Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Notice to Applicants
This communication is in response to the application filed on 3/13/2025.
Claims 1-19 are pending.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In paragraph [0072], “to be restoreed” needs to be changed to “to be restored”.
In paragraph [0093] and [0112], “restoreed pixel increased image” needs to be changed to “restored pixel increased image”.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities:
• In claim 12, line 3, "an F-number" should be “a F-number". Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because a storage medium (cited on claim 19) could include a transitory signal. It is noted that in paragraph 0113 of the specification limits a storage medium (which may also be referred to more fully as a 'non-transitory computer-readable storage medium') to not include transitory media. However, the “may” the statement is left open ended and therefore a storage medium could include transitory signals. The Examiner suggests amending claim 19 to disclose “a non-transitory computer readable storage medium”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The limitation, “processor acquires the third image using the plurality of restored images” in Claim 7 is not supported by the specification.
In the specification, Paragraph [0112] and FIG. 11 describe “In a case where the processing determining unit determines that the second processing is to be performed, the pixel increasing processing unit acquires a pixel increased image using the first image and the second image, and the image restoration processing unit acquires a restored pixel increased image by performing the image restoration processing for the pixel increased image”. It does not state that the plurality of images is already restored.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 7-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 7 recites “the processor acquires the third image using the plurality of restored images, the processor performs the image restoration processing for the third image.” The limitations are illogical sequence of steps that renders the claim scope unclear and indefinite. The processor "acquires a third image using a plurality of restored images." This explicitly establishes that the third image is already the result of a restoration process (since it is created using images that have already been restored). The processor "performs image restoration processing for the third image." It is unclear whether this means the already restored third image undergoes a second round of restoration processing, or something else.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 1-3, 7, 8, 16, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AJITO (U.S. Publication No. 2018/0255251) in view of Mikawa et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2017/0155881) (hereafter, "Mikawa").
Regarding claim 1, AJITO teaches an image processing apparatus comprising; a memory storing instructions; and at least one processor that executes the instructions to ([0057] The image processing section 32 performs various types of image processing for the RAW image data (normal image data) obtained from the image pickup device 22), to generate composite image data with a higher resolution … than the image data obtained from the image pickup device 22; [0041] The flash memory 14 is a storage medium configured to store a control program executed by the microcomputer 15; [0042] reads/writes information stored in the flash memory 14 upon receiving an instruction from the microcomputer 45; [0044] the camera body 2 includes ... an SDRAM (synchronous dynamic random access memory) 27 ... an image processing section 32 ... a recording medium 42, … a flash memory 44, and the microcomputer 45; [0046] The image pickup device 22 photoelectrically converts an optical image of the object having a plurality of pixels arrayed in a two-dimensional form): acquire a plurality of images that have been obtained by imaging at imaging positions different from each other ([0070] The microcomputer 45 also functions as an image pickup control section configured to cause the image pickup device 22 to perform an image pickup operation at each of the plurality of relative positions where the aforementioned shift mechanism 23 has performed the pixel shift, to acquire a plurality of pieces of image data; [0047] the shift mechanism 23 is used to move the image pickup device 22 by half pixel pitch, for example, when a plurality of images are picked up to obtain a composite image with a higher resolution than the resolution of image data obtained from the image pickup device 22); acquire a plurality of … images by performing image … processing for the plurality of images respectively; and ([0057] The image processing section 32 performs various types of image processing for the RAW image data (normal image data) obtained from the image pickup device 22; [0059] The edge enhancement processing section 34 determines an edge enhancement parameter based on a characteristic relating to a pixel opening of image data (normal image data or composite image data) (e.g., a pixel opening ratio or a pixel opening MTF (modulation transfer function) characteristic, described below), and performs edge enhancement processing for the image data (the normal image data or the composite image data) using the determined edge enhancement parameter; [0124] When the processing is started, the microcomputer 