DETAILED ACTION
This office action is responsive to application 18/925,450 filed on October 24, 2024. Claims 1-33 are pending in the application and have been examined by the Examiner.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statements (IDS) filed on 10/24/2024, 1/23/2025 and 2/25/2025 were received and have been considered by the Examiner.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
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 § 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.
Claims 1, 8, 11-13, 18, 25 and 28-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Staudacher et al. (US 2003/0174901).
Consider claim 1, Staudacher et al. teaches:
A processor-implemented (processor, 115, figure 1A, paragraph 0017) method (see figure 2) with image acquisition, the method comprising:
acquiring image frames comprising a shutter-off frame corresponding to a shutter-off through a sensor (sensor, 105, paragraphs 0014 and 0015) by performing the shutter-off during continuous shooting (Continuous shooting is performed in the method of figure 2 such that image frames are acquired at steps 210, 220, 225, 230 and 240, paragraphs 0020-0023. The image frames comprise shutter-off frames acquired at steps 225, 230 and 240.);
acquiring a measurement signal corresponding to a target image frame (i.e. at steps 210 and 220 of figure 2, paragraph 0020);
removing, based on a target shutter-off frame corresponding to the target image frame, a first remaining signal corresponding to the target shutter-off frame from a measurement signal corresponding to shutter-off period frames comprising image frames between the target image frame and the target shutter-off frame (Full dark images frames are continuously acquired at steps 225, 230 and 240 of figure 2, paragraphs 0021-0023. The Examiner interprets the last full dark image frame acquired at step 240 to be the target shutter-off frame. First remaining signals are removed at steps 235 and 240, from the measurement signal acquired at steps 210 and 220, based on full dark image frames acquired at steps 225, 230 and 240, which are between the target image frame acquired at steps 210 and 220 and the target shutter-off frame acquired during the last iteration of step 240. The first remaining signals correspond to the target shutter-off frame, as they are signals for the portions of the image not subjected to dark frame subtraction of the target shutter-off frame during the last iteration of step 240.); and
generating a target image frame from which a second remaining signal is removed based on one or more of the shutter-off period frames from which the first remaining signal is removed (During the last iteration of step 240 of figure 2, a target image frame is generated by subtracting a partial dark frame (i.e. second remaining signal) from the remaining portion of the image not yet subjected to dark frame subtraction, paragraph 0023. This is based on the one or more of the shutter-off period frames from which the first remaining signal is removed, as the first remaining signal was previously removed from the image in steps 235 and 240, paragraphs 0022 and 0023.).
Consider claim 8, and as applied to claim 1 above, Staudacher et al. further teaches that the generating of the target image frame from which the second remaining signal is removed comprises generating a target image frame from which a remaining signal due to a signal after a shutter-off corresponding to the target shutter-off frame is removed (i.e. at step 240 of figure 2, paragraph 0023).
Consider claim 11, and as applied to claim 1 above, Staudacher et al. further teaches that the sensor comprises an image sensor (e.g. a CCD or CMOS image sensor, paragraph 0015) and an optical structure for improving sensitivity (i.e. such that “an optical image is focused on the array and detected” paragraph 0014).
Consider claim 12, and as applied to claim 1 above, Staudacher et al. further teaches that the acquiring of the image frames comprises: determining a frequency and timing of the shutter-off; and acquiring the image frames by performing the shutter-off according to the determined frequency and timing (The shutter-off image capture is performed at a determined frequency and timing in steps 230 and 240 of figure 2, paragraphs 0022 and 0023.).
Consider claim 13, and as applied to claim 1 above, Staudacher et al. further teaches that the acquiring of the image frames comprises acquiring the image frames by periodically performing the shutter-off (The shutter-off image capture is performed periodically in steps 230 and 240 of figure 2, paragraphs 0022 and 0023.).
