DETAILED ACTION
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.
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: “unit” in claims 11-18.
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
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.
Claims 1-3, 11-13 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)as being anticipated by Yano et al (US 20190082160 A1).
RE claim 1, Yano teaches An image fusion method (abstract, Fig 2, [0004]), comprising:
acquiring a plurality of candidate images of a photographed object for the same photographing background (Figs 2, 7, [0004], [0072]);
performing image segmentation on the candidate images to obtain object images of the photographed object and background images of the photographing background in the candidate images (Fig 2, [0004], [0072]);
performing background fusion processing on the background images to obtain a fused background image (Fig 30, [0196]-[0197]);
performing object fusion processing on the object images and the fused background image to obtain a target image (Fig 30, [0198]-[0199]).
RE claim 2, Yano teaches wherein performing background fusion processing on the background images to obtain a fused background image comprises: determining a fused area of the background images; performing the background fusion processing on the background images based on the fused area to obtain the fused background image (Fig 30, [0113], [0196]-[0197]).
RE claim 3, Yano teaches wherein determining a fused area of the background images comprises: determining that the object images corresponding to the background images is mapped to object areas in the background images; performing regional fusion processing on the object areas to obtain a non-fused area; determining the fused area of the background images based on the non-fused area (Figs 6, 9-10, 30, [0126]-[0129], [0196]-[0197]);.
Claims 11-13 recite limitations similar in scope with limitations of claims 1-3 and therefore rejected under the same rationale. In addition Yano teaches An image fusion apparatus, wherein comprising: an acquisition unit; a segmentation unit; a first fusion unit; a second fusion unit configured to perform corresponding method steps (Figs 1, 2, 30, [0243]).
RE claim 19, Yano teaches A computer device, wherein, comprising a memory and a processor; the memory storing a computer program, and the processor configured to run the computer program in the memory to perform the image fusion method according to claim 1 (Fig 1, [0243]).
RE claim 20, Yano teaches A non-volatile computer-readable storage medium, wherein the computer-readable storage medium stores a computer program, and the computer program is applied for being loaded by a processor to perform the image fusion method according to claim 1 ([0243]).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yano et al , and further in view of Zhang et al (US 20140115531 A1).
RE claim 4, Yano is silent RE: wherein performing the background fusion processing on the background images based on the fused area to obtain the fused background image comprises: obtaining transparency of the fused area; based on the transparency of the fused area, superimposing the background images to obtain the fused background image.
However Zhang teaches in Figs 2, 4-5, abstract, [0025]-[0026] in order to provide a realistic rendering of overlapped objects.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Yano a system and method wherein performing the background fusion processing on the background images based on the fused area to obtain the fused background image comprises: obtaining transparency of the fused area; based on the transparency of the fused area, superimposing the background images to obtain the fused background image, as suggested by Zhang, in order to provide a realistic rendering of overlapped objects/portions of the background/target and thereby increasing system effectiveness and user experience.
Claim 14 recites limitations similar in scope with limitations of claim 4 and therefore rejected under the same rationale.
Claims 5-10, 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yano et al, and further in view of Zadeh et al (US 20180204111 A1).
RE claim 5, Yano teaches wherein performing object fusion processing on the object images and the fused background image to obtain a target image comprises: selecting a target object image from the object images; performing image fusion processing on the target object image and the fused background image to obtain the target image (Yano Fig 30, abstract, [0085]-[0089] , [0198]-[0199]).
Yano is silent RE: obtaining sharpness values of the object images; based on the sharpness values of the object images selecting the target object image.
However Zadeh teaches in Figs 125-126, [0737], [2093], [2382]-[2383], [2754]-[2755], [2816], [2029], [1880] etc in order to select/detect/segment a target object/face analyzing a scene objects based on sharpness/crispness value.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Yano a system and method obtaining sharpness values of the object images; based on the sharpness values of the object images selecting the target object image, as suggested by Zadeh, in order to select/detect/segment a target object/face analyzing a scene objects based on sharpness/crispness value and thereby increasing system effectiveness and user experience.
RE claim 6, Yano as modified by Zadeh teaches wherein obtaining sharpness values of the object images comprises: performing edge detection on an object in the object image to obtain a pixel value of each pixel point on an edge of the object in the object image; performing fusion processing on the pixel values of the respective pixel points on the edge of the object to obtain a fused pixel value; determining the fused pixel value as the sharpness value of the object image (Zadeh Figs 125-126, [1846], [2382]-[2383], [2754]-[2755], [1880], [1899], [2210] etc. In addition Yano [0088], [0102], ).
RE claim 7, Yano as modified by Zadeh teaches wherein performing fusion processing on the pixel values of the respective pixel points on the edge of the object to obtain a fused pixel value comprises: adding the pixel values of the respective pixel points on the edge of the object in the object image to obtain the fused pixel value (Zadeh Figs 125-126, [1846], [2382]-[2383], [2754]-[2755], [1880], [1899], [2210] etc. In addition Yano [0088], [0102] etc).
RE claim 8, Yano as modified by Zadeh teaches wherein the target object image is the object image with the largest sharpness value (Zadeh Figs 125-126, [0737], [2093], [2382]-[2383], [2754]-[2755], [2816], [2029], [1880] ).
RE claim 9, Yano is silent RE: wherein performing image segmentation on the candidate images to obtain object images of the photographed object and background images of the photographing background in the candidate images comprises: performing the image segmentation on the candidate images using an image segmentation model obtain the object images of the photographed object and the background images of the photographing background in the candidate images.
However Zadeh teaches in [1695], [1845] [2101] etc in order to select/detect/segment a target object/face utilizing neural network.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Yano a system and method wherein performing image segmentation on the candidate images to obtain object images of the photographed object and background images of the photographing background in the candidate images comprises: performing the image segmentation on the candidate images using an image segmentation model obtain the object images of the photographed object and the background images of the photographing background in the candidate images, as suggested by Zadeh, in order to select/detect/segment a target object/face utilizing neural network and thereby increasing system effectiveness and user experience.
RE claim 10, Yano is silent RE, wherein the photographed object is a portrait; performing image segmentation on the candidate images to obtain object images of the photographed object and background images of the photographing background in the candidate images comprises: performing portrait detection on each candidate image; if there is a portrait in the candidate image, performing the image segmentation on the candidate image to obtain the object image of the portrait and the background image of the photographing background in the candidate image.
However Zadeh teaches in [2101], [2104], [2108]-[2112] etc.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Yano a system and method wherein the photographed object is a portrait; performing image segmentation on the candidate images to obtain object images of the photographed object and background images of the photographing background in the candidate images comprises: performing portrait detection on each candidate image; if there is a portrait in the candidate image, performing the image segmentation on the candidate image to obtain the object image of the portrait and the background image of the photographing background in the candidate image, as suggested by Zadeh, in order to detecting interest points, then detecting boundaries or edges and linking them, and then testing the results with a statistical model, to verify to establish the identified object/face and thereby increasing system effectiveness and user experience.
Claims 15-18 recite limitations similar in scope with limitations of claims 5-7 and 10 respectively and therefore rejected under the same rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure (See attached 892).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SULTANA MARCIA ZALALEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1411. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8:00am-4:30pm.
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, Kent Chang can be reached at (571)272-7667. 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.
/Sultana M Zalalee/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2614
Prosecution Insights