DETAILED ACTION
Claim 9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim(s) 1,2,7 and 8,9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated1 by BORDES et al. (US 2023/0188713 A1).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BORDES et al. (US 2023/0188713 A1) in view of Mate et al. (US 2012/0229699 A1).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BORDES et al. (US 2023/0188713 A1) in view of KIM et al. (WO 2020/256185 A1) with SEARCH machine translation:
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BORDES et al. (US 2023/0188713 A1) in view of Nittur Seidhar et al. (US 2022/0035877 A1):
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BORDES et al. (US 2023/0188713 A1) in view of Zhang et al. (US 2020/0365118 A1):
Priority
Receipt (01/03/2025: NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE OF APPLICATION UNDER 35 U.S.C 371 AND 37 CFR1.495: The following items have been received:…Priority Documents filed on 07/26/2024) is acknowledged of certified copies (EP 22153613.9 27 January 2022 (27.01.2022), filed 07/26/2024) of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Amendment
The most current preliminary amendment was received 1/8/2025 and replaces all other prior claim sets. Claims of 1/8/2025 pending 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 and 8,9:
PNG
media_image1.png
407
91
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because claim 9’s “A computer program stored on234 a non-transitory medium” “embraces”5 both a non-statutory program6 and a statutory “non-transitory medium”. “Such claims fail the first step (Step 1: NO) and should be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101, for at least this reason.”. Suggested:
9. A non-transitory medium storing a computer program…
35 USC § 101 – Positive statement
Claims 1,8 reflect the “appropriate re-gradings of any video” (applicant’s disclosure, page 19, l. 15) improvement via applicant’s disclosure, page 18 regarding equations [Eqs. 3] and [Eqs. 4] creating a “good quality… image”, applicant’s disclosure, ll. 18-21. Thus claims 1-8 are statutory under 35 USC 101.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1,2,7 and 8,9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated7 by BORDES et al. (US 2023/0188713 A1).
PNG
media_image2.png
407
314
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Re 1.8 (Currently Amended), BORDES discloses An apparatus for luminance re9-grading10 (i.e., combining again) comprising11 (in a likewise manner):
a first neural network (fig. 17:top-“CNN) processing circuit,
wherein the first neural network processing circuit has a first input and at least two pluralities (fig. 17: 1,2,3,4) of first outputs
PNG
media_image3.png
702
1064
media_image3.png
Greyscale
,
wherein the at least two pluralities of first outputs comprise a first plurality (fig. 17:1,2) of first outputs and a second plurality (fig. 17:3,4) of first outputs,
wherein a plurality of input pixel lumas (or likewise “pixel values” [0094]) of an input image is provided to the first input,
wherein the first plurality (fig. 17:1,2) of first outputs comprises12
wherein the second plurality (fig. 17:3,4) of first outputs comprises13 at least two second output parameters (or likewise “offset…parameters are encoded in the bitstream” [0085] last two Ss); [[,]]
PNG
media_image3.png
702
1064
media_image3.png
Greyscale
a second neural network processing circuit (fig. 17:bottom-“CNN”),
wherein the second neural network processing circuit has a second input and a third output and a fourth output (or likewise arrows pointing outside a rectangle via fig. 17:3,4) [[s]]
PNG
media_image4.png
702
1064
media_image4.png
Greyscale
,
wherein at least one value from at least one sensor14 (or likewise “video”15 [0002] last S that receives a signal and responds to the signal via a sensitized screen: i.e., television) is provided to the second input,
wherein the third output s a first weight (or likewise “The weight mask” [0095] has a plurality of weights) [[s] ],
wherein the fourth output provides a second weight (or likewise “The weight mask” [0095] has a plurality of weights);
a combiner circuit (or likewise fig. 17: multiplication “X” & addition “+”, twice)
PNG
media_image4.png
702
1064
media_image4.png
Greyscale
,
wherein the combiner circuit is arranged (via fig. 17: “Compute avgOffset”) to multiply the at least two first output parameters (or likewise regarding the top-CNN: “offset… parameters are encoded in the bitstream” [0085] last two Ss) by the first weight (or likewise regarding the bottom-CNN: “The weight mask” [0095] has a plurality of weights) yielding at least two weighted first output parameters (or likewise offset0 and offset1 via fig. 24(e): wherein “offset”, four times, is a parameter),
wherein the combiner circuit is arranged (via fig. 17: “Compute avgOffset”) to multiply the at least two second output parameters (or likewise regarding the top-CNN: “offset… parameters are encoded in the bitstream” [0085] last two Ss) by the second weight (or likewise regarding the bottom-CNN: “The weight mask” [0095] has a plurality of weights) yielding at least two weighted second output parameters (or likewise offset2 and offset3 via fig. 24(e): wherein “offset”, four times, is a parameter),
