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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US 12315471 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the limitations in claim 1 is anticipated by claim 1 of the U.S. Patent No. US 12315471 B2.
Application 19193617
Claim 1
U.S. Patent No. US 12315471 B2
Claim 1
1. A processor for mapping a source colour point expressed according to a source colour gamut to a destination colour point expressed according to a destination colour gamut, the processor being configured to:
1. A processor for mapping a source colour point expressed according to a source colour gamut to a destination colour point expressed according to a destination colour gamut, the processor comprising:
a colour characterizer configured to determine a first scaling parameter in dependence on a curve that passes through the source colour point, the boundary of the source colour gamut and the boundary of the destination colour gamut, and
determine a second scaling parameter in dependence on the curve; and
a gamut mapper configured to calculate a first translation factor in dependence on the first and second scaling parameters and calculate a second translation factor in dependence on the first scaling parameter, and
if the source colour point lies inside the destination colour gamut, apply a first translation factor so as to translate the source colour point to a destination colour point within a first range of values on a curve that passes through the source colour point, the boundary of the source colour gamut and the boundary of the destination colour gamut; and
if the source colour point lies inside the destination colour gamut, apply the first translation factor so as to translate the source colour point to a destination colour point within a first range of values on the curve, and
if the source colour point lies outside the destination colour gamut, apply a second translation factor so as to translate the source colour point to a destination colour point within a second range of values on the curve; wherein the first and second translation factors are different, and
if the source colour point lies outside the destination colour gamut, apply the second translation factor, different than the first translation factor, so as to translate the source colour point to a destination colour point within a second range of values on the curve;
wherein the first and second ranges of values lie within the destination colour gamut.
wherein the first and second ranges of values lie within the destination colour gamut.
Claims 2-3
Claim 1
Claims 4-20
Claims 1-20
Claim 1, 17, and 19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, and 12 of U.S. Patent No. US 10748503 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the limitations in claim 1 is anticipated by claim 1 of the U.S. Patent No. US 10748503 B2.
Application 19193617
Claim 1
U.S. Patent No. US 10748503 B2
Claim 1
1. A processor for mapping a source colour point expressed according to a source colour gamut to a destination colour point expressed according to a destination colour gamut, the processor being configured to:
1. A colour processor for mapping an image from a source colour gamut to a destination colour gamut in an operating colour space, the colour processor comprising:
an input for receiving a source image comprising a plurality of source colour points expressed according to the source colour gamut;
a colour characterizer configured to, for each source colour point in the source image,
determine a first scaling parameter indicative of a relationship between the position of the source colour point and a position of intersection of the boundary of the destination colour gamut with a curve defined according to a predetermined set of constraints so as to pass through the source colour point,
determine a second scaling parameter indicative of a relationship between the position of the source colour points and a position of intersection of the boundary of the source colour gamut with the respective curve; and
a gamut mapper configured to calculate a first translation factor in dependence on the first and second scaling parameters and calculate a second translation factor in dependence on the first scaling parameter, and for each source colour point in the source image and in dependence on the first scaling parameter:
if the source colour point lies inside the destination colour gamut, apply a first translation factor so as to translate the source colour point to a destination colour point within a first range of values on a curve that passes through the source colour point, the boundary of the source colour gamut and the boundary of the destination colour gamut; and
if the source colour point lies inside the destination colour gamut, apply the first translation factor so as to translate the source colour point to a destination colour point within a first range of values on the respective curve, and
if the source colour point lies outside the destination colour gamut, apply a second translation factor so as to translate the source colour point to a destination colour point within a second range of values on the curve; wherein the first and second translation factors are different, and
if the source colour point lies outside the destination colour gamut, apply the second translation factor so as to translate the source colour point to a destination colour point within a second range of values on the respective curve;
wherein the first and second ranges of values lie within the destination colour gamut.
wherein the first and second ranges of values lie within the destination colour gamut.
Claim 17
Claim 1 and claim 12
Claim 19
Claim 1 and claim 12
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 6, 12-13, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Ramanath (US 20080043260 A1).
