Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/560,044

CASCADE IMAGE PROCESSING FOR NOISE REDUCTION

Non-Final OA §102§Other
Filed
Nov 09, 2023
Examiner
OMETZ, DAVID LOUIS
Art Unit
2672
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Qualcomm Incorporated
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
67%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
28 granted / 41 resolved
+6.3% vs TC avg
Minimal -1% lift
Without
With
+-0.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
60
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
9.0%
-31.0% vs TC avg
§103
44.8%
+4.8% vs TC avg
§102
35.3%
-4.7% vs TC avg
§112
7.0%
-33.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 41 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §Other
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11/9/2023 and 4/29/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner. Claim Objections Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: in claim 11, lines 12-13, “first noise reduction” should be changed to --second tone mapping--. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claims 1-9, 11-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by US 2015/0296193 to inventor Cote, hereinafter referred to as “Cote.” As per claim 1, Cote discloses a method, comprising: receiving a first image frame; processing the first image frame through a first pass in an image correction algorithm having a first configuration to generate an intermediate first image frame {see processing logic 154 and 164, [0253] and [0254]), wherein the first configuration results in the processing including a first set of operations related to a first noise reduction operation ([0253], “fixed pattern noise reduction”); and processing the intermediate first image frame through a second pass in the image correction algorithm having a second configuration to generate a corrected first image frame (see processing logic 174, [0255]), wherein the second configuration results in the processing including a second set of operations related to a second noise reduction operation (“chroma noise reduction” [0255]). As per claim 2, Cote discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising forming a video sequence comprising the corrected first image frame and at least a corrected second image frame (“video” [0248]). As per claim 3, Cote discloses the method of claim 2, further comprising at least one of: storing the video sequence in a memory ([0248] “memory 100”) ; transmitting the video sequence through a wireless network; or displaying the video sequence on a display ([0248], “display 28”). As per claim 4, Cote discloses the method of claim 1, wherein: processing the first image frame through a first pass in an image correction algorithm comprises processing the first image frame through a first image post-processing engine (IPE) (ISP pipeline processing is a back-end processing of the video via processing logic 154/164); and processing the intermediate first image frame through a second pass in the image correction algorithm comprises processing the first image frame through a second image post- processing engine (IPE) (processing logic 174 performed on the captured image/video; [0254]-[0255]). As per claim 5, Cote discloses the method of claim 4, wherein the first IPE is the same IPE as the second IPE (Cote discloses at [0540] and [0894] that multiple passes through the same logic 150/170 is useful in removing additional noise). As per claim 6, Cote discloses the method of claim 1, wherein: the first configuration for the first image correction algorithm comprises applying a first tone mapping (“local tone mapping” [0254]); and the second configuration for the second image correction algorithm comprises applying a different second tone mapping (“brightness, contrast, and color adjustment” [0255]) for contrast enhancement and luminance enhancement. As per claim 7, Cote discloses the method of claim 1, wherein: the first configuration for the first image correction algorithm comprises applying gamma correction (“gamma/degamma” [0254]); and the second configuration for the image correction algorithm does not comprise applying gamma correction (processing logic 174 at [0255] sets forth that “gamma/degamma” is optional, i.e. “may perform”). As per claim 8, Cote discloses the method of claim 1, wherein: only one of the first image correction algorithm and the second image correction algorithm comprises applying a color correction matrix ([0254] only logic 164 employs “color correction matrix”). As per claim 9, Cote discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: determining a low-light condition is present in the first image frame; and processing the first image frame and processing the intermediate first image frame in response to the determination of the low-light condition ([0453] and [0540] where Cote discloses that noise reduction is performed in response to low-light conditions) As per claim 11, Cote discloses a method, comprising: receiving a first image frame (“raw image data” [0250]); applying a first noise reduction to the first image frame (“fixed pattern noise reduction” [0253]); applying a first tone mapping to the first image frame after applying the first noise reduction (“tone mapping” [0254]); applying a gamma correction to the first image frame after applying the first tone mapping (“gamma” correction [0254]); applying a second noise reduction to