45 reads out a parameter used for image processing … and sets the parameter in the image processing section 32 (step S31). The parameter set in step S31 includes an edge enhancement parameter corresponding to a characteristic relating to a pixel opening of image data (a pixel opening ratio, a pixel opening MTF characteristic, etc.) … the pixel opening ratio or the pixel opening MTF characteristic has a value determined depending on whether a shooting mode is a normal shooting mode or a pixel shift super-resolution shooting mode) acquire a third image using the plurality of … images ([0056] The synthesis processing section 31 is an image synthesis section configured to synthesize a plurality of pieces of image data acquired by control of the microcomputer 45 serving as an image pickup control section (a plurality of pieces of image data picked up by the shift mechanism 23 moving the image pickup device 22), to generate composite image data with a higher resolution … than the image data obtained from the image pickup device 22; [0057] The image processing section 32 performs various types of image processing for the RAW image data (normal image data) obtained from the image pickup device 22; [0059] performs edge enhancement processing for the image data (the normal image data or the composite image data) using the determined edge enhancement parameter; [0124] When the processing is started, the microcomputer 45 reads out a parameter used for image processing from the flash memory 44, and sets the parameter in the image processing section 32 (step S31). The parameter set in step S31 includes an edge enhancement parameter corresponding to a characteristic relating to a pixel opening of image data (a pixel opening ratio, a pixel opening MTF characteristic, etc.) ... the pixel opening ratio or the pixel opening MTF characteristic has a value determined depending on whether a shooting mode is a normal shooting mode or a pixel shift super-resolution shooting mode) … wherein the third image has pixels more than those of each of the plurality of images ([0056] The synthesis processing section 31 is an image synthesis section configured to synthesize a plurality of pieces of image data acquired by control of the microcomputer 45 serving as an image pickup control section (a plurality of pieces of image data picked up by the shift mechanism 23 moving the image pickup device 22), to generate composite image data with a higher resolution … than the image data obtained from the image pickup device 22).
AJITO does not expressly teach restored … restoration … restored … wherein the processor performs restoring for the plurality of images after acquiring all of the plurality of images.
However, Mikawa teaches acquire a plurality of restored images by performing image restoration processing for the plurality of images respectively; and ([0060] at step S412, the controller 101 performs the optical correction processing (image restoration processing) on each of the parallax image A and the parallax image B. In other words, the controller 101 applies the first image restoration filter (i.e., performs filtering processing based on first data) on the parallax image A (first parallax image) to generate a first restored image. Furthermore, the controller 101 applies the second image restoration filter (i.e., performs filtering processing based on second data) on the parallax image B (second parallax image) to generate a second restored image) acquire a third image using the plurality of restored images ([0061] at step S413, the controller 101 performs refocus processing on each of the restored image (first restored image) corresponding to the parallax image A where the image restoration processing has been performed and the restored image (second restored image) corresponding to the parallax image B where the image restoration processing has been performed. The refocus processing is processing (image synthesis processing) of synthesizing (combining) the first restored image with the second restored image (i.e., synthesizing the restored images corresponding to the respective parallax images) while shifting them by the image shift amount set at step S404 to generate a synthetic image (refocus image); [0064] a specific mode (high-quality image processing mode) that gives priority to high image quality relative to another mode is set), wherein the processor performs restoring for the plurality of images after acquiring all of the plurality of images ([0045] at step S203, the controller 101 acquires the parallax image A and the parallax image B …, and it stores the parallax images in the RAM 103; [0046] at step S204 ... “image shift amount” (a value relating to a relative shift amount between the parallax image A and the parallax image B) that indicates a degree of the shift between the parallax image A and the parallax image B in a horizontal direction for the image synthesis; [0059] At step S411, the controller 101 acquires ... image restoration filters that are used for the optical correction processing (image restoration processing); [0060] at step S412, the controller 101 performs the optical correction processing (image restoration processing) on each of the parallax image A and the parallax image B; Based on FIGS. 2 and 4, steps S203 and S204 are equivalent to steps S403 and S404 and the restoration is performed after acquiring all images).