DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/05/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-5, 7, 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshida (US 20220167853 to Yoshida et al) in view of Hirama (US 20230281776 to Hirama et al).
Regarding claim 1, Yoshida discloses an imaging device (dermatoscopy camera 1) comprising an image sensor (image sensor 44) configured to photograph an imaging object (a target), and a processor (controller 2) (Yoshida, figs. 2-3, par [0036-0039]), the processor being configured to:
determine whether a close-up attachment (adapter 70) is attached to the imaging device, based on the derived distance (an interval), to obtain a determination result (attachment result) (Yoshida, figs. 2, 23, par [0104, 0143], wherein in step s75, the adapter 70 is detected based on normal imaging that determines an interval between a target and cover 132); and
set an imaging mode (second dermatoscopy imaging operation) in accordance with the determination result (Yoshida, figs. , 2, 3, 23, par [0141], wherein second dermatoscopy imaging operation is set in accordance with attachment of adapter 70).
However, Yoshida does not disclose:
derive a distance between the imaging object and the image sensor to obtain a derived distance.
On the other hand, in the same endeavor, Hirama discloses:
derive a distance (distance) between the imaging object (subject) and the image sensor (image sensor) to obtain a derived distance (Hirama, abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to an artisan before the effective filing date of the current application to incorporate the disclosure by Hirama into the device by Yoshida so as to achieve the invention as claimed because such incorporation makes it possible to perform computer graphics combining processing even when the user cannot recognize the subject distance that is used for computer graphics combining processing (Hirama, par [0004].
Regarding claim 2, Yoshida and Hirama discloses aforementioned limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Yoshida discloses:
the image sensor (image sensor 44) is configured to photograph the imaging object by an auto-focus method (Yoshida, figs. 2, 3, par [0104], and
the processor (controller 2) is configured to derive the distance (the interval), based on a focal distance (a focal distance) at a time of photographing the imaging object (Yoshida, figs. 2, 3, par [0104], wherein autofocus is performed and wherein the interval is determined based on a focal distance).
Regarding claim 3, Yoshida and Hirama discloses aforementioned limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Yoshida discloses:
at least one lighting unit (illumination device body 100) configured to illuminate the imaging object (Yoshida, fig. 2, par [0042]),
wherein the processor (controller 2) is configured to light some of the at least one lighting unit, in a case of deriving the focal distance (focal distance) (Yoshida, fig. 2, par [0104, 0101, 0113, 0118], wherein LEDs are turned on for obtaining focal distance in autofocus).
Regarding claim 4, Yoshida and Hirama discloses aforementioned limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Yoshida discloses:
the processor (controller 2) is configured to control a lighting state (lighting state) of the lighting unit in accordance with an imaging mode that is set (Yoshida, fig. 2, par [0104, 0101, 0113, 0118], wherein LEDs are turned on in an imaging mode).
Regarding claim 5, Yoshida and Hirama discloses aforementioned limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Yoshida discloses:
the lighting units (illumination device body 100) include a first lighting unit (led 140) illuminating a first range (a first range) in an imaging range of the image sensor (image sensor 44), and a second lighting unit (led 141) illuminating a second range (second range) different from the first range in the imaging range of the image sensor (Yoshida, figs. 2, 7, 8, par [0049-0051, 0057, 0062], wherein in various leds 140 and 141 are installed), and
the processor (controller 2) is configured to set the imaging mode to one of a plurality of imaging modes, including a first imaging mode in which the first lighting unit is lighted and a second imaging mode in which the second lighting unit is lighted (Yoshida, figs. 2, 7, 8, par [0049-0051, 0057, 0062], wherein in various leds 140 and 141 are turned on in different modes).
Regarding claim 7, Yoshida and Hirama discloses aforementioned limitations of the parent claim. Additionally, Yoshida discloses:
the processor (controller 2) is further configured to: determine a kind (type) of the close-up attachment (adapter 70) that is attached to the imaging device, based on the derived distance (interval); and set the imaging mode (second dermatoscopy imaging operation) in accordance with a determination result of the kind of the close-up attachment (Yoshida, figs. 2, 23, par [0104, 0143], wherein second dermatoscopy imaging operation is determined in step s72 after normal imaging in step s74 that determines an interval between a target and cover 132).
Regarding claim 10, same ground of rejection as in claim 1 is applied.
Regarding claim 11, same ground of rejection as in claim 1 is applied, wherein a non-transitory computer readable recording medium storing a program for causing a processor of an imaging device (Yoshida, , par [0097]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 8-9 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.
Regarding claim 6, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor renders obvious, in combination with other claim limitations, the claim language of “the processor is configured to: light the first lighting unit at a time of deriving the focal distance; set the imaging mode to the first imaging mode and continue lighting of the first lighting unit, in a case where the focal distance is determined to be a predetermined close-up distance; and switch the lighting of the first lighting unit to lighting of the second lighting unit and set the imaging mode to the second imaging mode, in a case where the focal distance is determined to be not the predetermined close-up distance.”
Regarding claim 8, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor renders obvious, in combination with other claim limitations, the claim language of “the lighting units include a first lighting unit illuminating a first range in an imaging range of the image sensor, and a second lighting unit illuminating a second range different from the first range in the imaging range of the image sensor, the close-up attachment attached to the imaging device includes at least one of a first close-up attachment and a second close-up attachment, and the processor is configured to set the imaging mode to one of a plurality of imaging modes, including a first imaging mode in which neither first close-up attachment nor the second close-up attachment is used, a second imaging mode in which the first close-up attachment is used, and a third imaging mode in which the second close-up attachment is used.”
Regarding claim 9, the claim is object as being dependent on claim 8.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUAN H LE whose telephone number is (571)270-1130. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00 am- 5:30 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, Lin Ye can be reached at 5712727372. 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.
/TUAN H LE/ Examiner, Art Unit 2638
/LIN YE/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2638