DETAILED ACTION
I. 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 .
II. Response to Amendment
A. The response, filed June 23, 2026, has been entered and made of record. Claims 1-6,8-16,18,19, and 21-23 are pending in the application.
B. Applicant’s cancelation of claims 7 and 17 and amendment to claim 12 have overcome the outstanding rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) and the outstanding objection.
III. Response to Arguments
Applicant largely reiterates arguments presented in previous responses, and as explained in the examiner’s previous Office action, those arguments are not persuasive. As to arguments with respect to the newly added limitation of dynamically adjusting the input parameter of the frequency at which at least one image is received at the color tone adjustment, the examiner submits that they are moot as the previously cited references will not be used to satisfy those limitations. See the prior art rejections that follow.
IV. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112:
(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.
A. Lack of antecedent basis
Claims 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Specifically, on lines 7 and 8, claim 21 recites “the color tone adjustment generated for the portions of the image that are influenced by the illumination of the light source identified from the one or more inputs.” The claim fails to establish antecedent basis for “the image” and “the light source identified from the one or more inputs.” The color tone adjustment system clause of the claim only requires the determination of specific color tone adjustments required to compensate or characteristics of one or more illumination sources from the one or more inputs. That clause does not require that the determined color tone adjustment be performed on an image, and it does not require that the one or more illumination sources (or light source(s)) be identified from the one or more inputs. Rather, it states that the color tone adjustment(s) be determined from the one or more inputs. Claims 22 and 23 are rejected as indefinite because they depend on claim 21 and fail to remedy its ambiguity.
For the purpose of prior art rejection, the examiner will interpret claim 21 as if it reads as follows, which is also a suggested amendment to overcome this rejection:
21. (Currently Amended) A computer system, comprising:
a color tone adjustment system configured to determine specific color tone adjustments required to compensate for characteristics of one or more illumination sources from one or more of the following operatively connected inputs: image data, metadata, or one or more secondary sources;
the color tone adjustment system configured to generatean image that are influenced by the one or more illumination sources.
The following amendments to claim 22 are also suggested:
22. (Currently Amended) The computer system of claim 21, the color tone adjustment system configured to receive the one or more inputs, the one or more secondary sources comprising an artificial intelligence model to identify the characteristics of theone or more illumination sources.
B. Ambiguity as to whether “the color tone adjustment system” invokes interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f)
In this Office action, the examiner incorporates by reference the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) from the Office action dated Jun 30, 2025 (See p. 2 of that action). There, the examiner reasoned that it was unclear whether the “color tone adjustment system” of claims 1,11, and 20 invoked interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f). After amendments to those claims that clarified the indefiniteness, the examiner withdrew the rejection. However, in new claim 21, Applicant has re-presented the ambiguity of the limitation. Therefore, the claim is indefinite as detailed in the incorporated rejection. Claims 22 and 23 are rejected as indefinite because they depend on claim 21 and fail to remedy its ambiguity.
V. Claim Objections
A. Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: One line 10, the second “more” should be deleted.
B. Claim 23 is objected to because of the following informalities: One line 1, “tonight” should be “tone,” and “the” before “claim 21” on line 1 should be deleted.
VI. 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)(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. Claim 21 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kang et al. (US 2022/0292635 A1)
As to claim 21, Kang et al. teaches a computer system (Fig. 10, image correction apparatus “1000”; [0105], lines 1-3), comprising:
a color tone adjustment system (Fig. 10, processor “1020”; [0124], lines 1-3) configured to determine specific color tone adjustments (Fig. 1, “120”; [0066]; {The claimed color tone adjustments are the adjustments to the input image through application of the illumination map in equation 7.}) required to compensate for characteristics of one or more illumination sources (Fig. 1, “110”; {The claimed characteristics of the one or more illumination sources are the chromaticities of illuminants affecting each pixel.}) from one or more of the following operatively connected inputs: image data, metadata, or one or more secondary sources (Fig. 4, neural network “410”);
the color tone adjustment system configured to generatean image that are influenced by the one or more illumination sources ([0066]; note, also, [0058]).
