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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/11/2026, with regards to the prior art, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments will now be addressed:
Applicant argues (Remarks; top of page 10), with regards to independent claim 21, that prior art Ishizaki (Ishizaki et al., US 2014/0022571 A1) “does not teach or suggest the forgoing features of claim 21 including estimating a first set of L*a*b* values from the digital image of the workpiece” and specifically because “the color sample data used by Ishizaki to generate the first set of estimated L*a*b* values was created in advance and from outside the image forming apparatus, and not from a digital image of the workpiece”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. First, the Examiner would like to point out that the workpiece (as described by Applicant in paragraph [0016] of the Specification as filed) is a color calibration chart. Ishizaki teaches estimating a first set of L*a*b* values (L1*a1*b1* data) (Fig. 13; [0090]) from the digital image (wherein the colorimeter 401 images/measures the colors) (Fig. 13; [0090]) of the workpiece (of the color sample data, such as color patches (color calibration chart), on the monitor 400) (Fig. 13; [0090]). As for the argument that Ishizaki does not take a “digital image” of the workpiece the Examiner points out that in response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). As pointed out in the rejection made to independent claim 21, prior art Ozaki (Ozaki et al., US 2009/0027705 A1) was used to teach this and other limitations. Ozaki teaches to produce a calibration paper (galley) ([0122]); wherein digitally imaging the workpiece (wherein the printed picture (color chart/scale) is measured by a sensor) ([0126]); estimating a first set of L*a*b* values from the digital image of the workpiece (wherein estimating a set of L*a*b* values from the measured color development density of the color chart) ([0126]); selecting a first set of colors from a wide gamut of colors related to the first set of L*a*b* values (selecting a set of colors related to the L*a*b* values) ([0126-0127]); and creating a digital chart of the first set of colors (wherein using these colors the simulation printer can output colors of the chart to the printer and measure the outputted colors) ([0126-0127]). Ozaki also states it is possible to actually measure the Lab of a galley by means of a scanner or the like and confirm or actually measure the Lab output of the simulation printing tool with data and then digitize (color difference .DELTA.E) the difference between the Lab of the galley and the Lab of the simulation printing tool to perform comparison ([0145-0146]). Thus, as described above, the combination of prior arts (Ishizaki and Ozaki) teaches the limitation of “estimating a first set of L*a*b* values from the digital image of the workpiece”.
Applicant also argues (Remarks; p. 10, 1st paragraph), with regards to independent claim 21, that prior art Ishizaki does not “teach or suggest the claim feature of selecting a first set of colors from a wide gamut of colors related to the first set of L*a*b* values”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Ishizaki teaches selecting a first set of colors from a wide gamut of colors (selecting CMYK color data from the RGB color data that was used to create the first set of L*a*b* values (L1*a1*b1* data), thus the CMYK color data is related to the first set of L*a*b* values) (Figs. 13 and 14; [0090-0091]) related to the first set of L*a*b* values (wherein the RGB and CMYK values are related to the first set of L*a*b* values (L1*a1*b1* data), since they were used to create the first color patches to generate the L1*a1*b1* data) (Figs. 13 and 14; [0090-0092]). Ozaki also teaches selecting a first set of colors from a wide gamut of colors related to the first set of L*a*b* values (selecting a set of colors related to the L*a*b* values) ([0126-0127]).
