\
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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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, and 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shijo (JP2015117957 IDS) in view of Ishizuka (US 20120120099).
Regarding claim 1, Shijo teaches an image inspection apparatus comprising: processing circuitry configured to:
acquire inspection target image data (p0006:acquisition unit that acquires a read image of an image formed on a recording medium as an image to be inspected);
compare the acquired inspection target image data with comparison image data to detect a plurality of regions of an inspection target image as a plurality of detection target images (p0006: comparing the difference between the image to be inspected and a reference image; judgment threshold that is predetermined for each area of the image included in the image to be inspected)
Shijo does not teach merge a plurality of display frames indicating the plurality of regions detected as the plurality of inspection target images, which are determined to overlap, into a display frame after merge; and display the display frame after merge on the inspection target image, the display frame including the plurality of regions detected as the plurality of detection target images.
Isuizuka teaches merge a plurality of display frames indicating the plurality of regions detected as the plurality of inspection target images, which are determined to overlap, into a display frame after merge (p0068: similar regions are detected in images, and thereafter the images are automatically combined such that the similar regions overlap each other); and display the display frame after merge on the inspection target image, the display frame including the plurality of regions detected as the plurality of detection target images (p0068:As a result of this emphasized display, even if a large number of similar regions have been detected, the user can instruct the automatic combining of images after having checked the similar regions that will overlap each other when the images are combined).
Shijo and Isuizuka are combinable because they both deal with detecting image . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Shijo with the teaching of Isuizuka for purpose of enable appropriate and easy determination of a layout for multiple images suggested by Isuizuka (p0008).
Regarding claim 9, the limitations are substantially similar to the claim 1, therefore it is rejected for the same reason as claim 1, except a printing system comprising: a printer to print an image on a recording medium, however Shijo teaches (p0011: The print inspection device 4 is an image inspection device that inspects the output results by comparing the scanned image generated by reading the paper (recording medium) output by the print engine 3 with the master image generated above).
The rational applied to the rejection of claim 1 has been incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 10, the structural elements of apparatus claim 1 perform all of the steps of method claim 10. Thus, claim 10 is rejected for the same reasons discussed in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, Shijo teaches The image inspection apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is configured to: acquire the inspection target image data from the inspection target image that is read from an image printed on a recording medium (p0006:acquisition unit that acquires a read image of an image formed on a recording medium as an image to be inspected), the comparison image data being image data used for printing the image to be read; and detect a defective region of the inspection target image, as the detection target image (p0006: comparing the difference between the image to be inspected and a reference image; judgment threshold that is predetermined for each area of the image included in the image to be inspected).
Claim 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shijo in view of Isuizuka as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ikeda et al. (US 5963204).
Regarding claim 6, Shijo in view of Isuizuka does not teach the image inspection apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the display frame has a predetermined shape.
Ikeda teaches wherein the display frame has a predetermined shape (col. 6, lines 30-35: This image reproducing apparatus can display the display frame of a motion image in various shapes).
Shijo in view of Isuizuka and Ikeda are combinable because they both deal with detecting object and display them. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to combine the teachings of Shijo in view of Isuizuka with the teaching of Ikeda for to provide an image reproducing apparatus capable of starting reproducing a plurality of motion images at the same timing.
Regarding claim 7, Shijo in view of Isuizuka and Ikeda teaches the image inspection apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuitry is configured to merge the plurality of display frames that are closer to each other than a predetermined distance into the display frame after merge (Ikeda: fig. 43).
The rational applied to the rejection of claim 6 has been incorporated herein.
Allowable Subject Matter
8. Claims 2-5 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Shijo (JP2015117957 IDS) teaches similar system. However, the closest prior art of record, namely Shijo (JP2015117957 IDS), does not disclose, teach or suggest, the claim limitation, as recited in dependent claim 2.
Claim 3-5 are found to be allowable because claims 3-5 are depending on claim 2.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HELEN Q ZONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1600. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9-6.
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, Merouan, Abderrahim can be reached on (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.
HELEN ZONG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2683
/HELEN ZONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2683
Prosecution Insights