Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/16/2024, 09/18/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(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, 6-12, 14, 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ding et. al. (Chinese Patent CN112287958A).
Regarding claim 1, Ding et. al. discloses a color classification method (Ding et. al. abstract), comprising: determining, according to a first color numerical value of a color to be classified under a first color space, an initial category to which the color to be classified belongs (Ding et. al. paragraph [0066]: the query color corresponds to the color to be classified; [0068], [0087], Fig.4A: generating one or more alternative query colors using a second color model. The second color model corresponds to the first color space, and the set of alternative query colors corresponds to the initial category), wherein the first color space comprises a hue dimension (Ding et. al. [0088], [0094]: the HSL color value); taking at least one sub-color category under the initial category as at least one candidate category (Ding et. al. [0068], [0094]: alternative query colors; figures 3A and 4B); and determining a target category of the color to be classified from the at least one candidate category according to a similarity of a second color numerical value of the color to be classified in a second color space (Ding et. al. [0082]-[0083]: a color space 310; [0094], the first color model corresponds to the second color space. For example, a color classification system 106 may convert the alternative color value from the HSL color model back to the LAB color model) with a third color numerical value of each of the at least one candidate category in the second color space (Ding et. al. [0075], [0098]-[0099]; Figure 4C: a query color 312, an alternative query color 412).
Regarding claim 9, which is a color classification apparatus, comprising: a first classification module, corresponding to the method of claim 1, in which the rejection analysis is incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 10, which is an electronic device, comprising: at least one processor; a storage device configured to store at least one program, the at least one program, when executed by the at least one processor, causes the at least one processor to implement the color classification method of claim 1, in which the rejection analysis is incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 11, which is a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing computer-executable instructions, wherein the computer-executable instructions, when executed by a computer processor, are used to execute a color classification method, which corresponds to the method of claim 1, which the rejection analysis is incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 2, 12, and 14 Ding et. al. discloses the method of claim 1, and the color classification apparatus of claim 9, wherein the color classification apparatus further comprises a conversion module, and the conversion module configured to, and the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11, before the determining, according to a first color numerical value of a color to be classified under a first color space, an initial category to which the color to be classified belongs, further comprising: obtaining color numerical value of the color to be classified, and determining a third color space of an obtained color numerical value; and converting the obtained color numerical value into the first color space in a case where the third color space does not belong to the first color space (Ding et. al. [0088], [0095]: the LAB color value corresponds to the color value of the third color space).
Regarding claim 6 and claim 18, Ding et. al. discloses the method according to claim 1, and the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium according to claim 11, wherein in a case that the second color space comprises at least two (Ding et. al. paragraphs [0027], [0115-0116] of specification: a method of classifying colors of objects in digital images, and specifically discloses that color classification system 106 may generate color matching scores based on one or more metrics corresponding to shortest distance 524, average distance 526, and/or query color distance 528)) determining the target category of the color to be classified comprises: determining a first similarity of the second color numerical value to each third color numerical value under a same second color space; grouping the first similarity by a corresponding at least one candidate category, and determining a second similarity of the color to be classified and a candidate category corresponding to each group according to first similarities within the each group after grouping; and determining the target category of the color to be classified from the at least one candidate category according to the second similarity (Ding et. al. paragraphs [0027], [0115-0116] of specification: In additional embodiments, color classification system 106 may further weight each metric when calculating a color matching score. For example, the color classification system 106 may weigh the query color distance 528 with a greater weight (e.g. becoming more influential) than other metrics. Based on the color matching scores, the color classification system 106 can determine whether the color of the detected query object 502 (or detected instances of the query object) generally matches the query color (segments 115-116). The color classification system may classify the object as a color based on the color matching score (27 segments). It can be seen that it discloses weighting against multiple metrics to obtain the final color matching score, all for synthesizing metrics of multiple color spaces to more accurately classify colors).
Regarding claim 7 and 19, Ding et. al. discloses the method of claim 6, and the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 18, wherein the determining a second similarity of the color to be classified and a candidate category corresponding to each group according to first similarities within the each group after grouping comprises: determining weights of the first similarities within the each group according to a second color space to which the first similarities within the each group correspond; and weighting the first similarities within the each group according to the weights, resulting in the second similarity of the color to be classified and a candidate category corresponding to the each group (Ding et. al. paragraphs [0027], [0115-0116] of specification).
