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 Objections
Claim 13 objected to because of the following informalities: limitations on line 2 of claim 13 refer to “one or more second frames after to the current frame”, which is phrasing that is grammatically incorrect. For the purposes of examination, “one or more second frames after to the current frame” will be interpreted as “one or more second frames after.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 2 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 2, the claimed limitations refer to “the one or more adjusted first parity values” and “the one or more adjusted second parity values”, without previously disclosing any “adjusted first parity values” and “adjusted second parity values” previously. This leaves the limitations as claimed without an antecedent basis. Review of the claims appear to most likely relate to the previously recited “adjusted first disparity values” and “adjusted second disparity values”. However, this is not explicit and merely appears to be the most similar limitations the instant limitations may be referring to. For this reason, the claimed parity values are indefinite.
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.
Claim(s) 1,6-7,18-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being taught by BROBERG; DAVID K. et al. (US 20130201283 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Broberg teaches,
A method (Title, method of “CAPTIONS OVER STEREOSCOPIC 3D IMAGES”) comprising:
determining a disparity value (¶30-32, disparity map 128 according to gray scale “used to differentiate relative depth of the objects according to a color value assigned to each pixel of the monochromatic image” for individually identified “plurality of objects included within each of the left and right images 122, 124”) from a plurality of disparity values in a current frame (¶30-31 and fig. 9, disparity detection processor 120 configured to generate “disparity maps as monochromatic images”, as depicted in fig. 9, to represent relative “disparity between the objects included within the captured images”) of a stereoscopic video, (¶30-31,28, and fig. 7-8, captured “left image 122” and “right image 124” depicted in fig. 7 and 8, respectively, comprised in a “stereoscopic video” delivered as a plurality of image frames) wherein the disparity value is based on a difference of a value for a pixel (¶30-31 and fig. 9, “relative disparity between the objects” differentiated according to “color value assigned to each pixel”) between a first video and a second video of the stereoscopic video; (¶30-31,28, and fig. 9, “relative disparity between the objects included within the captured images” identifying the plurality of objects included within “each of the left and right images 122, 124” comprising the “stereoscopic video”)
determining a location in a current frame (¶31, “relative positioning of objects within an image/frame”) that include the disparity value; (¶31, “generating disparity information” in the form of monochromatic images as disparity maps 128 indicative of “relative positioning of objects” within an image/frame)
analyzing one or more first frames (¶41-47 and fig. 12, “a first segment 182” corresponding with “one second intervals of time” used to map “the depth of the first object across a plurality of images” during the corresponding time interval, where “object depth lines may be included for any additional objects of interest or objects identified to be associated with the particular graphical overlay” as depicted in fig. 12) prior to the current frame (¶41-47 and fig. 12, plurality of images “corresponding to time interval” associated with “first segment 182” followed by “second segment 184”) to adjust disparity values in the one or more first frames (¶42,45-47, and fig. 12, overlay depth line “first portion 192” that is shaped with “a non-linear but smoother shape” associated with object depth lines “across a plurality of images” corresponding to “a first segment 182” depicted in fig. 12) to generate one or more adjusted first disparity values; (¶45-47,54, and fig. 12, “first portion 192” corresponding with first segment 182 shaped so that “beginning and endings thereof are sloped relative to the nearest appearing object” with a slope as depicted in fig. 12 so that the disparity map is “smoothed and filtered to mask distortions and scaled to a uniform range”)
analyzing one or more second frames (¶41-47 and fig. 12, “third segment 186” corresponding with “one second intervals of time” used to map “the depth of the first object across a plurality of images” during the corresponding time interval, where “object depth lines may be included for any additional objects of interest or objects identified to be associated with the particular graphical overlay” as depicted in fig. 12) after the current frame (¶41-47 and fig. 12, plurality of images “corresponding to time interval” associated with “third segment 186” that follows “second segment 184”) to adjust disparity values in the one or more second frames (¶42,45-47, and fig. 12, overlay depth line “third portion 196” that is shaped with “a non-linear but smoother shape” associated with object depth lines “across a plurality of images” corresponding to “a third segment 186” depicted in fig. 12) to generate one or more adjusted second disparity values; (¶45-47,54, and fig. 12, “third portion 196” corresponding with third segment 186 shaped so that “beginning and endings thereof are sloped relative to the nearest appearing object” with a slope as depicted in fig. 12 so that the disparity map is “smoothed and filtered to mask distortions and scaled to a uniform range”) and
