Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/671,368

IMAGE ENCODING/DECODING METHOD AND DEVICE FOR DETERMINING DIVISION MODE ON BASIS OF PREDICTION MODE TYPE DETERMINED ACCORDING TO COLOR FORMAT, AND METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING BITSTREAM

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
May 22, 2024
Examiner
PHAM, NAM D
Art Unit
2487
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Lg Electronics INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
91%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 12m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 91% — above average
91%
Career Allow Rate
481 granted / 530 resolved
+32.8% vs TC avg
Minimal +1% lift
Without
With
+0.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 12m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
564
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.0%
-33.0% vs TC avg
§103
32.3%
-7.7% vs TC avg
§102
28.4%
-11.6% vs TC avg
§112
4.3%
-35.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 530 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . DETAILED ACTION Summary This office action for US Patent application 18/671368 is responsive to communications filed on May 22nd, 2024. Currently, claims 1-14 are pending are presented for examination. Claim Objections Claim 10 is/are objected to because the typo error of the term “An an image encoding apparatus”. 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 obviousness-type 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); 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 conflicting 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. Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b). Claims 1-14 inprovisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2, 4, 6-7, 9-11 of copending Application No 17/591954, now US Patent 11,483,573 and provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 16-30 of copending Application No 17/962223, Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because it is merely in the terminology used in both sets of claims. This is an obviousness-type double patenting rejection. Below is a list of limitations that perform the same function. However different terminology is used in both sets to describe the limitations. Conflicting Co-pending Application 17/962223 Instant Application—18/671368 16. An image decoding method performed by an image decoding apparatus, the image decoding method comprising: determining prediction mode characteristic information of a first block; determining a prediction mode type of a second block included in the first block based on the determined prediction mode characteristic information; and decoding the second block based on the determined prediction mode type, wherein the prediction mode characteristic information is determined based on at least one of a color format, a size or a splitting mode of the first block. Claims 15-30 1. An image decoding apparatus, comprising: a memory; and at least one processor connected to the memory, the at least one processor configured to: determine prediction mode characteristic information of a first block; determine a prediction mode type of a second block included in the first block based on the determined prediction mode characteristic information; and decode the second block based on the determined prediction mode type, wherein the prediction mode characteristic information is determined based on a color format of the first block. Claims 2-14 Conflicting Co-pending Application 17/591954 Instant Application-18/671368- 1. An image decoding method performed by an image decoding apparatus, the image decoding method comprising: obtaining a current block by splitting an image; determining prediction mode characteristic information based on encoding information of the current block; determining a prediction mode type of a lower-layer block split from the current block based on the prediction mode characteristic information; obtaining the lower-layer block by splitting the current block; and decoding the lower-layer block based on the determined prediction mode type of the lower-layer block, wherein the prediction mode characteristic information is determined based on a color format of the current block. Claims 2, 4, 6-7, 9-11 1. An image decoding apparatus, comprising: a memory; and at least one processor connected to the memory, the at least one processor configured to: determine prediction mode characteristic information of a first block; determine a prediction mode type of a second block included in the first block based on the determined prediction mode characteristic information; and decode the second block based on the determined prediction mode type, wherein the prediction mode characteristic information is determined based on a color format of the first block. Claims 2-14 Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-14 are generic to all that is recited in claims of co-pending applications. That is, claims 16-30 is anticipated by the claims of co-pending applications. Claims 1-14 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of copending applications. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-14 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting. However, these claims would be allowable if the obvious-type double patenting is overcome. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications form the examiner should be directed to Nam Pham, whose can be contacted by phone at (571)270-7352. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon—Thurs. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, CZEKAJ DAVID, can be reached on (571)272-7327. 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 (too free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /NAM D PHAM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 22, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP
Oct 09, 2025
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598289
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ENCODING/DECODING IMAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12587644
Transforms on Non-dyadic Blocks
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581058
GEOMETRIC PARTITION MODE WITH MOTION VECTOR REFINEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12581056
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ENCODING/DECODING IMAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574514
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR ENCODING/DECODING IMAGE USING QUANTIZATION PARAMETER, AND RECORDING MEDIUM STORING BITSTREAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
91%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+0.6%)
1y 12m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 530 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month