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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
a motion state determining module (interpreted to be a processor see paragraph 236 and the associated function (see paragraph 103-117))
an interference pixel determining module (interpreted to be a processor see paragraph 236 and the associated function (see for example paragraph 138))
an image correcting module (interpreted to be a processor see paragraph 236 and the associated function (see for example paragraph 175-193))
in claim 15.
a neighboring difference determining module (interpreted to be a processor see paragraph 236 and the associated function (see for example paragraph 119))
a difference determining sub-module, (interpreted to be a processor see paragraph 236 and the associated function (see for example paragraph 162-166)
a pixel determining sub-module (interpreted to be a processor see paragraph 236 and the associated function (see for example paragraph 162-166)
a correction parameter determining sub-module (interpreted to be a processor see paragraph 236 and the associated function (see for example paragraph 175-193)
a preliminarily correcting module (interpreted to be a processor see paragraph 236 and the associated function (see for example paragraph 194-203)
in claim 16
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 11 12, and 16 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.
Re claim 11 The claim recites “calculating a range and a sum for each type of the angular velocity” and “based on the range and the sum.” The examiner notes that in the first element multiple ranges and sums are calculated for each type of angular velocity however in the second element “the sum” and “the range” are referred too. It is unclear which sum or range is being referred too.
Claim 12 depends from claim 11 and retains similar issues “the sum” and “the range” are referred too. It is unclear which sum or range is being referred too.
Re claim 16 The claim recites “calculating a range and a sum for each type of the angular velocity” and “based on the range and the sum.” The examiner notes that in the first element multiple ranges and sums are calculated for each type of angular velocity however in the second element “the sum” and “the range” are referred too. It is unclear which sum or range is being referred too. The claim further contains more reference to “the range” and “the sum” which are further unclear.
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, 2, 13, 15 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kostrzewa US 20170374305 A1.
Re claim 1 Kostrzewa discloses
A method for correcting a thermal imaging image (see paragraph 31), which comprises:
determining a motion state of a thermal imaging device corresponding to a thermal image to be corrected (see paragraph 63 “For example, noise reduction block 690 may determine the presence of motion in captured images on a per-pixel basis based on a previous-to-current frame neighborhood difference (e.g., provided by difference block 606) being greater than a programmable motion threshold. Noise reduction block 690 may provide a motion detection flag to spatial detection block 620 (illustrated in FIG. 6) for the currently processed center pixel 350. In some embodiments, the center pixel 350 anomaly score (further discussed herein) may be updated by spatial detection score 620 only when motion has been detected” note that whether or not motion exists in the image is determined);
determining a noise interference pixel from the thermal image to be corrected by using a target screening condition corresponding to the motion state (see paragraph 63 “Noise reduction block 690 may provide a motion detection flag to spatial detection block 620 (illustrated in FIG. 6) for the currently processed center pixel 350. In some embodiments, the center pixel 350 anomaly score (further discussed herein) may be updated by spatial detection score 620 only when motion has been detected.”);
wherein target screening conditions corresponding to different motion states are different (see paragraph 63 “Noise reduction block 690 may provide a motion detection flag to spatial detection block 620 (illustrated in FIG. 6) for the currently processed center pixel 350. In some embodiments, the center pixel 350 anomaly score (further discussed herein) may be updated by spatial detection score 620 only when motion has been detected.” Note that whether or not the spatial detection score is used is based on the motion state.)
performing correction on the thermal image to be corrected based on the noise interference pixel. (See paragraph 60 “In this regard, spatial detection block 620 determines an anomaly score for each pixel of the current image frame based on linearity measurements determined from estimated and actual pixel values. These anomaly scores are stored in frame buffer 650 are used by spatial detection block 620 to detect spatial anomalous pixels when processing successive image frames. If a spatially anomalous pixel is detected, then it is identified (e.g., as a dead pixel) in frame buffer 640 for subsequent replacement or other processing” note that anomalous pixels may be replaced i.e. corrected).
