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
Priority
1. Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/07/2024 has been considered by Examiner and made of record in the application file.
3. Claims 6, 8 and 15 are canceled.
Double Patenting
4. A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 1, 9-10 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1, 10-11 and 14 of U.S. Application No. 18/996,753. This is a statutory double patenting rejection. See table below:
Application No. 18/996,753
Application No. 18/852,912
1. A method of transmitting point cloud data, the method comprising: encoding point cloud data; and transmitting a bitstream containing the point cloud data.
1. A method of transmitting point cloud data, the method comprising: encoding point cloud data; and transmitting a bitstream containing the point cloud data.
10. A device for transmitting point cloud data, comprising: an encoder configured to encode point cloud data; and a transmitter configured to transmit a bitstream containing the point cloud data.
9. A device for transmitting point cloud data, comprising: an encoder configured to encode point cloud data; and a transmitter configured to transmit a bitstream containing the point cloud data.
11. A method of receiving point cloud data, the method comprising: receiving a bitstream containing point cloud data; and decoding the point cloud data.
10. A method of receiving point cloud data, the method comprising: receiving a bitstream containing point cloud data; and decoding the point cloud data.
14. 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.
18. 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
6. Claims 1-5, 7, 9-14 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tourapis et al. (U.S PAT. 10, 911, 787 hereinafter, “Tourapis”) in view of Wan (U.S PUB. 2023/0101072 hereinafter, “Wan”).
Consider claim 1, Tourapis teaches a method of transmitting point cloud data, the method comprising: encoding point cloud data (col. 5, line 37 through col. 6, line 8, i.e., the compressed point cloud may be transmitted).
Tourapis does not explicitly show that transmitting a bitstream containing the point cloud data.
In the same field of endeavor, Wan teaches transmitting a bitstream containing the point cloud data (pages 2-3 [0047]-[0048], disclosing use of point cloud information to generate a bitstream).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to use, transmitting a bitstream containing the point cloud data, as taught by Wan, in order to better convey compressed point cloud data to a decoding device.
Consider claim 2, Tourapis further teaches wherein the encoding of the point cloud data comprises: searching for a neighbor point of a current point; and predicting the current point based on the found neighbor point (col. 7, lines 27-49, disclosing use of neighboring pints to predict attribute information).
Consider claim 3, Wan further teaches wherein the searching for the neighbor point comprises: generating a matrix based on at least one of a radius or an azimuth for each laserID, wherein rows or columns of the matrix are sorted based on a value of at least one of the radius or the azimuth (page 6 [0101]).
Consider claim 4, Tourapis further teaches wherein the searching for the neighbor point comprises: converting a value of an azimuth of the point cloud data into an index using a log; and searching for the neighbor point based on the index (col. 7, line 50 through col. 8, line 7).
Consider claim 5, Tourapis further teaches wherein the searching for the neighbor point comprises: based on the current point being a road point, searching for a point having a closest value of an azimuth to the current point as the neighbor point among points having the same laserID as the current point, wherein the searching for the neighbor point is performed in a different search direction of the neighbor point based on at least one of a value of a radius or a value of an azimuth of the current point (col. 7, line 50 through col. 8, line 7).
Consider claim 7, Tourapis further teaches wherein the searching for the neighbor point comprises: determining the search direction of the neighbor point based on a region containing the current point in a quadrant composed of an axis of the radius and an axis of the azimuth, wherein the bitstream contains information indicating a search method for the neighbor point and information indicating a weight used for the neighbor point (col. 40, line 33 through col. 41, line 36).
Consider claim 9, the subject-matter of independent claim 9 relates to a device for transmitting point cloud data with features fully corresponding to the characteristics of claim 1. Therefore, the same argumentation presented in relation to claim 1 is, mutatis mutandis, of application to claim 9.
Consider claim 10, Tourapis teaches a method of receiving point cloud data, the method comprising: decoding the point cloud data (col. 5, line 37 through col. 6, line 8, disclosing that the compressed point cloud may be received by a decoder).
Tourapis does not explicitly show that receiving a bitstream containing point cloud data.
In the same field of endeavor, Wan teaches receiving a bitstream containing point cloud data (pages 2-3 [0047]-[0049], disclosing use of point cloud information to generate a bitstream that is used by a decoder).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to use, receiving a bitstream containing point cloud data, as taught by Wan, in order to better convey compressed point cloud data to a decoding device.
Consider claim 11, the previous rejections of claim 2 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 11.
Consider claim 12, the previous rejections of claim 3 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 12.
Consider claim 13, the previous rejections of claim 4 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 13.
Consider claim 14, the previous rejections of claim 5 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 14.
Consider claim 16, the previous rejections of claim 7 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 16.
Consider claim 17, the previous rejections of claim 7 apply mutatis mutandis to corresponding claim 17.
Consider claim 18, the subject-matter of independent claim 18 relates to a device for receiving point cloud data with features fully corresponding to the characteristics of claim 10. Therefore, the same argumentation presented in relation to claim 10 is, mutatis mutandis, of application to claim 18.
Conclusion
7. Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Mail Stop_________ (Explanation, e.g., Amendment or After-final, etc.)
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Facsimile responses should be faxed to:
(571) 273-8300
Hand-delivered responses should be brought to:
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22313
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tuan H. Nguyen whose telephone number is (571) 272-8329. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00Am - 5:00Pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Pan Yuwen can be reached on (571) 272-7855. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/TUAN H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2649
Prosecution Insights