outputting the one or more adjusted first disparity values and the one or more adjusted second disparity values (¶41-48, “generate depth and other positioning information” allows the graphical overlay that is shaped such that “the beginning and endings thereof are sloped relative to the nearest appearing object within the corresponding beginning and ending frame” to be “positioned to appear within a desirable portion of the output video”) for use in displaying captions in the first video or the second video. (¶41-48,17,23, and fig. 2, graphical overlay “caption 20 may be generated such that it appears to be parallel with or in front of the 3D image 22” depicted in fig. 2 by “add/combine the caption output from the graphics generator 46 to each of the left and right viewpoint images included within each video frame output”)
Regarding claim 6, Broberg teaches the limitations of claim 1,
Broberg teaches additionally,
determining one or more frames that contain the disparity value; (¶41, “identifying the nearest object within each image as a function of the disparity maps”) and
for each of the one or more frames, (¶41 and 31, “each image” with nearest object within and “image/frame”) determining one or more locations that include the disparity value. (¶41 and 31, “depth mapping may be generated for any one or more objects” relative positioning of objects within an image/frame “besides the nearest object” within each image as a function of the disparity maps with identified “nearest object within each image”)
Regarding claim 7, Broberg teaches the limitations of claim 6,
Broberg teaches additionally,
for each of the one or more locations: (¶31, “relative positioning of objects within an image/frame”)
analyzing one or more first frames prior (¶41-47, and fig. 12, “a first segment 182” corresponding with “one second intervals of time” used to map “the depth of the first object across a plurality of images” during the corresponding time interval, where “object depth lines may be included for any additional objects of interest or objects identified to be associated with the particular graphical overlay” as depicted in fig. 12) to a respective frame for a location (¶41-47,31, and fig. 12, plurality of images “corresponding to time interval” associated with “first segment 182” followed by “second segment 184” for first object across depth mapping “generated for any one or more objects” relative positioning of objects within an image/frame “besides the nearest object”) to adjust disparity values in the one or more first frames to generate one or more adjusted first disparity values; (¶45-47,54, and fig. 12, “first portion 192” corresponding with first segment 182 shaped so that “beginning and endings thereof are sloped relative to the nearest appearing object” with a slope as depicted in fig. 12 so that the disparity map is “smoothed and filtered to mask distortions and scaled to a uniform range”) and
analyzing one or more second frames (¶41-47,31, and fig. 12, “third segment 186” corresponding with “one second intervals of time” used to map “the depth of the first object across a plurality of images” during the corresponding time interval, where “object depth lines may be included for any additional objects of interest or objects identified to be associated with the particular graphical overlay” as depicted in fig. 12) after the respective frame for the location (¶41-47, and fig. 12, plurality of images “corresponding to time interval” associated with “third segment 186” that follows “second segment 184” for first object across depth mapping “generated for any one or more objects” relative positioning of objects within an image/frame “besides the nearest object”) to adjust disparity values in the one or more second frames to generate one or more adjusted second disparity values. (¶45-47,54, and fig. 12, “third portion 196” corresponding with third segment 186 shaped so that “beginning and endings thereof are sloped relative to the nearest appearing object” with a slope as depicted in fig. 12 so that the disparity map is “smoothed and filtered to mask distortions and scaled to a uniform range”)
Regarding claim 18, Broberg teaches the limitations of claim 1,
Broberg teaches additionally,
displaying captions (¶50-52, “left and right text images” used by the display generator to manage “graphical overlay placement” of closed captions) using the one or more adjusted first disparity values and the one or more adjusted second disparity values in the first video or the second video. (¶50 and 48, depth signal including “depth defining information for the graphical overlay relative to each of the output images” provided with the caption stream “used by the display generator to control the off-set of the respective left and right text images” proportional to the resolution of the screen and the projected size of the image)
Regarding claim 19, it is the non-transitory computer readable medium claim of method claim 1.