Regarding to claim 1, Ramanath discloses a processor for mapping a source colour point expressed according to a source colour gamut to a destination colour point expressed according to a destination colour gamut (Fig. 9; [0049]: polynomial rubber-sheet mapping techniques operates via a computer processor 920, mapping color points from an input signal 910 with an input color gamut to a display device 930 with an output color gamut; the processor 920 interfaces with a memory color look-up table 925; the processor 920 scales any transformation of color points in the input color gamut via a mapping technique; the processor 920 maps the input color gamut to the output color gamut), the processor being configured to:
if the source colour point lies inside the destination colour gamut, apply a first translation factor so as to translate the source colour point to a destination colour point within a first range of values on a curve that passes through the source colour point, the boundary of the source colour gamut and the boundary of the destination colour gamut (Fig. 6; [0030]: rubber-sheet mapping technique; In FIG. 6, the input color gamut 610 of this particular hue slice is smaller than the output color gamut 620; the polynomial rubber-sheet mapping technique essentially acts to stretch the ends of the input color gamut 610 so that they correlate to the ends of the output color gamut 620, with all internal points stretching similarly to follow along behind the extreme points in order to adjust each point in the input color gamut 610 to a corresponding point proportionately within the output color gamut 620;
PNG
media_image1.png
534
666
media_image1.png
Greyscale
; [0031]: the points internal to the input gamut hue slice 610 follows along the path set by the extreme points, stretching like a rubber-sheet to proportionately map each point to its corresponding point in the output gamut hue slice 620; proportionately is first expansion translation factor; [0033]: the input gamut 610 is preferentially scaled in or out based on control points; the control points typically determine mapping for the extreme limits of the gamut, and mapping for the remaining points is scaled accordingly to provide for perceptually accurate reproduction; [0036-0037]: the rubber-sheet mapping technique provides a more accurate fit than would a linear mapping technique;
PNG
media_image2.png
50
136
media_image2.png
Greyscale
); and
if the source colour point lies outside the destination colour gamut, apply a second translation factor so as to translate the source colour point to a destination colour point within a second range of values on the curve ([0030]: a polynomial rubber-sheet mapping technique maps each of the input hue slice color gamuts to its corresponding output hue slice color gamut; [0032]: if the input gamut is larger than the output gamut, points of the input gamut that are outside of the output gamut would be brought inside the range of the output gamut; [0036-0037]: the rubber-sheet mapping technique provides a more accurate fit than would a linear mapping technique; Fig. 7; [0039]: polynomial rubber-sheet mapping techniques provides for superior mapping of an input gamut hue slice 710 to an output gamut hue slice 720; proportionately compress input gamut hue slice 710 to an output gamut hue slice 720; compression translation factor;
PNG
media_image3.png
412
604
media_image3.png
Greyscale
; Fig. 7A; [0040]: polynomial rubber sheet mapping; control point 745 in the input gamut 710 maps to control point 746 in the output gamut 720, while control point 747 in the input gamut 710 maps to control point 748 in the output control gamut 720; control point 747 in the input gamut 710 maps to control point 748 in the output control gamut 720; the polynomial rubber-sheet mapping provides a better fit;
PNG
media_image4.png
494
584
media_image4.png
Greyscale
; compression and expansion factors; [0041]: the 3-D rubber-sheet mapping technique translates points 810 and 850 as prescribed, while holding points 820, 830, and 840 constant;
PNG
media_image5.png
70
154
media_image5.png
Greyscale
);
wherein the first and second translation factors are different (Fig. 6; [0030]: rubber-sheet mapping technique; In FIG. 6, the input color gamut 610 of this particular hue slice is smaller than the output color gamut 620; the polynomial rubber-sheet mapping technique essentially acts to stretch the ends of the input color gamut 610 so that they correlate to the ends of the output color gamut 620, with all internal points stretching similarly to follow along behind the extreme points; stretch with expansion translation factor; Fig. 6; [0031]: first translation factor is expansion translation factor; [0032]: if the input gamut is larger than the output gamut, points of the input gamut that are outside of the output gamut would be brought inside the range of the output gamut with compression translation factor; [0036-0037]; Fig. 7; Fig. 7A; [0039-0040]: second translation factor is compression translation factor; the direction and value of first translation factor are different from the direction and value of second translation factor as illustrated in Fig. 6, Fig. 7, and Fig. 7A), and wherein the first and second ranges of values lie within the destination colour gamut (Fig. 6; [0030-0031]: first ranges of value lie in output gamut hue slice 620; [0036-0037]; Fig. 7; Fig. 7A; [0039-0040]: second ranges of value lie in the output control gamut 720).
