63Notice 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 Objections
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: at line 6 “a content map” should read the content map as the content map has already been referred to. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp
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.
Claim 2-6, 11-15, and 17-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-4, 10-14 and 16-19 of U.S. Patent No.12198306. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they disclose all of the features of the claims of the application.
Re claim 2 claim 1 of the patent discloses
An apparatus for image processing, comprising: (see claim 1 “An apparatus for image processing, comprising:”)
a content image processing circuit configured to receive a delta version image (see claim 1 “a content image processing circuit coupled to the image sharpener circuit and configured to receive the delta version image and a content map identifying categories of content in segments of the image” note that the content image processing segment receives that data from the image sharpener) of an luminance image comprising luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel of an image (see claim 1 “see claim 1 “an image sharpener circuit comprising a high-pass frequency filter and configured to perform contrast enhancement on a luminance image comprising luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel in an image to generate a delta version image of the luminance image“) and a content map identifying categories of content in segments of the image (claim 1 “a content image processing circuit coupled to the image sharpener circuit and configured to receive the delta version image and a content map identifying categories of content in segments of the image” note that the content map is received), wherein the delta version image comprises a high frequency component of the image generated by performing contrast enhancement by a high-pass frequency filter on the luminance image ( see claim 1 “an image sharpener circuit comprising a high-pass frequency filter and configured to perform contrast enhancement on a luminance image comprising luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel in an image to generate a delta version image of the luminance image, wherein the delta version image includes a high frequency component of the image;” note the received delta image will be a luminance image contrast enhanced by the high pass filter)
, and wherein the content image processing circuit is further configured to :determine a content factor associated with the pixel of the image based on the identified categories of content in the image and at least one of a texture value of the pixel or a chroma value of the pixel, wherein the texture value indicates a likelihood of a category of content associated with the pixel based on a texture in the image, and wherein the chroma value indicates a likelihood of the category of content associated with the pixel based on color information of the image (see claim 1 “wherein the content image processing circuit is further configured to: determine a content factor associated with the pixel of the image according to the identified categories of content in the image and at least one of a texture value of the pixel or a chroma value of the pixel, wherein the texture value indicates a likelihood of a category of content associated with the pixel based on a texture in the image, and wherein the chroma value indicates a likelihood of the category of content associated with the pixel based on color information of the image”); and
generate a processed version image by at least applying the content factor to the delta version image. (see claim 1 “generate a processed version image of the image by at least applying the content factor to the delta version image”)
Re claim 3 claim 2 discloses “wherein the processed version image comprises a noise reduced version of the luminance pixel value.” (See claim 2 “wherein the processed version image comprises a noise reduced version of the luminance pixel value”)
Re claim 4 claim 3 discloses wherein the delta version image comprises a tone mapped version of the luminance pixel value. (See claim 3 wherein the delta version image includes a tone mapped version of the luminance pixel value.)
Re claim 5 claim 4 discloses wherein the delta version image comprises a tone mapped version of the luminance pixel value. (See claim 4 wherein the processed version image comprises a white balanced version of the luminance pixel value.)
Re claim 6 claim 1 discloses wherein the processed version image is generated based on the delta version image (see claim 1 “generate a processed version image of the image by at least applying the content factor to the delta version image”), wherein the delta version image is generated based on the luminance image of the image (See claim 1 “comprising a high-pass frequency filter and configured to perform contrast enhancement on a luminance image comprising luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel in an image to generate a delta version image of the luminance image.
Re claim 11 Claim 10 of the patent discloses
A method, comprising: (see claim 10 “A method comprising:” )
receiving a delta version image of an luminance image comprising luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel of an image, wherein the delta version image comprises a high frequency component of the image generated by performing contrast enhancement by a high-pass frequency filter on the luminance image (see claim 10 “performing contrast enhancement on a luminance image comprising luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel in an image to generate a delta version image of the luminance image, wherein the delta version image comprises a high frequency component of the image” note the method will functionally receive the delta image after the contrast enhancement step is performed);
receiving a content map identifying categories of content in segments of the image; (see claim 10 “receiving a content map identifying categories of content in segments of the image”)
determining a content factor associated with the pixel of the image based on the identified categories of content in the image and at least one of a texture value of the pixel or a chroma value of the pixel, wherein the texture value indicates a likelihood of a category of content associated with the pixel based on a texture in the image, and wherein the chroma value indicates a likelihood of the category of content associated with the pixel based on color information of the image; (see claim 10 “determining a content factor associated with the pixel of the image according to the identified categories of content in the image and at least one of a texture value of the pixel or a chroma value of the pixel, wherein the texture value indicates a likelihood of a category of content associated with the pixel based on a texture in the image, and wherein the chroma value indicates a likelihood of the category of content associated with the pixel based on color information of the image;”)
and generating a processed version image by at least applying the content factor to the delta version image (see claim 10 “generating a processed version image of the image by at least applying the content factor to the delta version image;”)
Re claim 12 claim 11 discloses wherein the processed version image comprises a noise reduced version image of the luminance pixel value. See claim 11 wherein the processed version image comprises a noise reduced version image of the luminance pixel value.
Re claim 13 claim 12 discloses wherein the delta version image comprises a tone mapped version of the luminance pixel value. See claim 12 wherein the delta version image includes a tone mapped version of the luminance pixel value.
Re claim 14 claim 13 discloses wherein the processed version image comprises a white balanced version of the luminance pixel value. See claim 13 wherein the processed version image comprises a white balanced version of the luminance pixel value.
Re claim 15 claim 14 discloses wherein the delta version image is generated by a bilateral filter applied to the luminance information of the luminance pixel value of the pixel. See claim 14 wherein the delta version image is generated by a bilateral filter applied to the luminance information of the luminance pixel value of the pixel.
Re claim 17 claim 16 of the patent discloses
An electronic device, comprising: (see claim 16 “An electronic device, comprising:”) a neural processor circuit configured to generate a content map identifying categories of content in segments of an image by performing a machine learning algorithm on the image; (see claim 16 “a neural processor circuit configured to generate a content map identifying categories of content in segments of the image by performing a machine learning algorithm to the image; a content image processing circuit coupled to the neural processor circuit”)
and a content image processing circuit configured to receive a delta version image (see claim 16 “a content image processing circuit coupled to the neural processor circuit and the image sharpener circuit, the content image processing circuit configured to receive the delta version image and the content map”) of an luminance image comprising luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel of the image (see claim 16 “high-pass frequency filter and configured to perform contrast enhancement on a luminance image comprising luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel in an image to generate a delta version image” note the luminance information is processed)
and a content map identifying categories of content in segments of the image, (see claim 16 “a neural processor circuit configured to generate a content map identifying categories of content in segments of the image by performing a machine learning algorithm to the image; a content image processing circuit coupled to the neural processor circuit….the content image processing circuit configured to receive… the content map” note that the circuit receives the content map from the neural processor.)
wherein the delta version image includes a high frequency component of the image generated by performing contrast enhancement by a high-pass frequency filter on the luminance image, (see claim 16 “a high-pass frequency filter and configured to perform contrast enhancement on a luminance image comprising luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel in an image to generate a delta version image of the luminance image” note that the delta version of the image is produced by the sharpener and received by the content image processing circuit.)
and wherein the content image processing circuit is further configured to: determine a content factor associated with the pixel of the image based on the identified categories of content in the image and at least one of a texture value of the pixel or a chroma value of the pixel, wherein the texture value indicates a likelihood of a category of content associated with the pixel based on a texture in the image, and wherein the chroma value indicates a likelihood of the category of content associated with the pixel based on color information of the image; (see claim 16 “wherein the content image processing circuit further is configured to: determine a content factor associated with the pixel of the image according to the identified categories of content in the image and at least one of a texture value of the pixel or a chroma value of the pixel, wherein the texture value indicates a likelihood of a category of content associated with the pixel based on a texture in the image, and wherein the chroma value indicates a likelihood of the category of content associated with the pixel based on color information of the image”)
and generate a processed version image by at least applying the content factor to the delta version image (see claim 16 “generate a processed version image by at least applying the content factor to the delta version image”).