Re claim 2 Kostrzewa discloses wherein the method further comprises: determining a neighboring difference of each pixel in the thermal image to be corrected relative to a neighboring pixel of the pixel (see paragraph 63 also see paragraph 84-87 note that differences between neighboring pixels are used to determine a linearity ); wherein, constraints for neighboring difference of the noise interference pixel relative to a neighboring pixel of the noise interference pixel are different in the target screening conditions corresponding to the different motion states (see paragraph 63 “Noise reduction block 690 may provide a motion detection flag to spatial detection block 620 (illustrated in FIG. 6) for the currently processed center pixel 350. In some embodiments, the center pixel 350 anomaly score (further discussed herein) may be updated by spatial detection score 620 only when motion has been detected.” Note that whether or not the spatial detection score is used is based on the motion state.).
Re claim 13 Kostrzewa discloses wherein the thermal image to be corrected is a target thermal image to be processed (see paragraph 31 note that the processed image may be a thermal image), or the thermal image to be corrected is a preliminarily corrected thermal image obtained by performing preliminary correction on the target thermal image
Re claim 15 Kostrzewa discloses
a motion state determining module (see paragraph 104), configured to determine a motion state of a thermal imaging device corresponding to a thermal image to be corrected ( see paragraph 63 “For example, noise reduction block 690 may determine the presence of motion in captured images on a per-pixel basis based on a previous-to-current frame neighborhood difference (e.g., provided by difference block 606) being greater than a programmable motion threshold. Noise reduction block 690 may provide a motion detection flag to spatial detection block 620 (illustrated in FIG. 6) for the currently processed center pixel 350. In some embodiments, the center pixel 350 anomaly score (further discussed herein) may be updated by spatial detection score 620 only when motion has been detected” note that whether or not motion exists in the image is determined);
an interference pixel determining module (see paragraph 104), configured to determine a noise interference pixel from the thermal image to be corrected by using a target screening condition corresponding to the motion state (see paragraph 63 “Noise reduction block 690 may provide a motion detection flag to spatial detection block 620 (illustrated in FIG. 6) for the currently processed center pixel 350. In some embodiments, the center pixel 350 anomaly score (further discussed herein) may be updated by spatial detection score 620 only when motion has been detected.”);
wherein target screening conditions corresponding to different motion states are different (see paragraph 63 “Noise reduction block 690 may provide a motion detection flag to spatial detection block 620 (illustrated in FIG. 6) for the currently processed center pixel 350. In some embodiments, the center pixel 350 anomaly score (further discussed herein) may be updated by spatial detection score 620 only when motion has been detected.” Note that whether or not the spatial detection score is used is based on the motion state.)
an image correcting module (see paragraph 104), configured to perform correction on the thermal image to be corrected based on the noise interference pixel. (See paragraph 60 “In this regard, spatial detection block 620 determines an anomaly score for each pixel of the current image frame based on linearity measurements determined from estimated and actual pixel values. These anomaly scores are stored in frame buffer 650 are used by spatial detection block 620 to detect spatial anomalous pixels when processing successive image frames. If a spatially anomalous pixel is detected, then it is identified (e.g., as a dead pixel) in frame buffer 640 for subsequent replacement or other processing” note that anomalous pixels may be replaced i.e. corrected)
Re claim 18 Kostrzewa discloses A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, which stores a computer program therein, which when executed by a processor, implements the method (see paragraph 103 and 104 note that the invention may be implemented with computer code on a non-transitory computer readable medium) steps according to claim 1 (See rejection to claim 1 )
Claim(s) 1 13 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Williams US 2019/0130535.