wherein the combiner circuit is arranged to add (via “+” in fig. 24(e)) a first one of the at least two weighted first output parameters (or likewise offset0 and offset1) to a first one of the at least two weighted second output parameters (or likewise offset2 and offset3) yielding a combined first output parameter
PNG
media_image5.png
136
856
media_image5.png
Greyscale
,
wherein the combiner circuit is arranged to add a second one of the at least two weighted first output parameters to a second one of the at least two weighted second output parameters yielding a combined second output parameter (as similarly indicated in the above limitation with fig. 24(e)),
wherein a parametric re-grading equation is specified by the combined first output parameter and the combined second output parameter
(as shown in said fig. 24(e):
PNG
media_image5.png
136
856
media_image5.png
Greyscale
)
a luma mapping circuit (or likewise “The output…may be…luma…samples” [0098] last S : fig. 2),
wherein the luma mapping circuit is arranged to apply the input lumas of the input image to the parametric re-grading equation (represented in fig. 2 as 265: “In-loop Filters”) to obtain output lumas of an output image (as indicted by the filtered image in fig. 11(c))
Re 2. (Previously Presented), BORDES discloses The apparatus for luminance re-grading as claimed in claim 1, wherein the at least one sensor is coupled to a display (likewise said sensitive television screen).
Re 7. (Currently Amended), BORDES discloses The apparatus for luminance re-grading as claimed in claim 1, further comprising a video coding and communication apparatus (fig. 1:100), wherein the video coding and communication apparatus is arranged to transmit a video to at least one receiver[[s]].
Claim 8 is rejected like claim 1:
Re 8. (Currently Amended), BORDES A method comprising:
providing a plurality of input pixel lumas to a first neural network processing circuit,
wherein the plurality of input pixel lumas comprises an input image,
wherein the first neural network processing circuit has at least two pluralities of first outputs,
wherein the at least two pluralities of first outputs comprise a first plurality of first outputs and a second plurality of first outputs,
wherein the first plurality of first outputs comprises at least two first output parameters,
wherein the second plurality of first outputs comprises at least two second output parameters;
providing at least one value from at least one sensor to a second neural network processing circuit,
wherein from the second neural network processing circuit has a third output and a fourth output,
wherein the third output provides a first weight,
wherein the fourth output provides a second weight;
multiplying the at least two first output parameters by the first weight yielding at least two weighted first output parameters;
multiplying the at least two second output parameters by the second weight yielding at least two weighted second output parameters;
adding a first one of the at least two weighted first output parameters to a first one of the at least two weighted second output parameters yielding a combined first output parameter;
adding a second one of the at least two weighted first output parameters to a second one of the at least two weighted second output parameters yielding a combined second output parameter,
wherein a parametric re-grading equation is specified by the combined first output parameter and the combined second output parameter; and
applying the input lumas of the input image to the parametric re-grading equation to obtain output lumas of an output image.
Re 9. (Previously Presented), BORDES discloses A computer program (fig. 1:100) stored on a non-transitory medium, wherein the computer program when executed on a processor performs the method as claimed in claim 8.
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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BORDES et al. (US 2023/0188713 A1) in view of Mate et al. (US 2012/0229699 A1).
PNG
media_image6.png
407
383
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Re 3. (Previously Presented), BORDES teaches The apparatus for luminance re-grading as claimed in claim 1,
wherein the at least one sensor light meter,
wherein the light meter is arranged to provide a measure of a light (or likewise “a lighting system” [0047] 2nd S) in an environment.
BORDES does not teach the difference of claim 3 of:
the at least one sensor light meter,
wherein the light meter is arranged to provide a measure of (a light)16 in an environment.
Mate teach the difference of claim 3 of:
the at least one sensor light meter,
wherein the light meter is arranged to provide a measure of (a light)17 in an environment (or likewise:
[0051] The mobile terminal 40 may also include an illumination sensor 22, such as a light meter. As described above, a light meter is configured gather data representative of the ambient lighting conditions in proximity to the illumination sensor, such as by measuring the amount of light proximate to the light meter.).