As to claim 22, Kang et al. teaches the computer system of claim 21, the color tone adjustment system configured to receive the one or more inputs ([0124], lines 1-3, “…a neural network model stored in the memory 1030.”), the one or more secondary sources comprising an artificial intelligence model to identify the characteristics of theone or more illumination sources (Fig. 2, neural network “210”; [0073]).
B. Claims 21 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by the European patent application publication of Yamashita et al. (European publication number: EP 1 667 063 A1)
As to claim 21, Yamashita et al. teaches a computer system (Fig. 9, image processing device for display “723”), comprising:
a color tone adjustment system (Fig. 9, image processing device “750”) configured to determine specific color tone adjustments (col. 40, lines 19-24; {The color tone adjustments are the color processing operations performed by color processing portion “13” of Fig. 9.}) required to compensate for characteristics of one or more illumination sources from one or more of the following operatively connected inputs: image data, metadata, or one or more secondary sources (col. 39, lines 24-31);
the color tone adjustment system configured to generatean image that are influenced by the one or more illumination sources (col. 40, lines 19-24).
As to claim 23, Yamashita et al. teaches the computer system oftone adjustment system configured to query a database storing device or object manuals with identification information for a particular display providing illumination within the image and receive inputs from the database storing device or object manuals (col. 39, lines 47-52; {The examiner reads the claimed device manual as the product information of the display.}).
VII. Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 103
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
A. Claims 1,3,11, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borremans et al. (US 2022/0003907 A1) in view of Cross et al. (US 2012/0274724 A1) in view of Hsu et al. (US 2022/0329769 A1) and further in view of Takahashi et al. (US 2008/0174673 A1)
As to claim 1, Borremans et al. (Fig. 27A) discloses a method, the method comprising:
receiving, utilizing an image capture device (Fig. 20, sensor “10”) coupled to an information handling device employing a color tone adjustment system ([0114]; {The examiner reads the processor of Borremans as the claimed information handling device/claimed color tone adjustment system.}), at least one image of a scene (Fig. 27A, step “460”; [0115], lines 1 and 2);
identifying, using the color tone adjustment system, a light source providing illumination within the at least one image (Fig. 27A, step “466”); and
adjusting, using the color tone adjustment system, a color tone of the at least one image image based upon characteristics of the light source ([0115], last three lines; {The examiner reads the inherent white balance gains/parameters associated with the identified light source as the claimed characteristics.}), wherein the adjusting the color tone of the at least one image comprises adjusting a value for a color for a portion of the at least one image, wherein the adjusting the value for the color for the portion of the at least one image comprises adjusting the portion of the at least one image influenced by the light source providing illumination of the image ([0115]).
The claim differs from Borremans et al. in that it requires (1) that the color tone adjustment of the image is performed after capture of the image by the image capture device but before the image is transferred to an image receipt location and (2) that the color tone adjustment system includes a graphical user interface at which a dynamically established input specifying a predetermined frequency at which the at least one image of the scene is received by the color tone adjustment system is provided.
(1) However, in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Cross et al. discloses a videoconferencing system (Fig. 1) comprising a plurality of camera systems that respectively capture video of a participating user and transmit the video to other users participating in the videoconference ([0015]). Each camera system includes a video camera (Fig. 1, video camera “18”) and information handling system (Fig. 1, information handling system “10”). The information handling system performs a white balance correction process on a captured image then transmits the corrected image to participating users ([0016]).
In light of the teaching of Cross et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to apply the white balance adjustment method of Borremans to a camera system that is part of a video conference, where the white balance of captured video is adjusted and the adjusted video is sent to other users participating in the conference. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that applying Borremans’ method in this way would confer the benefits of that method to a commonplace work activity, where high-quality images are essential. Also, by adjusting white balance at the camera, the system can avoid transmission delays incurred when the image is transferred to a networked system for processing, like a cloud server.
(2) Further in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Hsu et al. discloses a white balancing system (Fig. 1) that corrects the color tone of an image by analyzing the color temperature of the image and applying gains that compensate for illumination casts in the image (Fig. 4). The system provides an option to customize the frequency at which white balance is updated ([0021], lines 26-32). The reference, however, fails to specifically disclose that the update frequency can be input at a graphical user interface. Further in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Takahashi et al. discloses a white balancing system (Fig. 4; [0079]) that provides the user with selectable white balance options via a graphical user interface (Fig. 13; [0149]).
