Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/094,271

Heuristic Detection of Potential Digital Media Artifacts and Defects in Digital Media Assets

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 06, 2023
Examiner
HAGHANI, SHADAN E
Art Unit
2485
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Disney Enterprises Inc.
OA Round
6 (Non-Final)
60%
Grant Probability
Moderate
6-7
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 60% of resolved cases
60%
Career Allow Rate
221 granted / 366 resolved
+2.4% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+18.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
399
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.1%
-37.9% vs TC avg
§103
60.3%
+20.3% vs TC avg
§102
13.8%
-26.2% vs TC avg
§112
16.1%
-23.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 366 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/19/2025 has been entered. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: (a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 21-22, 24, 26-32, 34, 36-40 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Liao (US 2012/0155553) in view of Azadegan (US Patent 5,819,004), Yachida (US PG Publication 2010/0086225 A1), and Hui (US Patent 6,982,762). Regarding Claim 21, Liao (US 2012/0155553) discloses a method of encoding (method and apparatus for encoding, Abstract) a video content (media, Abstract) including a plurality of video frames having a first frame and a second frame preceding the first frame (sequence of video frames in e.g., Fig. 9, [0088]), the method comprising: performing a first pass of an encoding process (one pass Xcoded version, Fig. 8) of the plurality of video frames (of media program 504, Fig. 8) that generates encoding information (output parameters and parameter values 802, Fig. 8; texture complexity T(n), motion complexity M(n), frame rate, size and bit rate (Kbps), and these metrics may be expressed as an average value, maximum value, or as a function of time [0072]; or an instantaneous value [0078]) about the first frame (instantaneous bitrate/ texture/ motion of a frame [0075], [0078]) based in part on the second frame (motion complexity [0078]; motion complexity is based on a second frame preceding in coding order the first frame [0088], as motion vectors indicate displacements relative to the second frame); storing (see communication line in Fig. 8) …, the encoding information about the first frame (output parameters and parameter values 802, Fig. 8; texture complexity T(n), motion complexity M(n), frame rate, size and bit rate (Kbps), and these metrics may be expressed as an average value, maximum value, or as a function of time [0072]; or an instantaneous value [0078]) generated by the first pass of the encoding process (output of transcoder 502, the first past transcoder, Fig. 8); after performing the first pass of the encoding process (constraints decision module 804 and adjustment module 808 are after the first pass transcoder 502, Fig. 8; if the single-pass transcoded version of media program 504 did not satisfy all constraints [0080]): retrieving the encoding information (output parameters and values are passed to the constraint decision module, Fig. 8) …, the encoding information including an encoding parameter (output parameters and parameter values 802, Fig. 8; texture complexity T(n), motion complexity M(n), frame rate, size and bit rate (Kbps), and these metrics may be expressed as an average value, maximum value, or as a function of time [0072]; or an instantaneous value [0078]) of the first frame (instantaneous values, by definition, refer to a single frame, as they are instantaneous); obtaining … a threshold (constraints 803 provided to the constraint decision module 804 [0073]) for a comparison (comparing metrics of the single pass transcoded version of the media program 504 with the provided constraints 803 [0073]) with the encoding parameter (the parameter values 802, Fig. 8; texture complexity T(n), motion complexity M(n), frame rate, size and bit rate (Kbps), and these metrics may be expressed as an average value, maximum value, or as a function of time [0072]; or an instantaneous value [0078]) of the first frame (instantaneous values, by definition, refer to a single frame); detecting, based on the comparison (compares to a constraint [0075]; satisfy one or more constraints 803 [0073]) of the encoding parameter (based on the parameter values 802, Fig. 8) with the threshold (constraints [0073]-[0082] are thresholds), the first frame as a candidate for encoding a defect (determining failed constraints and values 806, Fig. 8; encoding to constant quality [0065]) wherein the defect is at least one of a ringing, a blocking, or a break-up of a picture (video quality [0090]— ringing, blocking, and breakup are known compression distortions); performing, in response to detecting, a second pass of the encoding process (transcoder 811 transcode the failed time interval [0083]) of the first frame to generate an encoded first frame (second pass transcoding of the time interval [0083]). Liao does not disclose, but Azadegan (US Patent 5,819,004) teaches storing, in a first file (log file, Column 32 lines 23-42), the encoding information (H, the bits consumed by the motion vectors, stored in the log file per frame of video, Column 32 lines 23-42); retrieving the encoding information from the first file (the values of (X, g, H) are read from the stored data file which may be the log file described above, Column 32 lines 43-49). Liao does not disclose, but Yachida (US PG Publication 2010/0086225 A1) teaches wherein the defect is at least one of a ringing, a blocking, or a break-up of a picture (block distortion, Abstract, background, Summary [0028]-[0033]). Liao does not disclose, but Hui (US Patent 6,982,762) teaches obtaining, based on a frame type of the