Re claim 18 claim 17 of the patent discloses wherein the processed version image comprises a noise reduced version of the luminance pixel value. (See claim 17 wherein the processed version image comprises a noise reduced version of the luminance pixel value.)
Re claim 19 claim 18 of the patent discloses wherein the delta version image comprises a tone mapped version of the luminance pixel value. See claim 18 wherein the delta version image includes a tone mapped version of the luminance pixel value.
Re claim 20 claim 19 of the patent discloses wherein the delta version image is generated by a bilateral filter applied to the luminance information of the luminance pixel value of the pixel. See claim 19 wherein the delta version image is generated by a bilateral filter applied to the luminance information of the luminance pixel value of the pixel.
Claim 7-10 16 and 21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 6-9, 15 and 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12198306 in view of Hsu 2013/0216153.
Re claim 7 claim 6 discloses wherein the content image processing circuit is configured to apply the content factor to the delta version image by performing: a first image processing operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold; and a second image processing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold, (see claim 6 wherein the content image processing circuit is configured to apply the content factor to the delta version image by performing a first image processing operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold and performing a second different image processing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold.)
Claim 6 does not expressly disclose wherein the second image processing operation is different from the first image processing operation. Hsu discloses wherein the second image processing operation is different from the first image processing operation (see paragraph 31 “it is determined whether an analog gain is greater than or equal to a threshold, e.g., 4. When the analog gain is greater than or equal to the threshold, as shown in step S822, a second filter corresponding to a larger cross-shaped pattern as 102 shown in FIG. 2 is set as the selected filter. When the analog gain is not greater than or equal to the threshold, as shown in step S821, a first filter corresponding to a smaller cross-shaped pattern as 101 shown in FIG. 2 is set as the selected filter. Thus, as a greater analog gain indicates that an input image may include amplified noises, a filter corresponding to a larger cross-shaped pattern is selected to obtain smoother effects.”. The motivation to combine is that a larger cross shape pattern archives smoother effects i.e. the filter can be chosen based on the desired amount of smoothing. One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily modified the system of claim 6 to use a different filter as described by Hsu depending on the control factor of claim 6. Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Hsu with claim 6 to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Re claim 8 claim 7 discloses, wherein the first and second image processing operations comprise noise adjustment operations. (See claim 7 “wherein the first and second image processing operations are noise adjustment operations.”)
Re claim 9 claim 8 discloses wherein the first and second image processing operations comprise tone mapping operations. (see claim 8 “wherein the first and second image processing operations are tone mapping operations.”)
Re claim 10 claim 9 discloses wherein the first and second image processing operations comprise white balancing operations (see claim 9 wherein the first and second image processing operations are white balancing operations.)
Re claim 16 claim 15 discloses wherein applying the content factor to the delta version image comprises: performing a first image processing operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold; and performing a second image processing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold,, (see claim 15 wherein applying the content factor to the delta version image comprises performing a first image processing operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold and performing a second different image processing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold.)
Claim 15 does not expressly disclose wherein the second image processing operation is different from the first image processing operation. Hsu discloses wherein the second image processing operation is different from the first image processing operation (see paragraph 31 “it is determined whether an analog gain is greater than or equal to a threshold, e.g., 4. When the analog gain is greater than or equal to the threshold, as shown in step S822, a second filter corresponding to a larger cross-shaped pattern as 102 shown in FIG. 2 is set as the selected filter. When the analog gain is not greater than or equal to the threshold, as shown in step S821, a first filter corresponding to a smaller cross-shaped pattern as 101 shown in FIG. 2 is set as the selected filter. Thus, as a greater analog gain indicates that an input image may include amplified noises, a filter corresponding to a larger cross-shaped pattern is selected to obtain smoother effects.”. The motivation to combine is that a larger cross shape pattern archives smoother effects i.e. the filter can be chosen based on the desired amount of smoothing. One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily modified the system of claim 15 to use a different filter as described by Hsu depending on the control factor of claim 15. Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Hsu with claim 15 to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Re claim 21 claim 20 discloses wherein the content image processing circuit is further configured to apply the content factor to the delta version image by performing a first image processing operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold and performing a second image processing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold,, (see claim 20 wherein the content image processing circuit is configured to apply the content factor to the delta version image by performing a first image processing operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold and performing a second different image processing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold.)
Claim 20 does not expressly disclose wherein the second image processing operation is different from the first image processing operation. Hsu discloses wherein the second image processing operation is different from the first image processing operation (see paragraph 31 “it is determined whether an analog gain is greater than or equal to a threshold, e.g., 4. When the analog gain is greater than or equal to the threshold, as shown in step S822, a second filter corresponding to a larger cross-shaped pattern as 102 shown in FIG. 2 is set as the selected filter. When the analog gain is not greater than or equal to the threshold, as shown in step S821, a first filter corresponding to a smaller cross-shaped pattern as 101 shown in FIG. 2 is set as the selected filter. Thus, as a greater analog gain indicates that an input image may include amplified noises, a filter corresponding to a larger cross-shaped pattern is selected to obtain smoother effects.”. The motivation to combine is that a larger cross shape pattern archives smoother effects i.e. the filter can be chosen based on the desired amount of smoothing. One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily modified the system of claim 20 to use a different filter as described by Hsu depending on the control factor of claim 20. Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Hsu with claim 6 to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Claims 2, 3, 6, 7,11, 12, 16, 17, 18 and 21 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1, 11 and 16 of U.S. Patent No. 11,488,285 in view of Golub US 2010/030239.
