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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claims 1 – 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aoki et al. (US 20170221188 A1; hereafter referred to as Aoki) in view of Cho et al. (US 20150206291 A1; hereafter referred to as Cho) further in view of Yokoyama (see Machine Translation for JP 2018107541 A; hereafter referred to as Yokoyama).
Regarding Claim 1, Aoki teaches:
An image processing device comprising a processing circuit configured to perform filtering on each of a left image and a right image with use of a filter pattern set in advance, and generate a distance image by performing stereo matching based on the left image and the right image that have been subjected to the filtering (Aoki, [0005] “An object of the present invention is to provide an imaging device that prevents mismatching due to a difference in sharpness during image matching in parallax calculation”; Aoki, [0017] “An imaging device 1 of this embodiment is, for example, a stereo camera to be mounted in a vehicle, and includes a pair of right and left imaging system means 100a and 100b that capture images of an object in front of the vehicle, operation means 110, screen/audio output means 130, and control means 140”; Aoki, [0019] “Since the right and left imaging system means 100a and 100b are set at right and left positions which are spaced apart from each other by a distance corresponding to a baseline length, in the right and left images that are obtained by simultaneously photographing an object in front of the vehicle, the position of the object on the right image deviates from that on the left image in the horizontal direction”; Aoki, [0038] “the sharpness equalization, blur filter processing is performed on both processing regions so as to obtain a minimum sharpness value in the processing regions on the reference image and the comparison image”), wherein:
the filter pattern comprises a plurality of first filter coefficients provided in a first region and a plurality of second filter coefficients provided in a second region disposed around the first region, (Aoki, [0075] “According to the operation procedure (FIG. 2) of an embodiment of the imaging device of the present invention shown in FIG. 1, blur filter processing is performed in step S206 so as to match the processing regions of the reference image and the comparison image, thereby equalizing the sharpnesses in the processing regions of the reference image and the comparison image. As a result, the difference between the brightness values due to the difference between the sharpness of the shrunk template image and the sharpness of the searched image is reduced, thereby making it possible to prevent mismatching”; see [0051]);
one of the first filter coefficients having a largest absolute value is provided at a middle of the first region (Aoki, Fig. 4, [0052] “Elements at the center of the filter have a large weight, and the weight is set to become smaller as a distance from the center of the filter”);
the second filter coefficients comprise two or more filter coefficients having respective values different from each other (Aoki, Fig. 4, [0074] “the sharpness at end portions in the upper region and the lower region of each image is much lower than that in the central region”);
the second filter coefficients comprise four corner filter coefficients positioned at four corners of the filter pattern, and each of the corner filter coefficients has an absolute value larger than an absolute value of an adjacent filter coefficient in the filter pattern (Aoki, Fig. 4, In Aoki as seen in Fig. 4, the four corners filter coefficients has values larger than absolute values of an adjacent filter coefficient in the filter pattern); and
However, Aoki does not explicitly recite:
the first filter coefficients each having a value of a first polarity, the second filter coefficients each having a value of a second polarity different from the first polarity;
the second filter coefficients comprise two or more filter coefficients having respective values different from each other;
the second filter coefficients comprise four corner filter coefficients positioned at four corners of the filter pattern, and each of the corner filter coefficients has an absolute value larger than an absolute value of an adjacent filter coefficient in the filter pattern; and
the filter pattern is a pattern having four-fold rotational symmetry.
In the same field of endeavor, Cho teaches:
the first filter coefficients each having a value of a first polarity, the second filter coefficients each having a value of a second polarity different from the first polarity (Cho, [0040] “In order to obtain the image sharpening effect using the sharpening filtering algorithm (or, the unsharpening filtering algorithm) as described above, the image data may be processed using a high pass filter. A total sum of mask coefficients of the high pass filter may be positive. For example, a central mask coefficient may be positive, and surrounding coefficients may be negative”);
the second filter coefficients comprise two or more filter coefficients having respective values different from each other (Cho, [0065] “FIGS. 7A and 7B illustrate examples of an unsharpening kernel having a size of 5*5. As illustrated in FIG. 7A, the unsharpening kernel may include a directional filter set that includes a plurality of directional filters”; Fig. 7A and 7B shows the 5 x 5 filter having two or more filter coefficients at the outer edges having respective values different from each other);
the second filter coefficients comprise four corner filter coefficients positioned at four corners of the filter pattern, and each of the corner filter coefficients has an absolute value larger than an absolute value of an adjacent filter coefficient in the filter pattern (Cho, Fig. 7A and 7B shows the 5 x 5 filter comprising four corner filter coefficients at the outer edges having different values from each other);
Aoki and Cho are considered analogous art as they are reasonably pertinent to the same field of endeavor of image processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Aoki with the invention of Cho to make the invention that uses the filter as taught by Cho so that the first filter coefficients each having a value of a first polarity, the second filter coefficients each having a value of a second polarity different from the first polarity; the second filter coefficients comprise two or more filter coefficients having respective values different from each other; and the second filter coefficients comprise four corner filter coefficients positioned at four corners of the filter pattern, and each of the corner filter coefficients has an absolute value larger than an absolute value of an adjacent filter coefficient in the filter pattern; doing so the sharpness in object recognition regions in images which are simultaneously photographed by a plurality of cameras, are equalized to thereby prevent mismatching during image matching in parallax calculation (Cho, [0007]); thus, one of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the references.