Consider claim 18, Staudacher et al. teaches:
An electronic device (figure 1A) comprising:
an image signal acquisition device comprising a sensor (sensor, 105, paragraphs 0014 and 0015) configured to acquire image frames comprising a shutter-off frame corresponding to a shutter-off by performing the shutter-off during continuous shooting (Continuous shooting is performed in the method of figure 2 such that image frames are acquired at steps 210, 220, 225, 230 and 240, paragraphs 0020-0023. The image frames comprise shutter-off frames acquired at steps 225, 230 and 240.), and
acquire a measurement signal corresponding to a target image frame (i.e. at steps 210 and 220 of figure 2, paragraph 0020); and
an image signal restoration device (processor, 115, figure 1A, paragraph 0017) configured to remove, based on a target shutter-off frame corresponding to the target image frame, a first remaining signal corresponding to the target shutter-off frame from a measurement signal corresponding to shutter-off period frames comprising image frames between the target image frame and the target shutter-off frame (Full dark images frames are continuously acquired at steps 225, 230 and 240 of figure 2, paragraphs 0021-0023. The Examiner interprets the last full dark image frame acquired at step 240 to be the target shutter-off frame. First remaining signals are removed at steps 235 and 240, from the measurement signal acquired at steps 210 and 220, based on full dark image frames acquired at steps 225, 230 and 240, which are between the target image frame acquired at steps 210 and 220 and the target shutter-off frame acquired during the last iteration of step 240. The first remaining signals correspond to the target shutter-off frame, as they are signals for the portions of the image not subjected to dark frame subtraction of the target shutter-off frame during the last iteration of step 240.), and
generate a target image frame from which a second remaining signal is removed based on one or more of the shutter-off period frames from which the first remaining signal is removed (During the last iteration of step 240 of figure 2, a target image frame is generated by subtracting a partial dark frame (i.e. second remaining signal) from the remaining portion of the image not yet subjected to dark frame subtraction, paragraph 0023. This is based on the one or more of the shutter-off period frames from which the first remaining signal is removed, as the first remaining signal was previously removed from the image in steps 235 and 240, paragraphs 0022 and 0023.).
Consider claim 25, and as applied to claim 18 above, Staudacher et al. further teaches that the generating of the target image frame from which the second remaining signal is removed comprises generating a target image frame from which a remaining signal due to a signal after a shutter-off corresponding to the target shutter-off frame is removed (i.e. at step 240 of figure 2, paragraph 0023).
Consider claim 28, and as applied to claim 18 above, Staudacher et al. further teaches that the sensor comprises an image sensor (e.g. a CCD or CMOS image sensor, paragraph 0015) and an optical structure for improving sensitivity (i.e. such that “an optical image is focused on the array and detected” paragraph 0014).
Consider claim 29, and as applied to claim 18 above, Staudacher et al. further teaches that the acquiring of the image frames comprises: determining a frequency and timing of the shutter-off; and acquiring the image frames by performing the shutter-off according to the determined frequency and timing (The shutter-off image capture is performed at a determined frequency and timing in steps 230 and 240 of figure 2, paragraphs 0022 and 0023.).
Consider claim 30, and as applied to claim 18 above, Staudacher et al. further teaches that the acquiring of the image frames comprises acquiring the image frames by periodically performing the shutter-off (The shutter-off image capture is performed periodically in steps 230 and 240 of figure 2, paragraphs 0022 and 0023.).
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.
Claims 2, 3, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Staudacher et al. (US 2003/0174901) in view of Corum et al. (US 6,101,287).
Consider claim 2, and as applied to claim 1 above, Staudacher et al. further teaches that removing the first remaining signal comprises removing the first remaining signal from the measurement signal corresponding to the shutter-off period frames (Full dark images frames are continuously acquired at steps 225, 230 and 240 of figure 2, paragraphs 0021-0023. The Examiner interprets the last full dark image frame acquired at step 240 to be the target shutter-off frame. First remaining signals are removed at steps 235 and 240, from the measurement signal acquired at steps 210 and 220, based on full dark image frames acquired at steps 225, 230 and 240, which are between the target image frame acquired at steps 210 and 220 and the target shutter-off frame acquired during the last iteration of step 240.).
Staudacher et al. does not explicitly teach estimating the first remaining signal based on the target shutter-off frame and parameter information of the sensor.
Corum et al. similarly teaches a method of correcting a captured image via dark frame subtraction (see figure 2, column 3, lines 25-38).
However, Corum et al. additionally teaches estimating the first remaining signal based on the target shutter-off frame and parameter information of the sensor (A dark frame (i.e. target shutter-off frame) and dark reference pixel values (i.e. parameter information of the sensor) are used to estimate the first remaining signal in step 230 of figure 2, column 3, lines 25-38).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the first remaining signal taught by Staudacher et al. be estimated in the manner taught by Corum et al. for the benefit of receiving an improved estimate for the ideal dark frame (Corum et al., column 3, lines 37-38).
Consider claim 3, and as applied to claim 2 above, Staudacher et al. does not explicitly teach that the estimating of the first remaining signal comprises estimating a remaining signal due to a signal generated before a shutter-off corresponding to the target shutter-off frame based on the target shutter-off frame and information on a photodiode forming the sensor.