Broberg teaches additionally,
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored thereon computer executable instructions, (¶37, “computer-readable medium” having “ non-transitory instructions stored thereon”) which when executed by a computing device, (¶37, method embodied in a computer-readable medium “having non-transitory instructions stored thereon, which are operable with a processor or other logically executing device”) cause the computing device to be operable (¶37, non-transitory instructions stored thereon “operable with a processor or other logically executing device, to facilitate the contemplated graphical overlay management”)
Refer to rejection of claim 1 to teach the additional limitations of claim 19.
Regarding claim 20, it is the apparatus claim of method claim 1.
Broberg teaches additionally,
An apparatus (¶37 and fig. 6, method “embodied in a computer-readable medium” for managing graphical overlays leveraging “the use of the system 100” depicted in fig. 6) comprising:
one or more computer processors; (¶37, “processor or other logically executing device”) and
a computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions for (¶37, “computer-readable medium, and/or computer program product, having non-transitory instructions stored thereon”) controlling the one or more computer processors to be operable (¶37, “non-transitory instructions stored thereon, which are operable with a processor or other logically executing device, to facilitate the contemplated graphical overlay management”)
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.
Claim(s) 2 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BROBERG; DAVID K. et al. (US 20130201283 A1) in view of Zhang; Tao et al. (US 20130162641 A1)
Regarding claim 2, Broberg teaches the limitations of claim 1,
But does not explicitly teach the limitations of claim 2,
However, Zhang teaches additionally,
the one or more adjusted first parity values (¶95-96 and Fig. 4A-4B, “disparities” of frame image pairs adjusted between consecutive “third image pair” f-2 appearing before “frame f-1” as depicted in fig. 4A-4B) do not change more than a difference value in consecutive first frames, (¶95-96, “disparity difference (or depth jump) that is less than the original disparity difference between the first and second image pairs” associated with the first frame image pair f-1) and
the one or more adjusted second parity values (¶95-96 and Fig. 4A-4B, “disparities” of frame image pairs adjusted between consecutive “fourth image pair” f1 appearing after “frame f0” as depicted in fig. 4A-4B) do not change more than the difference value in consecutive second frames. (¶95-96, “disparity difference (or depth jump) that is less than the original disparity difference between the first and second image pairs” associated with the second frame image pair f0)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the caption generation of Broberg with the content disparity adjustment of Zhang which adjusts the disparities between consecutive image pairs. This allows for image frames to be adjusted such that viewer discomfort arising from depth jumps can be avoided or reduced.
Claim(s) 3-5 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BROBERG; DAVID K. et al. (US 20130201283 A1) in view of LI; Weiming et al. (US 20160189380 A1)
Regarding claim 3, Broberg teaches the limitations of claim 1,
But does not explicitly teach the limitations of claim 3,
However, Li teaches additionally,
determining a disparity value (¶91 and 106, “depth of an object” from an image pair) from the plurality of disparity values (¶91-92 and 106, separated “target objects from the image pair”) that is considered closest to a viewer (¶106 and fig. 5, image processing apparatus analyzes difference in viewpoints to “determine a depth of an object closest to a viewer among objects included in the image pair”) of the stereoscopic video. (¶91-92,106, and fig. 5, “separate the target objects from the image pair”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the caption generation of Broberg with the image processing of Li which determines depth of an object closest to a viewer. This allows for a technique that can adjust a target object of a caption type in a region of interest is not occluded.
Regarding claim 4, Broberg teaches the limitations of claim 1,
But does not explicitly teach the limitations of claim 4,
However, Li teaches additionally,
determining a disparity value (¶91 and 106, “depth of an object” from an image pair) for locations in a plurality of locations (¶91-92,95, and 106, separated “target objects from the image pair” with relative “positions of the target objects” including an “object closest to a viewer among objects”) that is considered closest to a viewer (¶106 and fig. 5, image processing apparatus analyzes difference in viewpoints to “determine a depth of an object closest to a viewer among objects included in the image pair”) of the stereoscopic video; (¶91-92,106, and fig. 5, “separate the target objects from the image pair”) and
determining the location from the plurality of locations. (¶106 and 95, “determine a depth of an object closest to a viewer among objects included in the image pair” with positions of the target object in the first image and the second image)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the caption generation of Broberg with the image processing of Li which determines depth of an object closest to a viewer. This allows for a technique that can adjust a target object of a caption type in a region of interest is not occluded.