In light of the teaching of Hsu et al. and Takahashi et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to allow a user to set the frequency at which Borremans updates white balance via a graphical user interface presented on a display connected to the reference’s system because this would save computational resources by refraining from continuously checking for light sources when the environment is unlikely to change. Additionally, a graphical user interface, like Takahashi’s, provides a user-friendly, understandable approach to setting system parameters.
As to claim 11, Borremans et al. teaches an image capture device (Fig. 20, sensor “10” and processor of para. [0114]) configured to receive and process image data to adjust a value for a color for a portion of an image containing light source illumination data (Fig. 27A, step “466”) received by the image capture device ([0115]).
The claim differs from Borremans et al. in that it requires (1) that the image capture device be connectable to a system comprising a processor and memory operably connected to the processor and (2) that the system includes a color tone adjustment system that employs a graphical user interface, wherein the color tone adjustment system comprises parameters established based upon one more user inputs received at the graphical user interface for identifying the light source illumination data, and wherein the one or more user inputs comprises a predetermined frequency at which the image data is received by the color tone adjustment system.
(1) However, in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Cross et al. discloses a videoconferencing system (Fig. 1) comprising a plurality of camera systems that respectively capture video of a participating user and transmit the video to other users participating in the videoconference ([0015]). Each camera system includes a processor and memory connected to the processor (Fig. 1, CPU “12” and RAM “14”; [0015], lines 1-8; {The claimed system is another camera in the videoconferencing system including the CPU and RAM.}), and each camera system performs a white balance correction process on a captured image then transmits the corrected image to participating users ([0016]).
In light of the teaching of Cross et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to apply the white balance adjustment method of Borremans to a camera system that is part of a video conference, where the white balance of captured video is adjusted and the adjusted video is sent to other users participating in the conference. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that applying Borremans’ method in this way would confer the benefits of that method to a commonplace work activity, where high-quality images are essential.
(2) Further in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Hsu et al. discloses a white balancing system (Fig. 1) that corrects the color tone of an image by analyzing the color temperature of the image and applying gains that compensate for illumination casts in the image (Fig. 4). The system provides an option to customize the frequency at which white balance is updated ([0021], lines 26-32). The reference, however, fails to specifically disclose that the update frequency can be input at a graphical user interface. Further in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Takahashi et al. discloses a white balancing system (Fig. 4; [0079]) that provides the user with selectable white balance options via a graphical user interface (Fig. 13; [0149]).
In light of the teaching of Hsu et al. and Takahashi et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to allow a user to set the frequency at which Borremans updates white balance via a graphical user interface presented on a display connected to the reference’s system because this would save computational resources by refraining from continuously checking for light sources when the environment is unlikely to change. Additionally, a graphical user interface, like Takahashi’s, provides a user-friendly, understandable approach to setting system parameters.
As to claim 13, Borremans et al., as modified by Cross et al., Hsu et al., and Takahashi et al., teaches the system of claim 11, wherein to process the image data comprises identifying the light source illumination data that comprises characteristics of a light source (see Borremans et al., [0115], last three lines; {The examiner reads the inherent white balance gains/parameters associated with the identified light source as the claimed characteristics.}).
Claim 3 is a method claim reciting steps substantially similar to the processor
functions of claim 13. Therefore, claim 3 is rejected as detailed above.
B. Claims 1-6 and 10-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (US 2019/0132563 A1) in view of Cross et al. (US 2012/0274724 A1) in view of Hsu et al. (US 2022/0329769 A1) and further in view of Takahashi et al. (US 2008/0174673 A1)
As to claim 1, Wang discloses a method (Fig. 1), the method comprising:
receiving, utilizing an image capture device (Fig. 14, unnumbered camera hole in device “1000”) coupled to an information handling device employing a color tone adjustment system (Fig. 15, processor “200”), an image of a scene (Fig. 1, step “S110”);
identifying, using the color tone adjustment system, a light source providing illumination within the image (Fig. 1, step “S130,” “determining the type of scene;” [0039]); and
adjusting, using the color tone adjustment system, a color tone of the image based upon characteristics of the light source (Fig. 1, step “S130,” “performing a white balance processsing;” {The examiner reads the color temperature’s associated white balance parameters as the claimed characteristics.}), wherein the adjusting the color tone of the image comprises adjusting a value for a color for a portion of the image, wherein the adjusting the value for the color for the portion of the image comprises adjusting the portion of the image influenced by the light source providing illumination of the image (Fig. 1, step “130”).
