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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a histogram generator” in claim 1, and in claim 21.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
Claim 7, objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 7, line 4, recites “the image”, however should recite “the current image”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2-3, 13, and 25, rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In claim 2, line 5, recites “a shifting value”, however claim 1 in line 3, in which claim 13 depends from also recites “a shifting value”, hence from the claim language it is not clear whether the claimed shifting value in claim 2 is same as being claim in claim 1 or different, rendering claim 2 indefinite.
Similar issue exist in claim 3, as claim 3, also recites “a shifting value” in line 5, hence same rejection is applicable to claim 3.
In claim 13, line 5, recites “a shifting value”, however claim 11 in line 5, in which claim 13 depends from also recites “a shifting value”, hence from the claim language it is not clear whether the claimed shifting value in claim 13 is same as being claim in claim 11 or different, rendering claim 13 indefinite.
Claim 25, recites the limitation "the image signal processor" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 23, rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 23, is duplicate of claim 22. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 4-12, 14-15, 21-22, and 24, are allowed.
Reasons for Allowance
The following is an examiner's statement of reason for allowance: Regarding independent claims 1, and 11, (and their respective dependent claims), Gintsburg (US PGPUB 2024/0273858 A1) reference discloses an imaging system receives an image captured by an image sensor. The imaging system determines that an image region in the image includes a representation (e.g., depiction) of an object of a specified category. The imaging system adjusts a hue (and/or saturation and/or brightness) of at least one pixel of the representation of the object in the image region to a specified hue (and/or saturation and/or brightness) to generate a processed image. Funamoto (US PGPUB 2022/0130053 A1) reference discloses obtaining an image; generating a high frequency image according to a high frequency component based on a plurality of first pixel values of a plurality of first pixels of the image obtained; generating, according to color information based on the plurality of first pixel values of the image obtained, one or more color images corresponding to one or more different colors; generating a composite image by weighted addition of the high frequency image and the one or more color images; and outputting the composite image generated. However, Gintsburg in view of Funammoto references whether taken alone or in combination fail to disclose “a color shifting circuit configured to generate an enhanced image by applying color shifting depending on the shifting value to each pixel of the current image, based on the shifting value; and a histogram generator configured to generate a histogram of the current image based on the classified content of the current image, wherein the generated histogram of the current image is used to generate a shifting value of a subsequent image” and used in combination with each and every limitations of the claim. Further, “a histogram generator” as being claimed in claim 1, is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Regarding independent claim 21, (and its respective dependent claims), Gintsburg (US PGPUB 2024/0273858 A1) reference discloses an imaging system receives an image captured by an image sensor. The imaging system determines that an image region in the image includes a representation (e.g., depiction) of an object of a specified category. The imaging system adjusts a hue (and/or saturation and/or brightness) of at least one pixel of the representation of the object in the image region to a specified hue (and/or saturation and/or brightness) to generate a processed image. Funamoto (US PGPUB 2022/0130053 A1) reference discloses obtaining an image; generating a high frequency image according to a high frequency component based on a plurality of first pixel values of a plurality of first pixels of the image obtained; generating, according to color information based on the plurality of first pixel values of the image obtained, one or more color images corresponding to one or more different colors; generating a composite image by weighted addition of the high frequency image and the one or more color images; and outputting the composite image generated. However, Gintsburg in view of Funammoto references whether taken alone or in combination fail to disclose “a color shifting circuit configured to generate an enhanced image by applying color shifting to the at least one pixel of the current image, based on the shifting value; and a histogram generator configured to generate a histogram of the current image based on the classified content of the current image” and used in combination with each and every limitations of the claim. Further, “a histogram generator” as being claimed in claim 21, is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
The aspect summarized above are neither anticipated nor obviated by the prior art of the record.
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."
Pertinent Priori Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Choi (US PGPUB 2021/0097646 A1) reference discloses a method and apparatus for generating a high resolution video frame, capable of improving processing speed and efficiency by using a plurality of neural networks for image processing on a video frame, to achieve super resolution imaging.
Belagal (US PGPUB 2020/0033930 A1) reference discloses systems and methods for reducing display image power consumption while maintaining a consistent, objectively measurable, level of image distortion that comports with a display image quality metric. Raw image data is converted to an HSV format. “V” values are extracted from the HSV format raw image data and a histogram generates a plurality of “V” values. HSV format raw image data is provided to at least one layer of a trained CNN to extract a plurality of features. The plurality of “V” values and the plurality of features are provided to an AI circuit to generate a plurality of distortion class value pairs. Each of the distortion class value pairs is weighted based on proximity of display image distortion and the display image quality metric. The distortion class pair providing a display image distortion close to the display image quality metric is applied to the raw image data to generate the display image data.
Winn (US Patent 8,774,553 B1) reference discloses contrast enhancement of images by histogram manipulation.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYED Z HAIDER whose telephone number is (571)270-5169. The examiner can normally be reached MONDAY-FRIDAY 9-5:30 EST.
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, SAM K Ahn can be reached at 571-272-3044. 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.
/SYED HAIDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633