Regarding to claim 2, Ramanath discloses the processor as claimed in claim 1, the processor being further configured to:
calculate the first translation factor; and/or
calculate the second translation factor
(or is optional; Ramanath; [0031]: the points internal to the input gamut hue slice 610 follows along the path set by the extreme points, stretching like a rubber-sheet to proportionately map each point to its corresponding point in the output gamut hue slice 620; expansion translation factor; [0036-0037]: the rubber-sheet mapping technique provides a more accurate fit than would a linear mapping technique;
PNG
media_image2.png
50
136
media_image2.png
Greyscale
; translation factors are calculated).
Regarding to claim 3, Ramanath discloses the processor as claimed in claim 1, the processor being further configured to calculate the first translation factor in dependence on a first scaling parameter and a second scaling parameter (Ramanath; Fig. 6; [0030]: rubber-sheet mapping technique; In FIG. 6, the input color gamut 610 of this particular hue slice is smaller than the output color gamut 620; the polynomial rubber-sheet mapping technique essentially acts to stretch the ends of the input color gamut 610 so that they correlate to the ends of the output color gamut 620, with all internal points stretching similarly to follow along behind the extreme points in order to adjust each point in the input color gamut 610 to a corresponding point proportionately within the output color gamut 620;
PNG
media_image1.png
534
666
media_image1.png
Greyscale
; [0031]: the points internal to the input gamut hue slice 610 follows along the path set by the extreme points, stretching like a rubber-sheet to proportionately map each point to its corresponding point in the output gamut hue slice 620; proportionately is first expansion translation factor; [0036-0037]: the rubber-sheet mapping technique provides a more accurate fit than would a linear mapping technique;
PNG
media_image2.png
50
136
media_image2.png
Greyscale
; translation factors are calculated based on control points).
Regarding to claim 4, Ramanath discloses the processor as claimed in claim 3, wherein the first scaling parameter is indicative of a relationship between the position of the source colour point and a position of intersection of the boundary of the destination colour gamut with the curve (Ramanath; Fig. 6; [0030]: rubber-sheet mapping technique; In FIG. 6, the input color gamut 610 of this particular hue slice is smaller than the output color gamut 620; the polynomial rubber-sheet mapping technique essentially acts to stretch the ends of the input color gamut 610 so that they correlate to the ends of the output color gamut 620, with all internal points stretching similarly to follow along behind the extreme points in order to adjust each point in the input color gamut 610 to a corresponding point proportionately within the output color gamut 620 ;
PNG
media_image6.png
554
660
media_image6.png
Greyscale
; Fig. 6; [0031]: the point of maximum chroma 616 of the input gamut 610 is mapped to the maximum chroma 626 of the output gamut 620; the points internal to the input gamut hue slice 610 follows along the path set by the extreme points, stretching like a rubber-sheet to proportionately map each point to its corresponding point in the output gamut hue slice 620;
PNG
media_image7.png
227
390
media_image7.png
Greyscale
; [0036]: accuracy improves as control points are added).