Applicant also argues (Remarks; p. 11, 1st paragraph), with regards to independent claim 26, that prior art Ishizaki “does not teach or suggest the forgoing features of claim 26 including digitally selecting a color target for the workpiece and estimating a first set of L*a*b* values from the color target” and specifically because “the color sample data used by Ishizaki to generate the first set of estimated L*a*b* values was created in advance and from outside the image forming apparatus, and not from a color target digitally selected for the workpiece”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As discussed above Ishizaki teaches estimating a first set of L*a*b* values (L1*a1*b1* data) (Fig. 13; [0090]) from the color target (of the color sample data, such as color patches (color calibration chart), on the monitor 400) (Fig. 13; [0090]). Ishizaki also teaches digitally selecting a color target for the workpiece (wherein the color target is selected by the RGB colors to create the workpiece (color patches) digitally on monitor 400) (Fig. 13; [0090]). As for the argument that Ishizaki does not take a “color target digitally selected for the workpiece” the Examiner points out that in response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). As pointed out in the rejection made to independent claim 26, prior art Ozaki was used to teach this and other limitations. Ozaki teaches to produce a calibration paper (galley) ([0122]); wherein digitally selecting a color target for the workpiece (wherein the printed picture (color chart/scale), selected, is measured by a sensor; selected for the ) ([0126]); estimating a first set of L*a*b* values from the color target (wherein estimating a set of L*a*b* values from the measured color development density of the color chart) ([0126]); selecting a first set of colors from a wide gamut of colors related to the first set of L*a*b* values (selecting a set of colors related to the L*a*b* values) ([0126-0127]); and creating a digital chart of the first set of colors (wherein using these colors the simulation printer can output colors of the chart to the printer and measure the outputted colors) ([0126-0127]). Ozaki also states it is possible to actually measure the Lab of a galley by means of a scanner or the like and confirm or actually measure the Lab output of the simulation printing tool with data and then digitize (color difference .DELTA.E) the difference between the Lab of the galley and the Lab of the simulation printing tool to perform comparison ([0145-0146]). Thus, as described above, the combination of prior arts (Ishizaki and Ozaki) teaches the limitations of “digitally selecting a color target for the workpiece and estimating a first set of L*a*b* values from the color target”.
Applicant also argues (Remarks; p. 11, 2nd paragraph), with regards to independent claim 26, that prior art Ishizaki does not “teach or suggest the claim feature of selecting a first set of colors from a wide gamut of colors related to the first set of L*a*b* values”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As discussed above, Ishizaki teaches selecting a first set of colors from a wide gamut of colors (selecting CMYK color data from the RGB color data that was used to create the first set of L*a*b* values (L1*a1*b1* data), thus the CMYK color data is related to the first set of L*a*b* values) (Figs. 13 and 14; [0090-0091]) related to the first set of L*a*b* values (wherein the RGB and CMYK values are related to the first set of L*a*b* values (L1*a1*b1* data), since they were used to create the first color patches to generate the L1*a1*b1* data) (Figs. 13 and 14; [0090-0092]). Ozaki also teaches selecting a first set of colors from a wide gamut of colors related to the first set of L*a*b* values (selecting a set of colors related to the L*a*b* values) ([0126-0127]).
Applicant also argues (Remarks; bottom of page 12 to the top of page 13), with regards to independent claim 31, that prior art Ishizaki “does not teach or suggest the forgoing features of claim 31 including estimating a first set of space-specific color values corresponding to a workpiece” and specifically because “the color sample data used by Ishizaki to estimate a first set of space-specific color values was created in advance and from outside the image forming apparatus, and not correspond to a workpiece”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. First, the Examiner would like to point out that the workpiece (as described by Applicant in paragraph [0016] of the Specification as filed) is a color calibration chart. Ishizaki teaches estimating a first set of space-specific color values (L1*a1*b1* data) (Fig. 13; [0090]) corresponding to a workpiece (of the color sample data, such as color patches (color calibration chart), on the monitor 400) (Fig. 13; [0090]). As for the argument that Ishizaki does not take a “a first set of space-specific color values was created in advance and from outside the image forming apparatus” of the workpiece the Examiner points out that in response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). As pointed out in the rejection made to independent claim 31, prior art Ozaki was used to teach this and other limitations. Ozaki teaches to produce a calibration paper (galley) ([0122]); wherein estimating a first set of space-specific color values corresponding to a workpiece (wherein estimating a set of L*a*b* values from the measured color development density of the color chart) ([0126]); selecting a first set of colors from a wide gamut of colors related to the first set of space-specific color values (selecting a set of colors related to the L*a*b* values) ([0126-0127]); and creating a digital chart of the first set of colors (wherein using these colors the simulation printer can output colors of the chart to the printer and measure the outputted colors) ([0126-0127]). Ozaki also states it is possible to actually measure the Lab of a galley by means of a scanner or the like and confirm or actually measure the Lab output of the simulation printing tool with data and then digitize (color difference .DELTA.E) the difference between the Lab of the galley and the Lab of the simulation printing tool to perform comparison ([0145-0146]). Thus, as described above, the combination of prior arts (Ishizaki and Ozaki) teaches the limitation of “estimating a first set of space-specific color values corresponding to a workpiece”.