The claim differs from Wang in that it requires (1) that the color tone adjustment of the image is performed after capture of the image by an image capture device but before the image is transferred to an image receipt location and (2) that the color tone adjustment system includes a graphical user interface at which a dynamically established input specifying a predetermined frequency at which the at least one image of the scene is received by the color tone adjustment system is provided.
(1) However, in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Cross et al. discloses a videoconferencing system (Fig. 1) comprising a plurality of camera systems that respectively capture video of a participating user and transmit the video to other users participating in the videoconference ([0015]). Each camera system includes a video camera (Fig. 1, video camera “18”) and information handling system (Fig. 1, information handling system “10”). The information handling system performs a white balance correction process on a captured image then transmits the corrected image to participating users ([0016]).
In light of the teaching of Cross et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to apply the white balance adjustment method of Wang to a camera system that is part of a video conference, where the white balance of captured video is adjusted and the adjusted video is sent to other users participating in the conference. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that applying Wang’s method in this way would confer the benefits of that method to a commonplace work activity, where high-quality images are essential.
(2) Further in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Hsu et al. discloses a white balancing system (Fig. 1) that corrects the color tone of an image by analyzing the color temperature of the image and applying gains that compensate for illumination casts in the image (Fig. 4). The system provides an option to customize the frequency at which white balance is updated ([0021], lines 26-32). The reference, however, fails to specifically disclose that the update frequency can be input at a graphical user interface. Further in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Takahashi et al. discloses a white balancing system (Fig. 4; [0079]) that provides the user with selectable white balance options via a graphical user interface (Fig. 13; [0149]).
In light of the teaching of Hsu et al. and Takahashi et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to allow a user to set the frequency at which Wang updates white balance via a graphical user interface presented on a display connected to the reference’s system because this would save computational resources by refraining from continuously checking for light sources when the environment is unlikely to change. Additionally, a graphical user interface, like Takahashi’s, provides a user-friendly, understandable approach to setting system parameters.
As to claim 10, Wang, as modified by Cross et al., Hsu et al., and Takahashi et al., teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the identifying the light source comprises querying a secondary information source for characteristics related to the light source (see Wang, [0041], lines 4-11; {The inherent storage can be reasonably construed as secondary to the portion of memory “300” that stores the program of Fig. 15.}).
As to claim 11, Wang teaches an image capture device (Fig. 15, electronic device “1000”) configured to receive and process image data to adjust a value for a color for a portion of an image containing light source illumination data (Fig. 1, step “S130,” “determining the type of scene;” [0039]) received by the image capture device (Fig. 1, step “S130”).
The claim differs from Wang in that it requires (1) that the image capture device be connectable to a system comprising a processor and memory operably connected to the processor and (2) that the system includes a color tone adjustment system that employs a graphical user interface, wherein the color tone adjustment system comprises parameters established based upon one more user inputs received at the graphical user interface for identifying the light source illumination data, and wherein the one or more user inputs comprises a predetermined frequency at which the image data is received by the color tone adjustment system.
(1) However, in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Cross et al. discloses a videoconferencing system (Fig. 1) comprising a plurality of camera systems that respectively capture video of a participating user and transmit the video to other users participating in the videoconference ([0015]). Each camera system includes a processor and memory connected to the processor (Fig. 1, CPU “12” and RAM “14”; [0015], lines 1-8; {The claimed system is another camera in the videoconferencing system including the CPU and RAM.}), and each camera system performs a white balance correction process on a captured image then transmits the corrected image to participating users ([0016]).
In light of the teaching of Cross et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to apply the white balance adjustment method of Wang to a camera system that is part of a video conference, where the white balance of captured video is adjusted and the adjusted video is sent to other users participating in the conference. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that applying Wang’s method in this way would confer the benefits of that method to a commonplace work activity, where high-quality images are essential.