Re claim 2 Claim 1 of the patent discloses An apparatus for image processing, comprising: a content image processing circuit configured to receive luminance image comprising luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel of an image (see claim 1 “An apparatus for image processing, comprising a content image processing circuit configured to receive luminance pixel values of an image” note that the image note that the circuit operates on luminance pixel values)
and a content map identifying categories of content in segments of the image, (see claim 1 “a content image processing circuit configured to receive luminance pixel values of an image and a content map identifying categories of content in segments of the image,”)
wherein the content image processing circuit is further configured to: (see claim 1 “the content image processing circuit comprising”)
determine a content factor associated with the pixel of the image based on the identified categories of content in the image and at least one of a texture value of the pixel or a chroma value of the pixel, wherein the texture value indicates a likelihood of a category of content associated with the pixel based on a texture in the image, and wherein the chroma value indicates a likelihood of the category of content associated with the pixel based on color information of the image; ( see claim 1 “determine a content factor associated with a pixel of the image according to the identified categories of content in the image and at least one of a texture value of the pixel or a chroma value of the pixel, wherein the texture value indicates a likelihood of a category of content that is associated with the pixel based on a texture in the image, and wherein the chroma value indicates a likelihood of the category of content that is associated with the pixel based on color information of the image”)
and generate a processed version image by at least applying the content factor to the image. (see claim 1” a content modifying circuit coupled to the content factor circuit to receive the content factor and configured to generate a sharpened version of a luminance pixel value of the pixel by at least applying the content factor to a version of a luminance pixel value of the pixel, wherein the content modifying circuit is configured to apply the content factor to the version of the luminance pixel value by (i) performing a sharpening operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold, and (ii) performing a smoothing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold.” Note that the content filter is used to generate a processed version of the image)
Claim 1 does not expressly discloses a delta version image wherein the delta version image comprises a high frequency component of the image generated by performing contrast enhancement by a high-pass frequency filter on the image, and generate a processed version of the delta image
Golub discloses a delta version image wherein the delta version image comprises a high frequency component of the image generated by performing contrast enhancement by a high-pass frequency filter on the image, and generate a processed version of the delta image (see paragraph 28 note the image processed with contrast enhancement, edge enhancement (i.e. sharpening) and high pass filtering prior to processing further image processing performed on the image i.e. post processing to further advance contrast the intermediate result of the contrast enhancement and high pass filtering corresponds to the generated ). One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily performed various the known preprocessing steps as preliminary steps prior to further processing the image as described in Golub, prior to performing the processing of claim 1. The motivation to combine is to enhance contrast, reduce noise enhance edges (see paragraph 28) as preprocessing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Claim 1 and Golub to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Re claim 3 claim 1 discloses wherein the processed version image comprises a noise reduced version of the luminance pixel value (see claim 1 “performing a smoothing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold.” Note that smoothing removes noise).
Re claim 6 Claim 1 discloses operating on a luminance image (See rejection to claim 2) claim 1 does not expressly disclose wherein the processed version image is generated based on the delta version image, wherein the delta version image is generated based on the image.
Golub further discloses wherein the processed version image is generated based on the delta version image, wherein the delta version image is generated based the image (see paragraph 28 note the image processed with contrast enhancement, edge enhancement (i.e. sharpening) and high pass filtering prior to processing further image processing performed on the image i.e. post processing to further advance contrast the intermediate result of the contrast enhancement and high pass filtering corresponds to the delta image) The motivation to combine is to enhance contrast, reduce noise enhance edges (see paragraph 28 ) as preprocessing. One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily performed various the known preprocessing steps as preliminary steps prior to further processing the image as described in Golub, prior to performing the processing of claim 1. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine claim 1 and Golub to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Claim 7 claims 1 discloses wherein the content image processing circuit is configured to apply the content factor to the image by performing: a first image processing operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold; and a second image processing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold, wherein the second image processing operation is different from the first image processing operation. (see claim 1 “a content modifying circuit coupled to the content factor circuit to receive the content factor and configured to generate a sharpened version of a luminance pixel value of the pixel by at least applying the content factor to a version of a luminance pixel value of the pixel, wherein the content modifying circuit is configured to apply the content factor to the version of the luminance pixel value by (i) performing a sharpening operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold, and (ii) performing a smoothing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold.”). Golub discloses processing a delta version (see rejection of claim 2)
Re claim 11 claim 11 of the patent discloses
A method, comprising: receiving of a luminance image comprising luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel of an image, (see claim 11 “A method comprising: receiving luminance pixel values of an image” note that the being operated on comprises luminance values)
receiving a content map identifying categories of content in segments of the image; (see claim 11 “receiving a content map identifying categories of content in segments of the image;”
determining a content factor associated with the pixel of the image based on the identified categories of content in the image and at least one of a texture value of the pixel or a chroma value of the pixel, wherein the texture value indicates a likelihood of a category of content associated with the pixel based on a texture in the image, and wherein the chroma value indicates a likelihood of the category of content associated with the pixel based on color information of the image; (see claim 11 “determining a content factor associated with a pixel in the image according to the identified categories of content in the image and at least one of a texture value of the pixel or a chroma value of the pixel, wherein the texture value indicates a likelihood of a category of content that is associated with the pixel based on a texture in the image, and wherein the chroma value indicates a likelihood of the category of content that is associated with the pixel based on color information of the image;”)
and generating a processed version image by at least applying the content factor to the image (see claim 11 “generating a sharpened version of a luminance pixel value of the pixel by at least applying the content factor to a version of a luminance pixel value of the pixel, wherein applying the content factor to the version of the luminance pixel value comprises (i) performing a sharpening operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold, and (ii) performing a smoothing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold.” Note the content factor is used to process the image)
Claim 11 does not expressly a delta version image wherein the delta version image comprises a high frequency component of the image generated by performing contrast enhancement by a high-pass frequency filter on the image and generate a processed version of the delta image
Golub discloses a delta version image wherein the delta version image comprises a high frequency component of the image generated by performing contrast enhancement by a high-pass frequency filter on the image generate a processed version of the delta image(see paragraph 28 note the image processed with contrast enhancement, edge enhancement (i.e. sharpening) and high pass filtering prior to processing further image processing performed on the image i.e. post processing to further advance contrast the intermediate result of the contrast enhancement and high pass filtering corresponds to the generated ) One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily performed various the known preprocessing steps as preliminary steps prior to further processing the image as described in Golub, prior to performing the processing of claim 11. The motivation to combine is to enhance contrast, reduce noise enhance edges (see paragraph 28) prior to further processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Claim 11 and Golub to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Re claim 12, claim 11 of the patent discloses wherein the processed version image comprises a noise reduced version of the luminance pixel value (see claim 11 “a smoothing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold” note that smoothing removes noise).
Re claim 16 Claim 11 discloses wherein applying the content factor to the image comprises: performing a first image processing operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold; and performing a second image processing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold, wherein the second image processing operation is different from the first image processing operation (see claim 11 “generating a sharpened version of a luminance pixel value of the pixel by at least applying the content factor to a version of a luminance pixel value of the pixel, wherein applying the content factor to the version of the luminance pixel value comprises (i) performing a sharpening operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold, and (ii) performing a smoothing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold.” Note that smoothing is different than sharpening). Golub discloses processing a delta version (see rejection of claim 11)
Re claim 17 claim 16 of the patent discloses
An electronic device, comprising: a neural processor circuit configured to generate a content map identifying categories of content in segments of an image by performing a machine learning algorithm on the image; (see claim 16 “An electronic device comprising: a neural processor circuit configured to generate a content map identifying categories of content in segments of an image by performing a machine learning algorithm to the image;”)
and a content image processing circuit configured to receive a image of an luminance image comprising luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel of the image (see claim 16” and a content image processing circuit coupled to the neural processor circuit, the content image processing circuit configured to receive luminance pixel values of the image a” note that the circuit receives luminance information”)
and a content map identifying categories of content in segments of the image, see claim 16 “An electronic device comprising: a neural processor circuit configured to generate a content map identifying categories of content in segments of an image by performing a machine learning algorithm to the image; a content image processing circuit coupled to the neural processor circuit, the content image processing circuit configured to receive …the content map” ()
and wherein the content image processing circuit is further configured to: determine a content factor associated with the pixel of the image based on the identified categories of content in the image and at least one of a texture value of the pixel or a chroma value of the pixel, wherein the texture value indicates a likelihood of a category of content associated with the pixel based on a texture in the image, and wherein the chroma value indicates a likelihood of the category of content associated with the pixel based on color information of the image (see claim 16 “a content factor associated with a pixel of the image according to the identified categories of content in the image and at least one of a texture value of the pixel or a chroma value of the pixel, wherein the texture value indicates a likelihood of a category of content that is associated with the pixel based on a texture in the image, and wherein the chroma value indicates a likelihood of the category of content that is associated with the pixel based on color information of the image”)
generate a processed version image by at least applying the content factor to the image (see claim 16 “content modifying circuit coupled to the content factor circuit to receive the content factor and configured to generate a sharpened version of a luminance pixel value of the pixel by at least applying the content factor to a version of a luminance pixel value of the pixel, wherein the content modifying circuit is configured to apply the content factor to the version of the luminance pixel value by (i) performing a sharpening operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold, and (ii) performing a smoothing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold.”).