Since BORDER suggest the possibility of sending a control signal to a lighting system by selecting a communications protocol that enable device control via [0047]:
[0047] The system 100 may provide an output signal to various output devices, including a display 165, speakers 175, and other peripheral devices 185. The other peripheral devices 185 include, in various examples of embodiments, one or more of a stand-alone DVR, a disk player, a stereo system, a lighting system, and other devices that provide a function based on the output of the system 100. In various embodiments, control signals are communicated between the system 100 and the display 165, speakers 175, or other peripheral devices 185 using signaling such as AV.Link, CEC, or other communications protocols that enable device-to-device control with or without user intervention. The output devices may be communicatively coupled to system 100 via dedicated connections through respective interfaces 160, 170, and 180. Alternatively, the output devices may be connected to system 100 using the communications channel 190 via the communications interface 150. The display 165 and speakers 175 may be integrated in a single unit with the other components of system 100 in an electronic device, for example, a television. In various embodiments, the display interface 160 includes a display driver, for example, a timing controller (T Con) chip.
one of skill in the art of controls could or would have done is to refer to other teachings of controls and respective communications protocols can make BORDER’s be as Mate’s seeing in the change “ desired lighting conditions…to illuminate the area of interest”, Mate [0053] last S via explicit or even routine steps:
MAKE A FLASHLIGHT:
a) install just like as shown in Mate’s fig. 4:22: “LIGHT METER” and fig. 4:12: “IMAGE SENSOR” to BORDES’s fig. 1;
b) write a computer illumination program based on Mate’s fig. 6;
c) install Mate’s illumination program into BORDES’ fig. 1:140: “Storage Device”;
d) run the installed illumination program.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BORDES et al. (US 2023/0188713 A1) in view of KIM et al. (WO 2020/256185 A1) with SEARCH machine translation:
PNG
media_image7.png
415
386
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Re 4. (Previously Presented), BORDES teaches The apparatus for luminance re-grading as claimed in claim 1,
wherein the at least one sensor is an image summarization unit,
wherein the image summarization unit is arranged to measure luminance aspects of the input image.
BORDES does not teach the difference of claim 4 of:
an image summarization unit,
wherein the image summarization unit is arranged to measure luminance aspects.
KIM teach the difference of claim 4 of:
an image summarization unit (or likewise “a histogram summarizing the result of measuring the luminance when the HDR image signal is output from the display unit 180.”, pg. 35, 1st txt blk, last S),
wherein the image summarization unit is arranged to measure luminance aspects.
Since BORDES suggests other display controllers via [0047] last S:
[0047] The system 100 may provide an output signal to various output devices, including a display 165, speakers 175, and other peripheral devices 185. The other peripheral devices 185 include, in various examples of embodiments, one or more of a stand-alone DVR, a disk player, a stereo system, a lighting system, and other devices that provide a function based on the output of the system 100. In various embodiments, control signals are communicated between the system 100 and the display 165, speakers 175, or other peripheral devices 185 using signaling such as AV.Link, CEC, or other communications protocols that enable device-to-device control with or without user intervention. The output devices may be communicatively coupled to system 100 via dedicated connections through respective interfaces 160, 170, and 180. Alternatively, the output devices may be connected to system 100 using the communications channel 190 via the communications interface 150. The display 165 and speakers 175 may be integrated in a single unit with the other components of system 100 in an electronic device, for example, a television. In various embodiments, the display interface 160 includes a display driver, for example, a timing controller (T Con) chip.
one of skill in the art of controllers could or would have done is refer to other teachings of display controllers and thus make BORDES’ be as KIM’s seeing in the change “the expressive power of the image is enriched and the contrast is improved” , KIM, page 35, 2nd txt blk, last S via explicit creative or even routine steps:
a) install KIM’s “controller 170”, pg. 10, 5th txt blk, into BORDES’s “Display Interface” of fig. 1:160.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BORDES et al. (US 2023/0188713 A1) in view of Nittur Seidhar et al. (US 2022/0035877 A1):
PNG
media_image8.png
415
551
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Re 5. (Previously Presented), BORDES teaches The apparatus for luminance re-grading as claimed in claim 1, further comprising a user interface18 circuit (or likewise “Processor 110 may include embedded memory, input output interface” [0037] 2nd S) and a selector circuit (or likewise “ a single RDO module (1630) selects which CNN filter will be used finally” [0107] 3rd S),
wherein the user interface circuit is arranged to determine a plurality of user-specified weights (or likewise “the NN filter determines a weight mask” [0085] 4th S),
wherein the selector circuit is arranged to select at least one user-specified weight in place of a corresponding weight from the second neural network processing circuit.
