CTNF 18/759,347 CTNF 80068 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Double Patenting 08-33 AIA 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. 08-36 AIA Claim s 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim s 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,056,842 in view of Li (U.S. Publication 2019/0335203) . The claim numbers correspond to each other as follows: App 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Pat 1 2 3 4 5 1 1 6 7 8 9 10 6 6 11 12 13 14 11 11 Application claim 1 corresponds to Patent claim 1 as follows: Application Patent A decoder comprising: first circuitry to: access a message including a hemisphere cubemap; A decoder comprising: first circuitry to: access a message including a hemisphere cubemap and map the hemisphere cubemap to an image map the hemisphere cubemap to an image the hemisphere cubemap consisting of six half faces including one full face and first, second, third, and fourth half faces, the hemisphere cubemap consisting of one rectangular full face and first, second, third, and fourth rectangular half faces the one full face and the first, second, third, and fourth half faces representing a same hemisphere the one rectangular full face and the first, second, third, and fourth rectangular half faces representing a same hemisphere the first half face being a first portion of a first full face, the second half face being a second portion of a second full face, the third half face being a third portion of a third full face, the fourth half face being a fourth portion of a fourth full face the first rectangular half face being a first portion of a first rectangular full face, the second rectangular half face being a second portion of a second rectangular full face, the third rectangular half face being a third portion of a third rectangular full face, the fourth rectangular half face being a fourth portion of a fourth rectangular full face wherein the first full face, the second full face, the third full face, and the fourth full face are distinct from each other, and one or more of the six half faces are classifed as inactive regions wherein the first rectangular full face, the second rectangular full face, the third rectangular full face, and the fourth rectangular full face are distinct from each other the hemisphere cubemap having the one full face and the four half faces arranged into a one dimensional arrangement of data where the inactive regions of the one or more of the six half faces are not included in the one dimensional arrangement of data the hemisphere cubemap having the one rectangular full face and the four rectangular half faces arranged into a one dimensional arrangement of data the one dimensional arrangement of data including, in order, the first half face, the second half face, the full face, the third half face, and the fourth half face the one dimensional arrangement of data including, in order, the first rectangular half face, the second rectangular half face, the rectangular full face, the third rectangular half face, and the fourth rectangular half face second circuitry to cause display of the mapped image second circuitry to cause display of the mapped image. The claims match except that the patent claim explicitly requires rectangular full and half faces and the application claim requires half faces that are inactive regions and not included in the 1D arrangement of data. It is noted that the application claim inherently requires rectangular half and full faces. The claim explicitly requires the hemisphere cubemap to consist of six half faces including one full face and first, second, third, and fourth half faces. While half faces can be triangular in some instances, in order to represent a hemisphere with a cubemap consisting of one full face and 1 st -4 th half faces, the half faces would have to be rectangular- this number of triangular half faces would not be able to fully represent the hemisphere. In other words, while a cubemap can comprise triangular half faces, if the hemisphere cubemap in the application claims had triangular half faces, it would not be able to consist of the full face and 1 st -4 th half faces alone, necessitating rectangular half and full faces to meet the application claim. Thus, the only way in which the claims actually differ in scope is that the application claim also requires one or more of the six half faces are classified as inactive regions and where the inactive regions of the one or more of the six half faces are not included in the one dimensional arrangement of data. While the patent claim discusses the faces being half faces, the patent claim does not teach, but Li teaches one or more of the six faces are classified as inactive regions (figs. 5a and 5e; p. 7, sections 0108-0110; an entire collection of faces, including at least six, includes both active and inactive/invalid face regions) and where the inactive regions of the one or more of the six faces are not included in the one dimensional arrangement of data (figs. 5a and 5e; p. 7, sections 0108-0110; a 2D representation includes both active and inactive/invalid regions while the 1D representation includes only active regions with no invalid regions). The motivation for this is that the invalid samples cannot be used for references for frame prediction (p. 9, section 0130). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the patent claim to have one or more of the six faces are classified as inactive regions and have the inactive regions of the one or more of the six faces be not included in the one dimensional arrangement of data because the invalid samples cannot be used for references for frame prediction as taught by Li. Application claims 8 and 15 correspond to patent claims 6 and 11 in a manner similar to that described above. As to application claim 6, patent claim 1 does not disclose, but Li does disclose detecting at least one of an active region or an inactive region in the image; and initiating map instructions in response to detection of at least one of the active region or the inactive region (p. 9, section 0127; detected inactive/invalid regions are assigned a particular flag in the mapping). Motivation for the combination is given in the discussion of application claim 1 above. As to application claim 7, patent claim 1 does not disclose, but Li does disclose wherein the inactive regions are at least one of unoccupied or partially occupied (figs. 5a-5b; the inactive/invalid regions are empty). Motivation for the combination is given in the discussion of application claim 1 above. Application claims 13, 14, 19, 20 correspond to patent claims 6 and 11 in a manner similar to that described above . Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: The term “classifed” in line 11 of the claim should be spelled “classified” . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 07-34-01 Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites six half faces, including four half faces and two half portions of full face, of a cubemap where “one or more of the six half faces are classifed as inactive regions” and the half faces being arranged “including, in order, the first half face, the second half face, the full face, the third half face, and the fourth half face”. The claim also recites that “inactive regions of the one or more of the six half faces are not included in the one dimensional arrangement of data”. If at least one half face must be an inactive region, and inactive regions are not included in the arrangement of data, then the half faces cannot possibly be arranged, in order, the first half face, the second half face, the full face, the third half face, and the fourth half face. At least one of the half faces would have to be omitted. Thus, this claim contains a contradiction and cannot be interpreted definitely. Either an inactive region cannot be an entire half face, or the arrangement of data cannot include all of the half faces. Claims 8 and 15 recite similar limitations and the analysis above also applies to them. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AARON M RICHER whose telephone number is (571)272-7790. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM. 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, King Poon can be reached at (571)272-7440. 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. /AARON M RICHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2617 Application/Control Number: 18/759,347 Page 2 Art Unit: 2617 Application/Control Number: 18/759,347 Page 3 Art Unit: 2617 Application/Control Number: 18/759,347 Page 4 Art Unit: 2617 Application/Control Number: 18/759,347 Page 5 Art Unit: 2617 Application/Control Number: 18/759,347 Page 6 Art Unit: 2617 Application/Control Number: 18/759,347 Page 7 Art Unit: 2617 Application/Control Number: 18/759,347 Page 8 Art Unit: 2617 Application/Control Number: 18/759,347 Page 9 Art Unit: 2617 Application/Control Number: 18/759,347 Page 10 Art Unit: 2617 Application/Control Number: 18/759,347 Page 11 Art Unit: 2617 Application/Control Number: 18/759,347 Page 12 Art Unit: 2617 Application/Control Number: 18/759,347 Page 13 Art Unit: 2617
Prosecution Insights