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 .
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 1, 2, 4, 5, 7-9, 11, 13-15, 17, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manzari et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 2020/0358963), hereinafter referenced as Manzari, in view of Bleyer et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 2021/0392312), hereinafter referenced as Bleyer.
Regarding claim 1, Manzari discloses a method for enhancing media, the method comprising: identifying whether a scene of a first preview frame captured by at least one primary camera was captured in low light based on at least one pre-defined parameter of the first preview frame (paragraph 836 teaches that a low light condition is determined based on the luminance value); based on identifying that the first preview frame was captured in low light, triggering at least one secondary camera to capture a second preview frame of the scene (paragraph 836 teaches based on the low light determination, switching from the telephoto camera to a wide camera), wherein the second preview frame has an exposure time higher than an exposure time of the first preview frame (paragraph 601 teaches that the low frame rate mode has a longer exposure time), and wherein the second preview frame comprises one of a higher field of view (FOV) and a same FOV as compared to the first preview frame (paragraph 836 teaches that the first camera is a telephoto lens with a first field of view of the second camera is a wide field of camera and therefore has a wider field of view than the first camera). However, Manzari fails to disclose generating an output frame based on the first preview frame, the second preview frame, and at least one of the at least one pre-defined parameter.
Bleyer is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Bleyer teaches an imaging device wherein the motivation of generating an improved image of a low light area would have prompted a predictable variation of Manzari by applying Bleyer’s known principal of merging two images captured from cameras with different fields of view based on their respective brightness (figure 9 exhibits a merged image as disclosed at paragraph 100).
In view of the motivations such as generating an improved image of a low light area one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Manzari.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 2, Manzari in view of Bleyer disclose the method of claim 1, in addition, Manzari discloses wherein the at least one pre-defined parameter comprises one or more of a luminance value, an International Standard for Organization (ISO) value, and an exposure gain of the first preview frame (paragraph 836 teaches that a low light condition is determined based on the luminance value).
Regarding claim 4, Manzari in view of Bleyer disclose the method of claim 1, in addition, Manzari discloses based on identifying that the first preview frame does not fall within a predetermined range of at least one of the at least one pre-defined parameter, triggering the at least one secondary camera to capture the second preview frame (paragraph 836 teaches based on the low light determination, switching from the telephoto camera to a wide camera).
Regarding claim 5, Manzari in view of Bleyer disclose the method of claim 1, in addition, Manzari discloses based on a user selecting a specific acquisition mode to capture the scene, triggering the at least one secondary camera to capture the second preview frame (paragraph 831 teaches that the change to low light mode may be manually initiated by a user).
Regarding claim 7, Manzari in view of Bleyer disclose the method of claim 1, in addition, Manzari discloses wherein the triggering the at least one secondary camera further comprises one of: capturing at least one region of an object in the scene with the higher FOV; and capturing at least one region of the object with the same FOV (paragraph 836 teaches that a camera with a wider FOV is activated in low light mode; therefore the region of the object is captured with the higher FOV).
Regarding claim 8, Manzari discloses an electronic device for enhancing media, the electronic device comprising: at least one primary camera (paragraph 836 discloses a first telephoto camera); at least one secondary camera (paragraph 836 discloses a second wide FOV camera); at least one memory storing one or more instructions (figure 1 exhibits memory 102 which stores operating programs as disclosed at paragraph 173); and at least one processor configured to execute the one or more instructions (figure 1 exhibits processor 120 which execute the programs); wherein the one or more instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the electronic device to: identify whether a scene of a first preview frame captured by the at least one primary camera was captured in low light based on at least one pre-defined parameter of the first preview frame (paragraph 836 teaches that a low light condition is determined based on the luminance value), based on identifying that the first preview frame was captured in low light, trigger the at least one secondary camera to capture a second preview frame (paragraph 836 teaches based on the low light determination, switching from the telephoto camera to a wide camera), wherein the second preview frame has an exposure time higher than an exposure time of the first preview frame (paragraph 601 teaches that the low frame rate mode has a longer exposure time), and wherein the second preview frame comprises one of a higher field of view (FOV) and a same FOV as compared to the first preview frame (paragraph 836 teaches that the first camera is a telephoto lens with a first field of view of the second camera is a wide field of camera and therefore has a wider field of view than the first camera). However, Manzari fails to disclose generate an output frame based on the first preview frame, the second preview frame, and at least one of the at least one pre-defined parameter.
