Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 16, 2026
Application No. 17/174,067

METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PROCESSING VIDEO SIGNAL

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Feb 11, 2021
Priority
Nov 18, 2016 — RE 10-2016-0154331 +2 more
Examiner
HILAIRE, CLIFFORD
Art Unit
2488
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
KT Corporation
OA Round
10 (Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
11-12
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allowance Rate
319 granted / 445 resolved
+13.7% vs TC avg
Strong +15% interview lift
Without
With
+15.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
487
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.5%
-36.5% vs TC avg
§103
52.0%
+12.0% vs TC avg
§102
14.2%
-25.8% vs TC avg
§112
29.8%
-10.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 445 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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 . Response to Arguments/Amendments Presented arguments have been fully considered, but are rendered moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection necessitated by amendment(s) initiated by the applicant(s). Priority Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 120 as follows: The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994) The disclosure of the prior-filed application, Application No. 16/461,830, fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application. Claims 1-30 are rejected below for introducing materials that were not part of the original disclosure. Accordingly, claim 16-30 are not entitled to the benefit of the prior application. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 31 and 36-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Applicant has not pointed out where the new (or amended) claim is supported, nor does there appear to be a written description of the claim limitation “determining whether to split a current block into a plurality of partition blocks or not; in response to determining to split the current block into the plurality of partition blocks, splitting the current block into the plurality of partitions blocks, wherein each of the plurality of partition blocks is a transform unit used as a unit for performing an inverse transform, wherein a prediction unit in the current block is determined based on a transform unit partitioning structure of the current block, wherein the prediction unit for performing intra prediction is formed by merging two or more transform units, and wherein transform units that form a single prediction unit have the same transform type”(claim 31), “wherein in response to the current block being split into two partition blocks, a transform skip flag indicating whether an inverse-transform is skipped or not is not transmitted through the bitstream regardless of a size of two partition blocks, and skipping the inverse-transform are not allowed for the two partition blocks’ (claim 36), “splitting a current block into a plurality of partition blocks; and encoding a flag indicating whether the current block is split into the plurality of partition blocks or not, wherein each of the plurality of partition blocks is used as a unit for performing a transform, wherein a prediction unit in the current block is determined based on a transform unit partitioning structure of the current block, wherein the prediction unit for performing intra prediction is formed by merging two or more transform units, and wherein transform units that form a single prediction unit have the same transform type” (claim 37), “encoding a flag indicating whether the current block is split into the plurality of partition blocks or not, wherein each of the plurality of partition blocks is a transform unit used as a unit for performing a transform, wherein a prediction unit in the current block is determined based on a transform unit partitioning structure of the current block, wherein the prediction unit for performing intra prediction is formed by merging two or more transform units, and wherein transform units that form a single prediction unit have the same transform type” (claim 38) in the application as filed. Nowhere in any of ¶00246-00248, of the originally filed application, is described the embodiments recited in any of amended claims 31, 36, 37 and 38. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLIFFORD HILAIRE whose telephone number is (571)272-8397. The examiner can normally be reached 5:30-1400. 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, SATH V PERUNGAVOOR can be reached at (571)272-7455. 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. CLIFFORD HILAIRE Primary Examiner Art Unit 2488 /CLIFFORD HILAIRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 24 earlier events
Nov 12, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 08, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Dec 18, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jun 24, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jun 24, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 26, 2026
Response Filed
Jul 28, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12707023
INTERPOLATION BASED CAMERA MOTION FOR TRANSITIONING BETWEEN BEST OVERVIEW FRAMES IN LIVE VIDEO
2y 11m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12695995
ADAPTIVE EXPOSURE
2y 3m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12695885
IMAGE CODING METHOD BASED ON INFORMATION RELATED TO TILE AND INFORMATION RELATED TO SLICE IN VIDEO OR IMAGE CODING SYSTEM
1y 7m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12689741
METHODS AND APPARATUS TO DETECT A REGION OF INTEREST BASED ON VARIABLE RATE SHADING
1y 8m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12684205
VIDEO PROCESSING METHOD AND VIDEO PROCESSING APPARATUS
2y 1m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

11-12
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+15.1%)
2y 7m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 445 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month