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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of species II corresponding to claims 1 and 5-19 in the reply filed on 1/26/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 2-4 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 1/26/2026.
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 9/27/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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, 8-10, 12-13 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsukagoshi US 2017/0094148 in view of Kunishige et al. US 2019/0289190.
Re claim 1, Tsukagoshi discloses an image capture apparatus (digital camera) comprising: an imaging unit (image sensor 6E) that captures an image of a subject; and at least, one processor and/or circuit (control section 1) (figure 1; paragraphs 15-20) configured to function as each of the following units: a detection unit that executes flicker detection processing on the image (flicker detection is performed) (figure 4; paragraphs 45-51); and a control unit (display 5) that displays live view image data (paragraph 18), wherein the control unit presents information when the number of times the flicker detection processing has been executed are greater than a predetermined number of times due to a case where the flicker detection processing cannot obtain the predetermined result (flicker detection processing is executed on captured images and if a brightness difference between frames exceeds a threshold flicker detection processing is repeated and when the number of redetection attempts reaches 10 flicker detection fails)(figure 4; paragraphs 45-51). However, although the Tsukagoshi reference discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 above, it fails to specifically disclose that the control unit presents information regarding an image capture method of a subject so that the flicker detection processing obtains a predetermined result.
Kunishige discloses that it is well known in the imaging art for an imaging device to present information regarding an image captured method such as flicker detection on a display 221 to provide user feedback status information (figure 7D; paragraph 101). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to have been motivated to include the teaching of presenting status/feedback information regarding a flicker detection method on a display as disclosed by the Kunishige reference in the image capture apparatus disclosed by the Tsukagoshi reference. Doing so would provide a means for providing a camera user with feedback regarding image processing operations such as flicker detection so that a user can easily identify the status of image processing operations.
Re claim 8, Kunishige further discloses that the control unit cancels the presentation of the information when an image capture method of the subject has been changed in accordance with the presented information (when a flicker warning is displayed and a user adjusts shutter speed, the process proceeds to step S3 and the flicker warning is canceled) (figures 7C, 7D; paragraph 101).
Re claim 9, Kunishige further discloses that when an image capture method of the subject has been changed in accordance with the presented information, the control unit presents information to induce a user to increase an image capturing range of the subject (a flicker warning is displayed with a live view image so that a user can change a shutter speed to avoid capturing images with lateral stripes) (figure 7D; paragraph 101).
Re claim 10, Kunishige further discloses that the predetermined result is an image capturing parameter of the image capture apparatus to reduce stripes that appear in the image due to a flicker detected by the flicker detection processing, and the information is a solution for a cases where the flicker detection processing cannot obtain the image capturing parameters (a flicker warning is displayed with a live view image so that a user can change a shutter speed to avoid capturing images with lateral stripes) (figure 7D; paragraph 101).
Re claim 12, Kunishige further discloses that the information is displayed as a message on a display of the image capture apparatus (figure 7D; paragraph 101).
Re claim 13, Kunishige further discloses that the information is displayed on an external apparatus connected to the image capture apparatus so as to be able to communicate therewith (display 221 may be a TV monitor connected to camera body 200) (figure 2; paragraph 45).
Re claim 18, claim 18 discloses a method of controlling an image capture apparatus which includes an imaging unit that captures an image of a subject and a detection unit that executes flicker detection processing on the image and includes limitations nearly identical to the limitations contained in the claimed image capture apparatus of claim 1 above. Therefore, the rejection above regarding claim 1 is also applicable to claim 18.
Re claim 19, claim 19 discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program for causing a computer to function as an image capture apparatus and includes limitations nearly identical to the limitations contained in the claimed image capture apparatus of claim 1 above. Therefore, the rejection above regarding claim 1 is also applicable to claim 19.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsukagoshi US 2017/0094148 in view of Kunishige et al. US 2019/0289190 and further in view of Sakurabu et al. US 2021/0203831.
Re claim 17, the combination of the Tsukagoshi and Kunishige references discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 above. However, although the combination discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 above, it fails to specifically disclose that the subject is a display with a light source that repeatedly blinks at a predetermined period.
Sakurabu discloses that it is well known in the imaging art for an image capturing apparatus to perform flicker reduction processing to reduce flicker caused by a flickering light source such as an LED display that blinks at a predetermined period)(paragraph 144). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filing date to have been motivated to include the teaching of performing flicker reduction processing to reduce flickering caused by blinking light associated with a display device as disclosed by the Sakurabu reference in the image capture apparatus disclosed by the Tsukagoshi and Kunishige references. Doing so would provide a means for performing flicker detection and correction processing on images in order to reduce flicker effects caused by lighting associated with a display device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-7, 11 and 14-16 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Re claims 5-7, the prior art fails to teach or suggest an image capture apparatus having the specific configurations disclosed in claims 5-7, wherein the image capturing apparatus comprises: an image capture apparatus comprising: an imaging unit that captures an image of a subject; and at least, one processor and/or circuit configured to function as each of the following units: a detection unit that executes flicker detection processing on the image; and a control unit that presents information regarding an image capture method of a subject SO that the flicker detection processing obtain a predetermined result, wherein the control unit presents information when the number of times the flicker detection processing has been executed are greater than a predetermined number of times due to a case where the flicker detection processing cannot obtain the predetermined result, wherein the difference between the angle of the image capture apparatus to the subject is the Nth flicker detection processing (N is a natural number greater than or equal to 2) and the angle of the image capture apparatus to the subject in the N-1th flicker detection processing has a predetermined relationship, and when the number of times the flicker detection processing has been executed are greater than or equal to the predetermined number of times, the information is presented. The prior art fails to specifically disclose an image capture apparatus including flicker detection processing arranged in the exact configuration disclosed in the claims and specification.