Regarding to claim 6, Ramanath discloses the processor as claimed in claim 3, wherein the second scaling parameter is indicative of a relationship between the position of the source colour point and a position of intersection of the boundary of the source colour gamut with the curve (Ramanath; [0031]: the point of minimum luminance 612 of the input gamut 610 is mapped to the point of minimum luminance 622 of the output gamut 620, the point of maximum luminance 614 of the input gamut 610 is mapped to the point of maximum luminance 624 of the output gamut 620;
PNG
media_image8.png
152
614
media_image8.png
Greyscale
; [0033]: the point of minimum lightness 612 for the input gamut 610 along the achromatic line 630, point A, maps to the point of minimum lightness 622 for the output gamut 620 along the achromatic line 630; Fig. 7A; [0040]: Control point 743, representing the maximum chroma of the input gamut 710, maps to control point 744 for the maximum chroma of the output gamut 720;
PNG
media_image9.png
492
610
media_image9.png
Greyscale
).
Regarding to claim 12, Ramanath discloses the processor as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first range of values on the curve extend between the centre of the destination colour gamut and a first transition point (Ramanath; Fig. 6; [0034]: the midpoint of the input gamut lightness value along the achromatic line 630 is mapped to the gray point of the output gamut; middle point and the gray point of the output gamut are center points; point 614 is first transition point; first range is from gray point to point 614 as illustrated in Fig. 6), and the second range of values on the curve extend between the first transition point and the boundary of the destination colour gamut (Ramanath; Fig. 6; [0031]: the point of maximum luminance 614 of the input gamut 610 is mapped to the point of maximum luminance 624 of the output gamut 620; second range is from point 614 to point 624 as illustrated in Fig. 6; Fig. 7; Fig. 7A).
Regarding to claim 13, Ramanath discloses the processor as claimed in claim 1, wherein two or more of luminance, hue, chrominance, brightness, lightness, colourfulness, and saturation are substantially constant at all colour points along the curve (Ramanath; [0027]: hue, lightness, and chroma; [0028]: maintain hue when mapping an input color gamut to a different output color gamut to avoid color shifts between the source and target color gamuts that could result in improper color renditions; Fig. 6; [0031]: the point of minimum luminance, i.e., lightness 612 of the input gamut 610 is mapped to the point of minimum luminance 622 of the output gamut 620, the point of maximum luminance 614 of the input gamut 610 is mapped to the point of maximum luminance 624 of the output gamut 620, and the point of maximum chroma 616 of the input gamut 610 is mapped to the maximum chroma 626 of the output gamut 620).
Regarding to claim 17, Ramanath discloses a method of mapping a source colour point expressed according to a source colour gamut to a destination colour point expressed according to a destination colour gamut (Fig. 9; [0049]: polynomial rubber-sheet mapping techniques operates via a computer processor 920, mapping color points from an input signal 910 with an input color gamut to a display device 930 with an output color gamut; the processor 920 interfaces with a memory color look-up table 925; the processor 920 scales any transformation of color points in the input color gamut via a mapping technique; the processor 920 maps the input color gamut to the output color gamut), the method comprising:
determining whether the source colour point lies inside or outside the destination colour gamut (or is optional; Fig. 6; [0030]: rubber-sheet mapping technique; In FIG. 6, the input color gamut 610 of this particular hue slice is smaller than the output color gamut 620; [0032]: if the input gamut is larger than the output gamut, points of the input gamut that are outside of the output gamut would be brought inside the range of the output gamut; Fig. 7; Fig. 7A; [0039-0041]), and:
in response to determining that the source colour point lies inside the destination colour gamut, applying a first translation factor so as to translate the source colour point to a destination colour point within a first range of values on a curve that passes through the source colour point, the boundary of the source colour gamut and the boundary of the destination colour gamut (Fig. 6; [0030]: rubber-sheet mapping technique; In FIG. 6, the input color gamut 610 of this particular hue slice is smaller than the output color gamut 620; the polynomial rubber-sheet mapping technique essentially acts to stretch the ends of the input color gamut 610 so that they correlate to the ends of the output color gamut 620, with all internal points stretching similarly to follow along behind the extreme points in order to adjust each point in the input color gamut 610 to a corresponding point proportionately within the output color gamut 620;
