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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 07/10/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 6, 11, 14, 20, 23, 25, 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Paluri et al. US 2025/0240442.
Paluri discloses:
1. and under similar rationales 11. 20. A method of decoding video data, the method being performed by at least one processor (Fig. 2: processor 230) and comprising: determining, using a picture header syntax element, and for all slices of a coded picture, whether the slices are B, P, and/or I type, the picture header syntax element being coded using an unsigned integer and included in a slice layer raw byte sequence payload network abstraction layer unit (0070; 0121; 0149; 0152-3; Figs. 23, 26-35, e.g.
PNG
media_image1.png
182
792
media_image1.png
Greyscale
descriptor u(n) in an unsigned integer of length n); and decoding the video data based on types of slices indicated by the picture header syntax element, and for the coded picture, only related syntax elements are coded, and when all slices of the coded picture are indicated as including intra-prediction, no inter-prediction syntax elements are coded (Fig. 14: decoding apparatus; 0070; 0121; 0149; 0152-3; Figs. 23, 26-35; 0184-5; 0232-3).
14. and 4. And 23. The apparatus of claim 11, wherein a flag is used to indicate a presence of the picture header related syntax elements in the slice layer raw byte sequence payload network abstraction layer unit (0070; 0121; 0149; 0152-3; Figs. 23, 26-35, e.g.
PNG
media_image1.png
182
792
media_image1.png
Greyscale
).
6. The method of claim 11, wherein the types of the slices are inferred when signaled in high level syntax (0149; 0152-3; Figs. 23, 26-35; 0184-5; 0232-3; 0161-6; 0177-80).
25. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 20, wherein the types of the slices are inferred when signaled in high level syntax (0149; 0152-3; Figs. 23, 26-35; 0184-5; 0232-3; 0161-6; 0177-80); or wherein the types of the slices are inferred based on a number of rectangular slices in the coded picture.
28. The method of claim 1, wherein a picture header raw byte sequence payload is included within the slice layer raw byte sequence payload network abstraction layer unit, and a picture parameter set includes a picture parameter set picture type indicator, and the picture header syntax element comprises a picture header picture type indicator that specifies the slice types for all slices of the coded picture, wherein signaling of the picture header picture type indicates the types of slices when the picture parameter set picture type indicator indicates a presence of both intra slices and inter slices in coded pictures, and otherwise without signaling of the picture header picture type indicator the picture header picture type indicator is inferred to be equal to the picture parameter set picture type indicator (0149; 0152-3; Figs. 23, 26-35; 0184-5; 0232-3; 0161-6; 0177-80).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 5, 16 and 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paluri in view of Ryu et al. US 2014/0036999 from IDS
Paluri discloses:
5. 16. and 24. The apparatus of claim 1,
Paluri does not explicitly disclose the following, however Ryu teaches wherein the types of the slices are inferred from a decoded access unit delimiter value. (0141-3; table 9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify the reference(s) as above in order to the AU delimiter may include a picture type, a priority identifier, and/or RBSP trailing bits and the picture type may indicate the type of picture following the AU delimiter, such as an I-picture/slice, a P-picture/slice, and/or a B-picture/slice (Ryu 0142)
Claim 7, 9, 10, 17 and 19 and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paluri in view of Chen et al. US 2012/0189053 hereinafter Chen053 from IDS.
Paluri discloses:
17. and 7. The method of claim 11,
Paluri does not explicitly disclose the following, however Chen053 teaches wherein the setting code is configured such that the picture header syntax element is a 2 bit syntax element configurable with three statuses. (0021-3; 0038-44).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify the reference(s) as above in order to have syntax elements defined to indicate construction information for the reference picture lists are encoded and signaled to a decoding device in a slice header of a coded video slice (Chen053 0021)
19. and 9. The method of claim 11,
Paluri does not explicitly disclose the following, however Chen053 teaches wherein the setting code is configured such that the picture header syntax element is a 2 bit syntax element configurable with four statuses. (0021-3; 0038-44; as there are 2 bits which can represent four values (0-3) it would be obvious to include a forth status if desired).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify the reference(s) as above in order to have syntax elements defined to indicate construction information for the reference picture lists are encoded and signaled to a decoding device in a slice header of a coded video slice (Chen053 0021)
10. The method of claim 1,
Paluri does not explicitly disclose the following, however Chen053 teaches wherein the syntax element is a 2 bit syntax element configurable with four statuses. (0021-3; 0038-44).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify the reference(s) as above in order to have syntax elements defined to indicate construction information for the reference picture lists are encoded and signaled to a decoding device in a slice header of a coded video slice (Chen053 0021)
27. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 20,
Paluri does not explicitly disclose the following, however Chen053 teaches wherein the picture header syntax element is a 2 bit syntax element configurable with any of three statuses four statuses. (0021-3; 0038-44; as there are 2 bits which can represent four values (0-3) it would be obvious to include a forth status if desired).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify the reference(s) as above in order to have syntax elements defined to indicate construction information for the reference picture lists are encoded and signaled to a decoding device in a slice header of a coded video slice (Chen053 0021)
Claim(s) 8, 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paluri in view of Chen et al. US 2014/0198181
Chen ‘181
8. and 26. The apparatus of claim 1,
Paluri does not explicitly disclose the following, however Chen teaches wherein the single syntax element is a 0-th order Exp-Golomb-coded syntax element (0171; 0212).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill before the effective filing date to modify the reference(s) as above in order to assign variable-length unsigned integers encoded using 0.sup.th order exponential Golomb (Exp-Golomb) coding with left bit first which can give more options than the u(1) which should only have 1 bit/two states (Chen ‘181 0171)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH W BECKER whose telephone number is (571)270-7301. The examiner can normally be reached flexible usually 10-6.
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, Mehrdad Dastouri can be reached at 5712727418. 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.
/JOSEPH W BECKER/Examiner, Art Unit 2424
Prosecution Insights