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
This is in response to the preliminary amendment filed on 10/14/24. Claims 1-56 are canceled and new claims 57-76 are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claim(s) 57, 58, 60--63, 65-68, 70-73 and 75-76 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ha et al., US Pub. No.20210037287 in view of Liu et al., US Pub. No.20210248810.
As to claim 57, Ha discloses an apparatus comprising:
at least one processor and at least one memory including computer program code, wherein the at least one memory and the computer program code are configured to, with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to perform: writing into a file:
a first media content or a subset thereof of a first set of media components for a main video track (each scene video file may include its own corresponding audio track (e.g., with its own corresponding audio mix, see fig.4, [0092]); and
a second media content or a subset thereof of a second set of media components for a picture-in-picture video track (selecting the corresponding PIP window (e.g., PIP window 1026, 1036, or 1046) as the new primary PIP window to be prominently displayed in the largest region of the display screen, see [0092]); and
including following information in the file: a picture-in-picture relationship between the first media content or a subset thereof of the first set of media components and the second media content or a subset thereof of the second set of media components (the selection of any PIP window as the new primary PIP window may additionally select the corresponding audio track from the same scene video file, such that the audio track for the primary PIP window is presented (e.g., played) concurrently with the display of the primary PIP window in the largest region of the display screen, see [0092] to [0094]). Ha does not specifically disclose a region id type value to indicate a type for a value taken by a region ID. However, Liu discloses a region id type value to indicate a type for a value taken by a region ID (a plurality of region popularity tables may be established for each frame of video image to track and collect hotspot viewing regions of users in a plurality of types of viewing videos, see Liu’s [0055]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the defective filing date of the invention was made to implement Liu’s teachings into the computer system of Ha to control video tracks because it would have provided hotspot region prompt for the user or for different types of users in a communication network (see Liu’s [0055]).
As to claim 58, Ha discloses the file comprises a manifest file; the first set of media components comprise a first adaptation set; the first media content comprises a first representation of the first adaptation set; the second set of media components comprise a second adaptation set; or the second media content comprises a second representation of the second adaptation set (modifying at least two of the concurrent video files in the set by incorporating a first picture-in-picture (PIP) window into a first foveated region of a first concurrent video file among the set of concurrent video files and incorporating a second PIP window into a second foveated region of a second concurrent video file among the set of concurrent video files, see [0136]).
As to claim 60, Ha discloses when region id type is equal to 0, region IDs comprise subpicture IDs (see [0086] to [0087]).
As to claim 61, Ha discloses apparatus is further caused to include following in the file a region id value to specify an i-th ID for encoded video data units representing a target picture-in-picture region in the main video track (processing video scene files, see fig.10. [0090] to [0091]).
Claims 62, 63, 65-66 are rejected for the same reasons set forth in claims 57, 58, 60 and 61 respectively.
Claims 67, 68, 70 and 71 are rejected for the same reasons set forth in claims 57, 58, 60 and 61 respectively.
Claims 72, 73, 75 and 76 are rejected for the same reasons set forth in claims 57, 58, 60 and 61 respectively.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 59, 64, 69 and 74 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.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: none of the cited prior art discloses or teaches an apparatus comprising a combination of: a when a region id type is equal to 1, region IDs comprise group ID value in an abstraction layer unit map sample group for abstraction layer units that are intended to be replaced by the abstraction layer units of a picture-in- picture representation.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Khanh Dinh whose telephone number is (571) 272-3936. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 8:00 A.m. to 5:00 P.m.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Umar Cheema, can be reached on (571) 270-3037. The fax phone number for this group 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).
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner for patents
P O Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
/KHANH Q DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2458