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 .
The action is responsive to the following communication: an application filed on 09/13/2024 where:
Claims 1-20 are cancelled.
Claims 21-40 are currently pending.
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.
Claims 21-28 and 37-40, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iiyama (US 2021/0014377) in view of Cook et al. (US 2014/0002722, hereinafter Cook).
Regarding claim 21, Iiyama teaches: A document reader system configured to capture images of a document, the document reader system (see FIG. 1 is a perspective view showing an appearance of a reading device according to a first embodiment of the present disclosure) comprising:
a document reader (fig. 1, reader 20) having:
a transparent scan area configured to receive the document on a first side of the transparent scan area (see fig. 1, [0025], the reading window member 22),
a light source (fig. 4, LED 27a), positioned on a second side of the transparent scan area opposite the first side, configured to emit light towards the transparent scan area (see fig. 4, [0028]), and
an image sensor (fig. 4, item 26) positioned on the second side of the transparent scan area and configured to capture images of the document on the first side of the transparent scan area ([0030], The imaging device 26 images the surface to be read of the reading object 10 placed on the upper surface of the reading window member 22, via the reading window member 22.).
Iiyama does not explicitly teach: a processor configured to process a first image of the document captured while the light source provides a first illumination output and a second image of the document captured while the light source provides a second illumination output to generate a third image of the document having corrected ambient light effects.
However, Cook teaches: a processor configured to process a first image of the document captured while the light source provides a first illumination output (fig. 9, step 102, [0056]) and a second image of the document captured while the light source provides a second illumination (fig. 9, step 103, [0056]) output to generate a third image of the document having corrected ambient light effects ([0053]. However, in some circumstances, such as when a document reader is used in a booth or other open environment, it may be desirable to correct the image obtained by removing the intensity component attributable to ambient light. This set of ambient pixel data is then subtracted from each of the first and second sets of raw pixel data. This may be done at the same time as other calibration operations, beforehand or afterwards, but before the first or second sets of final image data are created.).
Therefore, the Applicant's claimed invention would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Iiyama to include a processor configured to process a first image of the document captured while the light source provides a first illumination output and a second image of the document captured while the light source provides a second illumination output to generate a third image of the document having corrected ambient light effects as taught by Cook. The motivation/suggestion would have been to further enhance/improve document reader system since doing so would allow for correcting/compensation of ambient light during reading of a document; thereby preventing the deterioration in image quality.
Regarding claim 22, Iiyama and Cook teach: The document reader system of claim 21, wherein ambient light is received at the image sensor through the transparent scan area through a portion of the transparent scan area not covered by the document (Cook, [0053], However, in some circumstances, such as when a document reader is used in a booth or other open environment. Ambient light would be picked up my image sensor in this case).
Regarding claim 23, Iiyama and Cook teach: The document reader system of claim 22, wherein the processor subtracts pixel values of the second image from corresponding pixel values of the first image to generate the third image (Cook, [0053], This set of ambient pixel data is then subtracted from each of the first and second sets of raw pixel data.).
Regarding claim 24, Iiyama and Cook teach: The document reader system of claim 21, wherein the first illumination output includes energizing light configured to energize security features of the document that emit RGB light in response to the energizing light (Cook, [0055, [0056], LEDS, RGB values and [0026], In a further step, an image showing a blue reflective covert security feature was obtained by selecting pixels with a high blue response to determine the single color reflection.).
Regarding claim 25, Iiyama and Cook teach: The document reader system of claim 24, wherein the second illumination output omits the energizing light (Cook, fig. 9, step 103, and [0056]).
Regarding claim 26, Iiyama and Cook teach: The document reader system of claim 25, wherein the energizing light includes IR light generated by the light source (Cook, [0026], infra-red light).
Regarding claim 27, Iiyama and Cook teach: The document reader system of claim 25, wherein the energizing light includes UV lighting generated by the light source. (Cook, [0026], ultraviolet light).
Regarding claim 28, Iiyama and Cook teach: The document reader system of claim 25, wherein the light source is activated to provide the first illumination output and deactivated to provide the second illumination output (Cook, fig. 9, [0056], At step 102, the bio-data page was illuminated using the first half-array of LEDs from a first direction to capture the first raw pixel data set. At step 103, the bio-data page was illuminated from a second direction, different to the first, using the second half-array of LEDs to capture the second raw pixel data set.).
Claim 37 is rejected for reasons similar to claim 21 above.
Claim 38 is rejected for reasons similar to claim 22 above.
Claim 39 is rejected for reasons similar to claim 23 above.
Claim 40 is rejected for reasons similar to claim 24 above.
Claims 29-32, 35 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iiyama (US 2021/0014377) in view of Cook et al. (US 2009/0168118, hereinafter Cook).
Regarding claim 29, Iiyama teaches: A document reader system configured to capture images of a document, the document reader system (see FIG. 1 is a perspective view showing an appearance of a reading device according to a first embodiment of the present disclosure) comprising:
a document reader (fig. 1, reader 20) having:
a transparent scan area configured to receive the document on a first side of the transparent scan area (see fig. 1, [0025], the reading window member 22),
a light source (fig. 4, LED 27a), positioned on a second side of the transparent scan area opposite the first side, configured to emit light towards the transparent scan area (see fig. 4, [0028]), and
an image sensor (fig. 4, item 26) positioned on the second side of the transparent scan area and configured to capture images of the document on the first side of the transparent scan area ([0030], The imaging device 26 images the surface to be read of the reading object 10 placed on the upper surface of the reading window member 22, via the reading window member 22.).
