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: “acquisition unit”, “correction unit”, “generation unit”, “conversion unit”, “determination unit” in claims 1-8 and 10. The structures, from the specification, are computer hardware and/or software – and equivalents thereof.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20050151983 A1 (Harrington).
As per claim 1, Harrington teaches an image processing apparatus (Harrington:
PNG
media_image1.png
988
766
media_image1.png
Greyscale
) comprising:
an acquisition unit configured to acquire a first color information group included in a first area of image data and a second color information group included in a second area of the image data (Harrington: Fig. 3 (shown below): mainly 110-120;
[0005] The present invention recognizes that different objects and/or regions of a document may have different color gamut mapping intentions, and that a color gamut mapping scheme should be chosen to match. The present invention proposes that a desired color gamut mapping scheme can almost always be built as a blend of a small or finite number of color gamut mapping strategies to preserve a document creator's color gamut mapping intent.
[0016] The operation of the system 10 for device-independent color gamut mapping in accordance with embodiments of the present invention will now be described with reference to FIGS. 1, 3 and 4. Referring to FIG. 3 and beginning at step 100, by way of example only, a user operating computer 14 generates a document 40 shown in FIG. 4, although the document 40 may already be stored in the computer memory 32 or elsewhere, or another device may send the document 40 to the computer 14. The document 40 is provided for exemplary purposes only and includes several objects, such as a multi colored image object 50, a solid colored border object 52, and a solid colored text object 54, although the document 40 may include a greater or lesser number of objects.
[0021] At step 120, the printer 12 obtains a set of a specified linear combination of the color gamut mapping intents from the intent file 42. In embodiments of the present invention, each set of specified color gamut mapping intents expressed in the intent file 42 is associated with one or more of the objects 50, 52, 54 in the document 40 that is associated with a color being processed, although one set of intents may be associated with the entire document 40, the same or different sets of intents may be associated with one or more positions (e.g., pixels) or particular color specifications (e.g., R, G, B values) in the document 40, or the sets of intents may be associated with particular color specifications at particular positions in the document 40. In this example, the first color being processed happens to be from the object 50, and thus the printer 12 obtains the set of the specified linear combination of color gamut mapping intents associated with the object 50 from the intent file 42.
[0022] Further, the one or more sets of specified color gamut mapping intents are expressed in the intent file 42 as text strings, for example, specifying a linear combination of the above-described color gamut mapping strategies that should be employed by the device, printer 12 in this example, during color gamut mapping whenever color mapping decisions are required.
analyze two different, specific sections of an image (e.g., different sections on the same page or different pages) to understand their current color characteristics);
a correction unit configured to correct first color conversion information corresponding to the first area based on the first color information group, and correct second color conversion information corresponding to the second area based on the second color information group (Harrington:
Fig. 3 (shown below): mainly 120-140;
Paras 5, 21, 22 (as referenced above);
Para 10: “The printer 12 maps first colors in a document 40 to second colors that are within the color gamut of the printer 12 using a set of color mapping techniques to obtain a set of second colors for each first color, and then combines the second colors for each first color based on a specified linear combination of color gamut mapping intents included in an intent file 42, for example, to obtain a blended color result for each first color. The printer 12 may then print a color blended document 44 with the blended color results substituted for the first colors from the document 40. The system 10 and method for device-independent color gamut mapping offers a number of advantages, including providing document creators with more control over how documents 40 are rendered in a device-independent manner. As a result, color mapped documents 44 can be rendered with colors which more closely resemble their originally intended colors according to the document creator's intent.”;
[0017] The computer 14 also provides an intent file 42 to the printer 12. In embodiments of the present invention, the intent file 42 comprises a text file, for example, which includes one or more sets of specified color gamut mapping intents, although the intents may already be stored in the printer memory 22 or elsewhere, the intents may be included as comments in a job descriptor language ("JDL") stream sent to the printer 12 along with the document 40, the intents may be embedded in the document 40 as a Postscript.RTM. field where the document 40 is in a "tiff" file format, for example, or the weights may be encoded as an attribute value where the document is written in an "XML" format, for example. In embodiments of the present invention, each of the color gamut mapping intents included in the intent file 42 corresponds to a particular color gamut mapping strategy, such as a calorimetric preserving mapping strategy, a hue preserving mapping strategy, a luminance preserving mapping strategy and a solid/saturation preserving mapping strategy, although other color mapping strategies may be used. :applying weight values is correcting.
Para 22: “By providing the weight values for each of the specified intents, however, greater control over color gamut mapping is afforded”: applying weight values is correcting.
PNG
media_image2.png
880
720
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Based on that analysis, adapt existing color adjustment to create unique color adjustments for each section. It calculates how to fix colors in the first area and, separately, how to fix colors in the second area to make them look better or more accurate);
a generation unit configured to generate third color conversion information based on the corrected first color conversion information and the corrected second color conversion information (Harrington: Fig. 3 (shown below): mainly 150;
paras 10, 21 (referenced above);
[0026] At step 150, the printer 12 applies the set of the specified linear combination of the color gamut mapping intents obtained at step 120 to each of the color mapped second colors obtained at step 140 to determine a blended color value.