Lastly, Applicant argues (Remarks; p. 13, 1st paragraph), with regards to independent claim 31, that prior art Ishizaki does not “teach or suggest the claim feature of selecting a first set of colors from a wide gamut of colors related to the first set of L*a*b* values”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. First, the Examiner would like to point out that in independent claim 31, it isn’t “the first set of L*a*b* values” that is claimed but instead “the first set of space-specific color values”. As discussed above, Ishizaki teaches selecting a first set of colors from a wide gamut of colors (selecting CMYK color data from the RGB color data that was used to create the first set of L*a*b* values (L1*a1*b1* data), thus the CMYK color data is related to the first set of L*a*b* values) (Figs. 13 and 14; [0090-0091]) related to the first set of space-specific color values (wherein the RGB and CMYK values are related to the first set of L*a*b* values (L1*a1*b1* data), since they were used to create the first color patches to generate the L1*a1*b1* data) (Figs. 13 and 14; [0090-0092]). Ozaki also teaches selecting a first set of colors from a wide gamut of colors related to the first set of space-specific color values (selecting a set of colors related to the L*a*b* values) ([0126-0127]).
The 35 USC 112(b) rejection made to claims 24, 29, and 37 has been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendments.
Claims 21-37 are pending; claims 1-20 were previously canceled; and claims 24, 29, and 37 have been amended.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 21-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishizaki et al., US 2014/0022571 A1 (Ishizaki), and further in view of Ozaki et al., US 2009/0027705 A1 (Ozaki).
Regarding claim 21, Ishizaki teaches a method of creating a color target specification for a workpiece (creating the correct color tones for a sheet with an image formed thereon) ([0003]), comprising:
digitally imaging the workpiece (imaging the sheet with an image formed thereon using the image forming apparatus 10) (Figs. 1 and 14; [0091]);
estimating a first set of L*a*b* values (L1*a1*b1* data) (Fig. 13; [0090]) from the digital image (wherein the colorimeter 401 images/measures the colors) (Fig. 13; [0090]) of the workpiece (estimating a set of L1*a1*b1* data/values from the color sample data, such as color patches (color calibration chart), on the monitor 400) (Fig. 13; [0087-0090]);
selecting a first set of colors from a wide gamut of colors (selecting CMYK color data from the RGB color data that was used to create the first set of L*a*b* values (L1*a1*b1* data), thus the CMYK color data is related to the first set of L*a*b* values) (Figs. 13 and 14; [0090-0091]) related to the first set of L*a*b* values (wherein the RGB and CMYK values are related to the first set of L*a*b* values (L1*a1*b1* data), since they were used to create the first color patches to generate the L1*a1*b1* data) (Figs. 13 and 14; [0087] and [0090-0092]);
creating a digital chart of the first set of colors (wherein when making adjustments in the image forming apparatus 10, various charts, such as various color patches are arranged on a sheet) (Fig. 1; [0041]) (Fig. 14, step S3; [0092]);
forming the digital chart (various charts such as various color patches can be arranged on the sheet) ([0041]) (wherein the color patches (chart) are formed on the sheet) (Fig. 14, step S3; [0092]);
measuring the first set of colors, from the formed chart, to create a second set of L*a*b* values (the optical measuring instrument 26 is used to take colorimetric measurements of the color patches (color chart) to create L*a*b* data (L2*a2*b2*)) (Fig 1, Fig. 14, step S4; [0092-0093]);
calculating a value between the first set of L*a*b* values and the second set of L*a*b* values (comparing the values between L2*a2*b2* and L1*a1*b1* to determine if there is a sufficient match (the value being a distance between the two values)) (Fig. 14, step S5; [0094]);
determining whether or not the value is below a predetermined threshold (determine if the distance value is within a predetermined distance, or in other words, whether or not the two sets of data values sufficiently match) (Fig. 14, step S6; [0094]); and,
if the value is below the predetermined threshold (if the distance is within a predetermined distance) ([0094]), then creating the color target specification (creating the color target using those colors instead of doing a correction) ([0003] and [0094]).