(2) Further in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Hsu et al. discloses a white balancing system (Fig. 1) that corrects the color tone of an image by analyzing the color temperature of the image and applying gains that compensate for illumination casts in the image (Fig. 4). The system provides an option to customize the frequency at which white balance is updated ([0021], lines 26-32). The reference, however, fails to specifically disclose that the update frequency can be input at a graphical user interface. Further in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Takahashi et al. discloses a white balancing system (Fig. 4; [0079]) that provides the user with selectable white balance options via a graphical user interface (Fig. 13; [0149]).
In light of the teaching of Hsu et al. and Takahashi et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to allow a user to set the frequency at which Wang updates white balance via a graphical user interface presented on a display connected to the reference’s system because this would save computational resources by refraining from continuously checking for light sources when the environment is unlikely to change. Additionally, a graphical user interface, like Takahashi’s, provides a user-friendly, understandable approach to setting system parameters.
As to claim 12, Wang, as modified by Cross et al., Hsu et al., and Takahashi et al., teaches the system of claim 11, wherein to process the image comprises identifying a light source by accessing a data storage location identifying light sources within an environment (see Wang, [0041], lines 1-3; {The examiner reads the inherent storage that stores the correspondence as the claimed data storage location.}).
As to claim 13, Wang, as modified by Cross et al., Hsu et al., and Takahashi et al., teaches the system of claim 11, wherein to process the image comprises identifying the light source illumination data that comprises characteristics of a light source (see Wang, [0039]).
As to claim 14, Wang, as modified by Cross et al., Hsu et al., and Takahashi et al., teaches the system of claim 13, wherein the identifying the characteristics of the light source comprises accessing a data storage location (see Wang, [0041], lines 1-3) storing light sources and characteristics of the light sources and querying the data storage location for the light source identified (see Wang, [0041], lines 4-11).
As to claim 15, Wang, as modified by Cross et al., Hsu et al., and Takahashi et al., teaches the system of claim 11, wherein to process the image data comprises identifying a light source subsequent to querying a device operatively coupled to the color tone adjustment system ([0041], lines 4-11; {The claimed device is the inherent storage storing the correspondence.}).
As to claim 16, Wang, as modified by Cross et al., Hsu et al., and Takahashi et al., teaches the system of claim 11, wherein to process the image data comprises identifying, from the light source illumination data, an output color of a light source (see Wang, Fig. 1, step “S110,” “to obtain a color of the light source”).
Claims 2-6 are method claims reciting steps substantially similar to the processor
functions of claims 12-16. Therefore, claims 2-7 are rejected as detailed above.
C. Claims 1,3,9,11,13, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kadoi et al. (US 2019/0132563 A1) in view of Cross et al. (US 2012/0274724 A1) in view of Hsu et al. (US 2022/0329769 A1) and further in view of Takahashi et al. (US 2008/0174673 A1)
As to claim 1, Kadoi et al. discloses a method (Fig. 1), the method comprising:
receiving, utilizing an image capture device (Fig. 1A, image sensor “102”) coupled to an information handling device employing a color tone adjustment system ((Fig. 1, CPU “103”)), an image of a scene ([0052], lines 1 and 2);
identifying, using the color tone adjustment system, a light source providing illumination within the image ([0061], lines 1-5); and
adjusting, using the color tone adjustment system, a color tone of the image based upon characteristics of the light source (Fig. 4; [0039]; [0105]; {The examiner reads the white balance coefficient(s) as the claimed characteristics.}), wherein the adjusting the color tone of the image comprises adjusting a value for a color for a portion of the image, wherein the adjusting the value for the color for the portion of the image comprises adjusting the portion of the image influenced by the light source providing illumination of the image (Fig. 4; [0039]; [0105]).
The claim differs from Kadoi et al. in that it requires (1) that the color tone adjustment of the image is performed after capture of the image by the image capture device but before the image is transferred to an image receipt location and (2) that the color tone adjustment system includes a graphical user interface at which a dynamically established input specifying a predetermined frequency at which the at least one image of the scene is received by the color tone adjustment system is provided.
(1) However, in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Cross et al. discloses a videoconferencing system (Fig. 1) comprising a plurality of camera systems that respectively capture video of a participating user and transmit the video to other users participating in the videoconference ([0015]). Each camera system includes a video camera (Fig. 1, video camera “18”) and information handling system (Fig. 1, information handling system “10”). The information handling system performs a white balance correction process on a captured image then transmits the corrected image to participating users ([0016]).
