DETAIL OFFICE ACTIONS
The United States Patent & Trademark Office appreciates the response filed for the current application that is submitted on 05/07/2026. The United States Patent & Trademark Office reviewed the following documents submitted and has made the following comments below.
Amendment
Applicant submitted amendments on 05/07/2026. The Examiner acknowledges the amendment and has reviewed the claims accordingly.
Applicant Arguments:
Applicant/s state/s that the cited prior arts do not teach the amended claims, specially, the added limitation “the first threshold value serves as an upper limit that constrains the first target brightness.”; therefore, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 should be withdrawn.
Examiner’s Responses:
The Examiner finds that the amendments to the claim have changed the scope therefore the examiner has to issue a new rejection with new elements from Yamamoto et al. (US-20210160432-A1). Thus, the examiner has detailed the rejection below.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Yamamoto et al. (US-20210160432-A1, hereinafter Yamamoto).
CLAIM 1
In regards to Claim 1, Yamamoto teaches an image processing device (Yamamoto, Abstract: “An image processing device”) comprising: at least one processor and a memory (Yamamoto, ¶ [0044]: “The ECU 24 includes, for example, a central processing unit (CPU) 24 a, a read only memory (ROM) 24 b, a random access memory (RAM)”) storing instructions (Yamamoto, ¶ [0045]: “The CPU 24 a loads a stored (installed) computer program from a non-volatile storage device, such as the ROM 24 b, and performs computation by the computer program”) configured to implement: an acquisition unit (Yamamoto, ¶ [0050]: “acquirer acquires images generated by the imagers”) that acquires a plurality of images of which imaging target regions partially overlap with each other (Yamamoto, ¶ [0041 and 0050-0053]: “Image data (images) generated by the imagers includes mutually overlapping regions to prevent missing regions in combined images”), the plurality of images being captured by a plurality of imaging units provided in a vehicle as a surrounding situation of the vehicle (Yamamoto, ¶ [0039]: “the imagers successively shoot the surroundings outside the vehicle including road surfaces on which the vehicle is movable … to output image data.”); a region-of-interest setting unit (Yamamoto, ¶ [0052]: “region-of-interest setter 30”) that sets a plurality of regions of interest included in a plurality of overlapping regions in which two adjacent imaging target regions overlap with each other (Yamamoto, ¶ [0052]: “the region-of-interest setter sets regions of interest 40 (40FL, 40RL, 40RR, and 40FR) in each of the overlapping regions of the imaging regions acquired by the acquirer ... The regions of interest are, for example, rectangular regions having given lengths in the transverse and longitudinal directions of the vehicle”; see FIG. 5); and a first setting unit (Yamamoto, ¶ [0056-0059]: “first setter 32”) that sets a correction value for correcting brightness of the plurality of images based on first target brightness (Yamamoto, ¶ [0057]: “The target luminance (e.g., 200 in 256 levels) is derived in advance through experiment, for example, and serves as optimal viewability regardless of in dark or light environment. The fixed-value setter 32 a corrects luminance with a correction value for allowing the luminance of each region of interest 40 to match the target luminance” Yamamoto teaches correcting brightness to match an optimal brightness level 200), wherein the first target brightness is a value obtained by adding a first positive value to an average value of brightness of all the regions of interest Yamamoto, ¶ [0058 and 0091]: “For example, the average luminance of 125 of the region of interest 40FL and the region of interest 40FR is set to the target luminance. After determining that the brightness of the entire imaging region 36F after corrected with the target luminance is insufficient, the fixed-value addition setter 32 b adds a given adjusted value predefined. For example, the fixed-value addition setter 32 b adds the luminance adjustment value of 50, which is defined in advance by experiment, to uniformly correct the brightness of the entire imaging region 36F to rise.” Yamamoto teaches a scenario when the luminance of an imaging region 36F is 125 (36F includes 2 regions of interest (ROI) 40FR and 40FL, 36F’s luminance is the average luminance of the 2 ROIs), which is insufficient compared to the optimal level 200, then a positive luminance adjustment value of 50 is added, to uniformly raise the brightness of the entire imaging region),
and is a value equal to or lower than a first threshold value higher than the first positive value (Yamamoto, ¶ [0053, 0063 and 0111]: “0053: … in FIG. 5, the luminance is expressed in 256 levels of zero to 255 (zero represents dark and 255 represents light); 0063: the γ curve formulas represent curves constantly including the minimum luminance value of zero and the maximum luminance value of 255 in 256 levels of luminance”. Yamamoto teaches a maximum luminance value 255, which is higher than the adjustment value 50 mentioned in last scenario ¶0058), and the first threshold value serves as an upper limit that constrains the first target brightness. (Yamamoto, ¶ [0111]: “In FIG. 23, the region of interest 40FL and the region of interest 40FR of the corresponding regions H are adjusted to increase in luminance, for example, to the maximum luminance value of 255” Yamamoto teaches brightness can only adjusted or increased to the maximum level of 255)
CLAIM 3
Regarding claim 3, Yamamoto teaches the device of Claim 1. In addition, Yamamoto teaches a second setting unit (Yamamoto, ¶ [0049]: “a second setter”; see FIG. 3, element 34),
wherein the first setting unit sets, using the first target brightness, a first correction value for correcting brightness of a first region of interest (Yamamoto, ¶ [0083]: “For example, the region of interest 40FL (first region of interest) and the region of interest 40FR (second region of interest) in the imaging region 36F ahead of the vehicle 10 are considered. The region of interest 40FL exhibits luminance (average luminance in the region) of 150 in 256 levels, and the region of interest 40FR exhibits luminance of 100. The target luminance is set to 125 in 256 levels by the fixed-value setter 32 a. In this case, to correct the luminance to the target luminance, the region of interest 40FL requires a correction value of −25 and the region of interest 40FR requires a correction value of +25.”, see FIG. 5) included in a first overlapping region in which a first imaging target region, which is one of a pair of imaging target regions separated from each other with the vehicle interposed therebetween (Yamamoto, ¶ [0051]: “The overlapping region 38 (overlapping region 38FL) between the first imaging region and the second imaging region may be referred to as a first overlapping region.”, see annotated FIG. 4 below), and a second imaging target region, which is one of a pair of imaging target regions adjacent to the first imaging target region, overlap with each other (Yamamoto, ¶ [0051]: “One (e.g., the imaging region 36SL) of the pair of imaging regions 36 (e.g., the imaging region 36SL and the imaging region 36SR) adjacent to the first imaging region may be referred to as a second imaging region”, see annotated FIG. 4 below), and