Although Ishizaki does not explicitly state that the imaging is “digital” it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that since the image data is processed using an image processor 30, which includes components such as a memory and a computational circuit (Fig. 1; [0045]), that the imaging being done is digital. Ishizaki also states that the various color patches are “formed” on the sheet, however, Ishizaki does not explicitly state “printing”, “imaging” or calculating a “Delta E” value.
Ozaki teaches picture color tone control for a printing press (Abstract); wherein producing a calibration paper (galley) ([0122]); wherein digitally imaging the workpiece (wherein the printed picture (color chart/scale) is measured by a sensor) ([0126]); estimating a first set of L*a*b* values from the digital image of the workpiece (wherein estimating a set of L*a*b* values from the measured color development density of the color chart) ([0126]); selecting a first set of colors from a wide gamut of colors related to the first set of L*a*b* values (selecting a set of colors related to the L*a*b* values) ([0126-0127]); creating a digital chart of the first set of colors (wherein using these colors the simulation printer can output colors of the chart to the printer and measure the outputted colors) ([0126-0127]); and wherein a Delta E value is obtained based on the color difference (Lab difference) which is compared to a color difference threshold value ([0145-0146]).
Ozaki also states it is possible to actually measure the Lab of a galley by means of a scanner or the like and confirm or actually measure the Lab output of the simulation printing tool with data and then digitize (color difference .DELTA.E) the difference between the Lab of the galley and the Lab of the simulation printing tool to perform comparison ([0145-0146]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ishizaki to include detecting a Delta E value for the difference between the Lab values since it makes it possible to confirm a color shade before printing is performed thereby to prevent failure in printing and suppress incidence of paper loss (Ozaki; Abstract).
Regarding claim 22, Ishizaki teaches further comprising the step of: if the value is not below the predetermined threshold (if the distance values is above a predetermined distance; i.e. the values do not sufficiently match) (Fig. 14, step S6; [0094]), then, selecting a second set of colors from the wide gamut of colors (selecting a second set of colors by correcting the CMYK values of the RGB data) (Fig. 14, steps S7 and S8; [0094-0095]). Ozaki teaches picture color tone control for a printing press (Abstract); wherein a color chart is printed ([0126-0127]); and wherein a Delta E value is obtained based on the color difference (Lab difference) which is compared to a color difference threshold value ([0145-0146]).
Regarding claim 23, Ozaki teaches further comprising the step of: converting the digital chart to a digital form printable on an inkjet printer (wherein the color chart can be printed by the printing press) ([0031], [0073], and [0126-0127]).
Regarding claim 24, Ishizaki teaches wherein the step of determining further comprises the steps of: specifying that the predetermined threshold is 3 plus or minus 10% (wherein the threshold is a “predetermined distance”, which could obviously be set as 3 (or plus or minus 10%) by the user) ([0094]). Ozaki teaches wherein the step of determining further comprises the steps of: specifying that the predetermined threshold is plus or minus 10% (wherein the threshold value is provided and thus can obviously be set to 3 (or plus or minus 10%) if desired) ([0145-0146]).
Regarding claim 25, Ozaki teaches wherein the step of estimating further comprises the steps of: measuring the workpiece to create a third set of L*a*b* values; and, averaging the third set of L*a*b* values (wherein a third set of Lab values can be calculated and averaged to be used with the Delta E predetermined threshold) ([0146] and [0196]).
