DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
2. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Interpretation
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. 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: “an acquisition unit”, “a generation unit” in claim 1; “a determination unit” in claim 3 and “a setting unit” in claim 10.
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.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) limitations: CPU or ASIC (see Specification, paragraph 00331). It is noted that that the functions performed or controlled by CPU are disclosed in a manner that transforms the general CPU or the like to a special purpose CPU or the like programmed to perform the disclosed functions. That is, the various "unit" functions claimed are described in the specification in the form of prose and flow charts in a manner that provides sufficient structure.
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner's interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
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
6. Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: “a plurality objects” instead of “a plurality of objects”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
7. 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.
8. 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)(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.
9. Claims 1-7, 11-13, 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Woolfe et al. US Patent Application No. 2003/0112454 (hereinafter Woolfe).
Regarding claim 1, Woolfe discloses an information processing apparatus (an information handling/computer system, Figure 8), comprising:
one or more processors (at least one processor or central processing unit (CPU) 400; paragraph 78, Figure 8); and
one or more memories storing instructions executable by the one or more processors to cause the information processing apparatus to operate as (a computer program stored on the storage device 450. Such a computer program would act on an image frame supplied through the interface units, wherein the system would produce the desired color space transformation; paragraph 78):
an acquisition unit (CPU 400, Figure 8) configured to acquire a first color profile for performing colorimetric color conversion (generating a transform for converting a digital color image signal expressed as color values in a first color space having a first color gamut to code values; paragraph 17 and paragraph 6 illustrating reproduction match for a defined viewing illuminant and a defined standard observer), a second color profile for performing perceptual color conversion (Driving an output device having a second color gamut different from the first color gamut that includes the steps of: transforming the color values of the first color space to color values in an intermediate color space; specifying one or more predefined color regions in an intermediate color space; preferentially mapping the color values in the intermediate color space into the second color gamut; paragraph 17, and paragraphs 34-35, 84 illustrating wherein the intermediate color space is an approximately perceptually uniform color space), and a parameter for increasing a distance between colors mapped through gamut mapping (a function 22 that describes effect changes with color space distance increases (additional control over the direction of color change within the color space); paragraphs 35-52, Figure 1) ; and
a generation unit (CPU 400, Figure 8) configured to, based on the first color profile and the second color profile and the parameter, generate a third color profile (e.g., producing enhanced modified color values in the intermediate color space and transforming the modified color values to code values for driving the output device; paragraph 17).
Regarding claim 2, Woolfe discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the generation unit generates the third color profile by, based on the parameter, synthesizing the first color profile and the second color profile (transforming the gamut of an input digital image 600, having a Gamut 1 and expressed in an input device dependent color space, to be printed on an output device having a different color gamut (Gamut 2) includes the steps of transforming 602 the input digital image into a device independent, intermediate color space 604 using in combination; paragraph 81, Figure 9).
Regarding claim 3, Woolfe discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, the information processing apparatus being caused to further operate as: a determination unit configured to determine whether to perform color conversion using the second color profile or to perform color conversion using the third color profile, wherein the generation unit generates the third color profile when the determination unit determines to perform the color conversion using the third color profile (converting a digital color image signal expressed as color values in a first color space having a first color gamut to code values for driving an output device having a second color gamut different from the first color gamut that includes the steps of: transforming the color values of the first color space to color values in an intermediate color space to produce enhanced modified color values in the intermediate color space and transforming the modified color values to code values for driving the output device see abstract and paragraphs 17, 81).
Regarding claim 4, Woolfe discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein the generation unit does not generate the third color profile when the determination unit determines to perform the color conversion using the second color profile (e.g., restricting the mapping to regions outside of the predefined color regions to produce enhanced modified color values in the intermediate color space; paragraphs 17, 81).
Regarding claim 5, Woolfe discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 3, wherein based on gradation property of an input image, the determination unit determines whether to perform the color conversion using the second color profile or to perform the color conversion using the third color profile (paragraph 17).