Re claim 11, the prior art fails to teach or suggest an image capture apparatus having the specific configurations disclosed in claims 11, wherein the image capturing apparatus comprises: an image capture apparatus comprising: an imaging unit that captures an image of a subject; and at least, one processor and/or circuit configured to function as each of the following units: a detection unit that executes flicker detection processing on the image; and a control unit that presents information regarding an image capture method of a subject SO that the flicker detection processing obtain a predetermined result, wherein the control unit presents information when the number of times the flicker detection processing has been executed are greater than a predetermined number of times due to a case where the flicker detection processing cannot obtain the predetermined result, wherein the predetermined result is an image capturing parameter of the image capture apparatus to reduce stripes that appear in the image due to a flicker detected by the flicker detection processing, and the information is a solution for a case where the flicker detection processing cannot obtain the image capturing parameters, wherein the image capture method of the subject is a posture of the image capture apparatus when capturing an image of the subject, and the information is information that induces the user to rotate the posture of the image capture apparatus by a predetermined angle relative to the subject to execute the flicker detection processing. The prior art fails to specifically disclose an image capture apparatus including flicker detection processing arranged in the exact configuration disclosed in the claims and specification.
Re claim 14, the prior art fails to teach or suggest an image capture apparatus having the specific configurations disclosed in claims 14, wherein the image capturing apparatus comprises: an image capture apparatus comprising: an imaging unit that captures an image of a subject; and at least, one processor and/or circuit configured to function as each of the following units: a detection unit that executes flicker detection processing on the image; and a control unit that presents information regarding an image capture method of a subject SO that the flicker detection processing obtain a predetermined result, wherein the control unit presents information when the number of times the flicker detection processing has been executed are greater than a predetermined number of times due to a case where the flicker detection processing cannot obtain the predetermined result, wherein the information includes information indicating a difference between an angle in a posture of the image capture apparatus in the previous flicker detection processing and an angle in a posture of the image capture apparatus in a current posture of the image capture apparatus. The prior art fails to specifically disclose an image capture apparatus including flicker detection processing arranged in the exact configuration disclosed in the claims and specification.
Re claim 15, the prior art fails to teach or suggest an image capture apparatus having the specific configurations disclosed in claims 15, wherein the image capturing apparatus comprises: an image capture apparatus comprising: an imaging unit that captures an image of a subject; and at least, one processor and/or circuit configured to function as each of the following units: a detection unit that executes flicker detection processing on the image; and a control unit that presents information regarding an image capture method of a subject SO that the flicker detection processing obtain a predetermined result, wherein the control unit presents information when the number of times the flicker detection processing has been executed are greater than a predetermined number of times due to a case where the flicker detection processing cannot obtain the predetermined result, wherein the information includes notification that a difference between an angle in a posture of the image capture apparatus in the previous flicker detection processing and an angle in a current posture of the image capture apparatus is within a predetermined range. The prior art fails to specifically disclose an image capture apparatus including flicker detection processing arranged in the exact configuration disclosed in the claims and specification.
Re claim 16, the prior art fails to teach or suggest an image capture apparatus having the specific configurations disclosed in claims 16, wherein the image capturing apparatus comprises: an image capture apparatus comprising: an imaging unit that captures an image of a subject; and at least, one processor and/or circuit configured to function as each of the following units: a detection unit that executes flicker detection processing on the image; and a control unit that presents information regarding an image capture method of a subject SO that the flicker detection processing obtain a predetermined result, wherein the control unit presents information when the number of times the flicker detection processing has been executed are greater than a predetermined number of times due to a case where the flicker detection processing cannot obtain the predetermined result, wherein the image capture method of the subject is a posture of the image capture apparatus when capturing an image of the subject, when the posture of the image capture apparatus cannot be changed, the control unit presents information for changing the posture of the subject so that the flicker detection processing can obtain the predetermined result. The prior art fails to specifically disclose an image capture apparatus including flicker detection processing arranged in the exact configuration disclosed in the claims and specification.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sugawara et al. US 2021/0377436 discloses an image capturing apparatus including a flicker detection and warning process.
Kobayashi US 2023/0061655 discloses an imaging apparatus including a flicker detection method and a display for displaying flicker detection status.
Contacts
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kelly L. Jerabek whose telephone number is (571) 272-7312. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday (8:00 AM - 5:00 PM).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, George Eng can be reached at (571) 272-7495. The fax phone number for submitting all Official communications is (571) 273-7300. The fax phone number for submitting informal communications such as drafts, proposed amendments, etc., may be faxed directly to the Examiner at (571) 273-7312.
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 .
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).
/KELLY L JERABEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2699