Claim 16 does not expressly disclose a delta image wherein the delta version image includes a high frequency component of the image generated by performing contrast enhancement by a high-pass frequency filter on the luminance image and generate a processed version of the delta image.
Golub discloses a delta image wherein the delta version image includes a high frequency component of the image generated by performing contrast enhancement by a high-pass frequency filter on the luminance image and generate a processed version of the delta image (see paragraph 28 note the image processed with contrast enhancement, edge enhancement (i.e. sharpening) and high pass filtering prior to processing further image processing performed on the image i.e. post processing to further advance contrast the intermediate result of the contrast enhancement and high pass filtering corresponds to the generated ). One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily performed various the known preprocessing steps as preliminary steps prior to further processing the image as described in Golub, prior to performing the processing of claim 16. The motivation to combine is to enhance contrast, reduce noise enhance edges (see paragraph 28) prior to further processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Claim 16 and Golub to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Re claim 18 claim 16 discloses wherein the processed version image comprises a noise reduced version of the luminance pixel value. (see claim 16 “performing a smoothing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold.” Note that smoothing removes noise).
Claim 21 claims 16 discloses wherein the content image processing circuit is further configured to apply the content factor to the delta version image by performing a first image processing operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold and performing a second image processing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold, wherein the second image processing operation is different from the first image processing operation (see claim 16 “a content modifying circuit coupled to the content factor circuit to receive the content factor and configured to generate a sharpened version of a luminance pixel value of the pixel by at least applying the content factor to a version of a luminance pixel value of the pixel, wherein the content modifying circuit is configured to apply the content factor to the version of the luminance pixel value by (i) performing a sharpening operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold, and (ii) performing a smoothing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold.” Note that smoothing is different than sharpening). Golub discloses processing a delta version (see rejection of claim 16).
Claim 4, 13 and 19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 11 and 16 of U.S. Patent No. 11,488,285 in view of US 2010/0302396 and Silverstein US 2006/0093234.
Re claim 4 claim 1 discloses operating on luminance information (see rejection to claim 2) Claim 1 and Golub do not disclose wherein the delta version image comprises a tone mapped version. Silverstien discloses wherein the delta version image comprises a tone mapped version (see paragraph 61). One of ordinary skill could have easily added the tone mapping to the list of preprocessing operations discussed in Golub as combined claim 1. Adding this well know features as described in Silverstein as part of the preprocessing routine to the combination of claim 1 and Golub would yield predictable results of producing a preprocessed image that is also tone mapped in addition to the other operations. Therefore, the tone mapping and claim 1 would therefore perform the same function separately as they do together Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine claim 1 and Golub with Silverstein to reach the aforementioned advantages.
Re claim 13 claim 11 discloses operating on luminance information (see rejection to claim11) Claim 11 and Golub do not disclose wherein the delta version image comprises a tone mapped version. Silverstien discloses wherein the delta version image comprises a tone mapped version (see paragraph 61). One of ordinary skill could have easily added the tone mapping to the list of preprocessing operations discussed in Golub as combined claim 11. Adding this well know features as described in Silverstein as part of the preprocessing routine to the combination of claim 11 and Golub would yield predictable results of producing a preprocessed image that is also tone mapped in addition to the other operations. Therefore, the tone mapping and claim 11 would therefore perform the same function separately as they do together Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine claim 11 and Golub with Silverstein to reach the aforementioned advantages.
Re claim 19 claim 16 discloses operating on luminance information (see rejection to claim17) Claim 16 and Golub do not disclose wherein the delta version image comprises a tone mapped version. Silverstien discloses wherein the delta version image comprises a tone mapped version (see paragraph 61). One of ordinary skill could have easily added the tone mapping to the list of preprocessing operations discussed in Golub as combined claim 16. Adding this well know features as described in Silverstein as part of the preprocessing routine to the combination of claim 16 and Golub would yield predictable results of producing a preprocessed image that is also tone mapped in addition to the other operations. Therefore, the tone mapping and claim 16 would therefore perform the same function separately as they do together Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine claim 16 and Golub with Silverstein to reach the aforementioned advantages.
Claim 5, and 14 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,488,285 in view of Golub and Aisaka US 2010/0246939.
Re claim 5 claim 1 of the patent discloses all the elements of claim 1 and claim 1 discloses operating on luminance information (see rejection to claim 1). Claim 1 does not expressly disclose wherein the processed version imager comprises white balanced version of the pixel value. Aisaka discloses wherein the processed version of the pixel value is a white balanced version of the pixel value (see paragraph 65 and 123 white balance is performed in accordance with a subject map). The motivation to combine is to perform white balance correction and Lou in a similar application of image sharpening using a subject map to claim 1 (see paragraph 64 and 65) suggests the enhancement may be “or any other operations with which one or more attributes of an image can be enhanced” see paragraph 80. One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily performed the White balance of Aisaka as the image enhancement operation of claim 1. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine claim 1 Golub and Aisaka to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Re claim 14 claim 11 of the patent discloses all the elements of claim 11 discloses operating on luminance information (see rejection to claim 11). Claim 11 does not expressly disclose wherein the processed version image comprises a white balanced version of the pixel value. Aisaka discloses wherein the processed version of the pixel value is a white balanced version of the pixel value (see paragraph 65 and 123 white balance is performed in accordance with a subject map). The motivation to combine is to perform white balance correction and Lou in a similar application of image sharpening using a subject map to claim 1 (see paragraph 64 and 65) suggests the enhancement may be “or any other operations with which one or more attributes of an image can be enhanced” see paragraph 80. One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily performed the White balance of Aisaka as the image enhancement operation of claim 11. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine claim 11 Golub and Aisaka to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Claim 15 and 20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 11 and 16 of U.S. Patent No. 11,488,285 in view of Golub US 2010/0302396 and Silverstein US 2006/0093234.
Re claim 15 claim 11 discloses operating on luminance information (see rejection to claim 11 ) Claim 11 and Golub do not disclose wherein the delta version image is generated by a bilateral filter. Umanssky discloses wherein the delta version image is generated by a bilateral filter (see paragraph 33 note that preprocessing to remove noise is done by a bilateral filter). Golub discloses noise removal as part of the processing combined with claim 11 rejection of claim 10, see paragraph 28, Golub contemplates other filters being used for noise removal (see paragraph 28 “filter function is applied using high pass frequency filters such as but not limited to Wiener or homomorphic filters to reduce noise”. In light of this one of ordinary skill in the art could have to replaced the noise filter of Golub with a well known bilateral filter and the results of such a combination (noise is reduced in the image) would have been predictable. Therefore, it would have been obvious before to one of ordinary skill in the act before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Claim 11 and Golub with Umansky.