Re claim 1 Williams discloses A method for correcting a thermal imaging image, which comprises:
determining a motion state of a thermal imaging device (see paragraph 46 note that the device generates a thermal image) corresponding to a thermal image to be corrected (see paragraph 75 “Using blurred data from the current and at least one previous frame, motion detector 205 detects if there is frame to frame image motion.” Note that motion is detected);
determining a noise interference pixel from the thermal image to be corrected by using a target screening condition corresponding to the motion state; wherein target screening conditions corresponding to different motion states are different (see paragraph 82 “Referring now to FIGS. 11 and 12, an exemplary decay element 206 and an exemplary update FPN element 207 will be described. Depending on whether or not motion is detected, different scenarios are possible as shown in example decay element 206 and example update FPN element 207. If motion is true, than the correction factors for non-excluded pixels, FPNX.sub.x,y(t) may be updated by adding a factor depending on current frame blurred and non-blurred pixel data, P.sub.x,y(t) and K.sub.x,y(t), to the previous correction term, FPN.sub.x,y(t−1). A scaling factor S (as shown in FIG. 7) has been used that is less than 1, and specifically 0.8 has been used. It may also be desirable to perform an optional offset correction for FPNX.sub.x,y. An example offset correction is shown in step 2071 of FIG. 7, where the mean of all FPN terms from non-excluded pixels is subtracted from the FPN term. For excluded pixels as shown in FIG. 9, the current correction factor is set equal to the value derived from the previous frame. For the first frame for which the FPN filter is applied, e.g., t.sub.0, FPN.sub.x,y(t.sub.0) is set to zero. When motion is not detected, the correction factor FPNX.sub.x,y for both excluded and non-excluded pixels is decayed, as shown in example decay element 206 by multiplying the correction terms by a number less than 1. The number has been chosen to only be slightly less than 1 in some implementations, where a factor D of 1/16383 has been used for slow decay, but faster decay may be desirable in some circumstances as well.” Note that motion condition is applied to determine the FPN correction terms based on whether there is motion or there is not motion);
performing correction on the thermal image to be corrected based on the noise interference pixel (see paragraph 83 note that one the FPM term is determined is applied to correct the image).
Re claim 13 Wilson discloses wherein the thermal image to be corrected is a target thermal image to be processed, or the thermal image to be corrected is a preliminarily corrected thermal image obtained by performing preliminary correction on the target thermal image (see paragraph 74 “the filter may act in a feed forward fashion, in that the FPN filter correction FPNX.sub.x,y from the previous frame is applied to P.sub.x,y sig to create FPN corrected pixel set P.sub.x,y. Thus FPN filter 200 acts on already filtered data,” note that the filter acts on already filtered i.e. preliminarily filtered data from the previous frame.).
Re claim 14 Wilson discloses wherein the method further comprises: acquiring an accumulating correction parameter obtained by accumulating a correction parameter corresponding to each of previous thermal images of the target thermal image (see paragraph 82 note that each frame a correction parameter is created by adding [accumulating] the correction parameter for the current frame from the previous frame see paragraph 75 note that this correction parameter is fed into the next frame to be used for correction ); performing the preliminary correction on the target thermal image based on the (see paragraph 74 and 75 “the filter may act in a feed forward fashion, in that the FPN filter correction FPNX.sub.x,y from the previous frame is applied to P.sub.x,y sig to create FPN corrected pixel set P.sub.x,y. Thus FPN filter 200 acts on already filtered data,” note that the filter acts on already filtered i.e. preliminarily filtered data using correction data FPN from the previous frame, see also figure 2).
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) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kostrzewa US 20170374305 A1 in view of Heitz III US 20210400167 A1.
Re claim 17 Kostrzewa discloses An electronic device, which comprises a processor, and a computer readable medium; which is configured to store a computer program; the processor is configured to implement (see paragraph 103 and 104 note that the invention may be implemented with computer code on a non-transitory computer readable medium) the method steps according to claim 1 (see rejection to claim 1)
Kostrzewa does not expressly disclose An electronic device, which comprises a processor, a communication interface, a memory and a communication bus, wherein the processor, the communication interface and the memory communicate with each other through the communication bus. Heitz discloses An electronic device, which comprises a processor, a communication interface, a memory and a communication bus, wherein the processor, the communication interface and the memory communicate with each other through the communication bus( see paragraph 88 “In some implementations, the electronic device 204 (e.g., any devices of a home environment 100, FIG. 1) includes one or more processor(s) (e.g., CPUs, ASICs, FPGAs, microprocessors, and the like) 402, one or more communication interfaces 404, user interface(s) 410, image sensor(s) 418, illuminator(s) 420, sensor(s) 422, memory 426, and one or more communication buses 408 for interconnecting these components (sometimes called a chipset)”. One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily implemented method of Kostrzewa with the device of Heitz and the results would be similar (merely implementing the same function on a slightly different device) and therefore predictable. The elements of both reference before the same function together as the do separately as in the combination the method is merely implemented on a computing system with slightly different hardware. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Heitz and Kostrzewa.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3-10 are 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.