Regarding claim 5, Broberg teaches the limitations of claim 1,
But does not explicitly teach the limitations of claim 5,
However, Li teaches additionally,
the location comprises a cell (¶106 and 95, “depth of a caption-type target object” separated from the image pair with positions in “the first image and the second image”) that is defined as an area in the current frame, (¶106 and 95, “an object” separated from the image pair with a position “closest to a viewer among objects included in the image pair”) wherein the area is used to display a caption (¶106 and 95, “caption-type target object”) in the first video or the second video. (¶106 and 117, “caption-type target object” located in the image pair such that “caption-type target object among objects included in the image pair may be displayed at a position closest to a viewer”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the caption generation of Broberg with the image processing of Li which determines depth of an object closest to a viewer. This allows for a technique that can adjust a target object of a caption type in a region of interest is not occluded.
Claim(s) 8,12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BROBERG; DAVID K. et al. (US 20130201283 A1) in view of LI; Weiming et al. (US 20160189380 A1) in view of Zhang; Tao et al. (US 20130162641 A1)
Regarding claim 8, Brodberg teaches the limitations of claim 1,
Brodberg teaches additionally,
analyzing one or more first frames (¶41-47 and fig. 12, “a first segment 182” corresponding with “one second intervals of time” used to map “the depth of the first object across a plurality of images” during the corresponding time interval, where “object depth lines may be included for any additional objects of interest or objects identified to be associated with the particular graphical overlay” as depicted in fig. 12) prior to the current frame (¶41-47 and fig. 12, plurality of images “corresponding to time interval” associated with “first segment 182” followed by “second segment 184”) comprises:
determining a first frame; (¶42-47 and fig. 12, “first segment 182” divided into a one second interval “processed for output to the display at 30 images per second” with a 30th most image that corresponds with 30th filtered disparity map near the 1 second mark of “first segment 182” depicted in fig. 12)
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 8,
However, Li teaches additionally,
determining whether a disparity value for the first frame (¶115-117, and fig. 6, “determine a depth of each of the caption areas” determined in operation 620 depicted in fig. 6) is less than a disparity value for the current frame, (¶115-117, and fig. 6, depth of each of the caption areas determined in operation 620 used to “determine whether a caption area is displayed at a position closest to the viewer” in operation 630 as depicted in fig. 6) wherein less than indicates closer to a viewer of the stereoscopic video; (¶115-117, and fig. 6, In operation 630, “determine whether a caption area is displayed at a position closest to the viewer” based on a depth of the caption area to “maintain the caption area”) and
when the disparity value for the first frame (¶115-117, and fig. 6, “determine a depth of each of the caption areas” determined in operation 620 depicted in fig. 6) is not less than the disparity value for the current frame, (¶115-117, and fig. 6, depth of each of the caption areas determined in operation 620 used to determine that the “caption area is not displayed at the position closest to the viewer” in operation 630 as depicted in fig. 6) determining whether the disparity value for the first frame (¶115-117, “depth of each of the caption areas” corresponding to a matched “caption area of the first image and caption area of the second image”) is greater than the disparity value for the current frame, (¶115-117, “determined that the caption area is not displayed at the position closest to the viewer” based on depth of “match caption areas corresponding” an image pair) wherein greater than indicates farther away from the viewer (¶115-117 and fig. 6, “determined that the caption area is not displayed at the position closest to the viewer” based on determined depth of each of the caption areas) of the stereoscopic video. (¶115-117 and fig. 6, determined that the caption area is not displayed at the position closest to the viewer based on “match caption areas corresponding to each other in the image pair”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the caption generation of Broberg with the image processing of Li which determines depth of an object closest to a viewer. This allows for a technique that can adjust a target object of a caption type in a region of interest is not occluded.
Zhang teaches additionally,
determining whether the disparity value for the first frame (¶32 and fig. 1, disparity value of “the frame immediately before the current frame”) and the disparity value for the current frame (¶32 and fig. 1, disparity value of “current frame”) is greater than a difference value (¶32 and fig. 1, step S13 determine whether “two adjacent frames have a disparity difference” exceeding “a certain threshold value”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the caption generation of Broberg with the image processing of Li with the content disparity adjustment of Zhang which adjusts the disparities between consecutive image pairs. This allows for image frames to be adjusted such that viewer discomfort arising from depth jumps can be avoided or reduced.
