ( see [0045], see “Such fluorescence imaging data may be overlaid on black-and-white or RGB images to provide additional information and context”, colors in RGB images corresponds to pixel values).
Regarding claim 20, Talbert provides for, wherein the luminance values are generated from only the green pixel values (see [0145],Fig.8, see Green Frame 812a , which directed to step 814 for frame reconstruction, then followed by step 816 for color correction).
Regarding claim 21, Talbert provides for, wherein at least some of the luminance values are equal to corresponding pixel values of the only one of the plurality of different colors (see [0145],Fig.8, see Green Frame 812a , which directed to step 814 for frame reconstruction, then followed by step 816 for color correction).
Regarding claim 23, Talbert provides for, wherein the light received from the scene comprises reflected light generated by different color illuminators of an illumination system (Fig.1 see light 130, [0087], see “Light source 130 may be comprised of one or more lamps, light-emitting diodes ("LEDs") or other solid state light sources, lasers”).
Regarding claim 31, see the rejection of claim 1. It recites similar limitations as claim 31. Except for computer readable storage medium storing one or more programs for execution by one or more processors of a computing system (see [0084] of Talbert, see “Flash memory, phase-change memory (“PCM”), other types of memory, other optical disk storage, magnetic disk storage or other magnetic storage devices, or any other medium which can be used to store desired program code means in the form of computer executable instructions or data structures and which can be accessed by a general purpose or special purpose computer”). Hence it is similarly analyzed and rejected.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Talbert et al. US 20200402207 in view of RAJAB US 20170354358, further in view of Fulghum US 20090075391.
Regarding claim 17 Talbert as modified by Rajab does not provides
, wherein the endoscopic imager is a chip-on-tip endoscope.
Fulghum teaches the above missing limitation of Talbert as modified by Rajab (see [0123] of Fulghum, see “Light from the tissue 2769 as a result of the illumination is detected with a color CCD chip 2775 at the distal tip of the endoscope 2716”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of Fulghum with system and method of Talbert as modified by Rajab, in order to obtain the claimed invention, by detecting the Light from the tissue 2769 as a result of the illumination with a color CCD chip 2775, , a finding that one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. MPEP(2143).
Allowable Subject Matter
2. Claims 5,7,9,12,22,24,25-26 and 29 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Reasons for Allowance
3. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the closest prior arts of Talbert et al. US 20200402207 in view of RAJAB US 20170354358, further in view of Fulghum US 20090075391, failed to teach or suggest for features/limitations of claims 5,7,9,12,22,24,25-26 and 29.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
King US 20150182106, is cited because the reference teaches “[0083] Example system 100 is an endoscopic system configured for diagnosing diseased tissue 110. System 100 includes an endoscope with endoscopic camera 120, light source 130, control module 140, and display 150”.
KAMIMURA et al. US 20140180131 is cited because the reference teaches “In this case, although observation light radiated by the endoscope light source device 150 decreases, the image sensor of the distal end portion 211 can capture a normal observation image of the interior of the subject”, in [0127].
Gono et al. US 20100004520, is cited because the reference teaches “[0006] Further, when it is desirous to determine the presence of foreign matter on the blood content sensor window, the endoscope tip or blood content sensor window is removed from the surface of the tissue”.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALI BAYAT whose telephone number is (571)272-7444. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:00 M-F. 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, Andrew Bee can be reached at 571-2705183. 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.
/ALI BAYAT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2677
01/16/2026