However, Aoki in view of Cho fails to explicitly recite:
the filter pattern is a pattern having four-fold rotational symmetry.
In the same field of endeavor, Yokoyama teaches:
the filter pattern is a pattern having four-fold rotational symmetry (Yokoyama, page 11, para 6, “sharpening can be performed by bringing the captured image g (x, y) closer to the original image I (x, y) by applying rotational symmetric USM for the center part of the image. Since the correction amount is the difference value between the captured image and the image blurred by the unsharp mask, it is not necessary to use a simple smoothing filter for the unsharp mask USM in order to correct it with high accuracy”).
Aoki, Cho and Yokoyama are considered analogous art as they are reasonably pertinent to the same field of endeavor of image processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Aoki in view of Cho with the invention of Yokoyama to make the invention wherein the filter pattern has a pattern having four-fold rotational symmetry; doing so efficient sharpening and smoothing of the image can be performed by applying rotational symmetry (Yokoyama, page 11, para 6); thus, one of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the references.
Regarding Claim 2, Aoki teaches:
An image processing device comprising a processing circuit configured to perform filtering on each of a left image and a right image with use of a filter pattern set in advance, and generate a distance image by performing stereo matching based on the left image and the right image that have been subjected to the filtering (Aoki, [0005] “An object of the present invention is to provide an imaging device that prevents mismatching due to a difference in sharpness during image matching in parallax calculation”; Aoki, [0017] “An imaging device 1 of this embodiment is, for example, a stereo camera to be mounted in a vehicle, and includes a pair of right and left imaging system means 100a and 100b that capture images of an object in front of the vehicle, operation means 110, screen/audio output means 130, and control means 140”; Aoki, [0019] “Since the right and left imaging system means 100a and 100b are set at right and left positions which are spaced apart from each other by a distance corresponding to a baseline length, in the right and left images that are obtained by simultaneously photographing an object in front of the vehicle, the position of the object on the right image deviates from that on the left image in the horizontal direction”; Aoki, [0038] “the sharpness equalization, blur filter processing is performed on both processing regions so as to obtain a minimum sharpness value in the processing regions on the reference image and the comparison image”), wherein:
the filter pattern comprises a plurality of first filter coefficients provided in a first region and a plurality of second filter coefficients provided in a second region disposed around the first region, (Aoki, [0075] “According to the operation procedure (FIG. 2) of an embodiment of the imaging device of the present invention shown in FIG. 1, blur filter processing is performed in step S206 so as to match the processing regions of the reference image and the comparison image, thereby equalizing the sharpnesses in the processing regions of the reference image and the comparison image. As a result, the difference between the brightness values due to the difference between the sharpness of the shrunk template image and the sharpness of the searched image is reduced, thereby making it possible to prevent mismatching”; see [0051]);
one of the first filter coefficients having a largest absolute value is provided at a middle of the first region (Aoki, Fig. 4, [0052] “Elements at the center of the filter have a large weight, and the weight is set to become smaller as a distance from the center of the filter”);
the second filter coefficients comprise two or more filter coefficients having respective values different from each other (Aoki, Fig. 4, [0074] “the sharpness at end portions in the upper region and the lower region of each image is much lower than that in the central region”);
the second filter coefficients comprise four middle filter coefficients positioned at middles of four sides of the filter pattern, and each of the middle filter coefficients has an absolute value larger than an absolute value of an adjacent second filter coefficient in the filter pattern (Aoki, Fig. 4, In Aoki as seen in Fig. 4, the four corners middle filter coefficients positioned at middles of four sides of the filter pattern has values larger than absolute values of an adjacent filter coefficient in the filter pattern); and
However, Aoki does not explicitly recite:
the first filter coefficients each having a value of a first polarity, the second filter coefficients each having a value of a second polarity different from the first polarity;
the second filter coefficients comprise two or more filter coefficients having respective values different from each other;
the second filter coefficients comprise four middle filter coefficients positioned at middles of four sides of the filter pattern, and each of the middle filter coefficients has an absolute value larger than an absolute value of an adjacent second filter coefficient in the filter pattern; and
the filter pattern is a pattern having four-fold rotational symmetry.
