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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on November 21, 2026 and January 28, 2026 was filed after the mailing date of the Request for Reconsideration on January 28, 2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see applicant arguments, filed Janaury 9, 2026 and August 15, 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Aoki et al (US 2019/0327493) a reference supplied by the IDS submitted on January 28, 2026.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramasubramonian (US 2015/0382022)) in view of Boyce (2017/0111661) in further view of Aoki et al (US 2019/0327493) and further in view of Roswarne (US 2015/0016542).
[claim 1]
In regard to Claim 1, Ramasubramonian discloses a method for video processing, comprising:
performing a conversion between a target video block of a video and a bitstream of the video according to a decoding conformance constraint (Paragraph 0051 “As mentioned briefly above, the video encoder 20 encodes video data. The video data may comprise one or more pictures. Each of the pictures is a still image forming part of a video. In some instances, a picture may be referred to as a video “frame.” When the video encoder 20 encodes the video data, the video encoder 20 may generate a bitstream. The bitstream may include a sequence of bits that form a coded representation of the video data. The bitstream may include coded pictures and associated data. A coded picture is a coded representation of a picture.”);
wherein the decoding conformance constraint (Paragraph 0137 “Video coding standards may specify bitstream conformance constraints that a bitstream conforms to such standards should follow. In other words, to have a bitstream (e.g., conforming bitstream) that conforms to a standard, the bitstream needs to satisfy all the bitstream conformance constraints specified by the standard. In some video coding standards, a conforming bitstream is said to be decoded by a hypothetical decoder that is conceptually connected to the output of an encoder. Such a hypothetical decoder may consist of a decoder buffer, a decoder, and/or a display unit. This hypothetical decoder is sometimes referred to as a hypothetical reference decoder (HRD) in existing coding schemes (e.g., H.264, HEVC, etc), The bitstream conformance constraints of a given standard ensure that the encoder will generate a bitstream that can be properly decoded by arty decoder that conforms to the given standard.”)
specifies that a decoder conforming to a first profile (Figure 5 element 505, first bitstream partion. Paragraph 0146 “The method 500 begins at block 501. At block 505, the coder processes a bitstream conformance parameter associated with a bitstream partition of a plurality of bitstream partitions in a bitstream. The bitstream conformance parameter may be applicable to the bitstream partition but not to another portion of the bitstream not encompassed by the bitstream partition (e.g., other layers in the bitstream that do not belong to the bitstream partition). For example, such a parameter may be related to the timing information related to one or more pictures in the bitstream partition (e.g., when a picture in the bitstream partition is received by the decoding system, when a picture stored in the BPB is to be output to be decoded, etc.). In another example, the parameter may specify certain characteristics common to all the pictures in the bitstream partition or in a single partition unit of the bitstream partition. The parameter may also represent a bitstream conformance constraint applicable to a particular partition unit. The particular partition unit may include VCL NAL units of an AU that belong to the video layers contained in the bitstream partition and other non-VCL NAL units associated with the VCL NAL units.”);
is capable of decoding of at least a first picture of the bitstream when at least one condition applies (Paragraph 0138 “The bitstream conformance constraints can be used by any entity that desires to test whether a particular bitstream conforms to a standard. For example, such an entity may be on the encoder side (e.g., a content provider may wish to make sure that the bitstream being generated and sent out indeed conforms to the standard, since if the bitstream does not conform to the standard, the bitstream may not be properly decodable by a conforming decoder) or on the decoder side (e.g., since a decoder cannot be said to be a conforming decoder unless the decoder is able to decode all bitstreams that conform to the standard, it may be desirable for a decoder or an entity on the decoder side to test whether a given bitstream satisfies one or more bitstream conformance constraints specified by a given standard) or a network entity (e.g., a network box entity may receive bitstream and only forward it to other entities after ascertaining that the bitstream is a conforming bitstream by checking that the bitstream conformance constraints are valid).”);
the at least one condition comprising a first condition that the bitstream is indicated to conform to at least one second profile (Paragraph 0146 “The method 500 begins at block 501. At block 505, the coder processes a bitstream conformance parameter associated with a bitstream partition of a plurality of bitstream partitions in a bitstream. The bitstream conformance parameter may be applicable to the bitstream partition but not to another portion of the bitstream not encompassed by the bitstream partition (e.g., other layers in the bitstream that do not belong to the bitstream partition). For example, such a parameter may be related to the timing information related to one or more pictures in the bitstream partition (e.g., when a picture in the bitstream partition is received by the decoding system, when a picture stored in the BPB is to be output to be decoded, etc.). In another example, the parameter may specify certain characteristics common to all the pictures in the bitstream partition or in a single partition unit of the bitstream partition. The parameter may also represent a bitstream conformance constraint applicable to a particular partition unit. The particular partition unit may include VCL NAL units of an AU that belong to the video layers contained in the bitstream partition and other non-VCL NAL units associated with the VCL NAL units.”);
however, fails to disclose
wherein performing the conversion according to the decoding conformance constraint comprises obtaining the bitstream by a decoder conforming to the first profile and in response to at least one condition being met decoding the bitstream by the decoder
and wherein the first profile corresponds to a first bit depth and a first relative sample rate of color components of video samples, and the at least one second profile corresponds to a second bit depth and a second relative sample rate of color components of video samples, the second bit depth being different from the first bit depth, and the second relative sample rate being the same as the first relative sample rate.
