DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: disparity remapping function generation unit, multi-band disparity map generation unit, disparity guidance pattern generation unit , image pair generation unit in claims 1-3.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation: computer.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 4, 6,7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20150245007 A1 Hyodo; Yasuhide et al. (hereafter Morioka), and further in view of US 20090075601 A1 NEZHAD-AHMADI; MOHAMMAD-REZA et al. (hereafter NEZHAD-AHMADI).
Regarding claim 1, Hyodo discloses A stereo image generation device that generates a stereo image from image information, a disparity map of an image, and viewpoint information of an observer, the stereo image generation device comprising (Fig.14): a disparity remapping function generation unit that generates a disparity remapping function for converting an amount of disparity of pixels belonging to a certain range from a viewpoint into an amount of disparity within a predetermined range (Fig.14; [152]-[153], [157], a dynamical range of disparity or LR is a predetermined range); a multi-band disparity map generation unit that generates a first multi-band disparity map by low-pass filtering a disparity map (Fig.14, [98], [113], viewed or evaluation image is the result of low-pass filtering disparity), and generates a second multi-band disparity map by correcting the first multi-band disparity map with the disparity remapping function ( [135]-[137], the disparity of LR image is the second multi-band disparity map by enhancing the first multi-band disparity map); a disparity guidance pattern generation unit that generates a first band-pass image by band-pass decomposing image information ([108], original image input is image information), and generates a second band-pass image by shifting the first band-pass image
Hyodo fails to disclose generates a second band-pass image by shifting the first band-pass image by π/2 in a spatial phase.
However, NEZHAD-AHMADI teaches a generates second band-pass image by shifting the first band-pass image by π/2 in a spatial phase (Fig.3, [92], input signal to a polyphase filter 160 is split into sub-bands and filtered).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the stereo image generation device disclosed by Hyodo to include the teaching in the same field of endeavor of NEZHAD-AHMADI, in order to provide a low-power, compact image reject receiver, transmitter or transceiver, as NEZHAD-AHMADI identified.
Regarding claim 3, Hyodo discloses The stereo image generation device according to claim 1, wherein the multi-band disparity map generation unit processes the disparity map for each horizontal scanning line, and the disparity guidance pattern generation unit processes the image for each horizontal scanning line ([116]).
Regarding claims 4, 6, see the rejection for claim 1.
Regarding claim 7, Hyodo discloses The stereo image generation device according to claim 2, wherein a guidance parallax pattern is generated by using a pair of IL and a multiband parallax map GDF(x,y) ([246]-[248]).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hyodo, in view of NEZHAD-AHMADI, and further in view of US 20130050413 A1 Tsukamoto.
Regarding claim 2, Tsukamoto teaches The stereo image generation device according to claim 1, wherein the image information is a stereo image pair IL and IR, and the multi-band disparity map generation unit performs band-pass decomposition of IL and IR to generate band-pass images BLf and BRf, corrects the first multi-band disparity map on the basis of BLf and BRf, and corrects the corrected first multi-band disparity map using the disparity remapping function to generate the second multi-band disparity map ({05], [88]-[91]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention having all the references Hyodo, NEZHAD-AHMADI and Tsukamoto before him/her, to modify the stereo image generation device disclosed by Hyodo to include the teaching in the same field of endeavor of NEZHAD-AHMADI and Tsukamoto, in order to provide a low-power, compact image reject receiver, transmitter or transceiver, as NEZHAD-AHMADI identified, and an processing apparatus, and method, which is capable of suitably performing image quality adjustment of a stereoscopic image.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US 20150124062 A1, CN 103731651 A, US 20140028237 A1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRACY Y. LI whose telephone number is (571)270-3671. The examiner can normally be reached Monday Friday (8:30 AM- 4:30 PM) EST.
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, David Czekaj can be reached at (571) 272-7327. 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.
/TRACY Y. LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487