Regarding claim 12, Brodberg teaches the limitations of claim 1,
Brodberg teaches additionally,
analyzing one or more second frames (¶41-47 and fig. 12, “a third segment 186” corresponding with “one second intervals of time” used to map “the depth of the first object across a plurality of images” during the corresponding time interval, where “object depth lines may be included for any additional objects of interest or objects identified to be associated with the particular graphical overlay” as depicted in fig. 12) after to the current frame (¶41-47 and fig. 12, plurality of images “corresponding to time interval” associated with “third segment 186” that follows “second segment 184”) comprises:
determining a second frame; (¶42-47 and fig. 12, “third segment 186” divided into a one second interval “processed for output to the display at 30 images per second” with a 1st image that corresponds with 1st filtered disparity map near the 2 second mark of “third segment 186” depicted in fig. 12)
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 12,
However, Li teaches additionally,
determining whether a disparity value for the second frame (¶115-117, and fig. 6, “determine a depth of each of the caption areas” determined in operation 620 depicted in fig. 6) is less than a disparity value for the current frame, (¶115-117, and fig. 6, depth of each of the caption areas determined in operation 620 used to “determine whether a caption area is displayed at a position closest to the viewer” in operation 630 as depicted in fig. 6) wherein less than indicates closer to a viewer of the stereoscopic video; (¶115-117, and fig. 6, In operation 630, “determine whether a caption area is displayed at a position closest to the viewer” based on a depth of the caption area to “maintain the caption area”) and
when the disparity value for the second frame (¶115-117, and fig. 6, “determine a depth of each of the caption areas” determined in operation 620 depicted in fig. 6) is not less than the disparity value for the current frame, (¶115-117, and fig. 6, depth of each of the caption areas determined in operation 620 used to determine that the “caption area is not displayed at the position closest to the viewer” in operation 630 as depicted in fig. 6) determining whether the disparity value for the second frame (¶115-117, “depth of each of the caption areas” corresponding to a matched “caption area of the first image and caption area of the second image”) is greater than the disparity value for the current frame, (¶115-117, “determined that the caption area is not displayed at the position closest to the viewer” based on depth of “match caption areas corresponding” an image pair) wherein greater than indicates farther away from the viewer (¶115-117 and fig. 6, “determined that the caption area is not displayed at the position closest to the viewer” based on determined depth of each of the caption areas) of the stereoscopic video. (¶115-117 and fig. 6, determined that the caption area is not displayed at the position closest to the viewer based on “match caption areas corresponding to each other in the image pair”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the caption generation of Broberg with the image processing of Li which determines depth of an object closest to a viewer. This allows for a technique that can adjust a target object of a caption type in a region of interest is not occluded.
Zhang teaches additionally,
determining whether the disparity value for the second frame (¶32 and fig. 1, disparity value of “the frame immediately before the current frame”) and the disparity value for the current frame (¶32 and fig. 1, disparity value of “current frame”) is greater than a difference value (¶32 and fig. 1, step S13 determine whether “two adjacent frames have a disparity difference” exceeding “a certain threshold value”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the caption generation of Broberg with the image processing of Li with the content disparity adjustment of Zhang which adjusts the disparities between consecutive image pairs. This allows for image frames to be adjusted such that viewer discomfort arising from depth jumps can be avoided or reduced.