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the device and method of AJITO to incorporate the step/system of performing the image restoration processing on each of the parallax image A and the parallax image B to generate a plurality of restored images and synthesizing the plurality of restored images to generate a synthetic image (refocus image) taught by Mikawa.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to improve the accuracy OTF information of the image pickup optical system and to reduce an amount of data of an image restoration filter ([0009] The effective use of a restored image requires obtaining more accurate OTF information of the image pickup optical system; [0014] The present invention provides an image processing apparatus, an image pickup apparatus, an image processing method, and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium which are capable of reducing an amount of data of an image restoration filter relating to a plurality of parallax images and an amount of calculation of image restoration processing). Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known method with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predicted results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine AJITO with Mikawa to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of AJITO with Mikawa teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above. AJITO teaches wherein a resolution of the third image is higher than each of the plurality of images ([0056] The synthesis processing section 31 is an image synthesis section configured to synthesize a plurality of pieces of image data acquired by control of the microcomputer 45 serving as an image pickup control section (a plurality of pieces of image data picked up by the shift mechanism 23 moving the image pickup device 22), to generate composite image data with a higher resolution … than the image data obtained from the image pickup device 22).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of AJITO with Mikawa teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above. Mikawa teaches wherein the processor further executes the instructions to acquire an image restoration filter ([0059] At step S411, the controller 101 acquires, from the storage unit 104, image restoration filters that are used for the optical correction processing (image restoration processing); [0038] the image restoration circuit 101b performs image restoration processing by applying an image restoration filter to the synthetic image to generate a restored image), and wherein the processor performs the image restoration processing for the plurality of images using the image restoration filter ([0038] The image restoration circuit 101b performs filtering processing on the synthetic image, and the filtering processing is based on a point spread function (PSF) of the image pickup optical system 1 that is used to generate the first image and the second image. In other words, the image restoration circuit 101b performs image restoration processing by applying an image restoration filter to the synthetic image to generate a restored image).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of AJITO with Mikawa teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above. Mikawa teaches wherein the processor further executes the instructions to determine whether to perform first processing or second processing ([0058] At step S406, the controller 101 determines whether or not the parameter (refocus parameter or shift amount) … When the set parameter is within the range of the threshold values T, the flow proceeds to step S407. On the other hand, when the set parameter (shift amount) is outside the range of the threshold values T, the flow proceeds to step S411), wherein in a case where the processor determines that the first processing is to be performed, the processor performs the image restoration processing for the plurality of images, and ([0059] At step S411, the controller 101 acquires … image restoration filters that are used for the optical correction processing (image restoration processing); [0060] at step S412, the controller 101 performs the optical correction processing (image restoration processing) on each of the parallax image A and the parallax image B) acquires the plurality of restored images, and ([0060] at step S412, the controller 101 performs the optical correction processing (image restoration processing) on each of the parallax image A and the parallax image B. In other words, the controller 101 applies the first image restoration filter (i.e., performs filtering processing based on first data) on the parallax image A (first parallax image) to generate a first restored image. Furthermore, the controller 101 applies the second image restoration filter (i.e., performs filtering processing based on second data) on the parallax image B (second parallax image) to generate a second restored image) acquires a third image using the plurality of restored images ([0061] at step S413, the controller 101 performs refocus processing on each of the restored image (first restored image) corresponding to the parallax image A where the image restoration processing has been performed and the restored image (second restored image) corresponding to the parallax image B where the image restoration processing has been performed. The refocus processing is processing (image synthesis processing) of synthesizing (combining) the first restored image with the second restored image (i.e., synthesizing the restored images corresponding