Bleyer is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Bleyer teaches an imaging device wherein the motivation of generating an improved image of a low light area would have prompted a predictable variation of Manzari by applying Bleyer’s known principal of merging two images captured from cameras with different fields of view based on their respective brightness (figure 9 exhibits a merged image as disclosed at paragraph 100).
In view of the motivations such as generating an improved image of a low light area one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Manzari.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 9, Manzari in view of Bleyer disclose the electronic device of claim 8, in addition, Manzari discloses wherein the at least one pre-defined parameter comprises one or more of a luminance value, an International Standard for Organization (ISO) value, and an exposure gain of the first preview frame (paragraph 836 teaches that a low light condition is determined based on the luminance value).
Regarding claim 11, Manzari in view of Bleyer disclose the electronic device of claim 8, in addition, Manzari discloses wherein the one or more instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the electronic device to: based on identifying that the first preview frame does not fall within a predetermined range of at least one of the at least one pre-defined parameter, trigger the at least one secondary camera to capture the second preview frame (paragraph 836 teaches based on the low light determination, switching from the telephoto camera to a wide camera), and based on a user selecting a specific acquisition mode to capture the scene, trigger the at least one secondary camera to capture the second preview frame (paragraph 831 teaches that the change to low light mode may be manually initiated by a user).
Regarding claim 13, Manzari in view of Bleyer disclose the electronic device of claim 8, in addition, Manzari discloses wherein the one or more instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the electronic device to: trigger the at least one secondary camera to capture at least one region of an object in the scene with the higher FOV, or capture the at least one region of the object with the same FOV (paragraph 836 teaches that a camera with a wider FOV is activated in low light mode; therefore the region of the object is captured with the higher FOV).
Claim 14, a non-transitory computer readable medium having instructions stored therein, corresponds to and is analyzed the same as the method of claim 1 (figure 1 exhibits memory 102 which stores operating programs as disclosed at paragraph 173).
Claim 15, a non-transitory computer readable medium having instructions stored therein, corresponds to and is analyzed the same as the method of claim 2 (figure 1 exhibits memory 102 which stores operating programs as disclosed at paragraph 173).
Claim 17, a non-transitory computer readable medium having instructions stored therein, corresponds to and is analyzed the same as the method of claim 4 (figure 1 exhibits memory 102 which stores operating programs as disclosed at paragraph 173).
Claim 18, a non-transitory computer readable medium having instructions stored therein, corresponds to and is analyzed the same as the method of claim 5 (figure 1 exhibits memory 102 which stores operating programs as disclosed at paragraph 173).
Claim 20, a non-transitory computer readable medium having instructions stored therein, corresponds to and is analyzed the same as the method of claim 7 (figure 1 exhibits memory 102 which stores operating programs as disclosed at paragraph 173).
Claims 3, 10 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manzari in view of Bleyer and further in view of Thumpudi et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 2018/0035058), hereinafter referenced as Thumpudi.
Regarding claim 3, Manzari in view of Bleyer discloses the method of claim 1, however, Manzari fails to disclose wherein the generating the output frame comprises comparing a first histogram of the first preview frame and a second histogram of the second preview frame, wherein the first and the second histograms correspond to at least one of the at least one pre-defined parameter.
Thumpudi is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Thumpudi teaches a method for merging images wherein the motivation of improving the quality of a merged image would have prompted a predictable variation of Manzari by applying Thumpudi’s known principal of generating an output frame by comparing a first histogram of the first preview frame and a second histogram of the second preview frame, wherein the first and the second histograms correspond to at least one of the at least one pre-defined parameter (paragraph 24 discloses comparing histograms based on intensity of two images in order to align and merge the images).