Claim(s) 9,13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BROBERG; DAVID K. et al. (US 20130201283 A1) in view of LI; Weiming et al. (US 20160189380 A1) in view of Zhang; Tao et al. (US 20130162641 A1) in view of KIM; Daehun et al. (US 20110292190 A1)
Regarding claim 9, Brodberg with Li with Zhang teaches the limitations of claim 8,
Brodberg teaches additionally,
analyzing one or more first frames (¶41-47 and fig. 12, “a first segment 182” corresponding with “one second intervals of time” used to map “the depth of the first object across a plurality of images” during the corresponding time interval, where “object depth lines may be included for any additional objects of interest or objects identified to be associated with the particular graphical overlay” as depicted in fig. 12) prior to the current frame (¶41-47 and fig. 12, plurality of images “corresponding to time interval” associated with “first segment 182” followed by “second segment 184”) comprises:
adjusting the disparity value for the first frame (¶42,45-47, and fig. 12, overlay depth line “first portion 192” that is shaped with “a non-linear but smoother shape” associated with object depth lines “across a plurality of images” corresponding to “a first segment 182” depicted in fig. 12) to an adjusted first disparity value (¶45-47,54, and fig. 12, “first portion 192” corresponding with first segment 182 shaped so that “beginning and endings thereof are sloped relative to the nearest appearing object” with a slope as depicted in fig. 12 so that the disparity map is “smoothed and filtered to mask distortions and scaled to a uniform range”)
Zhang teaches additionally,
adjusting the disparity value for the first frame (¶95-96 and Fig. 4A-4B, “disparities” of frame image pairs adjusted between consecutive “third image pair” f-2 appearing before “frame f-1” as depicted in fig. 4A-4B) to an adjusted first disparity value that is equal to or less than the difference value. (¶95-96, “disparity difference (or depth jump) that is less than the original disparity difference between the first and second image pairs” associated with the first frame image pair f-1)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the caption generation of Broberg with the image processing of Li with the content disparity adjustment of Zhang which adjusts the disparities between consecutive image pairs. This allows for image frames to be adjusted such that viewer discomfort arising from depth jumps can be avoided or reduced.
Kim teaches additionally,
adjusting the disparity value for the first frame (¶132, “controller 170 may add or reduce a disparity between the left-eye image and the right-eye image”) to an adjusted first disparity value that is equal to or less than the disparity value (¶132 and 147, controller 170 may “reduce a disparity between the left-eye image and the right-eye image” to provide a “3D image having an optimum depth effect at a current viewing environment of the user”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the caption generation of Broberg with the image processing of Li with the content disparity adjustment of Zhang with the optimized depth of Kim which reduces the disparity between the left-eye image and right-eye image. This adjusts the suitable depth effect to prevent either a region where no images are displayed or the lost image information from being generated on the display due to the movement of display positions of the left-eye image and the right-eye image.
Regarding claim 13, Brodberg with Li with Zhang teaches the limitations of claim 8,
Brodberg teaches additionally,
analyzing one or more second frames (¶41-47 and fig. 12, “third segment 186” corresponding with “one second intervals of time” used to map “the depth of the first object across a plurality of images” during the corresponding time interval, where “object depth lines may be included for any additional objects of interest or objects identified to be associated with the particular graphical overlay” as depicted in fig. 12) after to the current frame (¶41-47 and fig. 12, plurality of images “corresponding to time interval” associated with “third segment 186” that follows “second segment 184”) comprises:
adjusting the disparity value for the second frame (¶42,45-47, and fig. 12, overlay depth line “third portion 196” that is shaped with “a non-linear but smoother shape” associated with object depth lines “across a plurality of images” corresponding to “a third segment 186” depicted in fig. 12) to an adjusted second disparity value (¶45-47,54, and fig. 12, “third portion 196” corresponding with third segment 186 shaped so that “beginning and endings thereof are sloped relative to the nearest appearing object” with a slope as depicted in fig. 12 so that the disparity map is “smoothed and filtered to mask distortions and scaled to a uniform range”)
Zhang teaches additionally,
adjusting the disparity value for the second frame (¶95-96 and Fig. 4A-4B, “disparities” of frame image pairs adjusted between consecutive “third image pair” f-2 appearing before “frame f-1” as depicted in fig. 4A-4B) to an adjusted second disparity value that is equal to or less than the difference value. (¶95-96, “disparity difference (or depth jump) that is less than the original disparity difference between the first and second image pairs” associated with the first frame image pair f-1)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the caption generation of Broberg with the image processing of Li with the content disparity adjustment of Zhang which adjusts the disparities between consecutive image pairs. This allows for image frames to be adjusted such that viewer discomfort arising from depth jumps can be avoided or reduced.