Re claim 3 Kostrzewa disclose all the elements of claim 2 but does not expressly disclose the combination of “wherein the motion states comprise at least two of following motion states: a high-speed motion state, a low-speed motion state, and a static state; the target screening condition comprises that: if a grayscale of a pixel in the thermal image to be corrected and a grayscale of a pixel at a corresponding position in a reference frame thermal image indicate different targets, and a difference value between a neighboring difference of the pixel in the thermal image to be corrected and a neighboring difference of the pixel at the corresponding position in the reference frame thermal image is less than a preset difference value threshold, the pixel at a corresponding position in the thermal image to be corrected is determined as the noise interference pixel; the constraints for the neighboring difference of the noise interference pixel relative to the neighboring pixel of the noise interference pixel being different in the target screening conditions corresponding to the different motion states, comprises: a preset difference value threshold corresponding to the high-speed motion state is greater than a preset difference value threshold corresponding to the low-speed motion state, and/or the preset difference value threshold corresponding to the low-speed motion state is greater than a preset difference value threshold corresponding to the static state”
Claims 4-10 depend from claim 3
Claim11 12, and 16 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.
Re claim 11 Kostrzewa further discloses determining motion but does not expressly disclose , wherein determining the motion state of the thermal imaging device corresponding to the thermal image to be corrected comprises: acquiring multiple groups of angular velocities of the thermal imaging device corresponding to the thermal image to be corrected, wherein each group of angular velocities comprises at least one of a swing angular velocity, a tilt angular velocity, and a flip angular velocity; calculating a range and a sum for each type of the angular velocity; determining whether the motion state of the thermal imaging device is a high-speed motion state, a low-speed motion state or a static state based on the range and the sum.
Claim 12 depends from claim 11.
Claim 16 discloses similar subject matter to claim 3 and additional elements.
Cited Art
The following is a listing of art considered relevant but not cited in a rejection above.
Högasten US 20150332441 A1 discloses “Techniques are disclosed for systems and methods using small form factor infrared imaging devices to image scenes in proximity to a vehicle. An imaging system may include one or more infrared imaging devices, a processor, a memory, a display, a communication module, and modules to interface with a user, sensors, and/or a vehicle. Infrared imaging devices may be positioned in proximity to, mounted on, installed in, or otherwise fixed relative to a vehicle. Infrared imaging devices may be configured to capture infrared images of scenes in proximity to a vehicle. Various infrared image analytics and processing may be performed on captured infrared images to correct and/or calibrate the infrared images. Monitoring information, notifications, and/or control signals may be generated based on the corrected infrared images and then presented to a user and/or a monitoring and notification system, and/or used to control aspects of the vehicle.” (see abstract)
Choi US 20190244328 A1 discloses Provided are an apparatus and method of reducing noise of an image. The apparatus for reducing noise of an image includes: a motion detector configured to detect a motion from a current image; a weight setting unit configured to set a weight of the current image based on the motion and a weight of a previous image; and a noise reduction unit configured to apply the weight of the current image to the current image to reduce temporal noise of the current image. (see abstract)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN T MOTSINGER whose telephone number is (571)270-1237. The examiner can normally be reached 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, Chineyere Wills-Burns can be reached at (571) 272-9752. 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.
/SEAN T MOTSINGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2673
Prosecution Insights