the first image frame after applying the gamma correction (“chroma noise reduction” [0255]); applying a second tone mapping to the first image frame after applying the second noise reduction (either “color space conversion” and/or “dynamic range compression” [0255] reads on the claimed second tone mapping); applying a color correction matrix to the first image frame after applying the first noise reduction (“color adjustment” [0255]); and outputting a corrected first image frame after applying the first noise reduction, applying the first tone mapping, applying the gamma correction, applying the second noise reduction, applying the second tone mapping, and applying the color correction matrix (see [0256]). As per claim 12, Cote discloses the method of claim 11, wherein: a first image post-processing engine (IPE) (see logic 154 and 164 [0253]-[0254]) performs the steps of applying the first noise reduction, applying the first tone mapping, and applying the gamma correction; and a second image post-processing engine (IPE) (see logic 174 [0255]) performs the steps of applying the second noise reduction, and applying the second tone mapping. As per claim 13, Cote discloses the method of claim 11, further comprising: determining a low-light condition is present in the first image frame; and in response to determining the low-light condition is present, performing the steps of applying the first noise reduction, applying the first tone mapping, applying the gamma correction, applying the second noise reduction, and applying the second tone mapping (see [0453] and [0540] in response to low light condition). As per claim 14, Cote discloses the method of claim 11, further comprising: forming a video sequence comprising the corrected first image frame and at least a corrected second image frame; and at least one of: storing the video sequence in a memory; transmitting the video sequence through a wireless network; or displaying the video sequence on a display (see display 28 and memory 100 [0248]). As per claim 15, see similar claim 1 or claim 11 above. As per claim 16, see similar claim 11 above As per claim 17, Cote discloses the apparatus of claim 15, wherein the image signal processor is configured to configure one of the first IPE or the second IPE to apply a color correction matrix (“color correction matrix” [0254]). As per claim 18, Cote discloses the apparatus of claim 15, wherein the image signal processor is configured to configure the second IPE to not apply a gamma correction ([0255] the processing logic 174 “may perform” “and/or” which makes optional the disclosed gamma correction of logic 174). As per claim 19, Cote discloses the apparatus of claim 15, wherein the image signal processor is configured to assign the plurality of IPEs for processing image frames from one or more image sensors (image sensors 90a and 90b, [0250]). As per claim 20, see similar claim 1 or claim 11 above As per claim 21, Cote discloses the apparatus of claim 20, wherein the at least one processor comprises an image signal processor (“ISP” pipe processing logic 80 [0253]). As per claim 22, Cote discloses the apparatus of claim 20, wherein the at least one processor comprises a graphics processing unit (GPU) ([0224] “GPU”). As per claim 23, Cote discloses the apparatus of claim 20, wherein the at least one processor comprises a central processing unit (CPU) ([0224] and microprocessor). As per claim 24, Cote discloses the apparatus of claim 23, wherein the apparatus comprises an image capture device (see abstract “digital camera”). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 10 is 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. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art cited exemplifies the state of the art in low light image noise reduction that involves multiple step denoising techniques. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID OMETZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7593. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8am-4pm. 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, Sumati Lefkowitz can be reached at 571-272-3638. 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. DAVID OMETZ Primary Examiner Art Unit 2672 /DAVID OMETZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2672
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 09, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §Other (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599436
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR TRAINING OPERATION DETERMINATION MODEL FOR MEDICAL INSTRUMENT CONTROL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597098
IMAGE ENHANCEMENT METHOD, CHIP AND IMAGE ACQUISITION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597505
DOCUMENT CREATION SUPPORT APPARATUS, DOCUMENT CREATION SUPPORT METHOD, AND DOCUMENT CREATION SUPPORT PROGRAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12586230
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR TRAINING A MODEL FOR DETERMINING VEHICLE FOLLOWING DISTANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586390
SYSTEMS, METHODS, AND COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIA FOR CHARACTERIZING MICROSPHERIC MATERIAL
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
68%
Grant Probability
67%
With Interview (-0.9%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 41 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month