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 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.
Claims 1 and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hotson et al. (US20230252638) hereafter Hotson in view of ISKEN et al. (US20220082508) hereafter ISKEN.
1. Regarding claim 1, Hotson discloses an image analysis system (figs 3, 4A-4D and 7, para 0023, 0055-0062 shows and discloses an image analysis system comprising at least one processor 306) comprising at least one processor, wherein the at least one processor is configured to:
acquire a target image showing one or more objects (figs 4A element 400, paras 0058-0059 is an input target image acquired by the one or more sensors showing one or more objects (figs 4B-4E shows the one or more objects), examiner notes that due to the recital of one or more only one is required to be met by the claim, also the specifics of one or more objects is also not required to be met);
input the target image to an instance segmentation model executing instance segmentation to set at least one instance mask corresponding to at least one of the one or more objects (fig 4A, para 0060 shows and discloses input the target image 400 to an instance segmentation model 410(c) to set at least one segmentation mask 426 corresponding to at least one of the one or more objects (para 0060, fig 4D shows the instance segmentation masks 426(a)-426(c) corresponding to each of the countable objects meeting the claim limitations);
input the target image to a semantic segmentation model executing semantic segmentation to set a semantic mask indicating (figs 4A-4B, para 0059 shows and discloses input the target image 400 to a semantic segmentation model 410(a) executing semantic segmentation to set a semantic mask 422 indicating a unique masks for As shown in FIG. 4B, the semantic mask 422 includes a unique mask (422(a), 422(b), 422(c), 422(d), and 422(e)) corresponding to: the road, the sky, the buildings, the sidewalk, and the fence, respectively, without distinction between different amorphous regions or countable objects of the same type);
identify, for each of the at least one object, (figs 4A, 4E and paras 0061-0062 identify, for each of the at least one object a panoptic mask 428 which indicates (identifies) the countable objects are behind other transparent objects (i.e for each of the at least one object) based on the at least one instance mask 426 and the semantic mask 422 meeting the above claim limitations). Hotson discloses the objects in the image and the masks indicating the objects as seen in figs 4A-4E. Hotson however is silent and fails to disclose one or more objects each of which has a base material and a coating region on the base material, mask indicating a contour and a coating region of an object set consisting of the at least one object and identify the contour and the coating region of the object.
ISKEN discloses one or more objects each of which has a base material and a coating region on the base material, mask indicating a contour and a coating region of an object set consisting of the at least one object and identify the contour and the coating region of the object (paras 0001- 0030, 0059-0082, 0166-0168 and 0190 discloses a Mask R-CNN accurately identifying coating surface comprising these defects based on the computed contours or segmented edges meeting the limitations of one or more objects each of which has a base material and a coating region on the base material, mask indicating a contour and a coating region of an object set consisting of the at least one object and identify the contour and the coating region of the object). Before the effective filing date of the invention was made, Hotson and ISKEN are combinable because they are from the same filed of endeavor are analogous art of image processing. The suggestion/motivation would be an accurate and faster (reduced computational processing) at paras 0082 and 0090. Therefore, it would be obvious and within one of ordinary skill in the art to have recognized the advantages of ISKEN in the system/method of Hotson to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1.
2. Regarding claim 7, Hotson and ISKEN discloses the image analysis system according to claim 1. ISKEN discloses further wherein the object is a particulate material (paras 0002, 0016, 0166-0168, 0190 discloses wherein the object is a particulate material).
3. Regarding claim 8, Hotson and ISKEN disclose the image analysis system according to claim 7. ISKEN disclose further wherein the base material is a core particle, and wherein the coating region is a set of a plurality of fine particles (paras 0001-0030, 0166-0168 and 0190 discloses wherein the base material is a core particle, and wherein the coating region is a set of a plurality of fine particles (coating surfaces with fine and coarse materials as disclosed in para 0030), examiner notes that the specifics of a core particle and plurality of fine particles are not required by the current claim).
4. Claim 9 is a corresponding method claim of claim 1. See the corresponding explanation of claim 1.
5. Claim 10 is a corresponding non-transitory computer-readable storage medium claim of claim 1. See the explanation of claim 1. Hotson discloses in para 0023 and fig 3 non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing instructions to perform the steps as recited in claim 10.
Examiner's Note: Examiner has cited figures, and paragraphs in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested for the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. Examiner has also cited references in PTO892 but not relied on, which are relevant and pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure, and may also be reading (anticipatory/obvious) on the claims and claimed limitations. Applicant is advised to consider the references in preparing the response/amendments in-order to expedite the prosecution.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAYESH PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-1227. The examiner can normally be reached IFW Mon-FRI.
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, Andrew Bee can be reached at 571-270-5183. 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.
/JAYESH A PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2677
/JAYESH PATEL/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2677
Prosecution Insights