BORDES does not teach the difference of claim 5 of:
user (interface circuit)19…20
the user (interface circuit)…
user-specified (weights)…
user-specified (weight).
Nittur Sridhar teach the difference of claim 5 of:
user (interface circuit)21 (or likewise “ [0009] FIG. 3 depicts an example machine learning (ML) architecture search user interface according to various embodiments.”) …22
the user (interface circuit)…
user-specified (weights) (or likewise “user-specified weights 208d” via [0025] last three sentences:
“In some implementations, the ML config. 105 may include multiple AI/ML tasks 205a and user-specified weights 208d (see e.g., FIG. 2) or prioritizations of each specified AI/ML task 205a. For example, the ML config. 105 may include a first AI/ML task 205a with a largest weight 208d (or highest priority), a second AI/ML task 205a with a next largest weight 208d (or next highest priority), and so forth until a N-th AI/ML task 205a (where Nis a number) with a smallest weight 208d (or lowest priority). Additional aspects of the weights 208d are discussed infra with respect to FIG. 2.”)
…
user-specified (weight).
Since BORDES suggests other known “traditional” possibilities to train a neural network:
[0148] The training of NNs (setting of NN parameters) can be made with traditional methods based on supervised learning where the output of the NN is matched with the desired output (original signal), trying to minimize a loss function such as the difference between NN output and the desired output. One can use for example back-propagation methods where the computation of the gradient of the loss function with respect to the weights of the network allow adjusting iteratively the weights and biases of the NN, such as gradient descent or stochastic gradient descent.
one of skill in the art of neural nets could of or would of have done is refer to other teachings of training neural nets and thus make BORDES’ be as Nittur Sridhar’s seeing in the change “computer algorithms that improve automatically through experience and by the use of data”, Nittur Sridhar [0002] 1st S via explicit creative or even routine steps:
a) create a metrics program based on Nittur Sridhar’s fig. 7
PNG
media_image9.png
973
721
media_image9.png
Greyscale
;
b) install the metrics program into BORDES’s computer;
c) run the installed metrics program:
c1) input to the metrics program BORDE’s neural networks.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BORDES et al. (US 2023/0188713 A1) in view of Zhang et al. (US 2020/0365118 A1):
PNG
media_image10.png
415
551
media_image10.png
Greyscale
Re 6. (Previously Presented), BORDES teaches The apparatus for luminance re-grading as claimed in claim 1, further comprising a display panel.
BORDES does not teach the difference of claim 6 of:
(display) panel.
Zhang teach the difference of claim 6 of:
(display) panel.
Since BORDES suggests other display controller drivers via “a display driver…example…controller” via [0047] last S:
[0047] The system 100 may provide an output signal to various output devices, including a display 165, speakers 175, and other peripheral devices 185. The other peripheral devices 185 include, in various examples of embodiments, one or more of a stand-alone DVR, a disk player, a stereo system, a lighting system, and other devices that provide a function based on the output of the system 100. In various embodiments, control signals are communicated between the system 100 and the display 165, speakers 175, or other peripheral devices 185 using signaling such as AV.Link, CEC, or other communications protocols that enable device-to-device control with or without user intervention. The output devices may be communicatively coupled to system 100 via dedicated connections through respective interfaces 160, 170, and 180. Alternatively, the output devices may be connected to system 100 using the communications channel 190 via the communications interface 150. The display 165 and speakers 175 may be integrated in a single unit with the other components of system 100 in an electronic device, for example, a television. In various embodiments, the display interface 160 includes a display driver, for example, a timing controller (T Con) chip.
one of skill in the art of display drivers could have or would have done is refer to other teachings of display drivers and thus make BORDES’ be as Zhang’s via explicit creative or even routine steps:
a) install Zhang’s fig. 6:40:44:”DISPLAY PANEL”: “DISPLAY DRIVER” into BORDES’ “Display Interface” of fig. 1:160.
Conclusion
The prior art “nearest to the subject matter defined in the claims” (MPEP 707.05) made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The following table lists several references that are relevant to the subject matter claimed and disclosed in this Application. The references are not relied on by the Examiner, but are provided to assist the Applicant in responding to this Office action.