to the respective parallax images) while shifting them by the image shift amount set at step S404 to generate a synthetic image (refocus image)), wherein in a case where the processor determines that the second processing is to be performed and ([0058] the flow proceeds to step S407; [0057] In FIG. 4, steps S401 to S405 and S407 to S410 are the same as steps S201 to S205 and S208 to S211 of the first embodiment described referring to FIG. 2), the processor acquires the third image using the plurality of restored images, and the processor performs the image restoration processing for the third image ([0060] the controller 101 performs the optical correction processing (image restoration processing) on each of the parallax image A and the parallax image B; [0061] the controller 101 performs refocus processing on each of the restored image (first restored image) corresponding to the parallax image A where the image restoration processing has been performed and the restored image (second restored image) corresponding to the parallax image B where the image restoration processing has been performed. The refocus processing is processing (image synthesis processing) of synthesizing (combining) the first restored image with the second restored image (i.e., synthesizing the restored images corresponding to the respective parallax images) while shifting them by the image shift amount set at step S404 to generate a synthetic image (refocus image)) acquires a fourth image ([0051] the controller 101 performs the optical correction processing (image restoration processing) on the synthetic image (refocus image) generated at step S208. The optical correction processing is processing that includes filtering processing by applying the image restoration filter … acquired at step S209 to the refocus image to generate a restored image).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of AJITO with Mikawa teaches all the limitations of claim 7 above. Mikawa teaches wherein the processor, based on restoration target data including the plurality of images, whether to perform the first processing or the second processing, and ([0058] At step S406, the controller 101 determines whether or not the parameter (refocus parameter or shift amount) set at step S404 is within the range of the threshold values T determined at step S405. When the set parameter is within the range of the threshold values T, the flow proceeds to step S407 … when the set parameter (shift amount) is outside the range of the threshold values T, the flow proceeds to step S411), wherein the processor determines that the first processing is to be performed in a case where the restoration target data relates to a moving image, and ([0058] when the set parameter (shift amount) is outside the range of the threshold values T, the flow proceeds to step S411; [0046] “image shift amount” (a value relating to a relative shift amount between the parallax image A and the parallax image B) that indicates a degree of the shift between the parallax image A and the parallax image B in a horizontal direction for the image synthesis during the refocus processing can be input and set by using a numerical value … a positive integer is set when the parallax image B is shifted to the right relative to the parallax image A, and on the other hand a negative integer is set when the parallax image B is shifted to the left relative to the parallax image A) that the second image is to be performed in a case where the restoration target data relates to a still image ([0058] When the set parameter is within the range of the threshold values T, the flow proceeds to step S407; [0046] When the image shift amount is set to “0”, it means that the parallax images A and B are synthesized without shifting the parallax image B relative to the parallax image A).
With respect to claim 16, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 1, are applicable.
With respect to claim 18, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 1, are applicable.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of AJITO with Mikawa teaches all the limitations of claim 18 above. AJITO teaches a storage medium storing a program for causing a computer to execute the image processing method ([0069] The flash memory 44 is a storage medium configured to store a processing program executed by the microcomputer 45).
Claim 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AJITO (U.S. Publication No. 2018/0255251) in view of Mikawa et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2017/0155881) (hereafter, "Mikawa") and further in view of HATAKEYAMA (U.S. Publication No. 2013/0050541).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of AJITO with Mikawa teaches all the limitations of claim 3 above. Mikawa teaches wherein the image restoration filter is generated based on an optical transfer function ([0038] The image restoration circuit 101b performs filtering processing on the synthetic image, and the filtering processing is based on a point spread function (PSF) of the image pickup optical system 1 that is used to generate the first image and the second image; [0007] An optical transfer function (OTF) obtained by the Fourier transform of the PSF is frequency component information on an aberration and represented by a complex number).
Mikawa does not expressly teaches … at a frequency lower than a Nyquist frequency and an optical transfer function at a frequency higher than the Nyquist frequency.
