Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/534,320

Magnitude Coding for Selected Subset of Prediction Candidates

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 08, 2023
Examiner
PHILIPPE, GIMS S
Art Unit
2424
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Comcast Cable Communications LLC
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
878 granted / 1030 resolved
+27.2% vs TC avg
Minimal +2% lift
Without
With
+1.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
1065
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.7%
-33.3% vs TC avg
§103
39.9%
-0.1% vs TC avg
§102
26.8%
-13.2% vs TC avg
§112
4.2%
-35.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1030 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 January 16, 2026 has been entered. 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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. Claims 1-3, 6-7, 10-11, 14-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsiang et al. (US Patent no. 9900625) in view of Lim et al (US Patent Application Publication no. 2022/0166998), and further in view of Hao et al. (US Patent Application Publication no. 2025/0240431). Regarding claim 1, Hsiang discloses a method comprising: determining symbols to predict for of a component of a block vector difference (BVD) that indicates a difference between a block vector (BV) and a block vector predictor (BVP) (See Hsiang Abstract, col. 2, lines 1-13), wherein the symbols comprise at least one of: sign symbols (See Hsiang col. 2, lines 29-40); or magnitude symbols (See Hsiang col. 2, lines 29-40, col. 8, lines 60-67 and col. 9, lines 1-4); selecting, based on a subset of a list of BVD (See Hsiang col. 10, lines 62-67, col. 11, lines 1-15 where two BVD components can be a list). It is noted that although Hsiang discloses a subset of a BVD list (See Hsiang col. 10, lines 62-67, col. 11, lines 1-15 where two BVD components is a list) and determines a symbol (See Hsiang col. 4, lines 9-35), it is silent about selecting the BVD predictor, and determining, based on the BVD predictor, at least one of the symbols. However, Lim teaches the BVD candidates, selecting the BVD predictor, and determining, based on the BVD predictor, at least one of the symbols (See Lim’s Abstract, [0006], [0008], [0016]-[0018] and [0428]-[0429]). Therefore, it is considered obvious that one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would recognize the advantage of modifying Hsiang to incorporate Lim’s teachings to provide the BVD candidates, selecting the BVD predictor, and determining, based on the BVD predictor, at least one of the symbols. The motivation for performing such a modification in Hsiang is to improve coding efficiency of the video encoding. It is further noted that the combination of Hsiang and Lim is silent about a BVD predictor associated with a current block of content, wherein each BVD candidate of the subset of the list of BVD candidates comprises a horizontal component and a vertical component. However, Hao teaches a BVD predictor associated with a current block of content, wherein each BVD candidate of the subset of the list of BVD candidates comprises a horizontal component and a vertical component (See Hao’s Abstract, [0118]). Therefore, it is considered obvious that one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would recognize the advantage of modifying the combination of Hsiang and Lim to incorporate Hao’s teachings to provide a BVD predictor associated with a current block of content, wherein each BVD candidate of the subset of the list of BVD candidates comprises a horizontal component and a vertical component. The motivation for performing such a modification in the above combination is to effectively reduce a bitrate required for transmission of signs of BVDs, and thus may improve coding efficiency. As per claim 11, Hsiang discloses a method comprising determining symbols to predict for of a component of a block vector difference (BVD) that indicates a difference between a block vector (BV) and a block vector predictor (BVP) (See Hsiang Abstract, col. 2, lines 1-13), wherein the symbols are at least one of: sign symbols (See Hsiang col. 2, lines 29-40); or magnitude symbols (See Hsiang col. 2, lines 29-40, col. 8, lines 60-67 and col. 9, lines 1-4). It is noted that Hsiang is silent about determining, based on a checklist comprising BVD candidates for predicting the symbols, a subset of the BVD candidates; determining costs associated with the subset of the BVD candidates; based on the costs associated with the subset of the BVD candidates, selecting, as a BVD predictor, a BVD candidate from the subset of the BVD candidates; and determining, based on the BVD predictor, at least one of the symbols. However, Lim teaches determining, based on a checklist comprising BVD candidates for predicting the symbols, a subset of the BVD candidates (See Lim Abstract, [0106]); determining costs associated with the subset of the BVD candidates (See Lim [0006]-[0008]); based on the costs associated with the subset of the BVD candidates, selecting, as a BVD predictor (See Lim [0425], [0428]-[0429], a BVD candidate from the subset of the BVD candidates; and determining, based on the BVD predictor, at least one of the symbols (See Lim’s Abstract, [0006], [0008], [0016]-[0018] and [0428]-[0429]).. Therefore, it is considered obvious that one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would recognize the advantage of modifying Hsiang to incorporate Lim’s teachings to determine, based on a checklist comprising BVD candidates for predicting the symbols, a subset of the BVD candidates; determining costs associated with the subset of the BVD candidates; based on the costs associated with the subset of the BVD candidates, selecting, as a BVD predictor, a BVD candidate from the subset of the BVD candidates; and determining, based on the BVD predictor, at least one of the symbols. The motivation for performing such a modification in Hsiang is to improve coding efficiency of the video encoding. It is further