CTNF 18/347,834 CTNF 93952 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 07-42-04 AIA 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 5/6/2026 has been entered. Response to Amendment The amendment of the instant Response to Office Action of 5/6/2026 has been considered; however, the amendments therein merely clarify the independent claims, and do not introduce further features, such that the previous rejections are of continuing vitality. To wit: the claims merely recite a first bitstream and a second bitstream, both the first and second bitstreams stored in an encapsulated file structure recited in the claims with the term track. Fundamentally, Hannuksela shows that tracks as recited is a term commonly used for referring to a grouping of temporally related media data in the art and the structures thereof are well known. As set forth previously, Ichigaya discloses associated bitstreams sharing a common coding protocol for transmission, which is an encapsulation, and Hannuksela teaches a track of bitstreams, thus teaching an encapsulation of related data in a common track file. See cited paragraph 0055. The arguments with regard to Ichigaya and Hannuksela are rejected as merely describing features with different or proprietary terms that have the same meaning, and then asserting the novelly named common aspects are new and untaught. This is a naming charade. For example, on page 19 of the instant Response, Applicant’s Representative asserts Hannuksela fails to teach: sample auxiliary information storing at least one second bitstream. However, cited paragraph 0055 of Hannuksela discloses a file structure with boxes, each box storing associated bitstreams in tracks. As such a track as commonly understood and the recited sample auxiliary information storing at least one second bitstream are functional equivalents such that disclosure of a track teaches the recited sample auxiliary information. The other contentions characterizing the cited art and distinctions thereof are likewise rejected as incorrect such that the outstanding rejections are maintained. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1, 2, 5-12 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ichigaya (US 2024/0340475) in view of Hannuksela (US 2020/0053392) . Regarding claim 1, Ichigaya discloses an apparatus (shown Figure 1, Transceiver apparatus) comprising: at least one processor; (paragraph 0087, SoC is same) and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed with the at least one processor, cause (paragraph 0086, program in storage for processor execution) the apparatus at least to: obtain a first bitstream, wherein the first bitstream is encoded according to a first coding method; (paragraph 0029, base layer coding) obtain at least one second bitstream, wherein the at least one second bitstream is encoded according to a second coding method; (paragraph 0029 enhancement layer coding) and generate an encapsulated file, ...and sample auxiliary information, (paragraph 0039, one or more enhancement bitstreams are same) wherein samples of the [data] of the encapsulated file comprise the first bitstream, wherein the sample auxiliary information associated with the [data] stores the at least one second bitstream, (paragraphs 0039/0043, encapsulated file formed by multiplexing first and second coded bitstreams with indicating flags-see also paragraph 0083) wherein the encapsulated file further comprises, at least: an indication that the first bitstream is encapsulated in the samples of the [data] , (paragraph 0047, separate indications of both base and enhancement layers) and an indication that the at least one second bitstream is encapsulated in the sample auxiliary information associated with the [data]. (paragraph 0035, enhancement layer flag sent in multiplexed stream) Ichigaya fails to identically disclose wherein the encapsulated file comprises, at least, a track , and the bitstream data is in the track . However, Hannuksela teaches wherein the encapsulated file comprises, at least, a track, and the bitstream data is in the track . (paragraph 0055, file encapsulates one or more tracks, and the tracks may include multiple compilations of bitstreams) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application that a file may contain tracks which may contain varieties of bitstreams because such was well known and commonly used in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application as evinced by Hannuksela. (paragraph 0055) Regarding independent claims 8 and 10, claims 8 and 10 are method and computer program product claims, respectively, reciting similar features to claim 1 and are therefore also rendered obvious by Ichigaya in view of Hannuksela for reasons similar to claim 1. Regarding claim 2, Ichigaya discloses wherein the first bitstream comprises a base bitstream, (paragraph 0029, base layer bitstream) wherein the at least one second bitstream comprises at least one enhancement bitstream, (paragraph 0029, enhancement layer bitstream) and wherein the second coding method comprises low complexity enhancement video coding . (paragraph 0006, the second enhancement layer may be coded per LCEVC) Regarding dependent claim 12, claim 12 is a claim reciting features similar to claim 2, and is therefore also disclosed by Ichigaya for reasons similar to claim 2. Regarding claim 5, Ichigaya discloses wherein the encapsulated file further comprises at least one of: an indication of a configuration for decoding the first bitstream, or an indication of a configuration for decoding the at least one second bitstream . (paragraph 0047, separate indications of both base and enhancement layers) Regarding dependent claims 9, 15 and 19, claims 9, 15 and 19 recite features similar to claim 5, and are therefore also disclosed by Ichigaya for reasons similar to claim 5. Regarding