Kim teaches additionally,
adjusting the disparity value for the second frame (¶132, “controller 170 may add or reduce a disparity between the left-eye image and the right-eye image”) to an adjusted second disparity value that is equal to or less than the disparity value (¶132 and 147, controller 170 may “reduce a disparity between the left-eye image and the right-eye image” to provide a “3D image having an optimum depth effect at a current viewing environment of the user”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the caption generation of Broberg with the image processing of Li with the content disparity adjustment of Zhang with the optimized depth of Kim which reduces the disparity between the left-eye image and right-eye image. This adjusts the suitable depth effect to prevent either a region where no images are displayed or the lost image information from being generated on the display due to the movement of display positions of the left-eye image and the right-eye image.
Claim(s) 11,15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BROBERG; DAVID K. et al. (US 20130201283 A1) in view of LI; Weiming et al. (US 20160189380 A1) in view of Zhang; Tao et al. (US 20130162641 A1) in view of Veera; Karthic et al. (US 20120262542 A1) in view of YAMAZAKI; Toshio et al. (US 20240378751 A1)
Regarding claim 11, Broberg with Li with Zhang teaches the limitations of claim 8,
But does not teach the additional limitations of claim 11,
However, Veera teaches additionally,
when the disparity value for the first frame (¶66, “depth of the current pixel in the destination image”) is less than the disparity value for the current frame, (¶66, depth of the current pixel in the destination image is less than “depth of the current pixel in the reference view image”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the caption generation of Broberg with the image processing of Li with the content disparity adjustment of Zhang with the condition of Veera which compares the depth of pixels in a current image with depth of pixels in a reference image. the techniques provide for more efficient conversion of images or video into 3D images or video.
Yamazaki teaches additionally,
when the disparity value is less than a value, (¶149 and fig. 9, “determines whether or not the disparity distribution score is equal to or greater than a predetermined value (S517)” in a case where the “disparity distribution score is less than the predetermined value”) ending the analyzing of the one or more first frames prior to the current frame. (¶149, “In a case where the disparity distribution score is less than the predetermined value (S517/No)”, calibration processing unit 147 determines that each image in which feature points have been detected is an image, and “ends the procedure”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the caption generation of Broberg with the image processing of Li with the content disparity adjustment of Zhang with the condition of Veera with the calibration processing of Yamazaki ends the procedure. This technique can help improve the accuracy of calculations by reducing the influence of errors.
Regarding claim 15, Broberg with Li with Zhang teaches the limitations of claim 8,
But does not teach the additional limitations of claim 15,
However, Veera teaches additionally,
when the disparity value for the second frame (¶66, “depth of the current pixel in the destination image”) is less than the disparity value for the current frame, (¶66, depth of the current pixel in the destination image is less than “depth of the current pixel in the reference view image”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the caption generation of Broberg with the image processing of Li with the content disparity adjustment of Zhang with the condition of Veera which compares the depth of pixels in a current image with depth of pixels in a reference image. the techniques provide for more efficient conversion of images or video into 3D images or video.
Yamazaki teaches additionally,
when the disparity value is less than a value, (¶149 and fig. 9, “determines whether or not the disparity distribution score is equal to or greater than a predetermined value (S517)” in a case where the “disparity distribution score is less than the predetermined value”) ending the analyzing of the one or more second frames prior to the current frame. (¶149, “In a case where the disparity distribution score is less than the predetermined value (S517/No)”, calibration processing unit 147 determines that each image in which feature points have been detected is an image, and “ends the procedure”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the caption generation of Broberg with the image processing of Li with the content disparity adjustment of Zhang with the condition of Veera with the calibration processing of Yamazaki ends the procedure. This technique can help improve the accuracy of calculations by reducing the influence of errors.