noted that the combination of Hsiang and Lim is silent about wherein each BVD candidate of the subset of the list of BVD candidates comprises a horizontal component and a vertical component. However, Hao teaches wherein each BVD candidate of the subset of the list of BVD candidates comprises a horizontal component and a vertical component (See Hao’s Abstract, [0118]). Therefore, it is considered obvious that one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would recognize the advantage of modifying the combination of Hsiang and Lim to incorporate Hao’s teachings wherein each BVD candidate of the subset of the list of BVD candidates comprises a horizontal component and a vertical component. The motivation for performing such a modification in the above combination is to effectively reduce a bitrate required for transmission of signs of BVDs, and thus may improve coding efficiency. As per claim 17, Hsiang discloses a method comprising: determining symbols to predict for of a component of a block vector difference (BVD) that indicates a difference between a block vector (BV) and a block vector predictor (See Hsiang Abstract, col. 2, lines 1-13), wherein the symbols are at least one of: sign symbols (See Hsiang col. 2, lines 29-40) or magnitude symbols (See Hsiang col. 2, lines 29-40, col. 8, lines 60-67 and col. 9, lines 1-4); determining, based on one or more selection criteria, a subset of BVD (See Hsiang col. 10, lines 62-67, col. 11, lines 1-15 where two BVD components can be a list), determining, based on one or more selection criteria, a subset of the BVD candidates (See Hsiang col. 10, lines 62-67, col. 11, lines 1-15 where two BVD components can be a list). It is noted that Hsiang is silent about determining costs associated with the subset of the BVD candidates; based on the costs associated with the subset of the BVD candidates, selecting, as a BVD predictor, a BVD candidate from the subset of the BVD candidates; and determining, based on the BVD predictor, at least one of the symbols. However, Lim teaches determining costs associated with the subset of the BVD candidates (See Lim [0006]-[0008]); based on the costs associated with the subset of the BVD candidates, selecting, as a BVD predictor (See Lim [0425], [0428]-[0429], a BVD candidate from the subset of the BVD candidates; and determining, based on the BVD predictor, at least one of the symbols (See Lim’s Abstract, [0006], [0008], [0016]-[0018] and [0428]-[0429]). Therefore, it is considered obvious that one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would recognize the advantage of modifying Hsiang to incorporate Lim’s teachings to determine, based on a checklist comprising BVD candidates for predicting the symbols, a subset of the BVD candidates; determining costs associated with the subset of the BVD candidates; based on the costs associated with the subset of the BVD candidates, selecting, as a BVD predictor, a BVD candidate from the subset of the BVD candidates; and determining, based on the BVD predictor, at least one of the symbols. The motivation for performing such a modification in Hsiang is to improve coding efficiency of the video encoding. It is further noted that the combination of Hsiang and Lim is silent about a BVD predictor associated with a current block of content, wherein each BVD candidate of the subset of the list of BVD candidates comprises a horizontal component and a vertical component. However, Hao teaches a BVD predictor associated with a current block of content, wherein each BVD candidate of the subset of the list of BVD candidates comprises a horizontal component and a vertical component (See Hao’s Abstract, [0118]). Therefore, it is considered obvious that one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would recognize the advantage of modifying the combination of Hsiang and Lim to incorporate Hao’s teachings to provide a BVD predictor associated with a current block of content, wherein each BVD candidate of the subset of the list of BVD candidates comprises a horizontal component and a vertical component. The motivation for performing such a modification in the above combination is to effectively reduce a bitrate required for transmission of signs of BVDs, and thus may improve coding efficiency. As per claim 2, the combination of Hsiang and Lim further teaches wherein the subset of the list of BVD candidates is selected based on a subset of the symbols (See Hsiang col. 3, lines 28-57). As per claim 3, the combination of Hsiang and Lim further teaches decoding the BVD (See Lim [0878]). As per claims 6 and 14, the combination of Hsiang and Lim further teaches a checklist as seen in the rejection of claim 11 (See Lim Abstract, [0106], [0006]-[0008]). As per claims 7 and 15, the combination of Hsiang and Lim further teaches a set of suffix bin positions for one or more portions of the sign and magnitude symbols of the component of the BVD (See Hsiang Abstract, col. 3, lines 28-60). As per claim 10, combination of Hsiang and Lim further teaches wherein the BVD is a motion vector difference (MVD), and the BVD predictor is an MVD predictor (See Hsiang’s Abstract, col. 2, lines 1-40). 