Regarding claim 6, Woolfe discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the parameter is set based on a color difference between colors obtained by performing colorimetric gamut mapping on colors of an input image (paragraphs 17, 19, 80-81).
Regarding claim 7, Woolfe discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein based on the parameter at each of areas obtained by dividing a color space in a hue direction, the generation unit generates the third color profile (calculation of color space distance is introduced by allowing separate weightings for the three dimensions of the color space; paragraphs 45-58).
Regarding claim 11, Woolfe discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein based on an object in an input image or attribute information of each pixel, the generation unit generates the third color profile (a means for operations such as mapping a color image from an input system with small color gamut to an image with large color gamut. Subsequently, the image can be transferred to an output system with a large color gamut; paragraphs 19, 82).
Regarding claim 12, Woolfe discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the generation unit generates the third color profile for each object in an input image (transforming the gamut of an input digital image to be printed on an output device having a different gamut; paragraphs 29, 36, 81, 84, Figures 9-10).
Regarding claim 13, Woolfe discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 12, wherein the generation unit generates the third color profile such that the third color profile generated for an image object in the input image is different from the third color profile generated for a text/graphics object in the input image (e.g., generating a transform for converting a digital color image signal expressed as color values in a first color space having a first color gamut to code values for driving an output device having a second color gamut different from the first color gamut; paragraph 17).
Claims 15 and 16 are directed to a method and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, and recite identical features as claim 1. Thus, claims 15 and 16 are rejected for the same reasons discussed in claim 1 above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
10. 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.
11. Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woolfe in view of OHKUBO et al. US Patent Application No. 2019/0297226 (hereinafter OHKUBO).
Regarding claim 8, Woolfe discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the third color profile is a color profile for converting color information in a first color space into color information in a second color space (e.g., converting a digital color image signal expressed as color values in a first color space having a first color gamut to code values for driving an output device having a second color gamut different from the first color gamut; paragraph 17), and
Woolfe does not explicitly disclose the generation unit adds the third color profile and a fourth color profile to data of an input image, where the fourth color profile is a color profile for converting color information in a third color space of the input image into the color information in the first color space.
However, OHKUBO et al. (US 20190297226) teaches the generation unit adds the third color profile and a fourth color profile to data of an input image, where the fourth color profile is a color profile for converting color information in a third color space of the input image into the color information in the first color space (paragraphs 52, 56).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to combine the system of Woolfe as taught by OHKUBO to include: the third color profile and a fourth color profile to data of an input image, where the fourth color profile is a color profile for converting color information in a third color space of the input image into the color information in the first color space. By doing so, the combined system of OHKUBO would have generated a case where the profiles are created on the basis of values obtained by measuring colors of a source side profile and a destination side profile by using different colorimeters, and thus color matching accuracy deteriorates (paragraph 00013 of OHKUBO).
Regarding claim 9, Woolfe discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 8, wherein the first color space is an RGB color space (input color space, such as RGB, is identified 700; paragraph 84).
However, OHKUBO teaches the second color space is an L*a*b* color space (paragraphs 116-117), and the third color space is a CMYK color space (paragraphs 128-129).
12. Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woolfe in view of CHANG et al. US Patent Application No. 2023/0071492 (hereinafter CHANG).
Regarding claim 10, Woolfe discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1.
Woolfe does not explicitly disclose the information processing apparatus being caused to further operate as: a setting unit configured to set whether to output white in an input image by using a color obtained by simulating white designated by a user or to output the white in the input image by using white of a print medium, wherein based on settings made by the setting unit, the generation unit generates the third color profile.
However, CHANG et al. (US 2023/0071492) working in the same field of endeavor (paragraph 0025) teaches the information processing apparatus being caused to further operate as: a setting unit configured to set whether to output white in an input image by using a color obtained by simulating white designated by a user or to output the white in the input image by using white of a print medium, wherein based on settings made by the setting unit, the generation unit generates the third color profile (paragraphs 42-44, 66, 79-81). Such an arrangement provides the ink judgment percentages and measurement data to the computing device.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of Applicant’s invention to have combined the system of Woolfe as taught by CHANG, since doing so would have predictably and advantageously provided the ink judgment percentages and measurement data to the computing device.
13. Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woolfe in view of ROULLAND et al. US Patent Application No. 2009/0310152 (hereinafter ROULLAND).
Regarding claim 14, Woolfe discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 12.
Woolfe does not explicitly disclose wherein the generation unit groups a plurality objects in the input image into one object group and generates the third color profile for the object group.
However, ROULLAND teaches wherein the generation unit groups a plurality of objects in the input image into one object group and generates the third color profile for the object group (detector 102 detects groups of objects that have the same (or very similar) color in the original document but different colors in the printed version; paragraphs 66, 68, 87).
In view of the above, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to combine the system of Woolfe as taught by OHKUBO to include: wherein the generation unit groups a plurality of objects in the input image into one object group and generates the third color profile for the object group. By doing so, the combined system of ROULLAND would have generated an optimal performance over extended runs (paragraph 0008 of ROULLAND).
Information Disclosure Statement
14. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/02/2024 was filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Cited Art
15. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ito et al. (US 7,612,914) discloses a method for producing a profile specifying the correspondence relationship of values in different color spaces, comprising the steps of: acquiring a first correspondence relationship constituted by a plurality of correspondence relationships of ink amounts and color values; acquiring a plurality of grid points that are a plurality of grid points in a predetermined color space and for which a relative relationship between the adjacent grid points is defined; acquiring a second correspondence relationship constituted by a plurality of correspondence relationships of the grid points and color values; setting a plurality of grid points for which a relative positional relationship in a predetermined color space is defined; acquiring a third correspondence relationship constituted by a plurality of correspondence relationships of the grid points and ink amounts based on the first correspondence relationship and the second correspondence relationship; and producing with a computer a profile specifying the third correspondence relationship.
Delang et al. (US 7,307,755) discloses a method for correcting digitized image data in the prepress stage when using printing presses having a device-independent color profile in the main printing stage, the method comprising the steps of: measuring colorimetrically a reference sheet and producing a first image file in a device-independent color space; converting a second image file associated with the reference sheet in a device-dependent color space into a third image file in a device-independent color space using a device-independent color profile belonging to the printing press to be used; comparing the first and third image files; and performing alterations on the second image file associated with the reference sheet or alterating a printing process in the printing press to be used if tolerance limits are exceeded, wherein, if the tolerance limits are exceeded, correction values are calculated and a mapping specification for converting the first and third image files into one another is calculated therefrom, wherein the mapping specification is taken into consideration in the color profile of the printing press.
Yoda (US 6,781,716) discloses a color conversion method comprising: a data receiving step of receiving input color data defined by coordinate values within an input device color space depending on an input device for receiving an image to derive image data; and a data conversion step of converting the input color data received in said data receiving step into output color data defined by coordinate values within an output device color space depending on an output device for outputting an image based on image data, using a first color conversion definition defining an association between coordinate values within the input device color space and coordinate values of a common color space independent of the input device and the output device, a second color conversion definition converting a set of values of input coordinate within partial space of at least part of the common color space into a set of values of output coordinate moved in an opposite direction to a direction of a vector wherein coordinate points of a reference white determined within a white area of the common color space are given as a starting point, and coordinate points of a basic color, in which the set of values of input coordinate exists outside .+-.90.degree. in hue angle with respect to hue of a basic color, of basic colors determined in a cyan color area, a magenta color area and a yellow color area of the common color space, respectively, are given as a terminating point, and a third color conversion definition defining an association between coordinate values within the common color space and coordinate values of the output device color space, wherein said data conversion step produces a single color conversion definition in which the first color conversion definition, the second color conversion definition and the third color conversion definition are combined, and converts the input color data into the output color data in accordance with the single color conversion definition.
16. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALLEN H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1229. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7 am-4 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, ABDERRAHIM MEROUAN can be reached at (571) 270-5254. 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.
/ALLEN H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2683
Prosecution Insights