Ex Parte Kim et al

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Sep 26, 2007

09785443 (B.P.A.I. Sep. 26, 2007)

The opinion in support of the decision being entered today is not binding
precedent of the Board.

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________

Ex parte HYEON JUN KIM and JI EUN LEE
____________

Appeal 2007-2513
Application 09/785,443
Technology Center 2600
____________

Decided: September 26, 2007
____________

Before JOSEPH F. RUGGIERO, ANITA PELLMAN GROSS,
and ST. JOHN COURTENAY, III, Administrative Patent Judges.

GROSS, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Kim and Lee (Appellants) appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the
Examiner's Final Rejection of claims 1, 2, 4 through 7, 9 through 18, and 28
through 33, which are all of the claims pending in this application. We have
jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). An oral hearing on this appeal was
conducted on September 12, 2007.
Appeal 2007-2513
Application 09/785,443

Appellants' invention relates to a system for retrieving multimedia
data using color histograms constructed with different color spaces and
different color quantization methods. See generally Specification 6:5-9.
Claim 1 is illustrative of the claimed invention, and it reads as follows:
1. A content-based multimedia retrieval system, comprising:

a first color quantizer which extracts a color histogram of query
multimedia data;

a second color quantizer which extracts a color histogram of
multimedia data to be retrieved; and

a histogram converter which converts the color histogram of
one of the extracted query multimedia data and the multimedia data to
be retrieved into a histogram having a color space and color
quantization method of the other of the extracted query multimedia
data and the multimedia data to be retrieved.

The prior art references of record relied upon by the Examiner in
rejecting the appealed claims are:
Yaung US 6,512,850 B2 Jan. 28, 2003
(filed Dec. 09, 1998)
Bergman US 6,564,263 B1 May 13, 2003
(filed Dec. 03, 1999)

Claims 1, 2, 4 through 7, 9 through 11, 13 through 18, and 28 through
33 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as being anticipated by Bergman.
Claim 12 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable
over Bergman in view of Yaung.
We refer to the Examiner's Answer (mailed August 29, 2005) and to
Appellants' Brief (filed July 13, 2006) and Reply Brief (filed October 28,
2005) for the respective arguments.
2
Appeal 2007-2513
Application 09/785,443

SUMMARY OF DECISION
As a consequence of our review, we will affirm the anticipation
rejection of claims 1, 2, 5 through 7, 9 through 11, and 28 through 33 and
the obviousness rejection of claim 12 and reverse the anticipation rejection
of claims 4 and 13 through 18.

OPINION
Appellants contend (Br. 8-9 and Reply Br. 1-3) that Bergman
discloses converting a histogram "based on color space," but not "based also
on color quantization, as recited in independent claim 1" (See Br. 8).
Appellants explain that the example in Bergman in columns 13-14 has the
same number of bins (or quantization methods) for both histograms, and,
therefore, does not base the conversion on the color quantization.
Appellants present no further arguments for claim 1. The Examiner asserts
(Answer 7) that the phrase "based on" does not appear in independent claim
1, and that Bergman converts one histogram with a given color space and
color quantization into another histogram having a given color space and
color quantization, as recited in claim 1. The first issue is, therefore,
whether claim 1 requires that the conversion be "based on" both color space
and color quantization.
Independent claim 1 reads in pertinent part, "a histogram converter
which converts the color histogram of one … into a histogram having a color
space and color quantization method of the other." As indicated by the
Examiner, the phrase "based on" does not appear in claim 1. The color
histograms disclosed by Bergman include both color space and bin number
(or color quantization method). In the example at column 13, line 39-
3
Appeal 2007-2513
Application 09/785,443

column 14, line 2, Bergman converts a query color histogram having a RGB
color space and bin number of 512 into an archive histogram having a
different color space derived from the RGB color space and a bin number of
512. Since the two color spaces are different, the histograms as a whole are
different. After the conversion, the histograms as a whole are the same,
since both the color space and the bin number are the same. Thus, Bergman
discloses converting a query histogram into another histogram having a
color space and color quantization method of an archive histogram.
Accordingly, we will sustain the anticipation rejection of independent claim
1 and the claims argued therewith, claims 2 and 5.
As to claim 4, Appellants contend (Br. 9-10 and Reply Br. 4) that
Bergman fails to disclose both a color space description means and also a
quantization description means, as recited in the claim. The Examiner
(Answer 9) asserts that Bergman discloses both description means as each
histogram defines both color space and color quantization method. The
second issue, accordingly, is whether Bergman discloses the two recited
description means.
Bergman (col. 13, ll. 1-6) refers to a color descriptor that defines a
histogram as having a particular color space and bin number. Bergman does
not disclose a description means defining color space and a separate
description means defining color quantization method. Although the word
"separate" or the like is not recited in claim 4, the recitation of two different
description means suggests two separate elements, which are not found in
Bergman. Therefore, we will reverse the anticipation rejection of claim 4.
Claim 6 includes the same language as claim 1 for the conversion
element/step. Appellants (Br. 10 and Reply Br. 3-4) set forth the same
4
Appeal 2007-2513
Application 09/785,443