5. Claims 4-5, 8-9, 12-13, 16, 18-19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hsiang et al. (US Patent no. 9900625) in view of Lim et al (US Patent Application Publication no. 2022/0166998) and Hao et al. (US Patent Application Publication no. 2025/0240431), as applied to claims 1, 11 and 17 above, and further in view of Nien et al. (US Patent Application Publication no. 2023/0217013). Regarding claims 4-5, 12-13 and 18, most of the limitations of these claims have been noted in the above rejections of claims 1, 11 and 17. It is noted that the combination of Hsiang, Lim and Hao is silent about wherein the determining further comprises: based on a symbol of the BVD predictor and a value of a corresponding symbol of the BVD, determining an indication of whether the symbol of the BVD predictor matches the corresponding symbol of the BVD and sending, via a bitstream, the indication, and wherein the determining further comprises: receiving, via a bitstream, an indication of whether a symbol of the BVD predictor matches a corresponding symbol of the BVD; and determining, based on the symbol of the BVD predictor and the indication, a value of the corresponding symbol of the BVD. However, Nien teaches wherein the determining further comprises: based on a symbol of the BVD predictor and a value of a corresponding symbol of the BVD, determining an indication of whether the symbol of the BVD predictor matches the corresponding symbol of the BVD (See Nien [0189], [0191]); and sending, via a bitstream, the indication (See Nien [0088]), and wherein the determining further comprises: receiving, via a bitstream, an indication of whether a symbol of the BVD predictor matches a corresponding symbol of the BVD; and determining, based on the symbol of the BVD predictor and the indication, a value of the corresponding symbol of the BVD (See Nien [0190], [0197]). Therefore, it is considered obvious that one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would recognize the advantage of modifying the combination of Hsiang, Lim and Hao to incorporate Nien’s teachings to determine further comprises: based on a symbol of the BVD predictor and a value of a corresponding symbol of the BVD, determining an indication of whether the symbol of the BVD predictor matches the corresponding symbol of the BVD and sending, via a bitstream, the indication, and wherein the determining further comprises: receiving, via a bitstream, an indication of whether a symbol of the BVD predictor matches a corresponding symbol of the BVD; and determining, based on the symbol of the BVD predictor and the indication, a value of the corresponding symbol of the BVD. The motivation for performing such a modification in the combination of Hsiang and Lim is to have better coding efficiency. As per claim 16, the combination of Hsiang, Lim and Nien further teaches removing, from the checklist, BVD candidates not matching a sign value and a magnitude bin of each selected BVD predictor (See Nien [0089], [0091]-[0092] and [0133]). As per claims 8 and 19, most of the limitations of these claims have been noted in the above rejection of claims 1 and 17. It is noted that the combination of Hsiang, Lim and Hao is silent about wherein the subset of the list of BVD candidates is selected based on one or more subset selection criteria, wherein the one or more subset selection criteria comprise one or more of: determining a selected BVD candidate, of the subset of the list of BVD candidates, for each allowed sign value combination; or determining a selected BVD candidate, of the subset of the list of BVD candidates, for a spatial position in a reference region. However, Nien teaches wherein the subset of the list of BVD candidates is selected based on one or more subset selection criteria, wherein the subset selection criteria comprise one or more of: determining a selected BVD candidate, of the subset of the list of BVD candidates, for each allowed sign value combination; or determining a selected BVD candidate, of the subset of the list of BVD candidates, for a spatial position in a reference region (See Nien [0009], [0087] and [0089]). Therefore, it is considered obvious that one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would recognize the advantage of modifying the combination of Hsiang, Lim and Hao to incorporate Nien’s teachings wherein the subset of the list of BVD candidates is selected based on one or more subset selection criteria, wherein the subset selection criteria comprise one or more of: determining a selected BVD candidate, of the subset of the list of BVD candidates, for each allowed sign value combination; or determining a selected BVD candidate, of the subset of the list of BVD candidates, for a spatial position in a reference region. The motivation for performing such a modification in the combination of Hsiang and Lim is to have better coding efficiency. As per claims 9 and 20, the combination of Hsiang, Lim, Hao and Nien further teaches wherein the determining costs associated with the subset of the BVD candidates further comprises determining a template matching cost for each BVD candidate of the subset, and wherein the selecting the BVD candidate further comprises: selecting the BVD predictor based on a template matching cost associated with the BVD predictor being a smallest template matching cost among the determined template matching costs (See Nien [0079], [0096], [0133]). 6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GIMS S PHILIPPE whose telephone number is (571)272-7336. The examiner can normally be reached Maxi Flex. 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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at 571-272-3982. 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. /GIMS S PHILIPPE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 08, 2023
Application Filed
Apr 05, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 10, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 10, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 16, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 16, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 28, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603979
PROCESSING IMAGES USING NEURAL STYLE TRANSFER NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597272
METHOD FOR DETERMINING THE POSITION OF AN OBJECT WITH RESPECT TO A ROAD MARKING LINE OF A ROAD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592073
IMAGE PROCESSING DEVICE AND IN-VEHICLE CONTROL DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12581093
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR VIDEO CODING USING AN IMPROVED IN-LOOP FILTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12581098
TRANSPORTING HEIF-FORMATTED IMAGES OVER REAL-TIME TRANSPORT PROTOCOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+1.5%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1030 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