DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 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 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.
Applicant’s submission filed on 03/16/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 3, 6, and 14 were amended. Claim 2 was canceled. Claims 1 and 3-14 are pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-7, and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(2) as being anticipated by Srivastava et al. (US 2024/0022827).
Regarding claim 1, Srivastava teaches: An asymmetric image fusion method, comprising:
acquiring a first image stream with a first frame rate (Srivastava [0067] “second image data is received from the first camera captured at the second frame rate” [0065] “the second frame rate may be 60 FPS or 90 FPS”);
acquiring a second image stream with a second frame rate different from the first frame rate (Srivastava [0064] “first image data is received from the first camera captured at the first frame rate” [0063] “the first frame rate may be 30 FPS”); and
fusing a first reused image frame of the first image stream with a set of second image frames of the second image stream respectively for outputting a set of fused image frames (Srivastava [0058] “An output image frame 232 (F1) may be determined from the intermediate image frame 222 (S12) and the image frame 202 (L1), such that F1=Fuse(S12,L1)” [0060] “The subsequent output image frame 234 (F2) may be determined such that F2=Fuse(L2,S12)” [Image frame S1 meets the first reused image frame; image frames L1 and L2 meet the set of second image frames.]);
fusing another first reused image frame of the first image stream with another set of second image frames of the second image stream respectively for outputting another set of fused image frames (Srivastava [0060] “fused to form an intermediate image frame 226, such as S56=Fuse(S5,S6), and output image frames 250 and 252 (F5 and F6) determined from intermediate image frame 226 and either long image frame 214 (L3) or long image frame 220 (L4)” [Image frame S5 meets the another first reused image frame; image frames L3 and L4 meet the another set of second image frames.]); and
combining the foresaid sets of fused image frames to provide an output image stream (Srivastava [0060] “The additional output image frames captured in this process may provide additional frames in a sequence of frames”);
wherein the another first reused image frame is not fused with the set of second image frames (Srivastava Fig. 2: the illustrated image frame S5 not being fused with image frames L1 and L2).
Regarding claim 3, Srivastava teaches: The asymmetric image fusion method of claim 1, wherein the second frame rate of the second image stream is equal to an output frame rate of the output image stream (Srivastava [0032] “The combination of long image frames and short image frames may be processed to determine output image frames that achieve a video sequence at a desired frame rate, which may be the lower of the first frame rate and the second frame rate”).
Regarding claim 4, Srivastava teaches: The asymmetric image fusion method of claim 1, wherein the first frame rate is variable (Srivastava [0032] “capturing long exposure frames and fusing one or more long exposure frames with multiple short exposure frames captured at different exposure durations. The different exposure durations may be obtained by controlling a frame rate of the camera” [0065] “the second frame rate may be 60 FPS or 90 FPS”).
Regarding claim 5, Srivastava teaches: The asymmetric image fusion method of claim 1, wherein an exposure setting of the first image stream is different from an exposure setting of the second image stream (Srivastava [0032] “capturing long exposure frames and fusing one or more long exposure frames with multiple short exposure frames captured at different exposure durations”).
Regarding claim 6, Srivastava teaches: The asymmetric image fusion method of claim 5, further comprising:
adjusting the exposure setting of the first image stream and/or the second image stream in a dynamically controlling manner (Srivastava [0032] “The different exposure durations may be obtained by controlling a frame rate of the camera to switch between a first frame rate for capturing one or more long image frames and a second frame rate for capturing two or more short image frames”).
Regarding claim 7, Srivastava teaches: The asymmetric image fusion method of claim 1, wherein a reused frequency of the first reused image frame is the same as a reused frequency of the another first reused image frame (Srivastava [0068] “Output image frames may be determined by combining portions of one or more short image frames and one or more long image frames”).
