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 .
Priority
Acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Japan on 9/4/2023. It is noted, however, that an attempt by the Office to electronically retrieve, under the priority document exchange program, the foreign application 2023-143176 to which priority is claimed has FAILED. Thus, the requirement of providing a certified copy of the foreign application has not been fulfilled. Please not the communication sent out by the Office (2/4/2025) for resolving the above issue.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1-20 are 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 claims 1-3 and 19-20, these claims recite the phrases “a normal image” and “a normal direction” (emphasis added). It is unclear what is meant by the term “normal”. More specifically, it is unclear if the term “normal” in these phrases to be meant as “not deviating from a norm or rule” or “perpendicular”. Clarification is required.
Claims not specifically mentioned above are rejected by virtue of their dependency on a rejected claim.
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, 3, 5-9, 11, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Inoue et al (JP 2016-035405).
Regarding claims 1 and 20 as far as the claim is understood, Inoue et al shows in Figs.1-4 the following elements of applicant’s claim: an image processing apparatus comprising one or more memories storing instructions and one or more processors that execute the instructions (paragraph 17; Fig.3) to: acquire a plurality of captured images (paragraphs 11-13) acquired by shooting an inspection target object (100) under a plurality of conditions; perform a first inspection (paragraph 15, Figs.1-2; light from a light source 2U is applied in a first direction to an inspection target area A) for inspecting a surface profile of the inspection target object based on a normal image indicating a normal direction of each position of the inspection target object, the normal image being generated from the plurality of captured images; and perform a second inspection (paragraph 15; light from a light source 2D is applied in a second direction to an inspection target area A) for inspecting a surface profile of the inspection target object based on a plurality of captured images, the second inspection being different from the first inspection. Regarding claim 19, the method steps therein are inherently disclosed by the device of Inoue et al.
Regarding claim 3, as far as the claim is understood, the limitations therein are disclosed in paragraph 30 of Inoue et al.
Regarding claims 5-6, the limitations therein are disclosed in paragraphs 11 and 20 of Inoue et al (Figs.6-7; i.e. shadow images are formed).
Regarding claims 7-8, the limitations therein are disclosed in paragraphs 12 of Inoue et al.
Regarding claims 9 and 11, the limitations therein are disclosed in paragraphs 12-13 and 15 of Inoue et al.
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) 2 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Inoue et al (JP 2016-035405) in view of Koseki et al (US 2019/0265172).
Regarding claims 2 and 4, although Inoue et al does not specifically mention the use of filtering process, such use is well known in the art as disclosed by Koseki et al (Fig.7; 232; paragraph 127) and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the teachings of Koseki et al in the device of Inoue et al in view of the desire to effectively detect a defect resulting in improving the accuracy of a defect measurement.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10 and 12-18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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: Regarding claim 10, the prior art fails to disclose or make obvious an image processing apparatus comprising, in addition to the other recited features of the claim and the intervening claim, the limitation of “a region that does not have predetermined characteristics on the surface of the inspection target object is a region to be inspected by the first inspection, a region having the predetermined characteristics is a region to be inspected by the second inspection, and the region having the predetermined characteristics is at least one of a shadow region and a surface reflection region”. Regarding claim 12, the prior art fails to disclose or make obvious an image processing apparatus comprising, in addition to the other recited features of the claim and the intervening claim, the limitation of “determine to perform the first inspection when no region having predetermined characteristics has been detected on the surface of the inspection target object, and determine to perform the second inspection when a region having the predetermined characteristics has been detected on the surface of the inspection target object, the region having the predetermined characteristics being at least one of a shadow region and a surface reflection region”. Regarding claims 13-18, the prior art fails to disclose or make obvious an image processing apparatus comprising, in addition to the other recited features of the claim and the intervening claim, the limitation of “determine which of the first and the second inspections is to be performed in accordance with information related to the inspection target object which has been set by a user”.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN K PYO whose telephone number is (571)272-2445. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:30 PM.
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, Georgia Y Epps can be reached at 571-272-2328. 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.
/KEVIN K PYO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2878