Aoki et al teaches the performing the conversion according to the decoding conformance constraint and conforming to a first profile once condition is met (Paragraphs 0014-0017 describes the refresh information for the decoding device in addition paragraphs 0027-0029 and 0086-0093 describe the conforming to a profile and decoding once the conditions are met and seen in Figures 16 and 17). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Ramasubramonian and further teach the conforming of the decoding based on a profile, as taught by Aoki, in order to efficiently satisfy the state of the transmission delay (Paragraph 0011).
Boyce further teaches the first profile corresponds to a first depth and a first relative sample rate of color components of video samples, and the at least one second profile corresponds to a second bit depth and a second relative sample rate of color components of video samples, the second bit depth being different from the first bit depth, and the second relative sample rate being the same as the first relative sample rate (Paragraphs 0022-0024; 0035-0037 discuss the various profiles and video samples being used and paragraphs 0065-0067 describe the processing of the data based on the sample rate of color components). It would have been obvious to one in ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to take the processing method of Ramasubramonian in view of Aoki and include a method of using multiple profiles such various defined bit depths as taught by Boyce to provide precision processing as required for various profiles (Paragraph 0035).
Roswarne further teaches the first profile comprises a first bit depth and a first relative sample rate (Paragraph 0193 “The encoded bitstream 312 may be said to conform to one or more profiles. The set of profiles that the encoded bitstream 312 conforms to is determined by ‘constraint flags’ in the ‘profile level tier’ syntax structure of the encoded bitstream 312. Constraint flags indicate the profile(s) to which the encoded bitstream conforms. For example, ‘general_max—12 bit_constraint_flag’ signals that the set of profiles to which the encoded bitstream 312 conforms excludes all profiles which support bit-depths greater than 12-bits. If ‘general_max—12 bit_constraint_flag’ is set to zero, then the set of profiles to which the encoded bitstream 312 conforms to excludes all profiles other than the following profiles: ‘Monochrome 16’, ‘Main 4:4:4 16 Intra’ and the ‘Main 4:4:4 16 Still Picture’. In such a case, the encoded bitstream 312 cannot be considered to conform to profiles such as ‘Main 4:4:4 12 Intra’ or ‘Main 10 Intra’. Other constraint flags may further restrict the set of profiles to which the encoded bitstream 312 conforms.”) and the at least one second profile comprises at least one non-Still Picture profile corresponding to at least one second bit depth (Paragraph 0166 “Such arrangements of the video encoder 114 and the video decoder 134 do not require a substantial increase in the MAX_TR_DYNAMIC_RANGE constant 388 beyond the value of ‘15’ inherent in the high efficiency video coding (HEVC) standard for the Main and Main10 profiles.”). It would have been obvious to one in ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to take the processing method of Ramasubramonian in view of Aoki in further view of Boyce and include a method of using multiple profiles such as still and video each with various defined bit depths as taught by Roswarne to provide precision processing as required for various profiles (Paragraph 0193-1095).