In the same field of endeavor, Cho teaches:
the first filter coefficients each having a value of a first polarity, the second filter coefficients each having a value of a second polarity different from the first polarity (Cho, [0040] “In order to obtain the image sharpening effect using the sharpening filtering algorithm (or, the unsharpening filtering algorithm) as described above, the image data may be processed using a high pass filter. A total sum of mask coefficients of the high pass filter may be positive. For example, a central mask coefficient may be positive, and surrounding coefficients may be negative”);
the second filter coefficients comprise two or more filter coefficients having respective values different from each other (Cho, [0065] “FIGS. 7A and 7B illustrate examples of an unsharpening kernel having a size of 5*5. As illustrated in FIG. 7A, the unsharpening kernel may include a directional filter set that includes a plurality of directional filters”; Fig. 7A and 7B shows the 5 x 5 filter having two or more filter coefficients at the outer edges having respective values different from each other);
the second filter coefficients comprise four middle filter coefficients positioned at middles of four sides of the filter pattern, and each of the middle filter coefficients has an absolute value larger than an absolute value of an adjacent second filter coefficient in the filter pattern (Cho, As seen in Fig. 7A and 7B, Cho describes the 5 x 5 filter comprising four middle filter coefficients positioned at middles of four sides of the filter pattern at the outer edges having absolute value larger than an absolute value of an adjacent second filter coefficient in the filter pattern);
Aoki and Cho are considered analogous art as they are reasonably pertinent to the same field of endeavor of image processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Aoki with the invention of Cho to make the invention that uses the filter as taught by Cho so that the first filter coefficients each having a value of a first polarity, the second filter coefficients each having a value of a second polarity different from the first polarity; the second filter coefficients comprise two or more filter coefficients having respective values different from each other; and the second filter coefficients comprise four middle filter coefficients positioned at middles of four sides of the filter pattern, and each of the middle filter coefficients has an absolute value larger than an absolute value of an adjacent second filter coefficient in the filter pattern; doing so the sharpness in object recognition regions in images which are simultaneously photographed by a plurality of cameras, are equalized to thereby prevent mismatching during image matching in parallax calculation (Cho, [0007]); thus, one of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the references.
However, Aoki in view of Cho fails to explicitly recite:
the filter pattern is a pattern having four-fold rotational symmetry.
In the same field of endeavor, Yokoyama teaches:
the filter pattern is a pattern having four-fold rotational symmetry (Yokoyama, page 11, para 6, “sharpening can be performed by bringing the captured image g (x, y) closer to the original image I (x, y) by applying rotational symmetric USM for the center part of the image. Since the correction amount is the difference value between the captured image and the image blurred by the unsharp mask, it is not necessary to use a simple smoothing filter for the unsharp mask USM in order to correct it with high accuracy”).
Aoki, Cho and Yokoyama are considered analogous art as they are reasonably pertinent to the same field of endeavor of image processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Aoki in view of Cho with the invention of Yokoyama to make the invention wherein the filter pattern has a pattern having four-fold rotational symmetry; doing so efficient sharpening and smoothing of the image can be performed by applying rotational symmetry (Yokoyama, page 11, para 6); thus, one of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the references.
Regarding Claim 3, Aoki in view of Cho further in view of Yokoyama teaches the image processing device according to claim 1, wherein the processing circuit is configured to perform the filtering with use of the filter pattern that is a single filter pattern (Cho, [0047] “The unsharpening algorithm executing unit 400 of FIG. 3B may be an element included in a single unsharpening kernel, and the calculator 440 may aggregate outputs of at least one unsharpening kernel. The plurality of directional filters 410_1 to 410_m may be a directional filter set”).
The reasons for combining Aoki, Cho and Yokoyama are similar to that stated in the rejection of claim 1. In addition, this same reasoning is pertinent and applicable to the rejections of claim 5 below.
Regarding Claim 4, Aoki in view of Cho further in view of Yokoyama teaches the image processing device according to claim 2, wherein the processing circuit is configured to perform the filtering with use of the filter pattern that is a single filter pattern (Cho, [0047] “The unsharpening algorithm executing unit 400 of FIG. 3B may be an element included in a single unsharpening kernel, and the calculator 440 may aggregate outputs of at least one unsharpening kernel. The plurality of directional filters 410_1 to 410_m may be a directional filter set”).