PNG
media_image1.png
534
666
media_image1.png
Greyscale
; [0031]: the points internal to the input gamut hue slice 610 follows along the path set by the extreme points, stretching like a rubber-sheet to proportionately map each point to its corresponding point in the output gamut hue slice 620; proportionately is first expansion translation factor; [0033]: the input gamut 610 is preferentially scaled in or out based on control points; the control points typically determine mapping for the extreme limits of the gamut, and mapping for the remaining points is scaled accordingly to provide for perceptually accurate reproduction; [0036-0037]: the rubber-sheet mapping technique provides a more accurate fit than would a linear mapping technique;
PNG
media_image2.png
50
136
media_image2.png
Greyscale
); or
in response to determining that the source colour point lies outside the destination colour gamut, applying a second translation factor so as to translate the source colour point to a destination colour point within a second range of values on the curve (or is optional; [0030]: a polynomial rubber-sheet mapping technique maps each of the input hue slice color gamuts to its corresponding output hue slice color gamut; [0032]: if the input gamut is larger than the output gamut, points of the input gamut that are outside of the output gamut would be brought inside the range of the output gamut; [0036-0037]: the rubber-sheet mapping technique provides a more accurate fit than would a linear mapping technique; Fig. 7; [0039]: polynomial rubber-sheet mapping techniques provides for superior mapping of an input gamut hue slice 710 to an output gamut hue slice 720; proportionately compress input gamut hue slice 710 to an output gamut hue slice 720; compression translation factor;
PNG
media_image3.png
412
604
media_image3.png
Greyscale
; Fig. 7A; [0040]: polynomial rubber sheet mapping; control point 745 in the input gamut 710 maps to control point 746 in the output gamut 720, while control point 747 in the input gamut 710 maps to control point 748 in the output control gamut 720; control point 747 in the input gamut 710 maps to control point 748 in the output control gamut 720; the polynomial rubber-sheet mapping provides a better fit;
PNG
media_image4.png
494
584
media_image4.png
Greyscale
; compression and expansion factors; [0041]: the 3-D rubber-sheet mapping technique translates points 810 and 850 as prescribed, while holding points 820, 830, and 840 constant;
PNG
media_image5.png
70
154
media_image5.png
Greyscale
);
the rest claim limitations are similar to claim limitations recited in claim 1. Therefore, same rational used to reject claim 1 is also used to reject claim 17.
Regarding to claim 19, Ramanath discloses a non-transitory machine readable storage medium having stored thereon machine readable instructions that, when processed at a computer system for generating a manifestation of an integrated circuit, cause the computer system to generate a manifestation of a processor for mapping a source colour point expressed according to a source colour gamut to a destination colour point expressed according to a destination colour gamut, the processor being configured to ([0045]: the memory color look-up table protects memory colors in the input color gamut; Fig. 9; [0049]: polynomial rubber-sheet mapping techniques operates via a computer processor 920, mapping color points from an input signal 910 with an input color gamut to a display device 930 with an output color gamut; the processor 920 interfaces with a memory color look-up table 925; the processor 920 scales any transformation of color points in the input color gamut via a mapping technique; the processor 920 maps the input color gamut to the output color gamut; a storage device for later display; display panels and storage devices; [0051]: the previously performed polynomial rubber-sheet mapping process results are stored in memory 953):
The rest claim limitations are similar to claim limitations recited in claim 1. Therefore, same rational used to reject claim 1 is also used to reject claim 19.
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.
Claims 5, 7, 11, 14, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramanath (US 20080043260 A1) and in view of Henley (US 20050248785 A1).
Regarding to claim 5, Ramanath discloses the processor as claimed in claim 3, the processor being further configured to (same as rejected in claim 1)
Ramanath fails to explicitly teach “calculate the first scaling parameter as a ratio of the position of the source colour point on the curve with respect to the position of intersection of the boundary of the destination colour gamut with the curve”.