Regarding claim 13, Srivastava teaches: The asymmetric image fusion method of claim 1, further comprising:
changing the first frame rate to be equal to an output frame rate of the output image stream (Srivastava [0062]-[0063] “the image capture device may enter HDR mode with multiple frame rates, during which the operations of blocks 304, 306, 308, 310, and 312 may be performed and repeated … a first camera is configured for image capture at a first frame rate … the first frame rate may be 30 FPS”);
changing the second frame rate to be different from the output frame rate (Srivastava [0065] “a first camera is configured for image capture at a second frame rate … the second frame rate may be 60 FPS or 90 FPS”); and
fusing a second reused image frame of the second image stream with a set of first image frames of the first image stream respectively for outputting other set of fused image frames (Srivastava [0060] “The subsequent output image frame 234 (F2) may be determined such that F2=Fuse(L2,S12) … output image frames 236 and 238 (F3 and F4) determined from the intermediate image frame 224 and either long image frame 208 (L2) or long image frame 214 (L3)” [Image frame L2 meets the second reused image frame.]).
Claim 14 recites limitation(s) similar in scope to those of claim 1, and is rejected for the same reason(s). Srivastava further teaches an operation processor electrically connected with an image sensor (Srivastava Fig. 1: processor 104 and image sensor 101).
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.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Srivastava et al. (US 2024/0022827).
Regarding claim 8, Srivastava teaches: The asymmetric image fusion method of claim 1, further comprising:
acquiring a third image stream with a third frame rate (Srivastava [0079] “third image data captured at the second frame rate” [0067] “second image data is received from the first camera captured at the second frame rate” [It’s implicit that if the second image data is captured at 60 FPS, then the third image data is captured at 90 FPS.]); and
fusing the first reused image frame of the first image stream and a third reused image frame of the third image stream with the set of second image frames of the second image stream respectively for outputting the set of fused image frames (Srivastava [0079] “determining a first image frame based on the first image data; determining a second image frame based on the second image data and the third image data; and determining a first output image frame of the at least one output image frame based on the first image frame and the second image frame” [0058] “An output image frame 232 (F1) may be determined from the intermediate image frame 222 (S12) and the image frame 202 (L1), such that F1=Fuse(S12,L1)” [0060] “The additional output image frames captured in this process may provide additional frames in a sequence of frames”).
Srivastava does not teach a third frame rate different from the first frame rate and the second frame rate. Srivastava, however, suggests a third frame rate different from the first frame rate and the second frame rate (Srivastava [0065] “the second frame rate may be 60 FPS or 90 FPS” [0063] “the first frame rate may be 30 FPS”). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the third frame rate of Srivastava to be 90 FPS when the first and second frame rates are 60 and 90 FPS, respectively, as suggested by Srivastava to mix it up.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Srivastava et al. (US 2024/0022827) as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Fu (US 2009/0047971).
Regarding claim 9, Srivastava des not teach/suggest: The asymmetric image fusion method of claim 8, wherein a reused frequency of the first reused image frame is different from a reused frequency of the third reused image frame. Fu, however, teaches/suggests a reused frequency of is different from a reused frequency of (Fu [0005] “Under adaptive frequency reuse technique, different frame zones are applied with different frequency reuse factors”). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the first and third image frames of Srivastava to be reused at different frequencies as taught/suggested by Fu for adaptive frequency reuse.
As such, Srivastava as modified by Fu teaches/suggests a reused frequency of the first reused image frame is different from a reused frequency of the third reused image frame (Srivastava [0060] “additional output image frames may be generated by reusing intermediate image frame 222 (S12) for fusion with both adjacent long image frames” Fu [0005] “Under adaptive frequency reuse technique, different frame zones are applied with different frequency reuse factors”).
Claim(s) 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Srivastava et al. (US 2024/0022827) in view of Wu (US 2018/0335861).
Regarding claim 10, Srivastava teaches/suggests: The asymmetric image fusion method of claim 1, further comprising:
fusing the first reused image frame with a current second image frame of the set of second image frames to output a current fused image frame of the set of fused image frames (Srivastava [0058] “An output image frame 232 (F1) may be determined from the intermediate image frame 222 (S12) and the image frame 202 (L1), such that F1=Fuse(S12,L1)” [Image frame L1 meets the current second image frame.]); and
fusing the first reused image frame with a following second image frame of the set of second image frames to output a following fused image frame of the set of fused image frames (Srivastava [0060] “The subsequent output image frame 234 (F2) may be determined such that F2=Fuse(L2,S12)” [Image frame L2 meets the following second image frame.]).
