Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/780,332

TECHNIQUES FOR MULTIPLE CONFORMANCE POINTS IN MEDIA CODING

Non-Final OA §112§DP
Filed
Jul 22, 2024
Examiner
VAZQUEZ COLON, MARIA E
Art Unit
2482
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Tencent America LLC
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
411 granted / 568 resolved
+14.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+13.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
600
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.3%
-35.7% vs TC avg
§103
53.7%
+13.7% vs TC avg
§102
16.1%
-23.9% vs TC avg
§112
16.5%
-23.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 568 resolved cases

Office Action

§112 §DP
DETAILED ACTION 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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on March 17, 2026 has been entered. Double Patenting The double patenting rejection to claims 1-4, 7-11, and 14-18 has been withdrawn in view of current amendments. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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. Claims 7-13 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 7 recites “A non-transitory computer readable medium storing a video bitstream generated by a video encoding method comprising:”. Claim 7 is directed to a non-transitory medium storing a bitstream of video wherein clauses that appear to describe how the bitstream was generated. These elements or steps are not performed by an intended computer, and the bitstream is not a form of programming that causes functions to be performed by an intended computer. This shows that the computer-readable medium merely serves as support for storing the bitstream and provides no functional relationship between the steps/elements that describe the generation of the bitstream and intended computer system. Therefore, those claim elements are not given patentable weight. Patentable weight is given to data stored on a computer-readable medium when there exists a functional relationship between the data and its associated substrate. See MPEP 2111.05 III. For example, is a claim is drawn to a computer-readable medium containing programming, a functional relationship exists if the programming “performs some function with respect to the computer with which it is associated.” However, if the claim recites that the computer-readable medium merely serves as a storage for information or data that is not meant for being executed, no functional relationship exists and the information or data is not given patentable weight. The Examiner suggests that the claim be amended so that it is directed to a functional relationship. For example, in this particular case, the claim could instead be recited as “A method of storing a bitstream of a video into a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium, wherein the bitstream is generated by a method performed by a video processing apparatus, wherein the method comprising:” Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-6 and 14-20 allowed. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIA E VAZQUEZ COLON whose telephone number is (571)270-1103. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 AM-3:30 PM. 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, CHRISTOPHER S KELLEY can be reached at (571)272-7331. 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. /MARIA E VAZQUEZ COLON/Examiner, Art Unit 2482
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 22, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112, §DP
Sep 25, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 14, 2025
Final Rejection — §112, §DP
Jan 20, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 17, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 01, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604027
METHODS AND APPARATUSES FOR DECODER-SIDE MOTION VECTOR REFINEMENT IN VIDEO CODING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593061
DECODING METHOD AND APPARATUS, CODING METHOD AND APPARATUS, DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593053
MOVING IMAGE DECODING/ENCODING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12574626
TRACKING CAMERA AND OPERATION THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12574534
TRANSMISSION DEVICE FOR POINT CLOUD DATA AND METHOD PERFORMED BY TRANSMISSION DEVICE, AND RECEPTION DEVICE FOR POINT CLOUD DATA AND METHOD PERFORMED BY RECEPTION DEVICE
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+13.5%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 568 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