Corum et al. further teaches the estimating of the first remaining signal comprises estimating a remaining signal due to a signal generated before a shutter-off corresponding to the target shutter-off frame (i.e. generated in step 210 of figure 2) based on the target shutter-off frame (“dark frame” step 230) and information on a photodiode forming the sensor (“dark reference pixels Ri”, step 240, column 3, lines 25-38).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the first remaining signal taught by Staudacher et al. be estimated in the manner taught by Corum et al. for the benefit of receiving an improved estimate for the ideal dark frame (Corum et al., column 3, lines 37-38).
Consider claim 19, and as applied to claim 18 above, Staudacher et al. further teaches that removing the first remaining signal comprises removing the first remaining signal from the measurement signal corresponding to the shutter-off period frames (Full dark images frames are continuously acquired at steps 225, 230 and 240 of figure 2, paragraphs 0021-0023. The Examiner interprets the last full dark image frame acquired at step 240 to be the target shutter-off frame. First remaining signals are removed at steps 235 and 240, from the measurement signal acquired at steps 210 and 220, based on full dark image frames acquired at steps 225, 230 and 240, which are between the target image frame acquired at steps 210 and 220 and the target shutter-off frame acquired during the last iteration of step 240.).
Staudacher et al. does not explicitly teach estimating the first remaining signal based on the target shutter-off frame and parameter information of the sensor.
Corum et al. similarly teaches a method of correcting a captured image via dark frame subtraction (see figure 2, column 3, lines 25-38).
However, Corum et al. additionally teaches estimating the first remaining signal based on the target shutter-off frame and parameter information of the sensor (A dark frame (i.e. target shutter-off frame) and dark reference pixel values (i.e. parameter information of the sensor) are used to estimate the first remaining signal in step 230 of figure 2, column 3, lines 25-38).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the first remaining signal taught by Staudacher et al. be estimated in the manner taught by Corum et al. for the benefit of receiving an improved estimate for the ideal dark frame (Corum et al., column 3, lines 37-38).
Consider claim 20, and as applied to claim 19 above, Staudacher et al. does not explicitly teach that the estimating of the first remaining signal comprises estimating a remaining signal due to a signal generated before a shutter-off corresponding to the target shutter-off frame based on the target shutter-off frame and information on a photodiode forming the sensor.
Corum et al. further teaches the estimating of the first remaining signal comprises estimating a remaining signal due to a signal generated before a shutter-off corresponding to the target shutter-off frame (i.e. generated in step 210 of figure 2) based on the target shutter-off frame (“dark frame” step 230) and information on a photodiode forming the sensor (“dark reference pixels Ri”, step 240, column 3, lines 25-38).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the first remaining signal taught by Staudacher et al. be estimated in the manner taught by Corum et al. for the benefit of receiving an improved estimate for the ideal dark frame (Corum et al., column 3, lines 37-38).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Staudacher et al. (US 2003/0174901) in view of Sumitomo et al. (US 2002/0164082).
Consider claim 17, Staudacher et al. teaches that the method of claim 1 is implemented via a processor (115, see paragraphs 0017-0023).
Staudacher et al. does not explicitly teach that the processor executes instructions stored on a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium.
Sumitomo et al. similarly teaches a method a method for restoring an image (see figure 3, paragraphs 0030-0036).
However, Sumitomo et al. additionally teaches that the method is implemented by a processor that executes instructions stored on a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (“However, the present invention is not limited thereto, and the restoration sequence may be loaded, as a software program, in a computer (such as a personal computer) via a recording medium such as a CD-ROM or a network so that the image restoration processing can be performed by the computer.” paragraph 0037).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the processor taught by Staudacher et al. perform the method by executing instructions stored on a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium as taught by Sumitomo et al. for the benefit of enabling the method to be performed by a personal computer (Sumitomo et al., paragraph 0037).
Claims 9, 10, 26 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Staudacher et al. (US 2003/0174901) in view of Im et al. (US 2019/0131349).
Consider claim 9, and as applied to claim 1 above, Staudacher et al. does not explicitly teach that the sensor comprises an organic photodiode.
Im et al. similarly teaches an image sensor comprising a plurality of unit pixels (see paragraph 0022).
However, Im et al. additionally teaches that each of the unit pixels (see figure 16) comprises an OPD (organic photodiode, 173) and a silicon photodiode (silicon photodiode, 202), paragraphs 0151-0159.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the sensor taught by Staudacher et al. comprise an OPD and a silicon photodiode as taught by Im et al. for the benefit of enabling wide dynamic range imaging to be effectively performed (Im et al., paragraph 0159).