In same field of endeavor, Henley teaches “calculate the first scaling parameter as a ratio of the position of the source colour point on the curve with respect to the position of intersection of the boundary of the destination colour gamut with the curve” (Henley; [0049]: a scaling factor is determined based on the maximum lightness values of the source and destination hue leaves; the factor is a ratio of the maximum lightness value of the destination hue leaf to the maximum lightness value of the source hue leaf).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Ramanath to include “calculate the first scaling parameter as a ratio of the position of the source colour point on the curve with respect to the position of intersection of the boundary of the destination colour gamut with the curve” as taught by Henley. The motivation for doing so would have been to select one conversion from a plurality of conversions based on a lightness value associated with the maximum chroma and preserves the lightness aspect of the source color to obtain the gamut-mapped value as taught by Henley in paragraphs [0012] and [0057].
Regarding to claim 7, Ramanath discloses the processor as claimed in claim 3, the processor being further configured (same as rejected in claim 1)
Ramanath fails to explicitly disclose to calculate the second scaling parameter as a ratio of the position of the source colour point on the curve with respect to the position of intersection of the boundary of the source colour gamut with the curve.
In same field of endeavor, Henley teaches to calculate the second scaling parameter as a ratio of the position of the source colour point on the curve with respect to the position of intersection of the boundary of the source colour gamut with the curve (Henley; [0045]: a linear scaling is used to scale the source minimum lightness value to the destination's minimum lightness value; [0049]: a scaling factor is determined based on the maximum lightness values of the source and destination hue leaves; the factor is a ratio of the maximum lightness value of the destination hue leaf to the maximum lightness value of the source hue leaf; [0050]: the scaling factor is applied to each of the lightness values of the source hue leaf).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Ramanath to include to calculate the second scaling parameter as a ratio of the position of the source colour point on the curve with respect to the position of intersection of the boundary of the source colour gamut with the curve as taught by Henley. The motivation for doing so would have been to select one conversion from a plurality of conversions based on a lightness value associated with the maximum chroma and preserves the lightness aspect of the source color to obtain the gamut-mapped value as taught by Henley in paragraphs [0012] and [0057].
Regarding to claim 11, Ramanath discloses the processor as claimed in claim 1,
Ramanath fails to explicitly disclose wherein the first and second ranges of values on the curve are adjacent ranges delineated by a first transition point.
In same field of endeavor, Henley teaches wherein the first and second ranges of values on the curve are adjacent ranges delineated by a first transition point (Henley; Fig. 4B; [0036]: the cusp point is a first transition point and is defined by a chroma value, max_C, and a lightness value as illustrated in Fig. 4B; two curve are adjacent ranges delineated by cusp point as illustrated in Fig. 4B; [0041]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Ramanath to include wherein the first and second ranges of values on the curve are adjacent ranges delineated by a first transition point as taught by Henley. The motivation for doing so would have been to select one conversion from a plurality of conversions based on a lightness value associated with the maximum chroma and preserves the lightness aspect of the source color to obtain the gamut-mapped value as taught by Henley in paragraphs [0012] and [0057].
Regarding to claim 14, Ramanath discloses the processor as claimed in claim 1,
Ramanath fails to explicitly disclose wherein the curve is a line, the line being a curve with null curvature.
In same field of endeavor, Henley teaches wherein the curve is a line, the line being a curve with null curvature (Henley; Fig. 5B; [0043]: clip a source color that falls outside the destination gamut to within the destination gamut; mapping of the four source colors, s.sub.1, s.sub.2, s.sub.3 and s.sub.4, using LCLIP;
PNG
media_image10.png
148
182
media_image10.png
Greyscale
; scale along the lines as illustrated in Fig. 5B; Fig. 6B; [0060]: a midpoint, d, between v.sub.1 and v.sub.2 is calculated;
PNG
media_image11.png
84
394
media_image11.png
Greyscale
).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Ramanath to include wherein the curve is a line, the line being a curve with null curvature as taught by Henley. The motivation for doing so would have been to select one conversion from a plurality of conversions based on a lightness value associated with the maximum chroma and preserves the lightness aspect of the source color to obtain the gamut-mapped value as taught by Henley in paragraphs [0012] and [0057].
