DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on 2/18/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims has overcome previous 103 rejection.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claim 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent Application No. 19220391. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 in U.S. Patent Application No. 19220391 defines a method comprising: obtaining an input prompt and an indication of a first image generation mode; selecting a first image generation model from a set of image generation models including the first image generation model and a second image generation model based on the input prompt, wherein the first image generation model corresponds to the first image generation mode and the second image generation model corresponds to the second image generation mode different from the first image generation mode; and generating, using the first image generation model, a synthetic image based on the input prompt and the first image generation mode. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to notice claim 1, 6 and 14 in current application and claim 1 in U.S. Patent Application No. 19220391 are similar. All the claims are essentially the same structure and perform essentially the same function, therefore unpatentable for obvious-type double patenting.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim in Application 18639301
Claim in Application 19220391
1. A method comprising:
obtaining a text prompt and a noise input; and
1. A method comprising:
obtaining an input prompt and an indication of a first image generation mode;
selecting a first image generation model from a set of image generation models including the first image generation model and a second image generation model based on the input prompt, wherein the first image generation model corresponds to the first image generation mode and the second image generation model corresponds to the second image generation mode different from the first image generation mode; and
generating, using an image generation model, a synthetic image based on the text prompt and the noise input by performing a single pass with the image generation model,
generating, using the first image generation model, a synthetic image based on the input prompt and the first image generation mode.
wherein the image generation model is trained based on a multi-term loss comprising a positive term and a negative term, wherein the positive term is based on a difference between a diffusion output of the image generation model and a diffusion output of a pre-trained model, and wherein the negative term is based on a difference between a diffusion output of the image generation model and a diffusion output of a jointly-trained model different from the image generation model and the pre-trained model.
[0118]: the first image generation model is trained based on a multi-term loss including a first term based on an output of a pre-trained model, and a second term based on an output of a jointly-trained model, where the first term is added to the multi-term loss and the second term is subtracted from the multi-term loss. “Single pass” refers to a single generative iteration
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are allowed if terminal disclaimer is filed to avoid double patenting rejection.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 1, 6 and 14 are about generating a synthetic image based on the text prompt and the noise input by performing a single pass with the image generation model, wherein the image generation model is trained based on a multi-term loss comprising a positive term and a negative term, wherein the positive term is based on a difference between a diffusion output of the image generation model and a diffusion output of a pre-trained model, and wherein the negative term is based on a difference between a diffusion output of the image generation model and a diffusion output of a jointly-trained model different from the image generation model and the pre-trained model.
Saharia 20230377226, Hu 20240303780, and Dinh 20230245285 combined cannot discloses these limitations. the specific combination recited by the Applicant is found to be non-obvious. These limitations when read in light of the rest of the limitations in the claim make the claim allowable subject matter.
Claim 2-5 depend on claim 1, are allowed based on same reason as claim 1.
Claim 7-13 depend on claim 6, are allowed based on same reason as claim 6.
Claim 15-20 depend on claim 14, are allowed based on same reason as claim 14.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Yi Yang whose telephone number is 571-272-9589. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00 AM-5:00 PM EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Daniel Hajnik can be reached on 571-272-7642. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/YI YANG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2616
Prosecution Insights