Consider claim 10, and as applied to claim 1 above, Staudacher et al. does not explicitly teach that the sensor comprises a hybrid image sensor comprising an organic photodiode and a silicon photodiode.
Im et al. similarly teaches an image sensor comprising a plurality of unit pixels (see paragraph 0022).
However, Im et al. additionally teaches that each of the unit pixels (see figure 16) comprises an OPD (organic photodiode, 173) and a silicon photodiode (silicon photodiode, 202), paragraphs 0151-0159.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the sensor taught by Staudacher et al. comprise an OPD and a silicon photodiode as taught by Im et al. for the benefit of enabling wide dynamic range imaging to be effectively performed (Im et al., paragraph 0159).
Consider claim 26, and as applied to claim 18 above, Staudacher et al. does not explicitly teach that the sensor comprises an organic photodiode.
Im et al. similarly teaches an image sensor comprising a plurality of unit pixels (see paragraph 0022).
However, Im et al. additionally teaches that each of the unit pixels (see figure 16) comprises an OPD (organic photodiode, 173) and a silicon photodiode (silicon photodiode, 202), paragraphs 0151-0159.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the sensor taught by Staudacher et al. comprise an OPD and a silicon photodiode as taught by Im et al. for the benefit of enabling wide dynamic range imaging to be effectively performed (Im et al., paragraph 0159).
Consider claim 27, and as applied to claim 18 above, Staudacher et al. does not explicitly teach that the sensor comprises a hybrid image sensor comprising an organic photodiode and a silicon photodiode.
Im et al. similarly teaches an image sensor comprising a plurality of unit pixels (see paragraph 0022).
However, Im et al. additionally teaches that each of the unit pixels (see figure 16) comprises an OPD (organic photodiode, 173) and a silicon photodiode (silicon photodiode, 202), paragraphs 0151-0159.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the sensor taught by Staudacher et al. comprise an OPD and a silicon photodiode as taught by Im et al. for the benefit of enabling wide dynamic range imaging to be effectively performed (Im et al., paragraph 0159).
Claims 16 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Staudacher et al. (US 2003/0174901) in view of Yoshikawa (US 2020/0244902).
Consider claim 16, and as applied to claim 1 above, Staudacher et al. does not explicitly teach acquiring a short-term image frame corresponding to an exposure time shorter than an exposure time of the image frames; and generating a high dynamic range (HDR) image based on the short-term image frame.
Yoshikawa similarly teaches an image sensor (figure 2) which performs continuous imaging (“moving-image capturing” paragraph 0072).
However, Yoshikawa additionally teaches acquiring a short-term image frame corresponding to an exposure time shorter than an exposure time of the image frames; and generating a high dynamic range (HDR) image based on the short-term image frame (“A frame period with a long charge accumulation period is referred to as a long frame period, and a frame period with a short charge accumulation period is referred to as a short frame period. An image with a wide dynamic range can be obtained by performing so-called high dynamic range (HDR) processing on and combining a frame image output in a long frame period and a frame image output in a short frame period.” paragraph 0072, figure 11).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the imaging operations taught by Staudacher et al. include capturing a short-term image frame and generating an HDR image as taught by Yoshikawa for the benefit of enabling an image with high dynamic range to be obtained (Yoshikawa, paragraph 0072).
Consider claim 33, and as applied to claim 18 above, Staudacher et al. does not explicitly teach acquiring a short-term image frame corresponding to an exposure time shorter than an exposure time of the image frames; and generating a high dynamic range (HDR) image based on the short-term image frame.
Yoshikawa similarly teaches an image sensor (figure 2) which performs continuous imaging (“moving-image capturing” paragraph 0072).
However, Yoshikawa additionally teaches acquiring a short-term image frame corresponding to an exposure time shorter than an exposure time of the image frames; and generating a high dynamic range (HDR) image based on the short-term image frame (“A frame period with a long charge accumulation period is referred to as a long frame period, and a frame period with a short charge accumulation period is referred to as a short frame period. An image with a wide dynamic range can be obtained by performing so-called high dynamic range (HDR) processing on and combining a frame image output in a long frame period and a frame image output in a short frame period.” paragraph 0072, figure 11).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the imaging operations taught by Staudacher et al. include capturing a short-term image frame and generating an HDR image as taught by Yoshikawa for the benefit of enabling an image with high dynamic range to be obtained (Yoshikawa, paragraph 0072).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7, 14, 15, 21-24, 31 and 32 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:
Consider claim 4, the prior art of record does not teach nor reasonably suggest that the removing of the first remaining signal comprises removing the first remaining signal from the measurement signal corresponding to the shutter-off period frames by inputting the target shutter-off frame into a first artificial neural network model, in combination with the other elements recited in parent claim 1.
