Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 22, 2026
Application No. 19/074,663

IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING IMAGE PROCESSING APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 10, 2025
Priority
Mar 22, 2024 — JP 2024-047282
Examiner
WALLACE, JOHN R
Art Unit
2682
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Sharp Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 1m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allowance Rate
311 granted / 397 resolved
+16.3% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+22.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
423
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.3%
-32.7% vs TC avg
§103
63.6%
+23.6% vs TC avg
§102
12.5%
-27.5% vs TC avg
§112
14.6%
-25.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 397 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3 and 5 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. Reasons for allowance will be provided in the event the application becomes in condition for allowance. 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) 1, 2, 4, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hanawa (U.S.P.G. Pub. No. 2014/0126005) in view of Yui (U.S. Patent No. 5,677,741). Regarding claim 1, Hanawa (U.S.P.G. Pub. No. 2014/0126005) discloses: An image processing apparatus comprising one or more processors, an operation acceptor, and a memory, wherein the memory stores a first conversion table and a second conversion table for converting input image data including a first color value into output image data including black and a second color value (paragraphs [0032]-[0033], [0037], [0039], two tables are included, a brightness shift table and a color conversion table; the colors include each color of RGB and the output can be constructed of CMYK), and the one or more processors perform conversion based on the first conversion table when no instruction for color balance adjustment is input from the operation acceptor (paragraphs [0033]-[0036], the color conversion system determines that the brightness shift table is applied to the letter region; this determination constitutes an “input from the operation acceptor” and the brightness conversion involves a lightening/darkening and not a change in hue) and perform conversion based on the second conversion table when an instruction for color balance adjustment is input from the operation acceptor (paragraphs [0033]-[0035], the color conversion system determines that the background removal table is applied to the non-letter region; this determination constitutes an “input from the operation acceptor”; the background removal table turns colors that, for example, changes color data to white when input density approaches a set value) Even assuming arguendo that the claim requires and that Hanawa does not explicitly disclose: An operation acceptor that accepts an operation from the user; Performing or not performing color balance adjustment based on the operation from the user; Yui (U.S. Patent No. 5,677,741) discloses: An operation acceptor that accepts an operation from the user (column 3, lines 23-); the memory stores a first conversion table and a second conversion table for converting input image data (Figure 2A, column 2, line 62 through column 3, line 13 and column 3, lines 23-67, the system includes an ordinary processing mode and a table control button ON mode that convert input image data); and the one or more processors perform conversion based on first conversion table when no instruction for color balance adjustment is input from the operation acceptor corresponding to an operation from the user (Figure 2A, column 2, line 62 through column 3, line 13 and column 3, lines 23-67, when the user does not turn on the table control button, the ordinary processing is performed), and perform conversion based on the second conversion table when an instruction for color balance adjustment is input from the operation acceptor corresponding to an operation from the user (Figure 2A, column 2, line 62 through column 3, line 13 and column 3, lines 23-67, when the user turns on the table control button, the processing is performed according to the custom table) Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the system of Yui with the system of Hanawa such that the system would have been configured to accept an operation from the user and perform or not perform color balance adjustment based on the operation from the user as described in Yui. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to implement a system capable of “perform[ing] customized color conversion of the connected environment of a color system with optimal color reproducibility” (column 7, lines 24-27 of the Yui reference). Regarding claim 2, Hanawa additionally discloses: wherein the one or more processors distinguish between a character region and a non-character region in the input image data (paragraph [0033], the document is divided into a letter region and a non-letter region), and perform conversion based on any one of the first conversion table and the second conversion table selected based on the number of pixels in the non-character region when an instruction for color balance adjustment is input from the operation acceptor (paragraphs [0033]-[0038], the two tables are applied selectively for the pixels of each region) Regarding claim 4, the combination of Hanawa and Yui discloses the apparatus of the parent claim (claim 1). Hanawa does not explicitly disclose: wherein the second conversion table stored in the memory includes a plurality of second conversion tables, and when an instruction for color balance adjustment is input from the operation acceptor, the one or more processors perform conversion based on any one of the plurality of second conversion tables selected based on the instruction. Yui discloses: wherein the second conversion table stored in the memory includes a plurality of second conversion tables (column 4, lines 4-21, color tables for each user are stored), and when an instruction for color balance adjustment is input from the operation acceptor, the one or more processors perform conversion based on any one of the plurality of second conversion tables selected based on the instruction (column 4, lines 4-21, color tables for each user are stored; Figure 2A, column 2, line 62 through column 3, line 13 and column 3, lines 23-67, when the user turns on the table control button, the processing is performed according to the custom table) Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the system of Yui with the system of Hanawa such that the system would have been configured to accept an operation from the user and perform or not perform color balance adjustment based on the operation from the user as described in Yui. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to implement a system capable of “perform[ing] customized color conversion of the connected environment of a color system with optimal color reproducibility” (column 7, lines 24-27 of the Yui reference). Regarding claim 6, the structural elements of apparatus claim 1 perform all of the steps of method claim 6. Thus, claim 6 is rejected for the same reasons discussed in the rejection of claim 1. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN R WALLACE whose telephone number is (571)270-1577. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 8:30-5 PM. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Benny Tieu can be reached at 571-272-7490. 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. /JOHN R WALLACE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2682
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 10, 2025
Application Filed
Sep 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12761840
PRINTING SYSTEM AND METHODS FOR DYNAMICALLY CONFIGURED CONFLICT CHECKING IN PRINTING OPERATIONS
3y 3m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12764237
PRINTED MATERIAL INSPECTION SYSTEM AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER READABLE MEDIUM
3y 6m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12739327
CHANGING MODEL NAME ACCORDING TO PROVIDED FUNCTION
2y 4m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12724996
PRINTING SYSTEM AND CONTROL METHOD OF PRINTING SYSTEM
2y 6m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12714502
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR CUSTOMIZING TRAINING OF A USER TO PERFORM PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTIONS
3y 5m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+22.7%)
2y 8m (~1y 1m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 397 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month