In light of the teaching of Cross et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to design the image capturing apparatus executing the white balance adjustment of Kadoi et al. for use in videoconferencing, where the white balance of captured video is adjusted and the adjusted video is sent to other users participating in the conference. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that applying Kadoi’s apparatus and method in this way would confer the benefits of that system to a commonplace work activity, where high-quality images are essential. Also, by adjusting white balance at the image capture apparatus, the system can avoid transmission delays incurred when the image is transferred to a networked system for processing, like a cloud server.
(2) Further in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Hsu et al. discloses a white balancing system (Fig. 1) that corrects the color tone of an image by analyzing the color temperature of the image and applying gains that compensate for illumination casts in the image (Fig. 4). The system provides an option to customize the frequency at which white balance is updated ([0021], lines 26-32). The reference, however, fails to specifically disclose that the update frequency can be input at a graphical user interface. Further in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Takahashi et al. discloses a white balancing system (Fig. 4; [0079]) that provides the user with selectable white balance options via a graphical user interface (Fig. 13; [0149]).
In light of the teaching of Hsu et al. and Takahashi et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to allow a user to set the frequency at which Kadoi et al. updates white balance via a graphical user interface presented on a display connected to the reference’s system because this would save computational resources by refraining from continuously checking for light sources when the environment is unlikely to change. Additionally, a graphical user interface, like Takahashi’s, provides a user-friendly, understandable approach to setting system parameters.
As to claim 11, Kadoi et al. teaches an image capture device (Fig. 1A, image sensor “102”) configured to receive and process image data to adjust a value for a color for a portion of an image containing light source illumination data ([0061], lines 1-5) received by the image capture device (Fig. 4; [0039]; [0105]).
The claim differs from Kadoi et al. in that it requires that the image capture device be connectable to a system comprising a processor and memory operably connected to the processor and (2) that the system includes a color tone adjustment system that employs a graphical user interface, wherein the color tone adjustment system comprises parameters established based upon one more user inputs received at the graphical user interface for identifying the light source illumination data, and wherein the one or more user inputs comprises a predetermined frequency at which the image data is received by the color tone adjustment system.
(1) However, in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Cross et al. discloses a videoconferencing system (Fig. 1) comprising a plurality of camera systems that respectively capture video of a participating user and transmit the video to other users participating in the videoconference ([0015]). Each camera system includes a processor and memory connected to the processor (Fig. 1, CPU “12” and RAM “14”; [0015], lines 1-8; {The claimed system is another camera in the videoconferencing system including the CPU and RAM.}), and each camera system performs a white balance correction process on a captured image then transmits the corrected image to participating users ([0016]).
In light of the teaching of Cross et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to apply the white balance adjustment method of Kadoi et al. to a camera system that is part of a video conference, where the white balance of captured video is adjusted and the adjusted video is sent to other users participating in the conference. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that applying Kadoi’s method in this way would confer the benefits of that method to a commonplace work activity, where high-quality images are essential.
(2) Further in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Hsu et al. discloses a white balancing system (Fig. 1) that corrects the color tone of an image by analyzing the color temperature of the image and applying gains that compensate for illumination casts in the image (Fig. 4). The system provides an option to customize the frequency at which white balance is updated ([0021], lines 26-32). The reference, however, fails to specifically disclose that the update frequency can be input at a graphical user interface. Further in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Takahashi et al. discloses a white balancing system (Fig. 4; [0079]) that provides the user with selectable white balance options via a graphical user interface (Fig. 13; [0149]).
In light of the teaching of Hsu et al. and Takahashi et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to allow a user to set the frequency at which Kadoi et al. updates white balance via a graphical user interface presented on a display connected to the reference’s system because this would save computational resources by refraining from continuously checking for light sources when the environment is unlikely to change. Additionally, a graphical user interface, like Takahashi’s, provides a user-friendly, understandable approach to setting system parameters.
As to claim 13, Kadoi et al., as modified by Cross et al., Hsu et al., and Takahashi et al., teaches the system of claim 11, wherein to process the image data comprises identifying a light source that comprises characteristics of a light source (see Kadoi et al., Fig. 4; [0105]).