[claim 2]
In regard to Claim 2, Roswarne teaches a method of claim 1, wherein the first profile comprises an operation range extensions profile, and the at least one second profile comprises a non-operation range extensions profile. (Paragraph 0193 and as stated in Claim 1 recites “decoding the bit-stream of the encoded video data to determine decoded video data, using a profile supported by the video decoder, if the bit stream has extended precision processing enabled and a bit depth greater than nine (9) bits, the decoded video data having differences to the video data encoded in the bit-stream due to the unsupported profile being different to the supported profile”).
[claim 3]
In regard to Claim 3, Roswarne teaches a wherein the first profile comprises Main 12 profile, and the at least one second profile comprises at least one of the following: Main 10 profile or Main 10 Still Picture profile, or wherein the first profile comprises Main 12 4:4:4 profile or Main 16 4:4:4 profile, and the at least one second profile comprises at least one of the following: Main 10 4:4:4 profile or Main 10 4:4:4 Still Picture profile, or wherein the first profile comprises Main 12 Intra profile, and the at least one second profile comprises Main 10 Still Picture profile, or wherein the first profile comprises Main 12 4:4:4 Intra profile, Main 16 4:4:4 Intra profile, Main l2 4:4:4 Still Picture profile, or Main 16 4:4:4 Still Picture profile, and the at least one second profile comprises Main 10 Still Picture profile. (Paragraph 0193 “If ‘general_max—12 bit_constraint_flag’ is set to zero, then the set of profiles to which the encoded bitstream 312 conforms to excludes all profiles other than the following profiles: ‘Monochrome 16’, ‘Main 4:4:4 16 Intra’ and the ‘Main 4:4:4 16 Still Picture’. In such a case, the encoded bitstream 312 cannot be considered to conform to profiles such as ‘Main 4:4:4 12 Intra’ or ‘Main 10 Intra’. Other constraint flags may further restrict the set of profiles to which the encoded bitstream 312 conforms.”).
[claim 4]
In regard to Claim 4, Roswarne teaches a method wherein the decoding conformance constraint further specifies that the decoder conforming to the first profile at a first level of a first tier is capable of decoding of the bitstream when the at least one condition applies. (Paragraph 0146 The method 500 begins at block 501. At block 505, the coder processes a bitstream conformance parameter associated with a bitstream partition of a plurality of bitstream partitions in a bitstream. The bitstream conformance parameter may be applicable to the bitstream partition but not to another portion of the bitstream not encompassed by the bitstream partition (e.g., other layers in the bitstream that do not belong to the bitstream partition). For example, such a parameter may be related to the timing information related to one or more pictures in the bitstream partition (e.g., when a picture in the bitstream partition is received by the decoding system, when a picture stored in the BPB is to be output to be decoded, etc.). In another example, the parameter may specify certain characteristics common to all the pictures in the bitstream partition or in a single partition unit of the bitstream partition. The parameter may also represent a bitstream conformance constraint applicable to a particular partition unit. The particular partition unit may include VCL NAL units of an AU that belong to the video layers contained in the bitstream partition and other non-VCL NAL units associated with the VCL NAL units.”).
[claim 5]
In regard to Claim 5, Roswarne teaches a method of claim 4, wherein the at least one condition further comprises at least one of the following: a second condition that the bitstream is indicated to conform to a tier that is lower than or equal to the first tier, a third condition that the bitstream is indicated to conform to a level that is not level 15.5 and is lower than or equal to the first level (Roswarne teaches wherein at least one second bit depth is lower than or equal to the first bit depth (8-12 for second bit depths and first bit depth being greater than 9, Paragraph 0193 “Constraint flags indicate the profile(s) to which the encoded bitstream conforms. For example, ‘general_max—12 bit_constraint_flag’ signals that the set of profiles to which the encoded bitstream 312 conforms excludes all profiles which support bit-depths greater than 12-bits.” and Claim 4).