Regarding claim 26, Ishizaki teaches a method of creating a color target specification for a workpiece (creating the correct color tones for a sheet with an image formed thereon) ([0003]), comprising:
digitally selecting a color target for the workpiece (wherein the creator selects a target color on a monitor) ([0089-0090]) (wherein the color target is selected by the RGB colors to create the workpiece (color patches) digitally on monitor 400) (Fig. 13; [0090]);
estimating a first set of L*a*b* values (L1*a1*b1* data) (Fig. 13; [0090]) from the color target (of the color sample data, such as color patches (color calibration chart), on the monitor 400) (Fig. 13; [0090]);
selecting a first set of colors from a wide gamut of colors (selecting CMYK color data from the RGB color data that was used to create the first set of L*a*b* values (L1*a1*b1* data), thus the CMYK color data is related to the first set of L*a*b* values) (Figs. 13 and 14; [0090-0091]) related to the first set of L*a*b* values (wherein the RGB and CMYK values are related to the first set of L*a*b* values (L1*a1*b1* data), since they were used to create the first color patches to generate the L1*a1*b1* data) (Figs. 13 and 14; [0087] and [0090-0092]);
creating a digital chart of the first set of colors (wherein when making adjustments in the image forming apparatus 10, various charts, such as various color patches are arranged on a sheet) (Fig. 1; [0041]) (Fig. 14, step S3; [0092]);
forming the digital chart (various charts such as various color patches can be arranged on the sheet) ([0041]) (wherein the color patches (chart) are formed on the sheet) (Fig. 14, step S3; [0092]);
measuring the first set of colors, from the formed chart, to create a second set of L*a*b* values (the optical measuring instrument 26 is used to take colorimetric measurements of the color patches (color chart) to create L*a*b* data (L2*a2*b2*)) (Fig 1, Fig. 14, step S4; [0092-0093]);
calculating a value between the first set of L*a*b* values and the second set of L*a*b* values (comparing the values between L2*a2*b2* and L1*a1*b1* to determine if there is a sufficient match (the value being a distance between the two values)) (Fig. 14, step S5; [0094]);
determining whether or not the value is below a predetermined threshold (determine if the distance value is within a predetermined distance, or in other words, whether or not the two sets of data values sufficiently match) (Fig. 14, step S6; [0094]); and,
if the value is below the predetermined threshold (if the distance is within a predetermined distance) ([0094]), then creating the color target specification (creating the color target using those colors instead of doing a correction) ([0003] and [0094]).
Although Ishizaki does not explicitly state that the imaging is “digital” it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that since the image data is processed using an image processor 30, which includes components such as a memory and a computational circuit (Fig. 1; [0045]), that the imaging being done is digital. Ishizaki also states that the various color patches are “formed” on the sheet, however, Ishizaki does not explicitly state “printing” or calculating a “Delta E” value.
Ozaki teaches picture color tone control for a printing press (Abstract); producing a calibration paper (galley) ([0122]); wherein digitally selecting a color target for the workpiece (wherein the printed picture (color chart/scale), selected, is measured by a sensor; selected for the ) ([0126]); estimating a first set of L*a*b* values from the color target (wherein estimating a set of L*a*b* values from the measured color development density of the color chart) ([0126]); selecting a first set of colors from a wide gamut of colors related to the first set of L*a*b* values (selecting a set of colors related to the L*a*b* values) ([0126-0127]); creating a digital chart of the first set of colors (wherein using these colors the simulation printer can output colors of the chart to the printer and measure the outputted colors) ([0126-0127]); wherein a target color is selected (Abstract, [0023], and [0027]); wherein a color chart is printed ([0126-0127]); and wherein a Delta E value is obtained based on the color difference (Lab difference) which is compared to a color difference threshold value ([0145-0146]).
Ozaki also states it is possible to actually measure the Lab of a galley by means of a scanner or the like and confirm or actually measure the Lab output of the simulation printing tool with data and then digitize (color difference .DELTA.E) the difference between the Lab of the galley and the Lab of the simulation printing tool to perform comparison ([0145-0146]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ishizaki to include detecting a Delta E value for the difference between the Lab values since it makes it possible to confirm a color shade before printing is performed thereby to prevent failure in printing and suppress incidence of paper loss (Ozaki; Abstract).
