Patent Application 17770878 - IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD IMAGE PROCESSING DEVICE - Rejection
Patent Application 17770878 - IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD IMAGE PROCESSING DEVICE
Title: IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD, IMAGE PROCESSING DEVICE, AND PROGRAM
Application Information
- Invention Title: IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD, IMAGE PROCESSING DEVICE, AND PROGRAM
- Application Number: 17770878
- Submission Date: 2025-04-10T00:00:00.000Z
- Effective Filing Date: 2022-04-21T00:00:00.000Z
- Filing Date: 2022-08-30T00:00:00.000Z
- National Class: 351
- National Sub-Class: 205000
- Examiner Employee Number: 78669
- Art Unit: 2872
- Tech Center: 2800
Rejection Summary
- 102 Rejections: 1
- 103 Rejections: 1
Cited Patents
The following patents were cited in the rejection:
Office Action Text
DETAILED ACTION
Oath/Declaration
1. Oath and declaration filed on 8/30/2022 is accepted.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The prior art documents submitted by application in the Information Disclosure Statement filed on 8/30/2022 and 8/30/2023 have all been considered and made of record ( note the attached copy of form PTO – 1449).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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 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.
Claim(s) 1,2,8-11 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2006-61196 A.
Regarding claim 1,JP 2006-61196 a discloses (paragraph 0020-0057) an image processing method in which image processing is performed by a processor (paragraph 0023), the image processing method (paragraph 0013)comprising: acquiring a two-dimensional fundus image (paragraph 0026); acquiring a second point on an eyeball model corresponding to at least one first point of the two-dimensional fundus image (paragraph 0049); and creating data to represent a process to move the at least one first point to the second point (paragraph 0053 and figure 5 and 9-11).
Regarding claim 2, JP 2006-61196 a discloses wherein the data is video data configured from a plurality of frames (refer to paragraph 0053 and figure 5 and 9-11).
Regarding claim 8, JP 2006-61196 a discloses (refer to paragraphs 0026 and 0030-0057) wherein the at least one first point is a point selected from among a plurality of points on the two-dimensional fundus image (corresponding point in an overlapping area , paragraphs 0026 and paragraph 0030) .
Regarding claim 9, JP 2006-61196 a discloses (refer to paragraphs 0026 and 0030-0057) wherein the at least one first point is respective points in a stipulated area of the two- dimensional fundus image (corresponding point in an overlapping area , paragraphs 0026 and paragraph 0030).
Regarding claim 10, JP 2006-61196 a discloses (paragraph 0026 and paragraph 0049 and figure 11) wherein the at least one first point is respective points in the entire two-dimensional fundus image (paragraph 0049).
Regarding claim 11, JP 2006-61196 a discloses (paragraph 0026 and paragraph 0049 and figure 11) wherein the at least one first point is a point corresponding to a single pixel configuring the two-dimensional fundus image (paragraph 0049).
Regarding claim 13, JP 2006-61196 a discloses (paragraph 0026 and paragraph 0049 and figure 2B) wherein the two-dimensional fundus image is a montage image resulting from combining a first direction fundus image imaged in a state in which a gaze of an examined eye is facing in a first direction together with a second direction fundus image imaged in a state in which the examined eye is facing in a second direction different from the first direction.
Regarding claim 14, JP 2006-61196 a discloses (refer to paragraphs 0026 and 0030-0057) an image processing device (paragraph 0023), comprising: a memory, and a processor coupled to the memory(paragraph 0013, wherein the processor is configured to: acquire a two-dimensional fundus image (paragraph 0049); acquire a second point on an eyeball model corresponding to at least one first point of the two-dimensional fundus image; and create data to represent a process to move the at least one first point to the second point (paragraph 0053 and figures 5 and 9-11). .
Regarding claim 15, JP 2006-61196 a discloses (refer to paragraphs 0026 and 0030-0057)a non-transitory storage medium storing a program to cause a computer to execute processing comprising: acquiring a two-dimensional fundus image (paragraph 0049); acquiring a second point on an eyeball model corresponding to at least one first point of the two-dimensional fundus image; and creating data to represent a process to move the at least one first point to the second point (paragraph 0053 and figures 5 and 911).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JP 2006-61196 A in view of WO 2019/074077 A1.
Regarding claim 12, JP 2006-61196 A discloses (paragraph 0022 and 0025) wherein the eyeball model but does not indicate that the eyeball model is a model obtained by correcting a default eyeball model in accordance with eye axial length.
However, Wo discloses (refer to paragraphs 0034, paragraph 0035 and paragraph 0068) for example, in the field of fundus image processing methods, the fact that it is possible to determine eye axial length through ultrasonic wave measurement is well known feature and, in the image, processing method and using eye axial length as points on a fundus contour in order to generate an eyeball model is a matter is a matter that a person skilled in the art could have established as appropriate.
Allowable Subject Matter
5. Claims 3-7 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.
6. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: wherein: the process is set for each of a specific interval of time; a frame is generated for each specific interval of time for an intermediate position for moving a pixel at the at least one first point; and the video data includes a frame at the at least one first point, frames at a plurality of intermediate positions set between the at least one first point and the second point, and a frame at the second point and a plurality of movement patterns are predetermined for the movement; and the data is data representing a process of moving according to a movement pattern selected from among the plurality of movement patterns and the movement pattern is a path connecting the at least one first point and the second point in three-dimensional space and wherein the path is a straight line path connecting the at least one first point and the second point and the movement pattern includes data related to a movement speed for the at least one first point to move to the second point.
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMED A HASAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2331. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 6 AM -4 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, Wyatt Stoffa can be reached on 571-2701782. 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.
/MOHAMMED A HASAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 4/4/2025