However, HATAKEYAMA teaches wherein the image restoration filter is generated based on an optical transfer function at a frequency lower than a Nyquist frequency and an optical transfer function at a frequency higher than the Nyquist frequency ([0071] a frequency at which the MTF becomes this value may be defined as the specific frequency corresponding to the zero fall frequency; [0075] the image restoration filter is produced so as to perform, according to the window function, the image restoration process on a lower frequency band (hereinafter referred to as “a lower frequency side band”) than the specific frequency in the captured image, and so as to restrict the image restoration process on a higher frequency band (hereinafter referred to as “a higher frequency side band”) than the specific frequency; [0012] a case may occur in which the MTF falls to zero or approximately zero in a Nyquist frequency band of the image sensor … a frequency at which the zero fall occurs is hereinafter referred to as “a zero fall frequency”; [0069] at step S16, the computer produces the image restoration filter by using the optical transfer function and the window function; [0067] Next at step S14, the computer acquires a specific frequency at which an index value obtained by using the optical transfer function).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the method and device of AJITO with Mikawa to incorporate the step/system of producing the image restoration filter, based on an optical transfer function, to perform the image restoration process on a lower frequency band than the Nyquist frequency and to restrict the image restoration process on a higher frequency band than the Nyquist frequency taught by HATAKEYAMA.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to improve the accuracy of performing image restoration process ([0009] In order to effectively perform the image restoration process, it is necessary to acquire a more accurate OTF of the optical system; [0010] in order to highly accurately perform the image restoration process on the input image, it is necessary to use an image restoration filter produced based on variation of the OTF depending on the image height). Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known method with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predicted results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Mikawa and HATAKEYAMA to obtain the invention as specified in claim 4.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of AJITO with Mikawa and HATAKEYAMA teaches all the limitations of claim 3 above. HATAKEYAMA teaches wherein the image restoration filter is generated based on a restoration characteristic at a frequency lower than a Nyquist frequency and a restoration characteristic at a frequency higher than the Nyquist frequency ([0078] FIG. 10B shows a frequency characteristic of another image restoration filter restricting the image restoration band according to the specific frequency (zero fall frequency) ... FIG. 10C shows a profile of the image restoration filter. According to comparison with FIG. 13B, coefficient values of the image restoration filter shown in FIG. 10B do not change greatly at plural positions within a narrow positional range. Thus, the image restoration filter shown in FIG. 10B has a tolerance for difference in PSF while excellently restoring an image part whose frequency band including no zero fall).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of AJITO with Mikawa and HATAKEYAMA teaches all the limitations of claim 3 above. HATAKEYAMA teaches wherein the image restoration filter is generated based on optical information on an imaging optical system ([0059] This image restoration filter can be obtained by inverse Fourier transform of a function designed on the basis of an inverse function of the optical transfer function (OTF) of the image capturing optical system; [0051] The image restoration filter is produced based on the optical transfer function (OTF)).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AJITO (U.S. Publication No. 2018/0255251) in view of Mikawa et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2017/0155881) (hereafter, "Mikawa") and further in view of NARUSE et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2016/0165127) (hereafter, "NARUSE (A)").
Regarding claim 9, the combination of AJITO with Mikawa teaches all the limitations of claim 7 above. The combination of AJITO with Mikawa does not expressly teaches wherein the processor determines whether to perform the first processing or the second processing based on a point spread function or an optical transfer function of an imaging optical system.
However, NARUSE (A) teaches wherein the processor determines whether to perform the first processing or the second processing based on a point spread function or an optical transfer function of an imaging optical system ([0109] the ROM 47 stores first and second filters which are restoration filters generated corresponding to the point spread function (PSF) of the photography lens 12; [0122] A restoration processing section 100 reads a first filter 102 and a second filter 104 stored in the ROM 47, and performs the restoration processing on the luminance data Y through the first filter 102 and the second filter 104; [0130] a convolution-type Wiener filter can be used in the restoration of blurring performed through PSF. Referring to information of a SN ratio and an OTF which is obtained through Fourier transform on the PSFY(x, y), frequency characteristics d(ωx, ωy) of the restoration filter can be calculated; [0239] the image, which is in the target in-focus state, is subjected to the restoration processing through the first filter. Accordingly, a degraded image corresponding to the PSF of the photography lens 12 can be restored to a high-resolution image. In contrast, the image, in which a degree of blurring is large, is subjected to the restoration processing through the second filter of which the restoration strength is weak).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the method and device of AJITO with Mikawa to incorporate the step/system of applying different processing based on the Point Spread Function (PSF) or Optical Transfer Function (OTF) of the lens taught by NARUSE (A).