As to claim 19, Kadoi et al., as modified by Cross et al., Hsu et al., and Takahashi et al., teaches the system of claim 11, wherein to process the image data comprises identifying at least one light sources that controls an illumination within the scene by providing instructions to a controllable device (see Kadoi et al., Fig. 1, interactive light source “201”) to identify characteristics of an uncontrollable light source (see Kadoi et al., Fig. 1, non-interactive light source “202”) providing illumination within an image (see Kadoi et al., [0061], lines 1-5).
Claims 3 and 9 are method claims reciting steps substantially similar to the processor
functions of claims 13 and 19. Therefore, claims 3 and 9 are rejected as detailed above.
D. Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Borremans et al. (US 2022/0003907 A1) in view of Cross et al. (US 2012/0274724 A1) in view of Hsu et al. (US 2022/0329769 A1) and further in view of Takahashi et al. (US 2008/0174673 A1) in view of Mirzaei Domabi et al. (US 2020/0226720 A1)
As to claim 18, Borremans et al., as modified by Cross et al., Hsu et al., and Takahashi et al., teaches the system of claim 11. The claim differs from Borremans et al., as modified by Cross et al., Hsu et al., and Yamashita et al., in that it requires that to adjust comprises adjusting the value of a color of the image irrespective of values of other colors of an image. However, in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Mirzaei Domabi et al. teaches a white balance correction method in which only a single color channel can be corrected ([0045], “…white balance gains for one or more channels…”). In light of the teaching of Mirzaei Domabi et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application design Borremans’s white balance correction to correct a single color channel for white balance as this would increase the speed of white balance processing.
Claim 8 is a method claim reciting a step substantially similar to the processor
function of claim 18. Therefore, claim 8 is rejected as detailed above.
E. Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (US 2019/0132563 A1) in view of Cross et al. (US 2012/0274724 A1) in view of Hsu et al. (US 2022/0329769 A1) and further in view of Takahashi et al. (US 2008/0174673 A1) and further in view of Mirzaei Domabi et al. (US 2020/0226720 A1)
As to claim 18, Wang, as modified by Cross et al., Hsu et al., and Takahashi et al., teaches the system of claim 11. The claim differs from Wang, as modified by Cross et al., Hsu et al., and Yamashita et al., in that it requires that to adjust comprises adjusting the value of a color of the image irrespective of values of other colors of an image. However, in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Mirzaei Domabi et al. teaches a white balance correction method in which only a single color channel can be corrected ([0045], “…white balance gains for one or more channels…”). In light of the teaching of Mirzaei Domabi et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to design Wang’s white balance correction method to correct a single color channel for white balance as this would increase the speed of white balance processing.
Claim 8 is a method claim reciting a step substantially similar to the processor
function of claim 18. Therefore, claim 8 is rejected as detailed above.
F. Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kadoi et al. (US 2019/0132563 A1) in view of Cross et al. (US 2012/0274724 A1) in view of Hsu et al. (US 2022/0329769 A1) in view of Takahashi et al. (US 2008/0174673 A1)and further in view of Mirzaei Domabi et al. (US 2020/0226720 A1)
As to claim 18, Kadoi et al., as modified by Cross et al., Hsu et al., and Takahashi et al., teaches the system of claim 11. The claim differs from Kadoi et al., as modified by Cross et al., Hsu et al., and Yamashita et al., in that it requires that to adjust comprises adjusting the value of a color of the image irrespective of values of other colors of an image. However, in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, Mirzaei Domabi et al. teaches a white balance correction method in which only a single color channel can be corrected ([0045], “…white balance gains for one or more channels…”). In light of the teaching of Mirzaei Domabi et al., the examiner submits that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to design Kadoi’s white balance correction method to correct a single color channel for white balance as this would increase the speed of white balance processing.
Claim 8 is a method claim reciting a step substantially similar to the processor
function of claim 18. Therefore, claim 8 is rejected as detailed above.
VIII. 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 ANTHONY J DANIELS whose telephone number is (571)272-7362. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Sinh Tran can be reached at 571-272-7564. 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.
/ANTHONY J DANIELS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2637
9/28/2026