Re claim 20 claim 16 discloses operating on luminance information (see rejection to claim 17 ) Claim 16 and Golub do not disclose wherein the delta version image is generated by a bilateral filter. Umanssky discloses wherein the delta version image is generated by a bilateral filter (see paragraph 33 note that preprocessing to remove noise is done by a bilateral filter). Golub discloses noise removal as part of the processing combined with claim 16 rejection of claim 10, see paragraph 28, Golub contemplates other filters being used for noise removal (see paragraph 28 “filter function is applied using high pass frequency filters such as but not limited to Wiener or homomorphic filters to reduce noise”. In light of this one of ordinary skill in the art could have replaced the noise filter of Golub with a well known bilateral filter and the results of such a combination (noise is reduced in the image) would have been predictable. Therefore, it would have been obvious before to one of ordinary skill in the act before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Claim 16 and Golub with Umansky.
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.
Claim(s) 2, 3 , 6, 11,12, 17 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luo et al 2003/0108250 in view of Golub US 2010/0302396 Gallagher et al US 2003/0161545.
Re claim 2 Lou discloses an apparatus for image processing, comprising:
a content image processing circuit (See paragraph 29 note that invention can be constructed in hardware.) configured to receive a pixel value of a pixel of an image and a content map identifying categories of content in segments of the image, (see abst. see paragraph 32 subject matter belief map indicates probability)
and wherein the content image processing circuit is further configured to:
determine a content factor associated with the pixel of the image based on the identified categories of content in the image (see paragraph 45 and 46 note that a control signal for controlling image is selected based on the subject matter).
and at least one of a texture value of the pixel or a chroma value of the pixel, wherein the texture value indicates a likelihood of a category of content associated with the pixel based on a texture in the image, and wherein the chroma value indicates a likelihood of the category of content associated with the pixel based on color information of the image; (see paragraph 42 note that the subject matter belief map contains a probability, see paragraph 43 note that color and texture is used to determine the probabilities this corresponds to the color and or texture value , see paragraph 64 -66 note that a belief map values (which are the probabilities) are used to generate the control signal for each pixel also see paragraph 73 and 75).;
and generate a processed version image by at least applying the content factor to the image. (see paragraph 45 note that control signal is used for image enhancement see paragraph 80 note alternatively or additionally, the image enhancement operation may be noise reduction, de-blocking, scene balance adjustment, tone scale adjustment, color re-mapping, image interpolation, or any other operations with which one or more attributes of an image can be enhanced).
Lou does not disclose
A delta version image of a luminance image comprising luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel of an image wherein the delta version image comprises a high frequency component of the image generated by performing contrast enhancement by a high-pass frequency filter on the luminance image
Golub in a similar field of endeavor of image filtering discloses A delta version image of an image comprising pixel value of a pixel of an image wherein the delta version image comprises a high frequency component of the image generated by performing contrast enhancement by a high-pass frequency filter on the image (see paragraph 28 note the image processed with contrast enhancement, edge enhancement (i.e. sharpening) and high pass filtering prior to processing further image processing performed on the image i.e. post processing to further advance contrast the intermediate result of the contrast enhancement and high pass filtering corresponds to the delta image) The motivation to combine is to enhance contrast, reduce noise enhance edges (see paragraph 28 ) as preprocessing. One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily performed various the known preprocessing steps as preliminary steps prior to further processing the image as described in Golub, prior to performing the processing of Luo. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Luo and Golub to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Luo and Golub do not expressly disclose operating on “luminance values” i.e luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel of an image. Gallagher discloses operating on luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel of an image (see paragraph 63 Gallagher discloses performing image enhancement on the image in the luminance color difference domain and the processing is performed on luminance channel corresponding to the luminance image). The examiner notes that that one of ordinary skill in the art could have easily modified the system of Luo and Golub with the teaching of Gallagher to perform enhancement such as sharping in the luminance domain. The results of combining these known methods would yield predictable results of applying the enhancement in the luminance color difference domain and the functions of the elements (image enhancement and color channel conversion) are the same in the combination. As such the combination of the reference is merely combining known elements to yield predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Luo Golub and Gallagher.
Re claim 3 Lou discloses wherein the processed version image comprises a noise reduced version of the luminance pixel value (see paragraph 80 note alternatively or additionally, the image enhancement operation may be noise reduction, de-blocking, scene balance adjustment, tone scale adjustment, color re-mapping, image interpolation, or any other operations with which one or more attributes of an image can be enhanced). see paragraph 79 Gallagher discloses performing image enhancement on the image in the luminance color difference domain (see rejection to claim 2)
Re claim 6 Lou does not expressly disclose wherein the processed version image is generated based on the delta version image, wherein the delta version image is generated based on the luminance image of the image.
Golub further discloses wherein the processed version image is generated based on the delta version image, wherein the delta version image is generated based the image (see paragraph 28 note the image processed with contrast enhancement, edge enhancement (i.e. sharpening) and high pass filtering prior to processing further image processing performed on the image i.e. post processing to further advance contrast the intermediate result of the contrast enhancement and high pass filtering corresponds to the delta image) The motivation to combine is to enhance contrast, reduce noise enhance edges (see paragraph 28 ) as preprocessing. One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily performed various the known preprocessing steps as preliminary steps prior to further processing the image as described in Golub, prior to performing the processing of Luo. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Luo and Golub to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Luo and Golub does not expressly disclose operating on “luminance values” i.e. processing based on the luminance image of the image. Gallagher discloses operating on luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel of an image (see paragraph 63 Gallagher discloses performing image enhancement on the image in the luminance color difference domain and the processing is performed on luminance channel corresponding to the luminance image). The examiner notes that that one of ordinary skill in the art could have easily modified the system of Luo and Golub with the teaching of Gallagher to perform enhancement such as sharping in the luminance domain. The results of combining these known methods would yield predictable results of applying the enhancement in the luminance color difference domain and the functions of the elements (image enhancement and color channel conversion) are the same in the combination. As such the combination of the references is merely combining known elements to yield predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Luo Golub and Gallagher.
Re claim 11 Lou discloses
A method, comprising:
receiving an image comprising luminance information of a pixel value of a pixel of an image, (see abst. see paragraph 32 subject matter belief map indicates probability)
receiving a content map identifying categories of content in segments of the image (see abst. see paragraph 32 subject matter belief map indicates probability of content);
determining a content factor associated with the pixel of the image based on the identified categories of content in the image (see paragraph 45 and 46 note that a control signal for controlling image is selected based on the subject matter) and at least one of a texture value of the pixel or a chroma value of the pixel, wherein the texture value indicates a likelihood of a category of content associated with the pixel based on a texture in the image, and wherein the chroma value indicates a likelihood of the category of content associated with the pixel based on color information of the image; (see paragraph 42 note that the subject matter belief map contains a probability, see paragraph 43 note that color and texture is used to determine the probabilities this corresponds to the color and or texture value , see paragraph 64 -66 note that a belief map values (which are the probabilities) are used to generate the control signal for each pixel also see paragraph 73 and 75).;
and generating a processed version image by at least applying the content factor to the delta version image. (see paragraph 45 note that control signal is used for image enhancement see paragraph 80 note alternatively or additionally, the image enhancement operation may be noise reduction, de-blocking, scene balance adjustment, tone scale adjustment, color re-mapping, image interpolation, or any other operations with which one or more attributes of an image can be enhanced).
