DETAILED ACTION
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
This office action is a response to an application filed on 12/02/2025, in which claims 1-12 are pending and ready for examination.
Response to Argument
Applicant's arguments filed 12/02/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to claims rejected under 35 USC 102, 103, the Applicant argues, see Pg 6-7, that the cited teaching is not supported by the priority documents referenced by Chen (US 20130077681 A1) to pre-date the claimed priority date of the instant application.
Examiner cannot concur. The disclosure in at least Para. [00117, 128-132] of 61/539433 at least supports the teaching of cited paragraphs of Chen (US 20130077681 A1) or addresses the recited claim features involving a header value, MSB’s of a POC, and LSB’s of a POC. The disclosure in Para. [0139-140, 163-169] of 61/538787 shows similar support to the disclosure above-mentioned.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 –
(e) the invention was described in (1) an application for patent, published under section 122(b), by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent or (2) a patent granted on an application for patent by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent, except that an international application filed under the treaty defined in section 351(a) shall have the effects for purposes of this subsection of an application filed in the United States only if the international application designated the United States and was published under Article 21(2) of such treaty in the English language.
Claims 1, 5, 7, and 11 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e) as being anticipated by Chen (US Pub. 20130077681 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses a method of processing a video stream, the method comprising (Chen; Fig. 1, 2. A video coding system/method is used to code video data.):
obtaining a header value from a slice header of the video stream (Chen; Para. [0145-149]. At least a syntax value is obtained from a slice header of a bitstream.);
determining a Picture Order Count (POC) value of a current picture based on (Chen; Para. [0145-149]. A picture order count (POC) is determined for a current picture.):
the header value (Chen; Para. [0145-149]. A picture order count (POC) is determined for a current picture in accordance with at least a syntax value from a slice header.);
a plurality of most significant bits of a POC value of a key picture, wherein the key picture is a picture that prevents use of pictures previous to the key picture from being used to predict pictures after the key picture (Chen; Para. [0145-149]. A picture order count (POC) is determined in accordance with different MSB bits of a POC of a key picture, e.g. RAP, BLA, wherein pictures prior to a key picture are not used for prediction for pictures subsequent to a key picture.); and
a plurality of least significant bits of the POC value of the key picture (Chen; Para. [0145-149]. A picture order count (POC) is determined in accordance with different LSB bits of a POC of a key picture.); and
decoding the current picture based on the POC value of the current picture (Chen; Para. [0145-149]. A current picture is decoded in accordance with a POC of a current picture.).
Regarding claim 5, Chen discloses wherein the key picture is one of an Instantaneous Decoder Refresh (IDR) picture, an open-Group of Pictures (open-GOP) I-picture, and a switching point picture (Chen; Para. [0145-149]. A key picture is at least one of an IDR, open-GOP, I-picture, and a switching point picture, e.g. RAP, GDR.).
Claims 7, 11 are directed to a decoder comprising: processing circuitry and a memory, the memory containing instructions executable by the processing circuitry whereby the decoder is configured to perform a sequence of processing steps corresponding to the same as claimed in claims 1, 5, and are rejected for the same reason of anticipation as outlined above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 6 and 12 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chen (US Pub. 20130077681 A1) in view of Shi (WO 2008061164 A2).
Regarding claim 6, Chen discloses the video stream comprises a plurality of pictures of the video stream (Chen; Para. [0145-149]. A video stream includes different pictures of a bitstream.);
the plurality of pictures comprises the current picture and the key picture (Chen; Para. [0145-149]. Different pictures include a current picture and a key picture).
But it does not specifically disclose each picture of the plurality of pictures belongs to a corresponding layer identified by a respective layer identity.
However, Shi teaches each picture of the plurality of pictures belongs to a corresponding layer identified by a respective layer identity (Shi; Para. [0168-169]. Each picture of different pictures is associated with a corresponding layer identity.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the pertinent art at the time of the invention to further modify the video coding system of Chen to incorporate a layer specifying approach, by incorporating Shi’2’s teaching wherein layer identities associated with a layer directory is used for each picture, for the motivation to perform video coding based on non-RAP and RAP frames (Shi; Abstract.).
Claim 12 is directed to a decoder comprising: processing circuitry and a memory, the memory containing instructions executable by the processing circuitry whereby the decoder is configured to perform a sequence of processing steps corresponding to the same as claimed in claim 6, and is non-patentable over the prior art for the same reason as previously indicated.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hendry (US Pub. 20230224470 A1) teaches a video coding system that performs coding using POC MSB.
Hendry (US Pub. 20150373342 A1) teaches a video coding system that performs full picture order count reset for multi-layer codecs.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALBERT KIR whose telephone number is (571)272-6245. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30am - 5:00pm.
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, Jay Patel can be reached at (571) 272-2988. 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.
/ALBERT KIR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2485
Prosecution Insights