contentions as for claim 1. As we have found that the language relied upon
by Appellants neither appears in nor is implied by the claims, we will sustain
the anticipation rejection of claim 6 and the claims which are argued
therewith, claims 7 and 11.
For claims 9 and 10, Appellants (Br. 10-12) repeat the claims
verbatim in their entirety, discuss the relevant portions of the Specification,
and conclude with a statement that "Bergman does not disclose or suggest
such features." Appellants do not indicate which steps are allegedly lacking
from Bergman and do not explain why the portions referenced by the
Examiner (Answer 4-5), the same portions referenced by the Examiner in
the Final Rejection, do not satisfy the language of claims 9 and 10.
Appellants contend (Reply Br. 4-5) that Bergman's conversion is not based
on color space and color quantization method and, therefore, the Examiner's
statement (Answer 11) that "the comparison has to be inherent" is in error.
Thus, Appellants' contention regarding claims 9 and 10 appears to be that
Bergman does not disclose the claimed step of "converting the color
histograms into the color histograms having the same color space and color
quantization method when the color histogram[s] … are not the same,"
because Bergman only converts color space, not color quantization method.
As such, the issue for claims 9 and 10 is whether Bergman discloses the
claimed conversion step.
As discussed supra, Bergman discloses a beginning histogram with a
different color space than an ending histogram. Since the color spaces are
different, the histograms as a whole are different. Bergman discloses
converting the starting histogram into the ending one. Thus, even though the
color quantization methods of the starting and ending histograms are the
5
Appeal 2007-2513
Application 09/785,443

same, Bergman satisfies the claim language of claims 9 and 10.
Accordingly, we will sustain the anticipation rejection of claims 9 and 10.
Independent claim 13 recites a step of converting one histogram into
another "when the color spaces and color quantization methods … are
different [from] each other." Similar language is recited in independent
claim 17. Thus, claims 13 and 17 differ from independent claims 1 and 6, as
they do require that both the color space and also the color quantization
method of the query data be different from those of the data to be retrieved.
Since Bergman's example has the same bin number for both histograms, and
since Bergman only specifies (col. 13, ll. 60-66) that the color space must be
transformed, we would have to speculate as whether Bergman also does a
conversion of the color quantization method. Consequently, we cannot
sustain the anticipation rejection of claims 13 and 17 and their dependents,
claims 14 through 16 and 18.
As to claim 28, Appellants contend (Br. 13-14 and Reply Br. 6) that
Bergman fails to disclose a description means for describing both a color
space and a color quantization method, as Bergman does not take into
consideration the color quantization method when transforming histograms.
Further, Appellants contend that Bergman does not disclose extracting a
color histogram using a method "which is the same as the described color
space and color quantization method." The issue for claim 28 is whether
Bergman discloses a description means for describing both a color space and
a color quantization method and extracting a color histogram using a method
which is the same as the described color space and color quantization
method.
6
Appeal 2007-2513
Application 09/785,443

As indicated supra, Bergman (col. 13, ll. 1-6) refers to a color
descriptor that defines a histogram as having a particular color space and bin
number. Although Bergman does not disclose a description means defining
color space and a separate description means defining color quantization
method, claim 28 merely requires a description means for both. Thus,
Bergman discloses the claimed description means. As to using a method
which is the same as the described color space and color quantization
method, as indicated supra, Bergman transforms one histogram such that it
has the same color space and color quantization method as the other.
Therefore, we will sustain the anticipation rejection of claim 28.
Regarding claims 29 and 30, Appellants contend (Br. 14) that
Bergman fails to disclose "a retrieval unit for calculating a similarity
between the color histogram of the query multimedia data extracted before1
and the color histogram of the multimedia data to be retrieved." As
explained by the Examiner (Answer 14), Bergman transforms one histogram
to the same color space and color quantization method as another histogram
so as to be able to compare the two and retrieve the best responses to a
search query. Thus, Bergman calculates the similarities, and we will sustain
the anticipation rejection of claims 29 and 30.
For claim 31, Appellant (Br. 14-15) states what is recited in the claim
and discusses portions of the Specification, but does not indicate what
specifically is supposedly lacking from Bergman. In fact, Bergman is not
even mentioned. Therefore, we will pro forma sustain the anticipation
rejection of claim 31.

1 We note that claim 29 is unclear as to what the extraction occurs before.
Similar language appears in claim 32.
7
Appeal 2007-2513
Application 09/785,443

Appellants contend (Br. 15 and Reply Br. 7-8) that for claims 32 and
33, Bergman "does not judge histograms based on color quantization nor
does it perform such a judgment in advance of performing a similarity
calculation." The Examiner asserts (Answer 15-16) that "based on" is not
recited in the claims and that the judging step is inherent in Bergman
because "one need[s] to know before whether or not the archived multimedia
data is compatible with the query multimedia data Q." The issues for claims
32 and 33, therefore, are whether the claims require judging based on color
quantization and whether the claimed judging step is inherent in Bergman.
As to judging histograms "based on color quantization," no such
language appears in claims 32 and 33. Therefore, we find Appellants' first
contention beyond the scope of the claims. As to whether judging is
inherent to Bergman, we agree with the Examiner that before calculating a
similarity between two histograms, a determination must be made as to
whether the histograms are comparable. Bergman inherently performs the
judging step prior to converting one histogram into another. Accordingly,
we will sustain the anticipation rejection of claims 32 and 33.
The Examiner (Answer 6) rejects claim 12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103,
combining Yaung with Bergman. Appellants (Br. 15-16) merely contend
that Yaung fails to cure the alleged deficiency of Bergman as applied to
claim 6, from which claim 12 depends. As we have found no error in the
rejection of claim 6 over Bergman, we will sustain the obviousness rejection
of claim 12 over Bergman and Yaung.

8
Appeal 2007-2513
Application 09/785,443

ORDER
The decision of the Examiner rejecting claims 1, 2, 4 through 7, 9
through 11, 13 through 18, and 28 through 33 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) and
claim 12 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is affirmed as to claims 1, 2, 5 through 7, 9
through 12, and 28 through 33 and reversed as to claims 4 and 13 through
18.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). See 37 C.F.R.
§ 1.136(a)(1)(iv).
AFFIRMED-IN-PART

tdl/gw

KED & ASSOCIATES, LLP
P.O. Box 221200
Chantilly, VA 20153-1200
9