Consider claim 5, the prior art of record does not teach nor reasonably suggest that the generating of the target image frame from which the second remaining signal is removed comprises generating the target image frame from which the second remaining signal is removed by inputting shutter-off period frames from which the first remaining signal is removed into a second artificial neural network model, in combination with the other elements recited in parent claim 1.
Consider claim 6, the prior art of record does not teach nor reasonably suggest restoring an image frame corresponding to the target shutter-off frame by inputting a predetermined number of before and after image frames based on the target shutter-off frame into a third artificial neural network model, in combination with the other elements recited in parent claim 1.
Consider claim 7, the prior art of record does not teach nor reasonably suggest that the shutter-off frame constructs an image with a residual charge of a photodiode forming the sensor without acquiring a signal during a time corresponding to the shutter-off, in combination with the other elements recited in parent claim 1.
Consider claim 14, the prior art of record does not teach nor reasonably suggest that the removing of the first remaining signal comprises: acquiring a residual signal between the shutter-off period frames; and acquiring the shutter-off period frames from which the first remaining signal is removed based on the residual signal between the shutter-off period frames, in combination with the other elements recited in parent claim 1.
Claim 15 contains allowable subject matter as depending from claim 14.
Consider claim 21, the prior art of record does not teach nor reasonably suggest that for the removing of the first remaining signal, the image signal restoration device is further configured to remove the first remaining signal from the measurement signal corresponding to the shutter-off period frames by inputting the target shutter-off frame into a first artificial neural network model, in combination with the other elements recited in parent claim 18.
Consider claim 22, the prior art of record does not teach nor reasonably suggest that for the generating of the target image frame, the image signal restoration device is further configured to generate the target image frame from which the second remaining signal is removed by inputting shutter-off period frames from which the first remaining signal is removed into a second artificial neural network model, in combination with the other elements recited in parent claim 18.
Consider claim 23, the prior art of record does not teach nor reasonably suggest that the image signal restoration device is further configured to restore an image frame corresponding to the target shutter-off frame by inputting a predetermined number of before and after image frames based on the target shutter-off frame into a third artificial neural network model, in combination with the other elements recited in parent claim 18.
Consider claim 24, the prior art of record does not teach nor reasonably suggest that the shutter-off frame constructs an image with a residual charge of a photodiode forming the sensor without acquiring a signal during a time corresponding to the shutter-off, in combination with the other elements recited in parent claim 18.
Consider claim 31, the prior art of record does not teach nor reasonably suggest that for the removing of the first remaining signal, the image signal restoration device is further configured to: acquire a residual signal between the shutter-off period frames, and acquire the shutter-off period frames from which the first remaining signal is removed based on the residual signal between the shutter-off period frames, in combination with the other elements recited in parent claim 18.
Consider claim 32, the prior art of record does not teach nor reasonably suggest that for the generating of the target image frame, the image signal restoration device is further configured to: generate a residual signal between the shutter-off period frames from which the first remaining signal is removed, and generate the target image frame from which the second remaining signal is removed, based on the residual signal between the shutter-off period frames from which the first remaining signal is removed, in combination with the other elements recited in parent claim 18.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Compton et al. (US 2005/0195296) teaches generating an adjusted dark floor based on a baseline dark floor stored in memory and a contemporary dark frame (see figure 3).
Zhang (US 2006/0256215) teaches scaling a reference image based on current imaging conditions (see figures 4 and 6).
Baer (US 2002/0167600) teaches scaling a dark frame during dark current subtraction (see figure 1).
Tanaka et al. (US 2007/0230932) teaches dark frame subtraction in continuous imaging (see figure 13).
Bakhle et al. (US 6,061,092) teaches a device for dark frame subtraction (see figure 2) which includes storing dark images associated with dark column reference data (see figure 2).
Sander (US 2005/0023444) teaches a method of adjusting optical energy based on first and second dark current values (see figure 4).
Maekelae et al. (US 2024/0365018) teaches performing dark current correction using a dark current residual image (see figure 2).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALBERT H CUTLER whose telephone number is (571)270-1460. The examiner can normally be reached approximately Mon - Fri 8:00-4:30.
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, Sinh Tran can be reached at (571)272-7564. 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.
/ALBERT H CUTLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2637