The reasons for combining Aoki, Cho and Yokoyama are similar to that stated in the rejection of claim 2. In addition, this same reasoning is pertinent and applicable to the rejections of claim 6 below.
Regarding Claim 5, Aoki in view of Cho further in view of Yokoyama teaches the image processing device according to claim 1, wherein each of absolute values of the first filter coefficients in the first region is smaller as separating from the middle of the first region (Akoi, Fig. 5, filter coefficients of the middle of the first region and absolute values of the other regions surrounding the middle region are smaller as shown in Fig. 5 for 5 x 5 filter; Cho, Fig. 7A shows that the filter coefficients of the of the first region separate from the middle of the first region).
Regarding Claim 6, Aoki in view of Cho further in view of Yokoyama teaches the image processing device according to claim 2, wherein each of absolute values of the first filter coefficients in the first region is smaller as separating from the middle of the first region (Akoi, Fig. 5, filter coefficients of the middle of the first region and absolute values of the other regions surrounding the middle region are smaller as shown in Fig. 5 for 5 x 5 filter; Cho, Fig. 7A shows that the filter coefficients of the of the first region separate from the middle of the first region).
Claims 7 – 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aoki et al. (US 20170221188 A1; hereafter referred to as Aoki) in view of Cho et al. (US 20150206291 A1; hereafter referred to as Cho) further in view of Yokoyama (see Machine Translation for JP 2018107541 A; hereafter referred to as Yokoyama) and Sawada (see Machine Translation for JP 2009100150 A; hereafter referred to as Sawada).
Regarding Claim 7, Aoki in view of Cho further in view of Yokoyama teaches the image processing device according to claim 1 and reducing noise (Cho, [0039] “The filtering unit 300 may include at least one filter for noise removal or image enhancement”; Cho, [0058] “it is determined that sharpening noise has occurred in directions respectively corresponding to the plurality of directional filters. Thus, the sharpening noise may be removed (or reduced) from an output image”), however it fails to explicitly recite:
wherein one or both of the left image and the right image comprise a noise pattern that repeats light and shade in a unit of one or more pixel values in a predetermined direction.
In the same field of endeavor, Sawada teaches:
wherein one or both of the left image and the right image comprise a noise pattern that repeats light and shade in a unit of one or more pixel values in a predetermined direction (Sawada, [0009] “the zipper artifact refers to a phenomenon in which light and darkness that is not in the original image appears in a zipper shape (so-called slide fastener shape) along the image boundary due to demosaic processing”; Sawada, [0011] “Then, when the image signal shown in FIG. 9B is subjected to the low-pass filter of (Equation 1) for removing color carrier components, as shown in FIG. And undesirable pixel values 3/16, 5/16 are alternately generated, resulting in a light and dark pattern called zipper artifacts”).
Aoki, Cho, Yokoyama and Sawada are considered analogous art as they are reasonably pertinent to the same field of endeavor of image processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Aoki in view of Cho further in view of Yokoyama with the invention of Sawada to make the invention wherein the noise pattern repeats light and shade in a unit of one or more pixel values in a predetermined direction; doing so, the left and right image that have zipper artifacts and jaggies that occur along the image boundary could be suppressed and high quality image can be obtained (Sawada, [0012]) using the current invention; thus, one of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the references.
Regarding Claim 8, Aoki in view of Cho further in view of Yokoyama teaches the image processing device according to claim 2 and reducing noise (Cho, [0039] “The filtering unit 300 may include at least one filter for noise removal or image enhancement”; Cho, [0058] “it is determined that sharpening noise has occurred in directions respectively corresponding to the plurality of directional filters. Thus, the sharpening noise may be removed (or reduced) from an output image”), however it fails to explicitly recite:
wherein one or both of the left image and the right image comprise a noise pattern that repeats light and shade in a unit of one or more pixel values in a predetermined direction.
In the same field of endeavor, Sawada teaches:
wherein one or both of the left image and the right image comprise a noise pattern that repeats light and shade in a unit of one or more pixel values in a predetermined direction (Sawada, [0009] “the zipper artifact refers to a phenomenon in which light and darkness that is not in the original image appears in a zipper shape (so-called slide fastener shape) along the image boundary due to demosaic processing”; Sawada, [0011] “Then, when the image signal shown in FIG. 9B is subjected to the low-pass filter of (Equation 1) for removing color carrier components, as shown in FIG. And undesirable pixel values 3/16, 5/16 are alternately generated, resulting in a light and dark pattern called zipper artifacts”).