PNG
media_image3.png
351
991
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Instead of just applying the two corrections independently, the system merges or blends the two sets of adjustments to create a new, refined "master" set of color corrections (i.e. the third information)); and
a conversion unit configured to color-convert color information of the first area and color information of the second area using the third color conversion information generated by the generation unit (Harrington:
Para 10 (referenced above);
Paras 32-34;
Fig. 1 (shown below): mainly 12, 44;
Fig. 3 (shown below): mainly 160-170;
PNG
media_image4.png
633
828
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
1551
1075
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Also see mappings for claim 2 below.
The system applies this new, combined, and refined "master" correction formula to both areas of the image, resulting in a consistent, corrected final image).
As per claim 2, Harrington teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising
a determination unit configured to determine, based on the first color information group and the second color information group, whether to generate the third color conversion information,
wherein the generation unit generates the third color conversion information based on a determination result of the determination unit (Harrington: See arguments and citations offered in rejecting claim 2 above;
para 10: “The printer 12 maps first colors in a document 40 to second colors that are within the color gamut of the printer 12 using a set of color mapping techniques to obtain a set of second colors for each first color, and then combines the second colors for each first color based on a specified linear combination of color gamut mapping intents included in an intent file 42, for example, to obtain a blended color result for each first color.”
[0021] At step 120, the printer 12 obtains a set of a specified linear combination of the color gamut mapping intents from the intent file 42. In embodiments of the present invention, each set of specified color gamut mapping intents expressed in the intent file 42 is associated with one or more of the objects 50, 52, 54 in the document 40 that is associated with a color being processed, although one set of intents may be associated with the entire document 40, the same or different sets of intents may be associated with one or more positions (e.g., pixels) or particular color specifications (e.g., R, G, B values) in the document 40, or the sets of intents may be associated with particular color specifications at particular positions in the document 40. In this example, the first color being processed happens to be from the object 50, and thus the printer 12 obtains the set of the specified linear combination of color gamut mapping intents associated with the object 50 from the intent file 42.
[0024] At step 130, the printer 12 extracts the set of mapping weights (i.e., 0.90, 0.10, 0, 0) corresponding to each of the intents (i.e., calorimetric, hue, luminance and solid/saturation preservation) in the set of the specified linear combination of color gamut mapping intents associated with the first color from the object 50 that was obtained at step 120.
[0026] At step 150, the printer 12 applies the set of the specified linear combination of the color gamut mapping intents obtained at step 120 to each of the color mapped second colors obtained at step 140 to determine a blended color value. For instance, at step 140 the printer 12 determines the following exemplary R, G, B values shown below in Table 1 for each of the resulting color mapped second colors, although other values besides R, G, B values may be used, such as C, M, Y, K values:
determine whether to generate the refined "master" correction formula (i.e. third color conversion information) based on the first color information and second color information).
As per claim 6, Harrington teaches the apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the acquisition unit further acquires a third color information group included in a third area of the image data,
the determination unit determines not to correct the third color conversion information corresponding to the third area based on the third color information group, and
the conversion unit color-converts color information corresponding to the third area using the third color conversion information (Harrington:
PNG
media_image6.png
823
1005
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Weight of 1 indicates that the color correction (i.e. gamut mapping) will not be adapted.
for another “third” area, do not adapt the existing color correction algorithm for performing color correction).
As per claim 7, Harrington teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the first area and the second area are graphic areas (Harrington: See arguments and citations offered in rejecting claim 1 above;
Fig. 4: The portions are graphic areas;
PNG
media_image2.png
880
720
media_image2.png
Greyscale
).
As per claim 8, Harrington teaches the apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the first area and the second area are on a page basis (Harrington: See arguments and citations offered in rejecting claim 1 above;
Fig. 1: (shown above): mainly 40;
Fig. 4: The portions are from a to-be-printed page;
PNG
media_image2.png
880
720
media_image2.png
Greyscale
).
As per claim(s) 9, arguments made in rejecting claim(s) 1 are analogous.
As per claim(s) 10, arguments made in rejecting claim(s) 1 are analogous. Harrington teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program for causing a computer to function (Harrington: Fig. 2;
Paras 3, 12-14).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5 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: Limitations pertaining to “in a case where a determination result of the determination unit indicates that each of the plurality of pieces of color information included in the first color information group is not substantially the same color as each of a plurality of pieces of color information included in the second color information group, it is determined to generate the third color conversion information”, in conjunction with other limitations present in the claim 3, independent claim 1 and intervening claim 2, distinguish over the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Atiba Fitzpatrick whose telephone number is (571) 270-5255. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 10:00am-6pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Andrew Bee can be reached on (571) 270-5183. The fax phone number for Atiba Fitzpatrick is (571) 270-6255.
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.
Atiba Fitzpatrick
/ATIBA O FITZPATRICK/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2677