Lou does not expressly disclose A delta version image of an image comprising pixel value of a pixel of an image wherein the delta version image comprises a high frequency component of the image generated by performing contrast enhancement by a high-pass frequency filter on the image and an luminance image comprising luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel of an image.
Golub in a similar field of endeavor of image filtering discloses A delta version image of an image comprising pixel value of a pixel of an image wherein the delta version image comprises a high frequency component of the image generated by performing contrast enhancement by a high-pass frequency filter on the image (see paragraph 28 note the image processed with contrast enhancement, edge enhancement (i.e. sharpening) and high pass filtering prior to processing further image processing performed on the image i.e. post processing to further advance contrast the intermediate result of the contrast enhancement and high pass filtering corresponds to the delta image) The motivation to combine is to enhance contrast, reduce noise enhance edges (see paragraph 28 ) as preprocessing. One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily performed various the known preprocessing steps as preliminary steps prior to further processing the image as described in Golub, prior to performing the processing of Luo. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Luo and Golub to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Luo and Golub do not expressly disclose operating on “luminance values” i.e. luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel of an image. Gallagher discloses operating on luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel of an image (see paragraph 63 Gallagher discloses performing image enhancement on the image in the luminance color difference domain and the processing is performed on luminance channel corresponding to the luminance image). The examiner notes that that one of ordinary skill in the art could have easily modified the system of Luo and Golub with the teaching of Gallagher to perform enhancement such as sharping in the luminance domain. The results of combining these known methods would yield predictable results of applying the enhancement in the luminance color difference domain and the functions of the elements (image enhancement and color channel conversion) are the same in the combination. As such the combination of the reference is merely combining known elements to yield predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Luo Golub and Gallagher.
Re claim 12 Lou discloses wherein the processed version image comprises a noise reduced version of the luminance pixel value (see paragraph 80 note alternatively or additionally, the image enhancement operation may be noise reduction, de-blocking, scene balance adjustment, tone scale adjustment, color re-mapping, image interpolation, or any other operations with which one or more attributes of an image can be enhanced). see paragraph 79 Gallagher discloses performing image enhancement on the image in the luminance color difference domain (see rejection to claim 2)
Re claim 17 Lou discloses an apparatus for image processing, comprising:
a neural processor circuit configured to generate a content map identifying categories of content in segments of an image by performing a machine learning algorithm on the image (see paragraph 29 and figure 1 note that the various function may be implemented in hardware see paragraph 43 note the trained neural network is used to create the subject belief MP see paragraph 32)
a content image processing circuit (See paragraph 29 note that invention can be constructed in hardware.) configured to receive a pixel value of a pixel of an image and the content map identifying categories of content in segments of the image, (see abst. see paragraph 32 subject matter belief map indicates probability)
and wherein the content image processing circuit is further configured to:
determine a content factor associated with the pixel of the image based on the identified categories of content in the image (see paragraphs 45 and 46 note that a control signal for controlling image is selected based on the subject matter).
and at least one of a texture value of the pixel or a chroma value of the pixel, wherein the texture value indicates a likelihood of a category of content associated with the pixel based on a texture in the image, and wherein the chroma value indicates a likelihood of the category of content associated with the pixel based on color information of the image; (see paragraph 42 note that the subject matter belief map contains a probability, see paragraph 43 note that color and texture is used to determine the probabilities this corresponds to the color and or texture value , see paragraph 64 -66 note that a belief map values (which are the probabilities) are used to generate the control signal for each pixel also see paragraph 73 and 75).;
and generate a processed version image by at least applying the content factor to the image. (see paragraph 45 note that control signal is used for image enhancement see paragraph 80 note alternatively or additionally, the image enhancement operation may be noise reduction, de-blocking, scene balance adjustment, tone scale adjustment, color re-mapping, image interpolation, or any other operations with which one or more attributes of an image can be enhanced).
Lou does not expressly disclose
A delta version image of an luminance image comprising luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel of an image wherein the delta version image includes a high frequency component of the image generated by performing contrast enhancement by a high-pass frequency filter on the luminance image
Golub in a similar field of endeavor of image filtering discloses A delta version image of an image comprising pixel value of a pixel of an image wherein the delta version image includes a high frequency component of the image generated by performing contrast enhancement by a high-pass frequency filter on the image (see paragraph 28 note the image processed with contrast enhancement, edge enhancement (i.e. sharpening) and high pass filtering prior to processing further image processing performed on the image i.e. post processing to further advance contrast the intermediate result of the contrast enhancement and high pass filtering corresponds to the delta image) The motivation to combine is to enhance contrast, reduce noise enhance edges (see paragraph 28 ) as preprocessing. One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily performed various the known preprocessing steps as preliminary steps prior to further processing the image as described in Golub, prior to performing the processing of Luo. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Luo and Golub to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Luo and Golub do not expressly disclose operating on “luminance values” i.e. luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel of an image. Gallagher discloses operating on luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel of an image (see paragraph 63 Gallagher discloses performing image enhancement on the image in the luminance color difference domain and the processing is performed on luminance channel corresponding to the luminance image). The examiner notes that that one of ordinary skill in the art could have easily modified the system of Luo and Golub with the teaching of Gallagher to perform enhancement such as sharping in the luminance domain. The results of combining these known methods would yield predictable results of applying the enhancement in the luminance color difference domain and the functions of the elements (image enhancement and color channel conversion) are the same in the combination. As such the combination of the reference is merely combining known elements to yield predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Luo Golub and Gallagher.
Re claim 18 Lou discloses wherein the processed version image comprises a noise reduced version of the luminance pixel value (see paragraph 80 note alternatively or additionally, the image enhancement operation may be noise reduction, de-blocking, scene balance adjustment, tone scale adjustment, color re-mapping, image interpolation, or any other operations with which one or more attributes of an image can be enhanced). see paragraph 79 Gallagher discloses performing image enhancement on the image in the luminance color difference domain (see rejection to claim 2)
Claim(s) 4, 13 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luo et al 2003/0108250 and Golub in view of Gallagher et al US 2003/0161545 in further view of Silverstein US 2006/0093234.
Re claim 4 Luo Golub and Gallagher discloses all the elements of claim 2. Gallagher discloses operating on luminance image containing luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel in an image (see paragraph 63 Gallagher discloses performing image enhancement on the image in the luminance color difference domain and the processing is performed on luminance channel corresponding to the luminance image)
They do not disclose wherein the delta version image comprises a tone mapped version. In a similar field of endeavor of image filtering Silverstien discloses wherein the delta version image comprises a tone mapped version (see paragraph 61). One of ordinary skill could have easily added the tone mapping to the list of preprocessing operations discussed in Golub as combined with Luo and Gallagher. Adding this well know features as described in Silverstein as part of the preprocessing routine to the combination of Lou Golub and Gallagher would yield predictable results of producing a preprocessed image that is also tone mapped in addition to the other operations. The tone mapping and the features of Golub as combined with Luo and Gallagher would perform the same function together as separately. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Luo Golub and Gallagher with Silverstein to reach the aforementioned advantages.