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to improve the image resolution through the restoration processing ([0014] The present invention has been made in consideration of the above-mentioned situations, and an object of the invention is to provide an image capture device and an image processing method capable of preventing images of a degraded moving image from being overcorrected through restoration processing and acquiring high-resolution images through the restoration processing). Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known method with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predicted results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine AJITO and Mikawa with NARUSE (A) to obtain the invention as specified in claim 9.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AJITO (U.S. Publication No. 2018/0255251) in view of Mikawa et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2017/0155881) (hereafter, "Mikawa") and further in view of Kusaka (U.S. Publication No. 2007/0206940).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of AJITO with Mikawa teaches all the limitations of claim 7 above. The combination of AJITO with Mikawa does not expressly teaches wherein the processor determines whether to perform the first processing or the second processing, based on an F-number of an imaging optical system.
However, Kusaka teaches wherein the processor determines whether to perform the first processing or the second processing, based on an F-number of an imaging optical system ([0040] The focus adjustment controller executes focus adjustment based upon the focus adjustment state detected by the image sensor when a minimum f-number of the imaging optical system indicates a level brighter than a level corresponding to a predetermined value, and executes focus adjustment based upon the focus adjustment state detected by the focus detector when the minimum f-number indicates a level darker than the level corresponding to the predetermined value).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the method and device of AJITO with Mikawa to incorporate the step/system of selecting between two distinct processing paths based on the F-number of the imaging optical system compared to a predetermined value taught by Kusaka.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to improve the image quality by increasing the accuracy of focus detection ([0247] since the focus detection can be ultimately executed on a plane which exactly matches the imaging plane, highly accurate focus detection can be achieved by eliminating an error in the alignment of the image sensor and the focus detector and an error occurred with regard to the position of the image sensor itself). Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known method with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predicted results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine AJITO and Mikawa with Kusaka to obtain the invention as specified in claim 12.
Claim 15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AJITO (U.S. Publication No. 2018/0255251) in view of Mikawa et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2017/0155881) (hereafter, "Mikawa") and further in view of NARUSE et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2015/0199795) (hereafter, "NARUSE (B)").
Regarding claim 15, the combination of AJITO with Mikawa teaches all the limitations of claim 7 above. The combination of AJITO with Mikawa does not expressly teaches wherein the number of taps in an image restoration filter for the image restoration processing in the first processing is different from that in the second processing.
However, NARUSE (B) teaches wherein the number of taps in an image restoration filter for the image restoration processing in the first processing is different from that in the second processing ([0091] presence/absence of a phase component, an arrangement format of the restoration filter (the filter coefficient) and the number of the filter coefficients (the number of taps) to be stored. In FIG. 5, as one example, cases where the symmetry of the PSF is “the rotation symmetry”, “vertical symmetry”, “horizontal symmetry”, “the point symmetry”, and “asymmetry” are illustrated, and also the cases where the restoration filter is configured by the number of the taps of a square filter of M taps×M taps (7 taps×7 taps at a maximum) are illustrated; [0098] The filter information calculating unit 38 determines the filter information ID (identifier p), and then determines a filter size (an M value in the table in FIG. 5). Generally, the number of the taps required for the restoration filter becomes large for the PSF of the larger spread).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the method and device of AJITO with Mikawa to incorporate the step/system of having different the number of the taps for each processing taught by NARUSE (B).
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to improve the accuracy of performing image restoration process and reducing the data storage amount of the restoration filter ([0012] The present invention has been contrived in view of the above-mentioned circumstances, an object of the present invention being to provide a technology capable of reducing the data storage amount of the restoration filter used in point image restoration processing while suppressing the degradation of point image restoration accuracy). Further, one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as described above by known method with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded nothing more than predicted results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine AJITO with Mikawa and NARUSE (B) to obtain the invention as specified in claim 15.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of AJITO with Mikawa teaches all the limitations of claim 16 above. NARUSE (B) teaches wherein the imaging optical system includes a phase mask ([0200] the optical filter 211 may be one sheet or a combination of a plurality of sheets. Also, the optical filter 211 is just one example of optical phase modulation means; [0201] the present invention is applicable not only to a case that regularly distributed image formation is possible by an optical wave front modulation element (the optical filter 211 (phase plate))).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10, 11, 13, 14 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL C. CHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1277. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday and Alternate Fridays 8:00-5:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chan S. Park can be reached at (571) 272-7409. 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.
/DANIEL C CHANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2669 /CHAN S PARK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2669
Prosecution Insights