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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Double Patenting
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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1, 4-5, 15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over the corresponding independent claims of the following US Patents:
US-12548199-B2, US-12537978-B2, US-12464138-B2, US-12444089-B2, US-12423871-B2, US-12423877-B2, US-12413780-B2, US-12400369-B2, US-12395679-B2, US-12380604-B2, US-12380605-B2, US-12361598-B2, US-12354310-B2, US-12335520-B2, US-12322144-B2, US-12307729-B2, US-12307726-B2, US-12299938-B2, US-12299942-B2, US-12299943-B2, US-12273557-B2, US-12262055-B2, US-12260600-B2, US-12250414-B2, US-12244866-B2, US-12236646-B2, US-12205332-B2, US-12184895-B2, US-12165368-B2, US-12159435-B2, US-12149579-B2, US-12149751-B2, US-12143648-B2, US-12069316-B2, US-12058370-B2, US-12034979-B2, US-12021910-B2, US-12010350-B2, US-12010341-B2, US-11979607-B2, US-11968393-B2, US-11908168-B2, US-11902348-B2, US-11895341-B2, US-11882303-B2, US-11818190-B2, US-11803986-B2, US-11765387-B2, US-11631158-B2, US-11606547-B2, US-11601675-B2, US-11601488-B2, US-11601634-B2, US-11544877-B2, US-11483363-B2, US-11418564-B2, US-11395004-B2, US-11394979-B2, US-11380019-B2, US-11341687-B2, US-11328440-B2, US-11315270-B2, US-11308651-B2, US-11282239-B2, US-11217037-B2, US-11170556-B2, US-11158107-B2, US-11151742-B2, US-11138688-B2, US-11122102-B2, US-11057645-B2, US-11017591-B2.
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the independent claims from all of the above US Patents recited the feature transmitting point cloud data, encoding/decoding bitstream containing the point cloud data.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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,, in public use, on sale, otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151,, in an application for patent published, deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent, application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Takahashi et al. (US Pub 2023/0224482 A1).
As to claim 1, Takahashi discloses a method of transmitting point cloud data (¶0080, “atlas information (atlas), which is information for reconstructing a point cloud (3D data) from a patch (2D data), is encoded and transmitted to the decoding side”), the method comprising:
encoding point cloud data; and transmitting a bitstream containing the point cloud data (¶0080, “atlas information (atlas), which is information for reconstructing a point cloud (3D data) from a patch (2D data), is encoded and transmitted to the decoding side”).
As to claim 2, claim 1 is incorporated and Takahashi discloses the encoding of the point cloud data comprises:
encoding a low-resolution mesh data of mesh data in the point cloud data in a base layer (¶0149, “in a case where layer_id=0 is satisfied, the information (lod) regarding the resolution of the point cloud indicates an LoD value of the base layer. Furthermore, for example, in a case where layer_id=0 is not satisfied, the information (lod) regarding the resolution of the point cloud indicates the LoD value obtained by being simultaneously displayed with the point clouds of the layers 0 to (layer_id−1). Note that the LoD value may be a reference value determined by a content creator. Note that the information (lod) regarding the resolution of the point cloud may not be signaled, and the value of layer_id may signal the information regarding the resolution of the point cloud. That is, the information (lod) regarding the resolution of the point cloud may be included in the layer identification information (layer_id). For example, the value of layer_id may also indicate the resolution (lod value) of the point cloud corresponding to each layer from the highest layer of the spatial scalability to the layer indicated by the layer identification information.” ¶0150, “That is, the file generation device may store the information (lod) regarding the resolution of the point cloud in the spatial scalability InfoStruct, and the client device may select the sub-bitstream (track) on the basis of the information regarding the resolution of the point cloud.”), and
encoding a high-resolution mesh data of the mesh data in the point cloud data in an enhancement layer (Fig. 11, ¶0122, “By using a single such sparse patch or combining a plurality of such sparse patches, spatial scalability (resolution scalability) can be achieved.” ¶0242, “the file generation device may store the information (lod) regarding the resolution of the point cloud in the V3C3D region descriptor of the MPD, and the client device may select the sub-bitstream (adaptation set) on the basis of the information regarding the resolution of the point cloud stored in the V3C3D region descriptor of the MPD. By doing so, the client device can more easily grasp which adaptation set needs to be selected in order to obtain the desired LoD. Therefore, the client device can more easily reproduce the 3D data by using the spatial scalability.” ¶0249, “FIG. 24, the spatial scalability identification information (id) and information (lod) regarding resolution of the point cloud are set and layer identification information (layerId) are illustrated as v3c:spatialScalabilityInfo.”).