Regarding claim 8 and 20, Ding et. al. discloses the method of claim 1, and the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11, wherein the second color space comprises at least one of a red-green-blue color space, a hue-saturation-value color space, a hue-saturation- lightness color space, and a color model (Lab) color space (Ding et. al. [0047], [0088], [0094]: LAB, an example of a color model is the Red, Green, and Blue (“RGB”) color model and the other color model is CIELAB (or simply “LAB”). Color models include HSL (hue, saturation, lightness) models, HSV( hue, saturation, value) models.).
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) 3-5, 13, 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ding et. al. (Chinese Patent CN 112287958 A) in view of Saskia (European Patent EP 2944931-B1).
Regarding claim 3, 13, and 15, Ding et. al. discloses the method of claim 1, the color classification apparatus of claim 9, and the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11. However, Ding et. al. fails to disclose wherein the determining, according to a first color numerical value of a color to be classified under a first color space, an initial category to which the color to be classified belongs comprises: determining, from a preset numerical value range corresponding to each dimension of at least one dimension of the first color space, a target numerical value range to which a dimension numerical value of the each dimension of the first color numerical value belongs; and determining the initial category to which the color to be classified belongs according to the target numerical value range to which the dimension numerical value of the each dimension of the first color numerical value belongs.
Saskia teaches wherein the determining, according to a first color numerical value of a color to be classified under a first color space, an initial category to which the color to be classified belongs comprises: determining, from a preset numerical value range corresponding to each dimension of at least one dimension of the first color space, a target numerical value range to which a dimension numerical value of the each dimension of the first color numerical value belongs; and determining the initial category to which the color to be classified belongs according to the target numerical value range to which the dimension numerical value of the each dimension of the first color numerical value belongs (Saskia [0008]-[0010] of the specification discloses that all light sources from a basic quantity fall in an intermediate level, the light source, in terms of its emitted light, corresponds to the first reference color coordinate (with the aforementioned tolerance) or its spacing from the first reference color coordinate, in particular its color coordinate spacing being below a limit value and/or tolerance value (corresponding to a preset range of values for each dimension) that can be given beforehand. Furthermore, to facilitate the determination of the magnitude of the values, normalization of Euclidean distances is a conventional treatment). This is important to the claimed invention because this quantifies how the colors are classified according to a target numerical value range and dimensions. Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Ding et. al. and Saskia so that this feature is included in the solution to classifying colors.
Regarding claim 4 and 16, Ding et. al. discloses the method of claim 1, and the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11. However, Ding et. al. fails to disclose wherein determining the similarity comprises: determining the similarity of the second color numerical value to a third color numerical value of each of the at least one candidate category in the second color space according to a Euclidean distance between the second color numerical value and the third color numerical value of each of the at least one candidate category in the second color space.
Saskia teaches wherein determining the similarity comprises: determining the similarity of the second color numerical value to a third color numerical value of each of the at least one candidate category in the second color space according to a Euclidean distance between the second color numerical value and the third color numerical value of each of the at least one candidate category in the second color space (Saskia [0008]-[0010] of the specification). Similarly, this is important to the claimed invention because this quantifies how the colors are classified according to a target numerical value range and dimensions. Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Ding et. al. and Saskia so that this feature is included in the solution to classifying colors.
Regarding claim 5 and 17, Ding et. al. discloses the method of claim 4, and the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 16. However, Ding et. al. fails to disclose wherein the determining the similarity of the second color numerical value to a third color numerical value of each of the at least one candidate category in the second color space according to an Euclidean distance between the second color numerical value and the third color numerical value of each of the at least one candidate category in the second color space comprises: normalizing the Euclidean distance between the second color numerical value and the third color numerical value of each of the at least one candidate category under the second color space, and determining the similarity of the second color numerical value to the third color numerical value of each of the at least one candidate category under the second color space according to a normalization result.
Saskia teaches wherein the determining the similarity of the second color numerical value to a third color numerical value of each of the at least one candidate category in the second color space according to an Euclidean distance between the second color numerical value and the third color numerical value of each of the at least one candidate category in the second color space comprises: normalizing the Euclidean distance between the second color numerical value and the third color numerical value of each of the at least one candidate category under the second color space, and determining the similarity of the second color numerical value to the third color numerical value of each of the at least one candidate category under the second color space according to a normalization result (Saskia [0008]-[0010] of the specification).
Similarly, this is important to the claimed invention because this quantifies how the colors are classified according to a target numerical value range and dimensions. Thus, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Ding et. al. and Saskia so that this feature is included in the solution to classifying colors.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JESSICA YIFANG LIN whose telephone number is (571)272-6435. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00am-6:15pm, with optional day off.
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, Vu Le can be reached at 571-272-7332. 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.
/JESSICA YIFANG LIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2668 May 29, 2026
/VU LE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2668
Prosecution Insights