first frame (according to the picture coding type, Column 5 lines 18-33), a threshold (maximum and minimum quality factor K for each picture coding type: KB-min, KB-max, KP-min, KP-max, KI-min, KI-max, Column 6 lines 15-40). One of ordinary skill in the art before the time of invention would have been motivated to modify Liao to store the encoder parameters and values of Liao in a log file, as taught by Azadegan, because Azadegan teaches that the log files are particularly useful during re-encoding for improving the quality of video because they are needed to determine the edit points of the video (Column 19 lines 1-10, lines 30-35). One of ordinary skill in the art before the time of invention would have been motivated to consider the encoding parameters in Figs. 2-3 of Yachida in determining the recoding parameters of Liao because Yachida teaches that a combination of these parameters can be used to determine deblocking filter strength and reduce the effect of blocking artifacts in the compressed video [0010]-[0014], improving image quality. One of ordinary skill in the art before the time of invention would have been motivated to tailor the parameter values 802 of Liao to the picture coding type because Hui teaches that tailoring the quality-allocation to different coding types enables adapting the codec to balance the visual quality with motion characteristics of the video, improving bit-allocation with minimal increased complexity, improving the overall quality of coded video (Column 3 line 50 – Column 4 line 10). Claim 22: Liao (US 2012/0155553) discloses the method of claim 21. Liao does not disclose, but Azadegan (US Patent 5,819,004) teaches wherein the encoding parameter includes a first amount of change between the first frame and the second frame (bits MB header, Fig. 9C; macroblock header length, Figs. 10A, 10B); and wherein detecting includes comparing the first amount of change with a threshold (B is the number of bits of the frame resulting from the original encoding; there are determined to be too many bits, Column 38 lines 30-end) to determine whether the first frame is likely to contain the defect (increase the quantization level of the macroblocks to reduce the number of bits, Column 38 lines 30-end). One of ordinary skill in the art before the time of invention would have been motivated to modify Liao to store the encoder parameters and values of Liao in a log file, as taught by Azadegan, because Azadegan teaches that the log files are particularly useful during re-encoding for improving the quality of video because they are needed to determine the edit points of the video (Column 19 lines 1-10, lines 30-35). Claim 24: Liao (US 2012/0155553) discloses the method of claim 22. Liao does not disclose, but Azadegan (US Patent 5,819,004) teaches wherein the threshold has a static value (number of bits, Column 38 lines 30-end). One of ordinary skill in the art before the time of invention would have been motivated to modify Liao to store the encoder parameters and values of Liao in a log file, as taught by Azadegan, because Azadegan teaches that the log files are particularly useful during re-encoding for improving the quality of video because they are needed to determine the edit points of the video (Column 19 lines 1-10, lines 30-35). Claim 26: Liao (US 2012/0155553) discloses the method of claim 21. Liao does not disclose, but Azadegan (US Patent 5,819,004) teaches wherein the encoding information includes a provisional identification of the frame type (picture coding type, Fig. 9A). One of ordinary skill in the art before the time of invention would have been motivated to modify Liao to store the encoder parameters and values of Liao in a log file, as taught by Azadegan, because Azadegan teaches that the log files are particularly useful during re-encoding for improving the quality of video because they are needed to determine the edit points of the video (Column 19 lines 1-10, lines 30-35). Claim 27: Liao (US 2012/0155553) discloses the method of claim 21. Liao does not disclose, but Azadegan (US Patent 5,819,004) teaches wherein the encoding information includes a provisional allocation of bits to motion vectors (bits MB header, Fig. 9C; macroblock header length, Figs. 10A, 10B). One of ordinary skill in the art before the time of invention would have been motivated to modify Liao to store the encoder parameters and values of Liao in a log file, as taught by Azadegan, because Azadegan teaches that the log files are particularly useful during re-encoding for improving the quality of video because they are needed to determine the edit points of the video (Column 19 lines 1-10, lines 30-35). Claim 28: Liao (US 2012/0155553) discloses the method of claim 21. Liao does not disclose, but Azadegan (US Patent 5,819,004) teaches wherein the encoding information includes at least one of a residual (the master video bitstream file is the compressed bitstream for the entire movie, Column 14 lines 56-end; this includes the residual, Column 6 lines 59-end) or a provisional quantization parameter value (mean qscale, Fig. 9B; quantizer scale Figs. 10A, 10B). One of ordinary skill in the art before the time of invention would have been motivated to modify Liao to store the encoder parameters and values of Liao in a log file, as taught by Azadegan, because Azadegan teaches that the log files are particularly useful during re-encoding for improving the quality of video because they are needed to determine the edit points of the video (Column 19 lines 1-10, lines 30-35). Claim 29: Liao (US 2012/0155553) discloses the method of claim 21, further comprising storing the encoded first frame in an output file (stored in 2-pass coded media program 816). Claim 30: Liao (US 2012/0155553) discloses the method of claim 29. Liao does not disclose, but Azadegan (US Patent 5,819,004) teaches