Regarding claim 27, Ishizaki teaches further comprising: if the value is not below the predetermined threshold (if the distance values is above a predetermined distance; i.e. the values do not sufficiently match) (Fig. 14, step S6; [0094]), then, selecting a second set of colors from the wide gamut of colors (selecting a second set of colors by correcting the CMYK values of the RGB data) (Fig. 14, steps S7 and S8; [0094-0095]). Ozaki teaches picture color tone control for a printing press (Abstract); wherein a color chart is printed ([0126-0127]); and wherein a Delta E value is obtained based on the color difference (Lab difference) which is compared to a color difference threshold value ([0145-0146]).
Regarding claim 28, Ozaki teaches further comprising: converting the digital chart to a digital form printable on an inkjet printer (wherein the color chart can be printed by the printing press) ([0031], [0073], and [0126-0127]).
Regarding claim 29, Ishizaki teaches wherein the step of determining further comprises the steps of: specifying that the predetermined threshold is 2 plus or minus 10% (wherein the threshold is a “predetermined distance”, which could obviously be set as 2 (or plus or minus 10%) by the user) ([0094]). Ozaki teaches wherein the step of determining further comprises the steps of: specifying that the predetermined threshold is 2 plus or minus 10% (wherein the threshold value is provided and thus can obviously be set to 2 (or plus or minus 10%) if desired) ([0145-0146]).
Regarding claim 30, Ishizaki teaches wherein the step of selecting the color target further comprises the steps of: selecting the color target by use of color modification software (wherein the creator can select the color based on using the CPU for executing programs) ([0072], [0086], and [0089-0090]). Ozaki teaches selecting the color target by use of color modification software (selecting the color target using a simulation printing tool) (Abstract, [0023], and [0077]).
Claim(s) 31-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishizaki et al., US 2014/0022571 A1 (Ishizaki), Ozaki et al., US 2009/0027705 A1 (Ozaki), and further in view of Darel et al., 6,024,018 (Darel).
Regarding claim 31, Ishizaki teaches a method of creating a color target specification for a workpiece (creating the correct color tones for a sheet with an image formed thereon) ([0003]), comprising:
estimating a first set of space-specific color values (L1*a1*b1* data) (Fig. 13; [0090]) corresponding to a workpiece (estimating a set of L1*a1*b1* data/values of the color sample data, such as color patches (color calibration chart), on the monitor 400) (Fig. 13; [0087-0090]), said space-specific color values (L*a*b* values) ([0087-0090]);
selecting a first set of colors from a wide gamut of colors (selecting CMYK color data from the RGB color data that was used to create the first set of L*a*b* values (L1*a1*b1* data), thus the CMYK color data is related to the first set of L*a*b* values) (Figs. 13 and 14; [0090-0091]) related to the first set of space-specific color values (wherein the RGB and CMYK values are related to the first set of L*a*b* values (L1*a1*b1* data), since they were used to create the first color patches to generate the L1*a1*b1* data) (Figs. 13 and 14; [0087] and [0090-0092]);
creating a digital chart of the first set of colors (wherein when making adjustments in the image forming apparatus 10, various charts, such as various color patches are arranged on a sheet) (Fig. 1; [0041]) (Fig. 14, step S3; [0092]);
forming the digital chart (various charts such as various color patches can be arranged on the sheet) ([0041]) (wherein the color patches (chart) are formed on the sheet) (Fig. 14, step S3; [0092]);
measuring the first set of colors, from the formed chart, to create a second set of space-specific color values (the optical measuring instrument 26 is used to take colorimetric measurements of the color patches (color chart) to create L*a*b* data (L2*a2*b2*)) (Fig 1, Fig. 14, step S4; [0092-0093]);
calculating an error measurement between the first set of space-specific color values and the second set of space-specific color values (comparing the values between L2*a2*b2* and L1*a1*b1* to determine if there is a sufficient match (the value being a distance between the two values)) (Fig. 14, step S5; [0094]);
determining whether or not the error measurement is below a predetermined threshold (determine if the distance value is within a predetermined distance, or in other words, whether or not the two sets of data values sufficiently match) (Fig. 14, step S6; [0094]);
and, if the error measurement is below the predetermined threshold (if the distance is within a predetermined distance) ([0094]), then creating the color target specification (creating the color target using those colors instead of doing a correction) ([0003] and [0094]).