Regarding to claim 18, Ramanath discloses the method as claimed in claim 17,
The rest claim limitations are similar to claim limitations recited in claim 14. Therefore, same rational used to reject claim 14 is also used to reject claim 18.
Regarding to claim 20, Ramanath discloses the non-transitory machine readable storage medium as claimed in claim 19,
The rest claim limitations are similar to claim limitations recited in claim 14. Therefore, same rational used to reject claim 14 is also used to reject claim 20.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramanath (US 20080043260 A1) and in view of Atkins (US 20130114000 A1).
Regarding to claim 8, Ramanath discloses the processor as claimed in claim 1, the processor being further configured (same as rejected in claim 1)
Ramanath fails to explicitly disclose to calculate the second translation factor in dependence on a first scaling parameter.
In same field of endeavor, Atkins teaches to calculate the second translation factor in dependence on a first scaling parameter (Fig. 2A; [0051]: the image data specifies a colour at out-of-gamut point 13, point 13 may be gamut-compressed by mapping it to a corresponding in-gamut point for display; Fig. 2B-2D; [0052]: an out-of-gamut point 13 may be mapped to a corresponding in-gamut point along a mapping direction 25; the mapping direction 25 and the distance to which point 13 is gamut-compressed in the mapping direction 25 are determined according to one of several methods; one method of mapping to in-gamut points is to interpolate between two input video data streams; interpolation may be applied to determine a set of points located between the gamuts of the two input video data streams, for output to the display;
PNG
media_image12.png
784
676
media_image12.png
Greyscale
; [0053]: where the gamut of the image data is less than the gamut of the display, the points in colour space 10 specified in the image data may optionally be expanded or extrapolated to take advantage of the relatively greater gamut of the display.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ramanath to include to calculate the second translation factor in dependence on a first scaling parameter as taught by Atkins. The motivation for doing so would have been to perform mapping to generate image data that is more suitable for display on a display from image data that is less suitable for display on the display; to map a range of colour and/or luminance and/or other range of image data to an available range of colour and/or luminance and/or other range of a display; to map the ranges of the input video data stream to those of the display as taught by Atkins in paragraphs [0024], [0028], and [0041].
Regarding to claim 9, Ramanath in view of Atkins discloses the processor as claimed in claim 8, wherein the first scaling parameter is indicative of a relationship between the position of the source colour point and a position of intersection of the boundary of the destination colour gamut with the curve (Ramanath; Fig. 6; [0030]: rubber-sheet mapping technique; In FIG. 6, the input color gamut 610 of this particular hue slice is smaller than the output color gamut 620; the polynomial rubber-sheet mapping technique essentially acts to stretch the ends of the input color gamut 610 so that they correlate to the ends of the output color gamut 620, with all internal points stretching similarly to follow along behind the extreme points in order to adjust each point in the input color gamut 610 to a corresponding point proportionately within the output color gamut 620 ;
PNG
media_image6.png
554
660
media_image6.png
Greyscale
; Fig. 6; [0031]: the point of maximum chroma 616 of the input gamut 610 is mapped to the maximum chroma 626 of the output gamut 620; the points internal to the input gamut hue slice 610 follows along the path set by the extreme points, stretching like a rubber-sheet to proportionately map each point to its corresponding point in the output gamut hue slice 620;
PNG
media_image13.png
229
511
media_image13.png
Greyscale
; [0036]: accuracy improves as control points are added).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramanath (US 20080043260 A1) in view of Atkins (US 20130114000 A1), and further in view of Henley (US 20050248785 A1).