Citation
Relevance
IDS cited Nijland (EP 3 764 346 A1): an X-reference: same assignee
Nijland teaches a re-grading2324 function CMB (i.e., a re-combing multiplication addition function):
Regarding the coding, the difference between HDR and SDR is not only a physical one (more different pixel luminances, to be displayed on larger dynamic range capability displays), but also a technical one of developing a different luma code allocation function (OETF), additional dynamic -per shot of images- changing metadata which specifies how to re-grade the various image object pixel luminances to obtain an image of a secondary dynamic range different from a initial image dynamic range, etc….
Fig. 4 elucidates how the display optimization (a.k.a. display adaptation) works, for any re-grading function shape (and situation; coding embodiment) that the content creator may have elected for a particular HDR scene image (e.g. an image in which the left part is relatively dark, so that it needs RELATIVE brightening in the NORMALIZED SDR representation for the darker area, so that somebody lurking in the shadows is half-visible in both the HDR image display and the SDR image display; whilst simultaneously having enough contrast for a guy in the mist in a brighter part of that scene and its successive images, which may lead to a double curve optimizing the contrast in two regions like the FL_50t1_2 curve shown in Fig. 4).
Looking at Fig. 4A, suppose the current image (or shot of successive images) is such that the (e.g. received HDR image) is optimally re-graded to a corresponding SDR image by the specific normalized luma mapping function FL_50t_1 (note that the reader skilled in video can understand how the teachings can be formulated both in normalized luminances and in normalized lumas, merely by changing the axis, and the corresponding shape of the curve).
PNG
media_image11.png
121
927
media_image11.png
Greyscale
as the closest to the claimed “re-grading” of claim 1.
Muijs et al. (US 2014/0002479 A1): same assignee
Muijs teaches “grading”2526 means “comprising the artistic improvement of all colors (/luminances), so that the image looks optimal… so typically a grader recolors.”:
[0004] Our below technical solutions are inspired by an object to improve all kinds of grading-, compression-, and HDR systems. As is known to the skilled person, grading has a commonly known meaning comprising the artistic improvement of all colors (/luminances), so that the image looks optimal. In practice camera capturing can hardly generate the exact look i.e. luminances for all objects in the scene, so typically a grader recolors local regions, making a face more27 bright e.g., or even applying more28 advanced special effects, like e.g.
as the closest to the claimed “re-grading” of claim 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DENNIS ROSARIO whose telephone number is (571)272-7397. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9AM-5PM 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, Henok Shiferaw can be reached at 571-272-4637. 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.
/DENNIS ROSARIO/ Examiner, Art Unit 2676
/MATTHEW C BELLA/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2667
1 MPEP 2131 Anticipation — Application of 35 U.S.C. 102 [R-08.2017], 2nd para, 2nd to last S:
The elements must be arranged as required by the claim, but this is not an ipsissimis verbis test, i.e., identity of terminology is not required. In re Bond, 910 F.2d 831, 15 USPQ2d 1566 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
2 BROADEST REASONABLE INTERPRETAION of “on” (i.e., change meaning of “on”) via applicant’s disclosure: pg. 28, ll. 19-21: “Also, the fact that for pragmatic reasons only a limited spectrum of examples has been described, doesn't mean that other variants cannot fall under the scope of the claims.”, wherein variants is defined: a person or thing that varies, wherein vary is defined: to change or alter, as in form, appearance, character, or substance, wherein form is defined: Grammar. a word, part of a word, or group of words forming a construction that recurs in various contexts in a language with relatively constant meaning. (Dictionary.com)
3 BROADEST REASONABLE INTERPRETAION of “on”: The claimed “on” is defined “so as to be attached to or unified with.” (Dictionary.com): Thus the claimed “ program” is still written/stored on paper and not ready to be put inside the non-transitory medium since the paper written “program” still needs to be Optical Character Recognition processed into a computer and then attached or unified into the non-transitory medium.
4 BROADEST REASONABLE INTERPRETAION of “on”: The claimed “on” is defined: in addition to. (Dictionary.com): thus claim 9 claims –A computer program stored (on paper) in addition to a non-transitory medium--.
5 MPEP 2106.03 II. ELIGIBILITY STEP 1: WHETHER A CLAIM IS TO A STATUTORY CATEGORY, 3rd para: A claim whose BRI covers both statutory and non-statutory embodiments embraces subject matter that is not eligible for patent protection and therefore is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Such claims fail the first step (Step 1: NO) and should be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101, for at least this reason. In such a case, it is a best practice for the examiner to point out the BRI and recommend an amendment, if possible, that would narrow the claim to those embodiments that fall within a statutory category.
