DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-19 are pending for examination.
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim under KR10-2022-0160143 filed on 11/25/2022.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 10-12 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, WO 2016/190459 A1, in view of Peterson, US 2013/0314530 A1.
Regarding Claim 1, Kim discloses a system for simulation of mobile camera photographing (Kim Fig.1 – Camera 110 is installed on the transfer line 130, it may be installed to be movable), the system comprising:
an image acquisition unit configured to acquire an image of a panel moving in a preset direction at a preset speed (Kim Fig.1 – The camera 110 may be fixed if the examination table 200 may move, or if the display panel may move on the examination table 200);
a panel information input unit configured to receive operation information of the panel (Kim – defect test of the display panel);
an image acquisition unit information input unit configured to receive setting information of the image acquisition unit (Kim [55] – The module housing 210 may block external light. For example, the module housing 210 may be formed in a cylindrical shape or a polygonal pillar shape. The interior of the module housing 210 may be darkened to prevent light from being scattered. For example, the inside of the module housing 210 may be black. The PCB 230 may be installed inside the module housing 210, and the image sensor 250 may be mounted on the PCB 230. The image sensor 250 may be, for example, a CMOS or a CCD. The shutter unit 270 may be installed in the module housing 210 to selectively introduce light from the outside of the module housing 210. That is, by the operation of the shutter unit 270, light may be received or blocked by the image sensor 250).
However, Kim does not explicitly disclose an image information calculation unit configured to calculate image feature information corresponding to the operation information of the panel and the setting information of the image acquisition unit
Peterson teaches an image information calculation unit configured to calculate image feature information corresponding to the operation information of the panel and the setting information of the image acquisition unit (Peterson [0005] – To generate a trigger signal over link 44 at calculated times to the imaging device 32 to acquire one or more images of the disk 24 in the field of view. If the disk 24 is defective, the imaging device 32 and/or the controller 42 may be programmed to send a signal over link 46; [0041] – Because the smart camera 62, motion controller 64, and servo drive 94 are all synchronized by a common time base, the smart camera 62 may be able to generate the image acquisition trigger signal 98 that is close, within acceptable limits, to the actual object movement without the use of a hardware encoder; [0042] – The machine vision system 60 may be configured to detect a defective object 138. When an object is defective, the smart camera 62 and/or the motion controller 64 may be programmed to send a fail signal 140 over link 142 to a reject actuator 144 to remove the object 138 from the conveyer 66. The fail signal 140 can be generated by the time the object to be rejected arrives at the reject actuator 144 farther down the conveyor from the smart camera 62. In order to generate the fail signal 140 in the presence of conveyor speed changes, the smart camera 62 can determine how fast the conveyor 66 is moving).
Therefore, it 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 to modify Kim to calculate image feature information corresponding to the operation information of the panel and the setting information of the image acquisition unit, as taught by Peterson. One would be motivated as a determination of featuresa can be made using the parameters of the panel and the camera, such as a condition of a subject being captured.
Regarding Claim 2, Kim, in combination, further discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the panel rotates by a motor to move (Kim Fig.4 -– motor 490).
Regarding Claim 3, Kim, in combination, further discloses the system of claim 2, further comprising a lighting information input unit configured to receive illuminance information of lighting that illuminates the panel (Kim Fig.3 – 160 Backlight provides light for 150 Display and 170 Diffuser Plate spreads the light; Fig.4 – 270 Shutter Unit and Module Housing also control the light captured by the camera).
With regard to claim 10, the claim limitations are essentially the same as claim 1 but in a different embodiment. Therefore, the rational used to reject claim 1 is applied to claim 10.
With regard to claim 11, the claim limitations are essentially the same as claim 2 but in a different embodiment. Therefore, the rational used to reject claim 2 is applied to claim 11.
With regard to claim 12, the claim limitations are essentially the same as claim 3 but in a different embodiment. Therefore, the rational used to reject claim 3 is applied to claim 12.
With regard to claim 18, the claim limitations are essentially the same as claim 1 but in a different embodiment. Therefore, the rational used to reject claim 1 is applied to claim 18.
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 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claim falls outside the scope of patent-eligible subject matter at least because the claimed computer-readable recording medium in light of the supporting disclosure is broad enough to encompass transitory embodiments. “A computer-readable storage medium” is detailed in the specification as signal which is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101. See MPEP 2106(I).
Non-limiting examples of claims that are not directed to one of the statutory categories: i. transitory forms of signal transmission (for example, a propagating electrical or electromagnetic signal per se), In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 1357, 84 USPQ2d 1495, (Fed.Cir. 2007).
A broad but reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a computer readable medium (also called machine readable medium and other such variations) typically covers forms of non-transitory tangible media and also transitory propagating signals in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of computer readable media, particularly when the specification does not limit the computer readable medium to one that is non-transitory. See MPEP 2111.01
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-9, 13-17 and 19 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMIR SHAHNAMI whose telephone number is (571)270-0707. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am to 4:00 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, Joseph Ustaris can be reached at 571-272-7383. 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.
/AMIR SHAHNAMI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483
Prosecution Insights