[claim 6]
In regard to Claim 6, Ramasubramonian discloses a method of claim 1, wherein the decoding conformance constraint further specifies that the decoder conforming to the first profile at a first level of a first tier is capable of decoding of at least the first picture of the bitstream when the at least one condition applies (Paragraph 0146 The method 500 begins at block 501. At block 505, the coder processes a bitstream conformance parameter associated with a bitstream partition of a plurality of bitstream partitions in a bitstream. The bitstream conformance parameter may be applicable to the bitstream partition but not to another portion of the bitstream not encompassed by the bitstream partition (e.g., other layers in the bitstream that do not belong to the bitstream partition). For example, such a parameter may be related to the timing information related to one or more pictures in the bitstream partition (e.g., when a picture in the bitstream partition is received by the decoding system, when a picture stored in the BPB is to be output to be decoded, etc.). In another example, the parameter may specify certain characteristics common to all the pictures in the bitstream partition or in a single partition unit of the bitstream partition. The parameter may also represent a bitstream conformance constraint applicable to a particular partition unit. The particular partition unit may include VCL NAL units of an AU that belong to the video layers contained in the bitstream partition and other non-VCL NAL units associated with the VCL NAL units.”).
[claim 8]
[claim 7]
In regard to Claim 7, Roswarne teaches a method of claim 6, wherein the first profile comprises Main 12 profile, and wherein the at least one third profile comprises at least one of the following: Main 12 profile, Main 12 Intra profile, or Main 12 Still Picture profile, or wherein the first profile comprises Main 12 4:4:4 profile, and the at least one third profile comprises at least one of the following: Main 10 profile, Main 10 Still Picture profile, Main 12 profile, Main 12 Intra profile, Main 12 Still Picture profile, Main 12 4:4:4 profile, Main 12 4:4:4 Intra profile, or Main 12 4:4:4 Still Picture profile. (Roswarne teaches wherein at least one second bit depth is lower than or equal to the first bit depth (8-12 for second bit depths and first bit depth being greater than 9, Paragraph 0193 “Constraint flags indicate the profile(s) to which the encoded bitstream conforms. For example, ‘general_max—12 bit_constraint_flag’ signals that the set of profiles to which the encoded bitstream 312 conforms excludes all profiles which support bit-depths greater than 12-bits.” and Claim 6).
[claim 8]
In regard to Claim 8, Roswarne teaches a method of claim 6, wherein the first profile comprises Main 12 4:4:4 Intra profile, and wherein the at least one third profile comprises at least one of the following: Main 10 Still Picture profile, Main 12 Intra profile, Main 12 4:4:4 Intra profile, Main 12 Still Picture profile, or Main 12 4:4:4 Still Picture profile (Roswarne teaches wherein at least one second bit depth is lower than or equal to the first bit depth (8-12 for second bit depths and first bit depth being greater than 9, Paragraph 0193 “Constraint flags indicate the profile(s) to which the encoded bitstream conforms. For example, ‘general_max—12 bit_constraint_flag’ signals that the set of profiles to which the encoded bitstream 312 conforms excludes all profiles which support bit-depths greater than 12-bits.” and Claim 6).
[claims 9, 10, 11, 12, 13,14, 16, 18, and 20]
In regard to Claim 9-14, 16, , 18, and 20 are rejected under the same art and evidentiary limitations as determined for the method claim 8.
[claim 15]
In regard to Claim 15, is rejected under the same art and evidentiary limitations as determined for the method and apparatus claims 1 .Ramasubramonian discloses an apparatus for processing video data comprising a processor and a non-transitory memory with instructions that cause a processor to perform a method in accordance with any of claim 1 (Figure 1b and paragraphs 0006).
[claim 17]
In regard to Claim 17, is rejected under the same art and evidentiary limitations as determined for the method and apparatus claims 1 .Ramasubramonian discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that cause a processor to perform acts in accordance with any of claim 1 (Figure 1b and paragraphs 0006).
[claim 19]
In regard to Claim 19, is rejected under the same art and evidentiary limitations as determined for the method and apparatus claims 1 .Ramasubramonian discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that cause a processor to perform a method in accordance with any of claim 1 (Figure 1b and paragraphs 0006).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMIE JO ATALA whose telephone number is (571)272-7384. The examiner can normally be reached 830am-500pm M-TH.
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, Colleen Fauz. 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.
/JAMIE J ATALA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2486
Prosecution Insights