Regarding to claim 10, Ramanath in view of Atkins discloses the processor as claimed in claim 8, the processor being further configured to (same as rejected in claim 1)
Ramanath in view of Atkins fails to explicitly disclose to calculate the first scaling parameter as a ratio of the position of the source colour point on the curve with respect to the position of intersection of the boundary of the destination colour gamut with the curve.
In same field of endeavor, Henley teaches to calculate the first scaling parameter as a ratio of the position of the source colour point on the curve with respect to the position of intersection of the boundary of the destination colour gamut with the curve (Henley; [0049]: a scaling factor is determined based on the maximum lightness values of the source and destination hue leaves; the factor is a ratio of the maximum lightness value of the destination hue leaf to the maximum lightness value of the source hue leaf).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Ramanath and Atkins to include to calculate the first scaling parameter as a ratio of the position of the source colour point on the curve with respect to the position of intersection of the boundary of the destination colour gamut with the curve as taught by Henley. The motivation for doing so would have been to select one conversion from a plurality of conversions based on a lightness value associated with the maximum chroma and preserves the lightness aspect of the source color to obtain the gamut-mapped value as taught by Henley in paragraphs [0012] and [0057].
Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramanath (US 20080043260 A1) and in view of Ulichney (US 5233684 A).
Regarding to claim 15, Ramanath discloses the processor as claimed in claim 1,
wherein the operating colour space is a YUV colour space (Ramanath; Fig. 6[0031]: luminance and chroma), and
Ramanath fails to explicitly disclose wherein applying the first translation factor comprises multiplying the U and V coordinates of the source colour point by the first translation factor.
In same field of endeavor, Ulichney teaches wherein applying the first translation factor comprises multiplying the U and V coordinates of the source colour point by the first translation factor (Ulichney; col. 3, lines 25-41: obtain YUV based on RGB as illustrated in equation A; obtain RGB based on YUV; col. 6, lines 28-41: matrix formula in equation A has first and second translation factors; destination colors are obtained by multiply source color with matrix formula based on equation A; col. 7, lines 45-50: translate any YUV color triplet to corresponding RGB values; col. 13: a YUV space; the RGB space were viewed as completely enclosed within a YUV space; col. 13, lines 14-21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ramanath to include wherein applying the first translation factor comprises multiplying the U and V coordinates of the source colour point by the first translation factor as taught by Ulichney. The motivation for doing so would have been provide highest quality projection and to project each out-of-range YUV color triplet along a line from the point within the YUV space defined by the out-of-range YUV color triplet to the surface of the RGB space as taught by Ulichney in col. 13, lines 14-21.
Regarding to claim 16, Ramanath discloses the processor as claimed in claim 1,
wherein the operating colour space is a YUV colour space (Ramanath; Fig. 6[0031]: luminance and chroma), and
Ramanath fails to explicitly disclose wherein applying the second translation factor comprises multiplying the U and V coordinates of the source colour point by the first translation factor.
In same field of endeavor, Ulichney teaches wherein applying the second translation factor comprises multiplying the U and V coordinates of the source colour point by the first translation factor (Ulichney; col. 3, lines 25-41: obtain YUV based on RGB as illustrated in equation A; obtain RGB based on YUV; col. 6, lines 28-41: matrix formula in equation A has first and second translation factors; destination colors are obtained by multiply source color with matrix formula based on equation A; col. 7, lines 45-50: translate any YUV color triplet to corresponding RGB values; col. 13: a YUV space; the RGB space were viewed as completely enclosed within a YUV space; col. 13, lines 14-21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ramanath to include wherein applying the second translation factor comprises multiplying the U and V coordinates of the source colour point by the first translation factor as taught by Ulichney. The motivation for doing so would have been provide highest quality projection and to project each out-of-range YUV color triplet along a line from the point within the YUV space defined by the out-of-range YUV color triplet to the surface of the RGB space as taught by Ulichney in col. 13, lines 14-21.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Hai Tao Sun whose telephone number is (571)272-5630. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00AM-6:00PM.
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, Daniel Hajnik can be reached at 5712727642. 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.
/HAI TAO SUN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2616
Prosecution Insights