Re claim 13 Luo Golub and Gallagher discloses all the elements of claim 11. Gallagher discloses operating on luminance image containing luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel in an image (see paragraph 63 Gallagher discloses performing image enhancement on the image in the luminance color difference domain and the processing is performed on luminance channel corresponding to the luminance image)
They do not disclose wherein the delta version image comprises a tone mapped version. In a similar field of endeavor of image filtering Silverstien discloses wherein the delta version image comprises a tone mapped version (see paragraph 61). One of ordinary skill could have easily added the tone mapping to the list of preprocessing operations discussed in Golub as combined with Luo and Gallagher. Adding this well know features as described in Silverstein as part of the preprocessing routine to the combination of Lou Golub and Gallagher would yield predictable results of producing a preprocessed image that is also tone mapped in addition to the other operations. The tone mapping and the features of Golub as combined with Luo and Gallagher would perform the same function together as separately. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Luo Golub and Gallagher with Silverstein to reach the aforementioned advantages.
Re claim 19 Luo Golub and Gallagher discloses all the elements of claim 15. Gallagher discloses operating on luminance image containing luminance information of a luminance pixel value of a pixel in an image (see paragraph 63 Gallagher discloses performing image enhancement on the image in the luminance color difference domain and the processing is performed on luminance channel corresponding to the luminance image)
They do not discloses wherein the delta version image comprises a tone mapped version. In a similar field of endeavor of image filtering Silverstien discloses wherein the delta version image comprises a tone mapped version (see paragraph 61). One of ordinary skill could have easily added the tone mapping to the list of preprocessing operations discussed in Golub as combined with Luo and Gallagher. Adding this well know features as described in Silverstein as part of the preprocessing routine to the combination of Lou Golub and Gallagher would yield predictable results of producing a preprocessed image that is also tone mapped in addition to the other operations. The tone mapping and the features of Golub as combined with Luo and Gallagher would perform the same function together as separately. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Luo Golub and Gallagher with Silverstein to reach the aforementioned advantages.
Claim(s) 5 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lou et al 2003/0108250 in view of Gallagher et al US 2003/0161545 and Golub US 2010/0302396in further view of Aisaka US 2010/0246939.
Re claim 5 Lou Golub and Gallager disclose all the elements of claim 2. Gallagher discloses performing image enhancement on the image in the luminance image (see paragraph 79. Lou further discloses the enhancement may be “or any other operations with which one or more attributes of an image can be enhanced” see paragraph 80. They do not expressly disclose wherein the processed version of the pixel value is a white balanced version of the pixel value. Aisaka discloses wherein the processed version of the pixel value is white balanced version of the pixel value ( see paragraph 65 and 123 white balance is performed in accordance with a subject map). The motivation to combine is to perform white balance correction and Lou suggests the enhancement may be “or any other operations with which one or more attributes of an image can be enhanced” see paragraph 80. One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily performed the White balance of Aisaka as the image enhancement operation of Lou. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lou and Gallagher with Aisaka to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Re claim 14 Lou Golub and Gallager disclose all the elements of claim 11. Gallagher discloses Gallagher discloses performing image enhancement on the image in the luminance image (see paragraph 79). Lou further discloses the enhancement may be “or any other operations with which one or more attributes of an image can be enhanced” see paragraph 80. They do not expressly disclose wherein the processed version of the pixel value is a white balanced version of the pixel value. Aisaka discloses wherein the processed version of the pixel value is white balanced version of the pixel value (see paragraph 65 and 123 white balance is performed in accordance with a subject map). The motivation to combine is to perform white balance correction and Lou suggests the enhancement may be “or any other operations with which one or more attributes of an image can be enhanced” see paragraph 80. One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily performed the White balance of Aisaka as the image enhancement operation of Lou. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lou and Gallagher with Aisaka to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Claim(s) 7, 8 16 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luo et al 2003/0108250 in view of Gallagher et al US 2003/0161545 and Golub in further view of Hsu 2013/0216153.
Re claim 7 Luo further discloses
wherein the content image processing circuit is configured to apply the content factor to the version of the pixel value ( paragraph 45 note that control signal is used to enhance the image enhancement see paragraph 80 note alternatively or additionally, the image enhancement operation may be noise reduction, de-blocking, scene balance adjustment, tone scale adjustment, color re-mapping, image interpolation, or any other operations with which one or more attributes of an image can be enhanced). Golub discloses performing on a preprocessed (i.e. delta) version (see rejection to claim 2)
Lou Golub and Gallagher do not expressly disclose
a first image processing operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold; and a second image processing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold, wherein the second image processing operation is different from the first image processing operation.
Hsu discloses a first image processing operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold; and a second image processing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold, wherein the second image processing operation is different from the first image processing operation (see paragraph 31 “it is determined whether an analog gain is greater than or equal to a threshold, e.g., 4. When the analog gain is greater than or equal to the threshold, as shown in step S822, a second filter corresponding to a larger cross-shaped pattern as 102 shown in FIG. 2 is set as the selected filter. When the analog gain is not greater than or equal to the threshold, as shown in step S821, a first filter corresponding to a smaller cross-shaped pattern as 101 shown in FIG. 2 is set as the selected filter. Thus, as a greater analog gain indicates that an input image may include amplified noises, a filter corresponding to a larger cross-shaped pattern is selected to obtain smoother effects.”. The motivation to combine is that a larger cross shape pattern archives smoother effects i.e. the filter can be chosen based on the desired amount of smoothing. One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily modified the system of Luo to use a larger filter or smaller as described by Hsu depending on the control factor of Luo. Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Hsu with Luo Golub and Gallagher to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Re claim 8 Hsu further discloses wherein the first and second image processing operations are noise adjustment operations it is determined whether an analog gain is greater than or equal to a threshold, e.g., 4. When the analog gain is greater than or equal to the threshold, as shown in step S822, a second filter corresponding to a larger cross-shaped pattern as 102 shown in FIG. 2 is set as the selected filter. When the analog gain is not greater than or equal to the threshold, as shown in step S821, a first filter corresponding to a smaller cross-shaped pattern as 101 shown in FIG. 2 is set as the selected filter. Thus, as a greater analog gain indicates that an input image may include amplified noises, a filter corresponding to a larger cross-shaped pattern is selected to obtain smoother effects. see paragraph 63 Gallagher discloses performing image enhancement on the image in the luminance color difference domain.
Re claim 16 Luo further discloses
wherein the content image processing circuit is configured to apply the content factor to the version of the pixel value ( paragraph 45 note that control signal is used to enhance the image enhancement see paragraph 80 note alternatively or additionally, the image enhancement operation may be noise reduction, de-blocking, scene balance adjustment, tone scale adjustment, color re-mapping, image interpolation, or any other operations with which one or more attributes of an image can be enhanced). Golub discloses performing on a preprocessed (i.e. delta) version (see rejection to claim 2)
Lou Golub and Gallagher do not expressly disclose
wherein the content image processing circuit is further configured to apply the content factor to the delta version image by performing a first image processing operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold and performing a second image processing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold, wherein the second image processing operation is different from the first image processing operation.