generating second encoding information during the second pass of the encoding process (changing the quantization, Column 20 lines 23-33); and storing second encoding information in the output file (the original set of log files needs to be updated to correspond to the changes which occurred during editing, Column 20 lines 23-33). One of ordinary skill in the art before the time of invention would have been motivated to modify Liao to store the encoder parameters and values of Liao in a log file, as taught by Azadegan, because Azadegan teaches that the log files are particularly useful during re-encoding for improving the quality of video because they are needed to determine the edit points of the video (Column 19 lines 1-10, lines 30-35). Claim 31: Liao (US 2012/0155553) discloses A system for encoding a video content including a plurality of video frames having a first frame and a second frame preceding the first frame, the system comprising: a processor: and a memory; wherein the processor is configured (computer, Fig. 2 [0027]-[0034]). The remainder of Claim 31 is rejected on the grounds provided in Claim 21. Claim 32: Rejected on the grounds provided in Claim 22. Claim 34: Rejected on the grounds provided in Claim 24. Claim 36: Rejected on the grounds provided in Claim 26. Claim 37: Rejected on the grounds provided in Claim 27. Claim 38: Rejected on the grounds provided in Claim 28. Claim 39: Rejected on the grounds provided in Claim 29. Claim 40: Rejected on the grounds provided in Claim 30. Claims 23 and 33 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Liao (US 2012/0155553) in view of Azadegan (US Patent 5,819,004), Yachida (US PG Publication 2010/0086225 A1), Hui (US Patent 6,982,762), and Messmer (US PG Publication 2012/0315011). Claim 23: Liao (US 2012/0155553) discloses the method of claim 22. Liao does not disclose but Messmer (US PG Publication 2012/0315011) teaches wherein the first amount of change is an amount change in a color spectrum shift (metadata includes gamut curves [0063]). One of ordinary skill in the art before the time of invention would have been motivated to supplement the video-editing of Liao with the gamut correction of Messmer because Messmer teaches that the capabilities of different displays can fail to render images as the artistic designer anticipated, thwarting the artist’s intent [0011], and gamut correction can restore the quality of the displayed images. Claim 33: Rejected on the grounds provided in Claim 23. Claims 25 and 35 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Liao (US 2012/0155553) in view of Azadegan (US Patent 5,819,004), Yachida (US PG Publication 2010/0086225 A1), Hui (US Patent 6,982,762), and Dye (US 7190284 B1). Claim 25: Liao (US 2012/0155553) discloses the method of claim 22. Liao does not disclose, but Dye (US 7190284 B1) teaches wherein the threshold has a dynamic value (dynamic compression error threshold, Column 32 lines 5-15). One of ordinary skill in the art before the time of invention would have been motivated to implement the 2-pass coder of Liao with dynamic thresholds because Dye teaches that it produces high quality compression ratios, improving image quality, reducing blur, and reducing computation cost and coding rate, Column 30 lines 54-end. Claim 35: Rejected on the grounds provided in Claim 25. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments filed 12/01/2025 have been considered but are moot because a new reference is relied upon in this office action. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20130148741 A1 – automatic video format detection and conversion Perlman (WO 2009/073795 A1) – Perlman too many P frames in a row, change to I frame or increase bits in P frame Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHADAN E HAGHANI whose telephone number is (571)270-5631. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM - 5PM. 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, Jay Patel can be reached at 571-272-2988. 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. /SHADAN E HAGHANI/Examiner, Art Unit 2485
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 06, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 06, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 07, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 12, 2024
Response Filed
Nov 20, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 25, 2025
Response Filed
Apr 03, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
May 23, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 02, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 06, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 02, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 23, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 29, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 01, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 19, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 08, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604020
VIDEO DECODING METHOD AND DECODER DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598323
INTER PREDICTION-BASED VIDEO ENCODING AND DECODING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12586336
WEARABLE DEVICE, METHOD, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM CONTROLLING LIGHT RADIATION OF LIGHT SOURCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12574549
CHROMA INTRA PREDICTION WITH FILTERING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12568225
LIMITING A NUMBER OF CONTEXT CODED BINS FOR RESIDUE CODING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

6-7
Expected OA Rounds
60%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (+18.6%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 366 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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