Although Ishizaki does not explicitly state that the imaging is “digital” it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that since the image data is processed using an image processor 30, which includes components such as a memory and a computational circuit (Fig. 1; [0045]), that the imaging being done is digital. Ishizaki also states that the various color patches are “formed” on the sheet, however, Ishizaki does not explicitly state “printing”.
Ozaki teaches picture color tone control for a printing press (Abstract); producing a calibration paper (galley) ([0122]); wherein estimating a first set of space-specific color values corresponding to a workpiece (wherein estimating a set of L*a*b* values from the measured color development density of the color chart) ([0126]); selecting a first set of colors from a wide gamut of colors related to the first set of space-specific color values (selecting a set of colors related to the L*a*b* values) ([0126-0127]); creating a digital chart of the first set of colors (wherein using these colors the simulation printer can output colors of the chart to the printer and measure the outputted colors) ([0126-0127]); wherein a target color is selected (Abstract, [0023], and [0027]); and wherein a color chart is printed ([0126-0127]).
Ozaki also states it is possible to actually measure the Lab of a galley by means of a scanner or the like and confirm or actually measure the Lab output of the simulation printing tool with data and then digitize (color difference .DELTA.E) the difference between the Lab of the galley and the Lab of the simulation printing tool to perform comparison ([0145-0146]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ishizaki to include printing the chart for detecting a Delta E value for the difference between the Lab values since it makes it possible to confirm a color shade before printing is performed thereby to prevent failure in printing and suppress incidence of paper loss (Ozaki; Abstract).
Ishizaki teaches using L*a*b* values ([0087-0090]) and Ozaki teaches using L*a*b* values ([0144-0145]). However, neither explicitly teaches “a color space that encompasses all visible colors and is an absolute standard”.
Darel teaches a color control system for maintaining the color of a printed page of a printing press constant, within the context of the human perceptual color space system optimizes the settings of a plurality of ink keys in a printing press in accordance with a test image and a reference image (Abstract); and wherein using a color space that encompasses all visible colors and is an absolute standard (wherein the color comparison can be performed using any color space, such as CIE Lab) (col. 8, lines 9-10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of prior arts to include a color space that encompasses all visible colors and is an absolute standard, such as CIE Lab color space since it closely imitates human visual perception (Darel; col. 8, lines 10-12).
Regarding claim 32, Ishizaki teaches creating a color target specification for a workpiece (creating the correct color tones for a sheet with an image formed thereon) ([0003]), wherein the color space that encompasses all visible colors and is an absolute standard comprises a CIE Lab space and the space-specific color values comprise L*a*b* values (L*a*b* values) ([0087-0090]). Ozaki teaches using L*a*b* values ([0144-0145]).
However, neither explicitly teaches “wherein the color space that encompasses all visible colors and is an absolute standard comprises a CIE Lab space”.
Darel teaches a color control system for maintaining the color of a printed page of a printing press constant, within the context of the human perceptual color space system optimizes the settings of a plurality of ink keys in a printing press in accordance with a test image and a reference image (Abstract); and wherein the color space that encompasses all visible colors and is an absolute standard comprises a CIE Lab space (wherein the color comparison can be performed using any color space, such as CIE Lab) (col. 8, lines 9-10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of prior arts to include a color space that encompasses all visible colors and is an absolute standard, such as CIE Lab color space since it closely imitates human visual perception (Darel; col. 8, lines 10-12).