Aoki, Cho, Yokoyama and Sawada are considered analogous art as they are reasonably pertinent to the same field of endeavor of image processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Aoki in view of Cho further in view of Yokoyama with the invention of Sawada to make the invention wherein the noise pattern repeats light and shade in a unit of one or more pixel values in a predetermined direction; doing so, the left and right image that have zipper artifacts and jaggies that occur along the image boundary could be suppressed and high quality image can be obtained (Sawada, [0012]); thus, one of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the references.
Regarding Claim 9, Aoki in view of Cho further in view of Yokoyama teaches the image processing device according to claim 1, but fails to explicitly recite:
wherein the left image and the right image are generated by demosaicing.
In the same field of endeavor, Sawada teaches:
wherein the left image and the right image are generated by demosaicing (Sawada, [0007] “in image processing using a single-chip image sensor, so-called demosaic processing is performed based on a color mosaic image in which each pixel has only one of the R, G, and B components. Here, the demosaic process is a process in which the monochromatic information of each pixel of the color mosaic image is subjected to an interpolation operation using luminance information of other missing colors gathered from its surrounding pixels, so that each pixel has R, This is a process for generating a color image having all of the G and B components (so-called color interpolation process).”).
Aoki, Cho, Yokoyama and Sawada are considered analogous art as they are reasonably pertinent to the same field of endeavor of image processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Aoki in view of Cho further in view of Yokoyama with the invention of Sawada to make the invention wherein the left image and the right image are generated by demosaicing; generating left and right images by demosaicing is method of generating images using a specific type of digital image processing algorithm for reconstructing color images (Demosaicing – Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demosaicing) and this could yield predictable result of suppressing Zipper artifacts using the current invention; thus, one of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the references.
Regarding Claim 10, Aoki in view of Cho further in view of Yokoyama teaches the image processing device according to claim 2, but fails to explicitly recite:
wherein the left image and the right image are generated by demosaicing.
In the same field of endeavor, Sawada teaches:
wherein the left image and the right image are generated by demosaicing (Sawada, [0007] “in image processing using a single-chip image sensor, so-called demosaic processing is performed based on a color mosaic image in which each pixel has only one of the R, G, and B components. Here, the demosaic process is a process in which the monochromatic information of each pixel of the color mosaic image is subjected to an interpolation operation using luminance information of other missing colors gathered from its surrounding pixels, so that each pixel has R, This is a process for generating a color image having all of the G and B components (so-called color interpolation process).”).
Aoki, Cho, Yokoyama and Sawada are considered analogous art as they are reasonably pertinent to the same field of endeavor of image processing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Aoki in view of Cho further in view of Yokoyama with the invention of Sawada to make the invention wherein the left image and the right image are generated by demosaicing; generating left and right images by demosaicing is method of generating images using a specific type of digital image processing algorithm for reconstructing color images (Demosaicing – Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demosaicing) and this could yield predictable result of suppressing Zipper artifacts using the current invention; thus, one of the ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the references.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20220405890 A1 APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR NOISE REDUCTION FROM A MULTI-VIEW IMAGE An image processing apparatus is coupled to a plurality of image capturing devices. The image processing apparatus reduces a noise in an epi-polar image while generating a three-dimensional image from a multi view image. The image processing apparatus divides the multi view image into a flat region and a non-flat region, generates the epi-polar image from the multi view image, replaces an epi-polar line in the epi-polar image corresponding to the flat region with an average pixel value of the multi-view image, and replaces an epi-polar line in the epi-polar image corresponding to the non-flat region with a pixel value of a center-view image obtained from a centrally located image capturing device among the plurality of image capturing devices.
US 8391637 B2 Image Processing Device And Image Processing Method Tap coefficients of a filter include one reference tap coefficient having a maximum value that is applied to a pixel of interest in a pixel signal array, and negative tap coefficients having negative values that are applied to surrounding pixels around the pixel of interest located in an image height direction. In a tap coefficient array in which the tap coefficients to be applied to pixel signals located sequentially in the image height direction are sequentially arranged, the reference tap coefficient is positioned off center at a position other than the center of the tap coefficients. Among the negative tap coefficients located on both sides of the reference tap coefficient in the tap coefficient array, the number of the negative tap coefficient on a first side is one, and the number of the negative tap coefficients on a second side is two or more.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VAISALI RAO KOPPOLU whose telephone number is (571)270-0273. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 5.
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, Jennifer Mehmood can be reached at (571) 272-2976. 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.
VAISALI RAO. KOPPOLU
Examiner
Art Unit 2664
/VAISALI RAO KOPPOLU/Examiner of Art Unit 2664
Prosecution Insights