Hsu discloses wherein the content image processing circuit is further configured to apply the content factor to the delta version image by performing a first image processing operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold and performing a second image processing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold, wherein the second image processing operation is different from the first image processing operation (see paragraph 31 “it is determined whether an analog gain is greater than or equal to a threshold, e.g., 4. When the analog gain is greater than or equal to the threshold, as shown in step S822, a second filter corresponding to a larger cross-shaped pattern as 102 shown in FIG. 2 is set as the selected filter. When the analog gain is not greater than or equal to the threshold, as shown in step S821, a first filter corresponding to a smaller cross-shaped pattern as 101 shown in FIG. 2 is set as the selected filter. Thus, as a greater analog gain indicates that an input image may include amplified noises, a filter corresponding to a larger cross-shaped pattern is selected to obtain smoother effects.”. The motivation to combine is that a larger cross shape pattern archives smoother effects i.e. the filter can be chosen based on the desired amount of smoothing. One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily modified the system of Luo to use a larger filter or smaller as described by Hsu depending on the control factor of Luo. Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Hsu with Luo Golub and Gallagher to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Re claim 21 Luo further discloses
wherein the content image processing circuit is configured to apply the content factor to the version of the pixel value ( paragraph 45 note that control signal is used to enhance the image enhancement see paragraph 80 note alternatively or additionally, the image enhancement operation may be noise reduction, de-blocking, scene balance adjustment, tone scale adjustment, color re-mapping, image interpolation, or any other operations with which one or more attributes of an image can be enhanced). Golub discloses performing on a preprocessed (i.e. delta) version (see rejection to claim 2)
Lou Golub and Gallagher do not expressly disclose
a first image processing operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold; and a second image processing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold, wherein the second image processing operation is different from the first image processing operation.
Hsu discloses a first image processing operation responsive to the content factor being above a threshold; and a second image processing operation responsive to the content factor being below the threshold, wherein the second image processing operation is different from the first image processing operation see paragraph 31 “it is determined whether an analog gain is greater than or equal to a threshold, e.g., 4. When the analog gain is greater than or equal to the threshold, as shown in step S822, a second filter corresponding to a larger cross-shaped pattern as 102 shown in FIG. 2 is set as the selected filter. When the analog gain is not greater than or equal to the threshold, as shown in step S821, a first filter corresponding to a smaller cross-shaped pattern as 101 shown in FIG. 2 is set as the selected filter. Thus, as a greater analog gain indicates that an input image may include amplified noises, a filter corresponding to a larger cross-shaped pattern is selected to obtain smoother effects.”. The motivation to combine is that a larger cross shape pattern archives smoother effects i.e. the filter can be chosen based on the desired amount of smoothing. One of ordinary skill in the art could have easily modified the system of Luo to use a larger filter or smaller as described by Hsu depending on the control factor of Luo. Therefore, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Hsu with Luo Golub and Gallagher to reach the aforementioned advantage.
Claim(s) 15 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Luo et al 2003/0108250 in view of Gallagher et al US 2003/0161545 and Golub in further view of Umansky US 2014/0003734.
Re claim 15 Gallagher further discloses applied to the luminance information of the luminance pixel value of the pixel (See paragraph 63 Gallagher discloses performing image processing on the luminance channel). Lou, Gallagher and Golub do not disclose wherein the delta version image is generated by a bilateral filter. Umanssky discloses wherein the delta version image is generated by a bilateral filter (see paragraph 33 note that preprocessing to remove noise is done by a bilateral filter). Golub discloses noise removal as part of the processing combined with Lou Gallagher in the rejection of claim 1, see paragraph 28, Golub contemplates other filters being used for noise removal (see paragraph 28 “filter function is applied using high pass frequency filters such as but not limited to Wiener or homomorphic filters to reduce noise”. In light of this one of ordinary skill in the art could have to replaced the noise filter of Golub with a well known bilateral filter and the results of such a combination (noise is reduced in the image) would have been predictable. Therefore, it would have been obvious before to one of ordinary skill in the act before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lou, Gallagher and Golub with Umansky.
Re claim 20 Gallagher further discloses applied to the luminance information of the luminance pixel value of the pixel (See paragraph 63 Gallagher discloses performing image processing on the luminance channel). .Lou, Gallagher and Golub do not disclose wherein the delta version image is generated by a bilateral filter. Umanssky discloses wherein the delta version image is generated by a bilateral filter (see paragraph 33 note that preprocessing to remove noise is done by a bilateral filter). Golub discloses noise removal as part of the processing combined with Lou Gallagher in the rejection of claim 1, see paragraph 28, Golub contemplates other filters being used for noise removal (see paragraph 28 “filter function is applied using high pass frequency filters such as but not limited to Wiener or homomorphic filters to reduce noise”. In light of this one of ordinary skill in the art could have to replaced the noise filter of Golub with a well known bilateral filter and the results of such a combination (noise is reduced in the image) would have been predictable. Therefore, it would have been obvious before to one of ordinary skill in the act before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lou, Gallagher and Golub with Umansky.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 and 10 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 and any double patenting rejection are overcome.
Re claim 9 The combination of Luo Golub Gallagher and Hsu disclose all the features of claim 7. They do not expressly disclose wherein the first and second image processing operations comprise tone mapping operations.
Re claim 10 The combination of Luo Golub Gallagher and Hsu disclose all the features of claim 10. They do not expressly disclose wherein the first and second image processing operations comprise tone mapping operations.
Cited Art
The following is a recitation of cited art considered relevant but not used in a rejection above.
Bohm US 20090148015 A1 discloses “The invention relates to a method for noise suppression in medical images comprising steps of measuring the gradient field strength of an image pixel and selecting a suitable filter mask for noise suppression as a function of the gradient field strength, with the value of the gradient field strength being compared with a predetermined threshold value. The method is repeated when an additional image pixel is selected. A decision is made per read-in image pixel as to which type of filter mask is used for filtering. A selection can be made between filter masks of different sizes or isotropic or anisotropic or directional filter masks. The decision is based on the measured gradient field strength of the respective pixel. The use of different filter masks allows the signal-to-noise ratio to be improved, without distorting structures like edges for instance and without generating artificial structures in homogenous noise regions.” (See abstract)
Sumiya US 20080199101 A1 discloses
[PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED] It is an object of the present invention to provide an image processing apparatus capable of obtaining a sharp image having less noise.
[MEANS FOR SOLVING THE PROBLEM] Herein discloses is an image processing apparatus, comprising a horizontal edge strength calculating unit 22 for calculating an edge strength along a horizontal direction of a concerned pixel and pixels respectively disposed in left and right sides of said concerned pixel, a prefilter 24 for carrying out a filter processing based on the edge strength along the horizontal direction, and selectively performing noise reduction and edge enhancement, a vertical edge strength calculating unit 23 for calculating an edge strength along a vertical direction of the concerned pixel and pixels respectively disposed in upper and lower sides of said concerned pixel, and a prefilter 25 for carrying out a filter processing based on the edge strength along the vertical direction, and selectively performing noise reduction and edge enhancement, thereby enabling to sharpen image data in the vicinity of the concerned pixel respectively along upper and lower, left and right directions, and therefore obtain an image having less noises as well as sharp for edge directions. (See abstract)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN T MOTSINGER whose telephone number is (571)270-1237. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM.
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, Chineyere Wills-Burns can be reached at (571) 272-9752. 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.
/SEAN T MOTSINGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2673
Prosecution Insights