Regarding claim 33, Ishizaki teaches creating a color target specification for a workpiece (creating the correct color tones for a sheet with an image formed thereon) ([0003]), wherein estimating a first set of space-specific color values corresponding to a workpiece (estimating a set of L1*a1*b1* data/values from the image of the sheet with an image formed thereon) (Fig. 13; [0087-0090]) comprises: digitally imaging the workpiece (imaging the sheet with an image formed thereon using the image forming apparatus 10) (Figs. 1 and 14; [0091]); and estimating the first set of space-specific color values from the digital image of the workpiece (estimating a set of L1*a1*b1* data/values from the image of the sheet with an image formed thereon) (Fig. 13; [0087-0090]).
Although Ishizaki does not explicitly state that the imaging is “digital” it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that since the image data is processed using an image processor 30, which includes components such as a memory and a computational circuit (Fig. 1; [0045]), that the imaging being done is digital.
Regarding claim 34, Ishizaki teaches creating a color target specification for a workpiece (creating the correct color tones for a sheet with an image formed thereon) ([0003]), wherein estimating a first set of space-specific color values corresponding to a workpiece (estimating a set of L1*a1*b1* data/values from the image of the sheet with an image formed thereon) (Fig. 13; [0087-0090]) comprises: digitally selecting a color target for the workpiece (wherein the creator selects a target color on a monitor) ([0089-0090]); and estimating the first set of space-specific color values from the color target (estimating a set of L1*a1*b1* data/values from the image of the sheet with an image formed thereon) (Fig. 13; [0087-0090]). Ozaki teaches picture color tone control for a printing press (Abstract); wherein a target color is selected (Abstract, [0023], and [0027]).
Although Ishizaki does not explicitly state that the imaging is “digital” it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that since the image data is processed using an image processor 30, which includes components such as a memory and a computational circuit (Fig. 1; [0045]), that the imaging being done is digital.
Regarding claim 35, Ishizaki teaches creating a color target specification for a workpiece (creating the correct color tones for a sheet with an image formed thereon) ([0003]), wherein calculating the error measurement comprises computing the difference between an intended color value (reference color value) ([0094]) and a measured (measure color value) ([0094]) color value (comparing the values between L2*a2*b2* and L1*a1*b1* to determine if there is a sufficient match (the value being a distance between the two values)) (Fig. 14, step S5; [0094]). Ozaki teaches wherein a Delta E value is obtained based on the color difference (Lab difference) which is compared to a color difference threshold value ([0145-0146]) (difference between the Lab of the galley and the Lab of the simulation printing tool to perform comparison) ([0145]).
Regarding claim 36, Ozaki teaches for creating a color target specification for a workpiece (Abstract, [0023], and [0027]), wherein calculating the error measurement comprises computing Delta E (and wherein a Delta E value is obtained based on the color difference (Lab difference) which is compared to a color difference threshold value) ([0145-0146]).
Regarding claim 37, Ishizaki teaches creating a color target specification for a workpiece (creating the correct color tones for a sheet with an image formed thereon) ([0003]), wherein the predetermined threshold is 3 plus or minus 10% (wherein the threshold is a “predetermined distance”, which could obviously be set as 3 (or plus or minus 10%) by the user) ([0094]). Ozaki teaches wherein the predetermined threshold is 3 plus or minus 10% (wherein the threshold value is provided and thus can obviously be set to 3 (or plus or minus 10%) if desired) ([0145-0146]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Prior art Bhardwaj et al., 5,580,172: teaches a method and apparatus are provided for producing a temperature profile of a part operating within a machine is provided (Abstract); wherein the machine is operated with the part for a predetermined period of time (Abstract); wherein the part is placed in a light box in which a camera produces an image of the part (Abstract); and wherein the image is compared with a standard set of colors and the standard color most closely corresponding to each pixel of the image is selected (Abstract).
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J VANCHY JR whose telephone number is (571)270-1193. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 5pm.
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, Emily Terrell can be reached at (571) 270-3717. 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.
/MICHAEL J VANCHY JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2666 Michael.Vanchy@uspto.gov
Prosecution Insights