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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d). The certified copy of Japanese patent application number 2018-005212, filed on January 16, 2016, has been received and made of record in US application 16962785.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (lDS) submitted are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and have been considered by the Examiner.
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim 1 prior U.S. Patents No. 11,146,772 B2. This is a statutory double patenting rejection.
Regarding claim 1, claim 1 is directed to the same invention of claims 1 of the respective patents as shown in the table below.
Instant Application
US 11,1467,72 B2
1. An encoder, comprising: a correction unit configured to execute gradation correction on RAW image data from an image capture element having optical black on the basis of a gamma coefficient and an optical black value of the optical black; and an encoding unit configured to encode gradation correction RAW image data that has undergone gradation correction by the correction unit, wherein the correction unit is configured to execute first gradation correction for a first interval in which the input signal level of the RAW image data is less than the optical black value, and executes second gradation correction for a second interval in which the input signal level of the RAW image data is in at least a portion of a range from the optical black value to a maximum value.
1. An encoder, comprising: a correction unit configured to execute gradation correction on RAW image data from an image capture element having optical black on the basis of a gamma coefficient and an optical black value of the optical black; and an encoding unit configured to encode gradation correction RAW image data that has undergone gradation correction by the correction unit, wherein the correction unit is configured to execute first gradation correction for a first interval in which the input signal level of the RAW image data is less than the optical black value, and executes second gradation correction for a second interval in which the input signal level of the RAW image data is in at least a portion of a range from the optical black value to a maximum value.
Claim 1 is also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim 1 prior U.S. Patents No. 11,895,447 B2. This is a nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Regarding Claim 1, is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1of U.S. Patent No. 11,895,447 B2 as depicted in the Table below. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of the instant application is broader in scope over claim 1 of U.S. Patent 11,895,447 B2, in that claim 1 of the U.S. Patent contain all the limitations of claim 1 of the instant application. Claim 1 of the instant application is therefore not patently distinct from the earlier U.S. Patent claim and such are unpatentable for obvious-type double patenting.
Instant Application
US 11,895,447 B2
1. An encoder, comprising:
a correction unit configured to execute gradation correction on RAW image data from an image capture element having optical black on the basis of a gamma coefficient and an optical black value of the optical black;
and an encoding unit configured to encode gradation correction RAW image data that has undergone gradation correction by the correction unit, wherein the correction unit is configured to execute first gradation correction for a first interval in which the input signal level of the RAW image data is less than the optical black value,
and executes second gradation correction for a second interval in which the input signal level of the RAW image data is in at least a portion of a range from the optical black value to a maximum value.
1. An encoder, comprising:
a correction unit configured to execute gradation correction on using a gamma coefficient;
and an encoding unit configured to encode gradation correction RAW image data that has undergone gradation correction by the correction unit, wherein the correction unit is configured to execute first gradation correction for a first interval in which the input signal level of the RAW image data is less than
and executes second gradation correction,
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDELAAZIZ TISSIRE whose telephone number is (571)270-7204. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 8 AM to 5 PM.
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, Ye Lin can be reached on 571-272-7372. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ABDELAAZIZ TISSIRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2638