Srivastava does not teach/suggest delaying for showing the following fused image frame after a predefined period. Wu, however, teaches/suggests delaying for showing after a predefined period (Wu [0027] “the new second frame F2′ will be delayed by a certain of time and then displayed”). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the output image frames of Srivastava to be delayed and then displayed as taught/suggested by Wu for synchronization.
As such, Srivastava as modified by Wu teaches/suggests delaying for showing the following fused image frame after a predefined period (Srivastava [0060] “The subsequent output image frame 234 (F2) may be determined such that F2=Fuse(L2,S12)” Wu [0027] “the new second frame F2′ will be delayed by a certain of time and then displayed”).
Regarding claim 11, Srivastava as modified by Wu teaches/suggests: The asymmetric image fusion method of claim 10, wherein the predefined period is time difference between an ending point of time of the first reused image frame and an ending point of time of the current second image frame (Srivastava [0058] “An output image frame 232 (F1) may be determined from the intermediate image frame 222 (S12) and the image frame 202 (L1), such that F1=Fuse(S12,L1)” Wu [0027] “the new second frame F2′ will be delayed by a certain of time and then displayed”). In view of Srivastava and Wu, the time difference of the end time of image frame S1 and that of image frame L1 meets the predefined period.
Regarding claim 12, Srivastava teaches/suggests: The asymmetric image fusion method of claim 1, further comprising:
fusing the first reused image frame with a previous second image frame of the set of second image frames to output a previous fused image frame of the set of fused image frames (Srivastava [0058] “An output image frame 232 (F1) may be determined from the intermediate image frame 222 (S12) and the image frame 202 (L1), such that F1=Fuse(S12,L1)” [Image frame L1 meets the previous second image frame.]); and
fusing the first reused image frame with a current second image frame of the set of second image frames to output a current fused image frame of the set of fused image frames (Srivastava [0060] “The subsequent output image frame 234 (F2) may be determined such that F2=Fuse(L2,S12)” [Image frame L2 meets the current second image frame.]).
Srivastava does not teach/suggest delaying for showing the previous fused image frame after a predefined period, delaying for showing the current fused image frame after a predefined period. Wu, however, teaches/suggests delaying for showing after another predefined period (Wu [0027] “the new second frame F2′ will be delayed by a certain of time and then displayed”). The same rationale to combine as set forth in the rejection of claim 10 is incorporated herein.
As such, Srivastava as modified by Wu teaches/suggests delaying for showing the previous fused image frame after a predefined period (Srivastava [0058] “An output image frame 232 (F1) may be determined from the intermediate image frame 222 (S12) and the image frame 202 (L1), such that F1=Fuse(S12,L1)” Wu [0027] “the new second frame F2′ will be delayed by a certain of time and then displayed”), and delaying for showing the current fused image frame after a predefined period (Srivastava [0060] “The subsequent output image frame 234 (F2) may be determined such that F2=Fuse(L2,S12)” Wu [0027] “the new second frame F2′ will be delayed by a certain of time and then displayed”).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 03/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues “Srivastava fails to teach the inventive characteristic of 'the another first reused image frame is not fused with the set of second image frames' of the present application.” See Remarks, p. 8.
PNG
media_image1.png
376
644
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner respectfully disagrees. As shown in Fig. 2 of Srivastava (reproduced above), image frame S5 (the another first reused image frame) is not fused with image frames L1 and L2 (the set of second image frames).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 2023/0214976 – reuse background image for fusion
US 2024/0104703 – reuse current frame for fusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ANH-TUAN V NGUYEN whose telephone number is 571-270-7513. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9AM-5PM 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, JASON CHAN can be reached on 571-272-3022. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ANH-TUAN V NGUYEN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2619
Prosecution Insights