a second correction value for correcting brightness of a second region of interest (Yamamoto, ¶ [0083]: “For example, the region of interest 40FL (first region of interest) and the region of interest 40FR (second region of interest) in the imaging region 36F ahead of the vehicle 10 are considered. The region of interest 40FL exhibits luminance (average luminance in the region) of 150 in 256 levels, and the region of interest 40FR exhibits luminance of 100. The target luminance is set to 125 in 256 levels by the fixed-value setter 32 a. In this case, to correct the luminance to the target luminance, the region of interest 40FL requires a correction value of −25 and the region of interest 40FR requires a correction value of +25.”, see FIG. 5) included in a second overlapping region in which the first imaging target region and a third imaging target region (Yamamoto, ¶ [0051]: “The overlapping region 38 (overlapping region 38FR) between the first imaging region and the third imaging region may be referred to as a second overlapping region. ”, see annotated FIG. 4 below), which is the other of the imaging target regions adjacent to the first imaging target region, overlap with each other (Yamamoto, ¶ [0051]: “ the other of the pair of imaging regions 36 (e.g., the imaging region 36SL and the imaging region 36SR) adjacent to the first imaging region may be referred to as a third imaging region (e.g., the imaging region 36SR)”, see annotated FIG. 4 below), and
PNG
media_image1.png
1240
1624
media_image1.png
Greyscale
the second setting unit sets, using the first correction value and the second correction value, an individual correction value for correcting brightness of a region between at least the first region of interest and the second region of interest in the first imaging target region. (Yamamoto, ¶ [0008]: “a second setter that sets, according to the first correction value and the second correction value, an individual correction value for correcting luminance of a region between the first region of interest and the second region of interest.”, ¶ [0061, 0064 and 0082]: “The luminance setter 34 d sets an individual correction value for the luminance of the region between the first region of interest (e.g., the region of interest 40FL) and the second region of interest (e.g., the region of interest 40FR) by the linear interpolation formula” )
CLAIM 4
Regarding claim 4, Yamamoto teaches the device of Claim 3. In addition, Yamamoto teaches the second setting unit calculates the individual correction value based on an interpolation expression (Yamamoto, ¶ [0064 and 0072]: “luminance setter 34 d corrects (sets) the luminance of the region between the region of interest 40FL and the region of interest 40FR with the correction value (individual correction value) calculated by the generated linear interpolation formula 42F.”) for linear interpolation between the first correction value and the second correction value (Yamamoto, ¶ [0061]: “the linear interpolator 34 a generates, for example, a straight-line interpolation formula (straight line connecting the first correction value and the second correction value) for linear interpolation.”), and a slope of the interpolation expression is adjustable. (Yamamoto, ¶ [0080-0081]: “the gradient setter 34 b corrects the gradient of the linear interpolation formula 42 generated by the linear interpolator”)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 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.
The closest prior arts for Claim 2 are:
Yamamoto. (US-20210160432-A1). Yamamoto teaches an image processing system that acquire, modify and display images of surrounding views of a vehicle to driver. The images are combined into a displaying bird-eye view image. The system includes correcting brightness of image data to improve visibility of the displaying content. Yamamoto also discloses two modes of the display, normal mode and dark mode, and a method to switch between two said modes.
Takahashi et al. (US20240129638A1) teaches A vehicle image display system includes: a display device for displaying a digital image which is an image based on image data, a dark condition determination unit for determining whether a dark condition is satisfied with respect to the brightness of a surrounding environment of the vehicle, a luminance determination unit for determining whether the image data includes a high luminance pixel, a pixel value determination unit for determining whether a pixel having a pixel value equal to or lower than a second threshold value is not included in a peripheral pixel, and an image adjustment unit for performing a first brightness adjustment process for reducing the brightness of the image data when the dark condition is satisfied and the image data includes a high luminance pixel and the peripheral pixel does not include a pixel having a pixel value equal to or lower than the second threshold value.
While both Yamamoto and Takahashi teach system to correcting brightness of image content on a vehicle based on two displaying modes. Neither Yamamoto, or Takahashi, nor the combination teaches
“a mode switching unit that switches between a first mode and a second mode based on information on lightness,
wherein the first setting unit sets the correction value using the first target brightness in the first mode, and sets the correction value using second target brightness equal to or higher than the first target brightness in the second mode, and
the second target brightness is the first threshold value.”
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 NHUT HUY (JEREMY) PHAM whose telephone number is (703)756-5797. The examiner can normally be reached Mo - Fr. 8:30am - 6pm ET.
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, O'Neal Mistry can be reached on (313)446-4912. 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.
NHUT HUY (JEREMY) PHAMExaminerArt Unit 2674
/ONEAL R MISTRY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2674
Prosecution Insights