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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 4/24/2026, with respect to claims 1-3 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Specifically, the Examiner is persuaded that support for the claims is found in the provisional application, 64/004,337, which renders 2021/0218956 A1, inadmissible as prior art. However, a new ground of rejection is made in view of the newly found prior art, US 2022/0394304 A1, “Deng”.
The Examiner maintains that the present claims do not have written description for “The value of SubWidthC*(scaling_win_left_offset+ scaling_win_right_offset) shall be less than pic_width_in_luma_ samples, and the value of SubHeightC*(scaling_win_top_offset+scaling_win_bottom_offset) shall be less than pic_height_inluma_samples”
The Applicant states on page 8 of the response,
According to the above, the originally filed specification clearly describes the following:
1. A left scaling window offset and right scaling window offset,
individually, are less than a value of a picture width in units of luma sample.
2. A top scaling window offset and bottom scaling window offset, individually, are less than a value of a picture height in the units of luma sample.
while citing only support for having an absolute value of left/right/top/bottom scaling window offset be less than a value of a luma picture width, or for having a sum of left and right offsets and top and bottom offsets be less than a value of a luma picture width.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventors, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The specification describes that in [0363] “The value of SubWidthC*(scaling_win_left_offset+
scaling_win_right_offset) shall be less than pic_width_in_luma_ samples, and the value of SubHeightC*(scaling_win_top_offset+scaling_win_bottom_offset) shall be less than pic_height_inluma_samples. [emphasis added].” In the specification, the sum of the left and right scaling window offsets, and the sum of the top and bottom scaling window offsets, scaled by format subheight, are each less than pic_height in luma samples. However, in the claims, the left and right offset samples, individually, and the top and bottom offset samples individually, are less than a value of a luma picture width, which is not consistent with what is claimed.
While the specification also recites in [0674]-[0675], “The value of SubWidthC*(Abs (scaling_win_left_offset)+Abs(scaling_win_right_offset)) shall less be value than pic_width_in_luma_samples, and the of SubHeightC*(Abs (scaling_win_top_offset)+Abs (scaling_win_bottom_offset)) shall be less than pic_height_in_luma_samples.”, Applicant declined a proposed examiner’s amendment to include an absolute value term for each of the claim scaling window offsets (second through fifth syntax elements) to provide support for the claim language and place the application in condition for allowance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Deng, US 2022/0394304 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Deng discloses: a method of decoding video data, the method comprising:
receiving a picture parameter set;
parsing a first syntax element in the picture parameter set, wherein the first syntax element
indicates scaling window offset parameters are present in the picture parameter set (See scaling_window_explicit_signalling_flag, as disclosed in [0344], at top of page 39, “Scaling_window_explicit_signalling_flag equal to 1 specifies that the scaling window offset parameters are present in the PPS.”);
parsing a second syntax element in the picture parameter set, wherein the second syntax
element specifies a left scaling window offset;
parsing a third syntax element in the picture parameter set, wherein the third syntax element
specifies a right scaling window offset;
parsing a fourth syntax element in the picture parameter set, wherein the fourth syntax
element specifies a top scaling window offset; and
parsing a fifth syntax element in the picture parameter set, wherein the fifth syntax element
specifies a bottom scaling window offset (Second through Fifth syntax elements are also disclosed in [0344], in the following paragraph, “pps_conf_win_left_offset, pps_conf_win_right_offset, pps_conf_win_top_offset, and pps_conf_win_bottom_offset specify the samples of the pictures in the CLVS that are output from the decoding process, in terms of a rectangular region specified in picture coordinates for output”), wherein
each of the second syntax element, the third syntax element, the fourth syntax element, and the fifth syntax element are a signed integer 0-th order exponential Golomb coded syntax element with a left bit first and may have positive or negative values,
(i) a value of a product of (a) a value of the second syntax element and (b) a chroma format sub width variable and (ii) a value of a product of (a) a value of the third syntax element and (b) a chroma format sub width variable are less than a value of a picture width in units of luma samples (See [0344], on page 39, “PicOutputWidthL = pic_width_in_luma_samples - SubWidthC * ( scaling_win_right_offset + scaling_win_left_offset”, specifies a non-negative value for “pic_width_in_luma_samples - SubWidthC * ( scaling_win_right_offset + scaling_win_left_offset )”, since a PicOutputWidthL cannot assume a negative value.), and
(i) a value of a product of (a) a value of the fourth syntax element and (b) a chroma format sub height variable and (ii) a value of a product of (a) a value of the fifth syntax element and (b) a chroma format sub height variable are less than a picture height in units of luma samples (See [0344], on page 39, “PicOutputHeightL = pic_height_in_luma_samples - SubWidthC * ( scaling_win_bottom_offset + scaling_win_top_offset” specifies a non-negative value for “pic_width_in_luma_samples - SubWidthC * ( scaling_win_right_offset + scaling_win_left_offset )”, since a PicOutputWidthL cannot assume a negative value.).
Device encoding claim 2 and Device decoding claim 3 are respectively rejected as reciting an encoding device and decoding device that perform a method corresponding to decoding method claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYLE M LOTFI whose telephone number is (571)272-8762. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:00.
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, Brian Pendleton can be reached at 571-272-7527. 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.
/KYLE M LOTFI/Examiner, Art Unit 2425
Prosecution Insights