6 program: Also called computer program. Digital Technology. a precise sequence of instructions enabling a computer to perform a task; a piece of software. (Dictionary.com)
7 MPEP 2131 Anticipation — Application of 35 U.S.C. 102 [R-08.2017], 2nd para, 2nd to last S:
The elements must be arranged as required by the claim, but this is not an ipsissimis verbis test, i.e., identity of terminology is not required. In re Bond, 910 F.2d 831, 15 USPQ2d 1566 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
8 Claim 1 may be a Jepson claim: the improvement is not apparent in claim 1 itself: MPEP 2129 III. JEPSON CLAIMS and 35 CFR 1.775 (e): equations [Eqs.3] and [Eqs.4] in applicant’s disclosure, page 18, appears to be the disclosed the improvement.
9 re-: a prefix, occurring originally in loanwords from Latin, used with the meaning “again” or “again and again” to indicate repetition, or with the meaning “back” or “backward” to indicate withdrawal or backward motion. (Dictionary.com)
10 grading: present participle of grade, wherein grade VERB (USED WITHOUT OBJECT) is defined: to pass by degrees from one color or shade to another; blend wherein blend is defined: to mix or intermingle smoothly and inseparably, wherein mix is defined: to combine, unite, or join, wherein or is defined: (used to connect words, phrases, or clauses representing alternatives: such as (1) mix or (2) mix smoothly or (3) mix inseparably).(Dictionary.com)
11 BROAD CLAIM LANGUAGE: a suffix of nouns formed from verbs, expressing the action of the verb or its result, product, material, etc. (the art of building; a new building; cotton wadding )m wherein etc. is defined: and others; and so forth; and so on (used to indicate that more of the same sort or class might have been mentioned, but for brevity have been omitted), wherein so is defined: likewise or correspondingly; also; too. (Dictionary.com)
12 comprise: to include or contain, wherein contain is defined: to be equal to. (Dictionary.com)
13 comprise: to include or contain, wherein contain is defined: to be equal to. (Dictionary.com)
14 BROAD CLAIM LANGUAGE: sensor: anything, such as a photoelectric cell, that receives a signal or stimulus and responds to it (Dictionary.com)
15 video: an informal name for television, wherein television is defined: the system or process of producing on a distant screen a series of transient visible images, usually with an accompanying sound signal. Electrical signals, converted from optical images by a camera tube, are transmitted by UHF or VHF radio waves or by cable and reconverted into optical images by means of a television tube inside a television set, wherein camera tube is defined: the part of a television camera that converts an optical image into an electrical signal See also image orthicon vidicon Plumbicon iconoscope, wherein television tube is defined: Also called: picture tube. Sometimes shortened to: tube. a cathode-ray tube designed for the reproduction of television pictures, wherein cathode-ray tube is defined: Electronics. a vacuum tube generating a focused beam of electrons that can be deflected by electric fields, magnetic fields, or both. The terminus of the beam is visible as a spot or line of luminescence caused by its impinging on a sensitized screen at one end of the tube. Cathode-ray tubes were formerly commonly used to study the shapes of electric waves, to reproduce images in television receivers, to display alphanumeric and graphical information on computer monitors, as an indicator in radar sets, etc. CRT, wherein sensitized is defined: Photography. to render (a film or the like) sensitive to light or other forms of radiant energy, wherein sensitive is defined: photog having a high sensitivity, wherein sensitivity is defined: photog the degree of response of an emulsion to light or other actinic radiation, esp to light of a particular colour, expressed in terms of its speed (Dictionary.com)
16 (italics) represent claim limitations already taught
17 (italics) represent claim limitations already taught
18 user interface: Digital Technology. the interface features through which users interact with the hardware and software of computers and other electronic devices. UI (Dictionary.com)
19 (italics) represent claim limitations already taught
20 ellipses (…) represent claim limitations already taught
21 (italics) represent claim limitations already taught
22 ellipses (…) represent claim limitations already taught
23 grade: to pass by degrees from one color or shade to another; blend. (Dictionary.com)
24 grade: to change or blend (something) gradually; merge (Dictionary.com)
25 grade: to pass by degrees from one color or shade to another; blend. (Dictionary.com)
26 grade: to change or blend (something) gradually; merge (Dictionary.com)
27 more: additional or further.
28 more: additional or further.
Prosecution Insights