Claim(s) 16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BROBERG; DAVID K. et al. (US 20130201283 A1) in view of DiVerdi; Stephen et al. (US 20190295280 A1)
Regarding claim 16, Broberg teaches the limitations of claim 1,
Broberg teaches additionally,
the one or more adjusted first disparity values (¶45-47,54, and fig. 12, “first portion 192” corresponding with first segment 182 shaped so that “beginning and endings thereof are sloped relative to the nearest appearing object” with a slope as depicted in fig. 12 so that the disparity map is “smoothed and filtered to mask distortions and scaled to a uniform range”)
the one or more adjusted second disparity values (¶45-47,54, and fig. 12, “third portion 196” corresponding with first segment 182 shaped so that “beginning and endings thereof are sloped relative to the nearest appearing object” with a slope as depicted in fig. 12 so that the disparity map is “smoothed and filtered to mask distortions and scaled to a uniform range”)
But does not explicitly teach the limitations of claim 16,
However, DiVerdi teaches additionally,
the one or more adjusted first disparity values change at a rate (¶46-47,52-53, and fig. 2, “adjust the depth of the user interface element at a default rate” of the user interface elements depicted as “left user interface element 204a” within an input video as depicted in fig. 2) that is equal to or less than a difference threshold, (¶46-47, “user interface element moves slower than (or up to) a speed threshold”) and
the one or more adjusted second disparity values change at the rate (¶46-47,52-53, and fig. 2, “adjust the depth of the user interface element at a default rate” of the user interface elements depicted as “right user interface element 204b” within an input video as depicted in fig. 2) that is equal to or less than the difference threshold. (¶46-47, “user interface element moves slower than (or up to) a speed threshold”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the caption generation of Broberg with the depth conflict reduction of DiVerdi which generates elements at particular rates. This allows for adjusting depth at rates that can appear smooth and comfortable to a user.
Claim(s) 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BROBERG; DAVID K. et al. (US 20130201283 A1) in view of Yu; Yang et al. (US 20120038745 A1)
Regarding claim 17, Broberg teaches the limitations of claim 1,
Broberg teaches additionally,
the disparity values for one or more first frames (¶41-47 and fig. 12, “a first segment 182” corresponding with “one second intervals of time” used to map “the depth of the first object across a plurality of images” during the corresponding time interval, where “object depth lines may be included for any additional objects of interest or objects identified to be associated with the particular graphical overlay” as depicted in fig. 12) prior to the current frame (¶41-47 and fig. 12, plurality of images “corresponding to time interval” associated with “first segment 182” followed by “second segment 184”) adjusted to generate the one or more adjusted first disparity values, (¶45-47,54, and fig. 12, “first portion 192” corresponding with first segment 182 shaped so that “beginning and endings thereof are sloped relative to the nearest appearing object” with a slope as depicted in fig. 12 so that the disparity map is “smoothed and filtered to mask distortions and scaled to a uniform range”)and
the disparity values for one or more second frames (¶41-47 and fig. 12, “third segment 186” corresponding with “one second intervals of time” used to map “the depth of the first object across a plurality of images” during the corresponding time interval, where “object depth lines may be included for any additional objects of interest or objects identified to be associated with the particular graphical overlay” as depicted in fig. 12) after the current frame (¶41-47 and fig. 12, plurality of images “corresponding to time interval” associated with “third segment 186” that follows “second segment 184”) adjusted to generate the one or more adjusted second disparity values. (¶45-47,54, and fig. 12, “third portion 196” corresponding with third segment 186 shaped so that “beginning and endings thereof are sloped relative to the nearest appearing object” with a slope as depicted in fig. 12 so that the disparity map is “smoothed and filtered to mask distortions and scaled to a uniform range”)
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 17,
However, Yu teaches additionally,
the disparity values for one or more first frames the current frame (¶69, process 600 processes “depth of the 3D user interface element” formatted and merged with “2D user interface content data” with one of a left “image of the 3D video content”) are iteratively adjusted to generate the one or more adjusted first disparity values, (¶69, “process 600 iteratively processes” changes to a “depth of the 3D user interface element” relative to the displayed 3D video content) and
the disparity values for one or more second frames the current frame (¶69, process 600 processes “depth of the 3D user interface element” formatted and merged with “2D user interface content data” with one of a “right image of the 3D video content”) are iteratively adjusted to generate the one or more adjusted second disparity values. (¶69, “process 600 iteratively processes” changes to a “depth of the 3D user interface element” relative to the displayed 3D video content)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the caption generation of Broberg with the iterative processing of Yu which changes the depth of 3D elements. This conversion results in higher rendering resolution for 3D content than approaches that use passive or active glasses.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10,14 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY S LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7322. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 10AM-8PM EST.
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, Joseph G. Ustaris can be reached at (571) 272-7383. 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.
JIMMY S. LEE
Examiner
Art Unit 2483
/JIMMY S LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2483
/REBECCA A VOLENTINE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483 January 10, 2026