Iiyama does not explicitly teach: a transparent display configured to selectively block light from the first side of the transparent scan area from reaching the image sensor; and a processor configured to control the transparent display to selectively block the light.
However, Cook teaches: a transparent display configured to selectively block light from the first side of the transparent scan area from reaching the image sensor ([0039, 0040, 0045-0047], the LCD document glass is considered as the optical filter that is between the light source on the scan head and the document placement area. The LCD document glass also acts as a display. The display can very in light transmission in order to be in either a transparent state that completely transmits light and in a translucent state that blocks some of the light transmission); and a processor configured to control the transparent display to selectively block the light ([0045], For example, controller 18 may execute program instructions to operate LCD document glass 56 in the translucent state. [0040], As used herein, the term "transparent state" is an operating state that has the property of transmitting light without appreciable scattering, i.e., is clear. The term "translucent state" is an operating state that has the property of transmitting and diffusing light with appreciable light scattering such that the planar surface is darkened, i.e., is not clear).
Therefore, the Applicant's claimed invention would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Iiyama to include a transparent display configured to selectively block light from the first side of the transparent scan area from reaching the image sensor; and a processor configured to control the transparent display to selectively block the light as taught by Cook. The motivation/suggestion would have been to further enhance/improve document reader system since doing so would allow for blocking of ambient light during reading of a document; thereby preventing the deterioration in image quality.
Regarding claim 30, Iiyama and Cook teach: The document reader system of claim 29, wherein the processor is configured to:
identify a first region of the transparent scan area that contains the document (Cook, 47, the transparent state in a region under target document 58);
identify one or more second regions that do not contain the document (Cook, [0047], while operating LCD document glass 56 to be in a translucent (e.g., darkened) state in a region outside the boundary of target document 58); and
control the transparent display to block light from the first side of the transparent scan area within the one or more second regions from reaching the image sensor (Cook, 47, herein LCD document glass 56 is controlled to be clear in the region under target document 58, while operating LCD document glass 56 to be in a translucent (e.g., darkened) state in a region outside the boundary of target document 58)).
Regarding claim 31, Iiyama and Cook teach: The document reader system of claim 29, wherein the processor is configured to cause the transparent display to transition between a transparent state and an opaque state to block the light (Cook, [0047], while operating LCD document glass 56 to be in a translucent (e.g., darkened) state in a region outside the boundary of target document 58).
Regarding claim 32, Iiyama and Cook teach: The document reader system of claim 29, wherein the transparent display is a transparent light emitting diode display (Cook, Abstract LCD document glass. All LED screens are technically LCDs. An LCD panel generates the picture, while LED refers to the backlight used to illuminate it).
Regarding claim 35, Iiyama and Cook teach: The document reader system of claim 29, wherein the transparent display is integral with the transparent scan area (Cook, Abstract, ([0036, 0042, 0045], Abstract, LCD display, that spans the width of the scan area and is placed very close to the glass plate upon which rest the image to be scanned.).
Regarding claim 36, Iiyama and Cook teach: The document reader system of claim 29, wherein the document reader omits a hood over the transparent display (Cook, no hood over LCD see fig. 1).
Claim 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iiyama (US 2021/0014377) in view of Cook et al. (US 2009/0168118, hereinafter Cook) and further in view of Eidam et al. (US 11741517, hereinafter Eidam).
.
Regarding claim 33, Iiyama and Cook teach: The document reader system of claim 29.
Iiyama and Cook do not explicitly teach: wherein the transparent display is a transparent organic light emitting diode display.
However, Eidam teaches: wherein the transparent display is a transparent organic light emitting diode display (Col. 37, lines 35-40, OLED)
Therefore, the Applicant's claimed invention would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Iiyama and Cook to include wherein the transparent display is a transparent organic light emitting diode display as taught by Eidam. The motivation/suggestion would have been to further enhance/improve the document reader system since using OLED over LED so would allow for superior flexibility, thinner designs, and pixel-level light control designs because every single pixel makes its own light without needing a large background light.
Claim 34 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iiyama (US 2021/0014377) in view of Cook et al. (US 2009/0168118, hereinafter Cook) and further in view of Eidam et al. (US 11741517, hereinafter Eidam).
Regarding claim 34, Iiyama and Cook teach: The document reader system of claim 29.
Iiyama and Cook do not explicitly teach: wherein the transparent display is a transparent electroluminescent display.
However, Eidam teaches: wherein the transparent display is a transparent electroluminescent display (Col. 37, lines 35-40, TASEL).
Therefore, the Applicant's claimed invention would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Iiyama and Cook to include wherein the transparent display is a transparent electroluminescent display as taught by Eidam. The motivation/suggestion would have been to further enhance/improve the document reader system since using transparent electroluminescent display over LED so would allow for higher optical clarity, superior ruggedness, and a solid-state glass build that functions even if cracked.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW H LAM whose telephone number is (571)270-7969 and fax number is 571-270-8969. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-5PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Benny Tieu can be reached on 571-272-7490. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ANDREW H LAM/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2682
Prosecution Insights