Ex Parte Matsudo

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Nov 28, 2016

13482471 (P.T.A.B. Nov. 28, 2016)

United States Patent and Trademark Office
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O.Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
1946-0352 2814
EXAMINER
JONES, HEATHER RAE
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2481
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
13/482,471 05/29/2012
60803 7590 11/28/2016
Paratus Law Group, PLLC
1765 Greensboro Station Place
Suite 320
Tysons Corner, VA 22102
Masaharu MATSUDO
11/28/2016 PAPER
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte MASAHARU MATSUDO
Appeal 2016-000398
Application 13/482,471
Technology Center 2400
Before ALLEN R. MacDONALD, ROBERT E. NAPPI, and
STEVEN M. AMUNDSON Administrative Patent Judges.
NAPPI, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appeal 2016-000398
Application 13/482,471
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) of the Final
Rejection of claims 1 through 12. We have jurisdiction over the pending
claims under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We reverse.
INVENTION
Appellant’s invention relates to a method and apparatus of correcting
for error in a depth map used in rendering a stereoscopic image. See
Abstract. Claim 1 is illustrative of the invention and reproduced below:
1. An image processing apparatus comprising:
a reading and writing unit that writes and reads on and
from a recording medium depth information indicating a depth
of a subject in frames of a moving image and change
information indicating a change between continuous frames in a
series of frames,; and
a depth information correcting unit that corrects errors in
the depth information due to noise to time smooth the depth
information, wherein the depth information correcting unit
corrects the errors in the depth information based on the change
information read by the reading and writing unit,
wherein the reading and writing unit performs
overwriting with the depth information corrected by the depth
information correcting unit on the recording medium.
2
Appeal 2016-000398
Application 13/482,471
REJECTIONS AT ISSUE
The Examiner has rejected claims 1,2, and 8 through 12 under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Masuda (US 8,044,997 B2; Oct.
25, 2011) and Son (US 2010/0201790 Al; Aug. 12, 2010). Answer. 2-9.1
The Examiner has rejected claims 3 through 7 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Masuda, Son, and Koo (US
2011/0109731 Al; May 12, 2011). Answer. 9-15.
ISSUES
Appellant argues, on pages 11 through 14 of the Appeal Brief and
pages 4 through 6 of the Reply Brief, that the Examiner’s rejection of
independent claims 1,11, and 12 is in error. The dispositive issue presented
by these arguments is: Did the Examiner err in finding the combination of
Masuda and Son teaches a depth information correction unit that corrects
errors based upon the change information due to noise to time smooth the
depth information?
ANALYSIS
We have reviewed Appellant’s arguments in the Brief, the Examiner’s
rejections and the Examiner’s response to the Appellant’s arguments.
Appellant’s arguments have persuaded us of error in the Examiner’s
rejection of independent claims 1,11, and 12.
In response to Appellant’s arguments, the Examiner finds that Masuda
teaches a depth adjusting section which adjusts for sudden changes in depths
during scenes. Answer 15. Further, the Examiner finds that Son teaches
1 Throughout this Opinion, we refer to the Appeal Brief (filed February 26,
2015); Reply Brief (filed October 7, 2015); and the Examiner’s Answer
(mailed August 12, 2015).
3
Appeal 2016-000398
Application 13/482,471
smoothing user positon data to correct errors from noise. Answer 15, 16.
Based upon these findings the Examiner finds the disputed limitation is
taught by the combination of Masuda and Son. We concur with the
Examiner’s findings concerning Masuda. However, while Son does teach
smoothing position data to correct errors from noise, the information is
directed to the position of the viewer of an image and not the depth
information as claimed. Accordingly we do not sustain the Examiner’s
rejection independent claims 1,11, and 12, and claims 2 and 8 through 10,
which are similarly rejected.
The Examiner has not shown that the additional teachings of Koo
make up for the deficiency in the rejection of claims 1,11, and 12.
Accordingly, we do not sustain the Examiner’s rejection of claims 3 through
7 for the same reasons as claim 1.
DECISION
The decision of the Examiner to reject claims 1 through 12 is
reversed.
REVERSED
4