As to claim 4, Takahashi discloses a device for transmitting point cloud data, the device comprising: an encoder configured to encode point cloud data; and a transmitter configured to transmit a bitstream containing the point cloud data (See claim 1 for detailed analysis.).
As to claim 5, Takahashi discloses a method of receiving point cloud data, the method comprising: receiving a bitstream containing point cloud data; and decoding the point cloud data (See claim 1 for detailed analysis.).
As to claim 6, claim 5 is incorporated and Takahashi discloses the decoding of the point cloud data comprises:
decoding a low-resolution mesh data of mesh data in the point cloud data in a base layer, and decoding a high-resolution mesh data of the mesh data in the point cloud data in an enhancement layer (Fig. 11, ¶0115, “The point cloud objects constructed by the LoDs represent the same object as each other, but have different resolutions (the number of points) from each other. That is, this hierarchical structure can also be said to be a hierarchical structure based on the resolution of the point cloud.” ¶0122, “By using a single such sparse patch or combining a plurality of such sparse patches, spatial scalability (resolution scalability) can be achieved.” ¶0242, “the file generation device may store the information (lod) regarding the resolution of the point cloud in the V3C3D region descriptor of the MPD, and the client device may select the sub-bitstream (adaptation set) on the basis of the information regarding the resolution of the point cloud stored in the V3C3D region descriptor of the MPD. By doing so, the client device can more easily grasp which adaptation set needs to be selected in order to obtain the desired LoD. Therefore, the client device can more easily reproduce the 3D data by using the spatial scalability.” ¶0249, “FIG. 24, the spatial scalability identification information (id) and information (lod) regarding resolution of the point cloud are set and layer identification information (layerId) are illustrated as v3c:spatialScalabilityInfo.” ¶0120, “At the time of decoding, scaling is only required to be performed in the opposite direction. For example, as illustrated in B of FIG. 9, it is possible to restore sparse patches (large patches) by upscaling the point interval at the same ratio as that at the time of encoding”)..
As to claim 15, Takahashi discloses a device for receiving point cloud data, comprising: a receiver configured to receive a bitstream containing point cloud data; and a decoder configured to decode the point cloud data (See claim 1 for detailed analysis.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 7-14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Taghavi Nasrabadi et al. (US Patent 12,327,314 B1) teaches instead of generating a mesh having a large number of vertices, the decoder generates a lower resolution mesh and applies the variable transparency layer, such that portions of triangles or polygons of the lower resolution mesh extending beyond the boundaries of the objects at the different depths of the 3D scene are made transparent and not shown as being stretched across large depth distances.
Mammou et al. (US Pub 2023/0290063 A1) teaches decoded 3D textured mesh to adaptively tesselate the mesh.
Huang et al. (US Pub 2023/0177738 A1) teaches decodes, using a point cloud compression (PCC) decoder and from a bitstream, a point cloud that includes first points corresponding to vertices in a three dimensional (3D) mesh frame.
Any inquiry concerning this communication, earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YU CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7951. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8-5 PST Mid-day flex.
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, Xiao Wu can be reached on 571-272-7761. The fax phone number for the,ganization where this application, proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published, 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, CANADA), 571-272-1000.
/YU CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2613