claim 6, Ichigaya discloses wherein the first coding method is at least partially different from the second coding method . (paragraphs 0029/0047, shown Figure 1, base layer and multiple enhancement layers) Regarding claim 7, Ichigaya discloses wherein the first coding method and the second coding method comprise different layers of a same coding method . (paragraphs 0029/0047, shown Figure 1, base layer and multiple enhancement layers) Regarding dependent claims 16 and 17, claims 16 and 17 recite features similar to claims 6 and 7, respectively, and are therefore also disclosed by Ichigaya for reasons similar to claims 6 and 7, respectively. Regarding claim 11, Ichigaya discloses an apparatus (shown Figure 1, Transceiver apparatus) comprising: at least one processor; (paragraph 0087, SoC is same) and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed with the at least one processor, cause (paragraph 0086, program in storage for processor execution) the apparatus at least to: obtain an encapsulated file, ...and sample auxiliary information, (paragraph 0039, one or more enhancement bitstreams are same) wherein samples of the [data] of the encapsulated file comprise a first bitstream, wherein the sample auxiliary information associated with the [data] stores at least one second bitstream, (paragraph 0052, receiver obtains the multiplexed base and enhancement layers with corresponding indications) wherein the encapsulated file further comprises, at least: an indication that the first bitstream is encapsulated in the samples of the [data] , (paragraph 0047, separate indications of both base and enhancement layers) and an indication that the at least one second bitstream is encapsulated in the sample auxiliary information associated with the [data] ; (paragraph 0035, enhancement layer flag sent in multiplexed stream) obtain, from the encapsulated file, the first bitstream, wherein the first bitstream is encoded according to a first coding method; (paragraph 0056, base layer decoded) and obtain, from the encapsulated file, the at least one second bitstream, wherein the second bitstream is encoded according to a second coding method . (paragraph 0056, enhancement layer decoded) Ichigaya fails to identically disclose wherein the encapsulated file comprises, at least, a track , and the bitstream data is in the track . However, Hannuksela teaches wherein the encapsulated file comprises, at least, a track, and the bitstream data is in the track . (paragraph 0055, file encapsulates one or more tracks, and the tracks may include multiple compilations of bitstreams) Same rationale for combining and motivation as for claim 1 above. Regarding independent claims 18 and 20, claims 18 and 20 are method and computer program product claims, respectively, reciting similar features to claim 11 and are therefore also rendered obvious by Ichigaya in view of Hannuksela for reasons similar to claim 11 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 3, 4, 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ichigaya and Hannuksela in view of Kim (US 2021/0211724) . Regarding claim 3, Ichigaya fails to disclose the recited; however, Kim teaches wherein the first bitstream comprises an atlas bitstream, (paragraph 0514, atlas container for data transmission) wherein the at least one second bitstream comprises at least one of: a base mesh bitstream, a displacement bitstream, or a common atlas, and wherein the second coding method comprises at least one of: video-based dynamic mesh coding, or visual volumetric video-based coding . (paragraph 0005, mesh coding may be used for visual coding in 3D ranges) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that an atlas container could be used for transmission, and that the coding could be mesh coding before the effective filing date of the instant application because both coding mechanisms were well known in the art, memorialized in the V-PCC standard, and commonly used by those of skill in the art before the effective filing date as evinced by Kim, at least in the V-PCC standard. (paragraphs 0514 and paragraph 0005) Regarding claim 4, Ichigaya fails to disclose the recited; however, Kim teaches wherein the track comprises an atlas track, wherein an atlas sample entry of the atlas track comprises the first bitstream and the at least one second bitstream . (paragraph 0514, atlas transmission container used, as inclusive will include the two bitstreams) Same rationale for combining and motivation as per claim 3 above. Regarding dependent claims 13 and 14, claims 13 and 14 recite features similar to claims 3 and 4, respectively, and are therefore also rendered obvious by Kim for reasons similar to claims 3 and 4, respectively . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure : Malamal (US 2016/0232939) directly implicates the claimed invention. Hannuksela II (US 2015/0304665) directly implicates the claimed invention. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER KINGSBURY GLOVER whose telephone number is (303)297-4401. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-6 MT. 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. /CHRISTOPHER KINGSBURY GLOVER/Examiner, Art Unit 2485 /JAYANTI K PATEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2485 June 1, 2026 Application/Control Number: 18/347,834 Page 2 Art Unit: 2485 Application/Control Number: 18/347,834 Page 3 Art Unit: 2485 Application/Control Number: 18/347,834 Page 4 Art Unit: 2485 Application/Control Number: 18/347,834 Page 5 Art Unit: 2485 Application/Control Number: 18/347,834 Page 6 Art Unit: 2485 Application/Control Number: 18/347,834 Page 7 Art Unit: 2485 Application/Control Number: 18/347,834 Page 8 Art Unit: 2485 Application/Control Number: 18/347,834 Page 9 Art Unit: 2485 Application/Control Number: 18/347,834 Page 10 Art Unit: 2485
Prosecution Insights