Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/662,182

VIDEO SIGNAL PROCESSING METHOD AND DEVICE FOR PERFORMING INTRA-PREDICTION FOR AN ENCODING/DECODING TARGET BLOCK

Non-Final OA §103§DP
Filed
May 13, 2024
Examiner
HESS, MICHAEL J
Art Unit
2481
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Kt Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
44%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
52%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 44% of resolved cases
44%
Career Allow Rate
183 granted / 418 resolved
-14.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
66 currently pending
Career history
484
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.6%
-35.4% vs TC avg
§103
56.8%
+16.8% vs TC avg
§102
10.3%
-29.7% vs TC avg
§112
20.8%
-19.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 418 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §DP
DETAILED ACTION 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 conflicting claims 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) 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 www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 16–21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1–12 of U.S. Patent No. 11,438,582 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they represent substantially overlapping subject matter especially with respect to the novel feature of choosing reference line based on square or non-square block partitioning. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 16–21 are allowable subject to filing a terminal disclaimer. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Examiner was unable to find a teaching or suggestion in the prior art antedating Applicant’s foreign priority date that would have rendered obvious Applicant’s feature of using only the adjacent reference line for non-square blocks but using multiple reference lines (MRL) for square blocks. The closest prior art found by Examiner includes the references found for the rejections levied during prosecution under 35 U.S.C. 103 and that listed, infra. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Chang et al., "Multiple Reference Line Coding for Most Probable Modes in Intra Prediction," 2019 Data Compression Conference, 2019. This reference does not have a “good” date, but explains, “To reduce complexity arising from additional lines to be checked at encoder side, we further propose to restrict the MRL to angular most probable modes (MPMs) only.” (emphasis added). S. Matsuo, S. Takamura, and Y. Yashima, “Intra prediction with spatial gradients and multiple reference lines,” in Picture Coding Symposium, 2009. PCS 2009. IEEE, 2009, pp. 1–4. Liu (US 2014/0140404 A1) teaches restricted intra modes for non-square blocks sized 2NxN (e.g. ¶ 0023). Wang (US 2013/0136175 A1) teaches “a reduced number of intra-prediction modes are allowed for a prediction unit having a non-square shape.” (Abstract). It also teaches SDIP (e.g. ¶ 0102). Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael J Hess whose telephone number is (571)270-7933. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00am-5:30pm. 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, William Vaughn can be reached on (571)272-3922. 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. MICHAEL J. HESS Primary Examiner Art Unit 2481 /MICHAEL J HESS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2481
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 13, 2024
Application Filed
May 13, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 21, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §DP
Nov 25, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 25, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12563195
Method And An Apparatus for Encoding and Decoding of Digital Image/Video Material
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12563208
PICTURE CODING METHOD, PICTURE CODING APPARATUS, PICTURE DECODING METHOD, AND PICTURE DECODING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12556737
MOTION COMPENSATION FOR VIDEO ENCODING AND DECODING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12556747
ARRAY BASED RESIDUAL CODING ON NON-DYADIC BLOCKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12549728
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR CODING VIDEO DATA IN TRANSFORM-SKIP MODE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
44%
Grant Probability
52%
With Interview (+7.7%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 418 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