In view of the motivations such as motivation of improving the quality of a merged image one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Manzari.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 10, Manzari in view of Bleyer discloses the electronic device of claim 8, however, Manzari fails to disclose wherein the one or more instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the electronic device to: generate the output frame by comparing a first histogram of the first preview frame and a second histogram of the second preview frame, wherein the first and the second histograms correspond to at least one of the at least one pre-defined parameter.
Thumpudi is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Thumpudi teaches a method for merging images wherein the motivation of improving the quality of a merged image would have prompted a predictable variation of Manzari by applying Thumpudi’s known principal of generating an output frame by comparing a first histogram of the first preview frame and a second histogram of the second preview frame, wherein the first and the second histograms correspond to at least one of the at least one pre-defined parameter (paragraph 24 discloses comparing histograms based on intensity of two images in order to align and merge the images).
In view of the motivations such as motivation of improving the quality of a merged image one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Manzari.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 16, a non-transitory computer readable medium having instructions stored therein, corresponds to and is analyzed the same as the method of claim 3 (figure 1 exhibits memory 102 which stores operating programs as disclosed at paragraph 173).
Claims 6, 12 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manzari in view of Bleyer and further in view of Scharfenberger et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 2023/0342894), hereinafter referenced as Scharfenberger.
Regarding claim 6, Manzari in view of Bleyer discloses the method of claim 1, however, Manzari fails to disclose wherein the generating the output frame further comprises: performing a histogram equalization wherein the first preview frame and the second preview frame are combined using an artificial intelligence (AI) module to accurately reproduce a color of an object in the scene, and enhancing a brightness and reducing a noise of a region of the object in the scene using the AI module.
Scharfenberger is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Scharfenberger teaches an image processing system wherein the motivation of improving the quality of a merged image would have prompted a predictable variation of Manzari by applying Scharfenberger’s known principal of using a neural network to perform histogram equalization and combine images with accurate color, improved brightness and reduced noise (paragraph 88 teaches performing histogram equalization and combining images using AI which adds color, thereby reproducing the color more accurately and adding contrast which results in reduced noise; paragraph 87 teaches that the brightness is improved in the output image).
In view of the motivations such as improving the quality of a merged image one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Manzari.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 12, Manzari in view of Bleyer discloses the electronic device of claim 8, however, Manzari fails to disclose the one or more instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the electronic device to: generate the output frame by performing a histogram equalization wherein the first preview frame and the second preview frame are combined using an artificial intelligence (AI) module to accurately reproduce a color of an object in the scene, and enhance a brightness and reduce a noise of a region of the object in the scene using the AI module.
Scharfenberger is a similar or analogous system to the claimed invention as evidenced Scharfenberger teaches an image processing system wherein the motivation of improving the quality of a merged image would have prompted a predictable variation of Manzari by applying Scharfenberger’s known principal of using a neural network to perform histogram equalization and combine images with accurate color, improved brightness and reduced noise (paragraph 88 teaches performing histogram equalization and combining images using AI which adds color, thereby reproducing the color more accurately and adding contrast which results in reduced noise; paragraph 87 teaches that the brightness is improved in the output image).
In view of the motivations such as improving the quality of a merged image one of ordinary skill in the art would have implemented the claimed variation of the prior art system of Manzari.
Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 19, a non-transitory computer readable medium having instructions stored therein, corresponds to and is analyzed the same as the method of claim 6 (figure 1 exhibits memory 102 which stores operating programs as disclosed at paragraph 173).
Citation of Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Manzari et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 2022/0294992) teaches a method for low light imaging.
El-Khamy et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 2020/0134848) teaches a method for merging overlapping images.
Shida et al. (United States Patent Application Publication 2017/0026594) teaches a method for merging images with different brightnesses.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON A FLOHRE whose telephone number is (571)270-7238. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-3:00.
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.
JASON A. FLOHRE
Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2637
/JASON A FLOHRE/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2637