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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 6/24/26 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Applicant’s admitted prior art (APA).
APA, as specified in Applicant’s Background, clearly discloses the common concept of storing compressed video bitstreams.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 7, 8, 10-12, 14, 15, and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Deshpande (2017/0134742) for the same reasons as set forth in Sec. 4 of the parent application 17/087,865, dated 3/18/22.
Regarding claims 1, 8, and 15, Deshpande discloses a computer system (and the corresponding method; and non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon a computer program for coding) for coding video data (para [0159]-[0165], [0178], [0179], [0285], [0286], [0395], [0431]), the computer system comprising one or more computer-readable non-transitory storage media configured to store computer program code (para [0159]-[0165], [0178], [0179], [0285], [0286], [0395], [0431]); and one or more computer processors configured to access said computer program code and operate as instructed by said computer program code, said computer program code including receiving code configured to cause the one or more computer processors obtaining video data comprising a current picture and one or more other pictures (para [0159]-[0165], [0178], [0179], [0285], [0286], [0395], [0431]); determining a first flag indicating whether the current picture is referenced by the one or more other pictures in an encoding/decoding order (para [0159]-[0165], [0178], [0179], [0285], [0286], [0395], [0431]); determining a second flag indicating to whether the current picture is output (para [0322], [0395], [0603]); and decoding/encoding the video data in accordance with the first flag and the second flag (para [0007], [0397]), a value of the second flag is inferred (e.g. 0) based on a value of the first flag ([0606], [0614], [0655], e.g. alt_output_layer_flag), the first flag and the second flag are signaled in a picture header or a slice header associated with the video data (para [0395], [0604]), and a value of the second flag is inferred based on the value of the first flag not being explicitly signaled (para [0395], [0397], [0411], [0437], [0440]); and transmitting the video bitstream 1014.
Regarding claims 3, 10, and 17, Deshpande discloses the current picture is not encoded based on the first flag being set to one (para [0397], [0567]) and the second flag being set to zero (para [0397], [0567]).
Regarding claims 4, 11, and 18, Deshpande discloses the first flag corresponds to whether the current picture is referenced for motion compensation or parameter prediction (para [0395], [0397], [0437]).
Regarding claims 5, 12, and 19, Deshpande discloses the second flag corresponds to whether the current picture cropped and output for display or other purposes (para [0431], [0434]).
Regarding claims 7, and 14, Deshpande discloses the value of the second flag is inferred at the encoder side or at the decoder side (para [0103], [0368]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/24/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts on p. 7-8 of the Remarks that the reference fails to disclose the second flag is inferred. However, it is submitted that applicant concedes on p. 8 that Deshpande discloses that the value of the second flag may be inferred.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOUNG LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-7334. The examiner can normally be reached M - F, 11 - 7.
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.
/Y LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2485
Prosecution Insights