Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/858,478

IMAGE ENCODING/DECODING METHOD FOR TEMPLATE MATCHING AND BILATERAL MATCHING HANDLING, METHOD OF TRANSMITTING BITSTREAM AND RECODING MEDIUM STORING BITSTREAM

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Oct 21, 2024
Examiner
NAWAZ, TALHA M
Art Unit
2483
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allow Rate
538 granted / 604 resolved
+31.1% vs TC avg
Minimal -1% lift
Without
With
+-0.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
633
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.2%
-32.8% vs TC avg
§103
48.1%
+8.1% vs TC avg
§102
24.9%
-15.1% vs TC avg
§112
11.0%
-29.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 604 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Priority This application discloses and claims only subject matter disclosed in prior application, and names the inventor or at least one joint inventor named in the prior application. Accordingly, this application may constitute a continuation or divisional. Should applicant desire to claim the benefit of the filing date of the prior application, attention is directed to 35 U.S.C. 120, 37 CFR 1.78, and MPEP § 211 et seq. The presentation of a benefit claim may result in an additional fee under 37 CFR 1.17(w)(1) or (2) being required, if the earliest filing date for which benefit is claimed under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) and 1.78(d) in the application is more than six years before the actual filing date of the application. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see response to non-final with respect to rejection 35 USC 101 of claim 13, has been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection 35 USC 101 has been withdrawn in light of the newly amended claim. Applicant's arguments filed 02/05/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, applicant argues that A) Zhang does not disclose explicit signaling of enabling template matching mode. Regarding applicant’s argument A, the examiner respectfully disagrees. At the onset applicant is reminded to view the reference as a whole. The claim as currently recited merely requires template-based motion vector refinement to be enabled based on first information. The claims are silent with regards to what that first information is nor is there any mention of independent signaling of template matching based motion vector. Furthermore, the claims as currently recited are also silent with how to signal whether TM merge mode is enabled. Zhang discloses, “ in the template matching merge mode, the encoder can choose among uni-prediction from list 0 or 1 or bi-prediction for a CU. The selection is based on template matching cost as follows…” (see Zhang 0206-0213). The selection is indication of enabling template matching cost. Further clarification in the recited claims is required to differentiate between selection and enabling. Applicant’s argument regarding decoupling the control mechanisms for the matching is not recited in the instant claims. Therefore, Zhang discloses the limitations of the claims as currently recited. Additional matters relating to storage of a bitstream also require attention. Hence, the rejection of the claims is maintained see updated office action below. 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 (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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (US20220295089) (hereinafter Zhang). Regarding claim 1, Zhang discloses an image decoding method performed by an image decoding apparatus, the image decoding method comprising: determining a prediction mode of a current block [0207, 0251-0267; selecting from a plurality of prediction modes]. generating a prediction block of the current block based on the prediction mode [0207, 0251-0267, 401; selecting from a plurality of prediction modes and performing and reconstructing video blocks]. reconstructing the current block based on the prediction block [0207, 0251-0267, 401; selecting from a plurality of prediction modes and performing and reconstructing video blocks]. wherein the prediction block is generated based on first information on whether template matching-based motion vector refinement is enabled [0207, 0251-0267, 0271-0287; based on prediction mode, performing MV refinement of template matched motion vector derivation depending on information such as coding mode]. Regarding claim 2, Zhang discloses wherein the first information is signaled as a sequence parameter set (SPS) [0089, 0105-0110; SPS level signaled]. Regarding claim 3, Zhang discloses wherein the prediction block is generated further based on second information on whether to apply a template matching merge mode [0207, 0251-0267, 0271-0287; signaling to apply template matching merge mode]. Regarding claim 4, Zhang discloses wherein the second information is signaled based on the first information [0207, 0251-0267, 0271-0287; signaling during coding process]. Regarding claim 5, Zhang discloses wherein the prediction block is generated further based on third information on whether to apply a bilateral matching merge mode [0207, 0251-0267, 0271-0287; signaling merge mode]. Regarding claim 6, Zhang discloses wherein the third information is signaled based on the second information [0207, 0251-0267, 0271-0287; signaling during coding process]. Regarding claim 7, Zhang discloses wherein the third information is signaled based on the second information indicating that the template matching merge mode is not applied. Regarding claim 8, Zhang discloses wherein the second information is signaled with a specific value and the third information is further signaled, based on the first information indicating that the template matching-based motion vector refinement is disabled [0207, 0251-0267, 0271-0287; based on prediction mode, performing MV refinement of template matched motion vector derivation depending on information such as selected coding mode]. Regarding claim 9, Zhang discloses wherein fourth information indicating a direction of a bilateral matching merge mode is signaled based on the first information indicating that the template matching-based motion vector refinement is disabled [0207, 0251-0267, 0271-0287; based on prediction mode, performing MV refinement of template matched motion vector derivation depending on information such as coding selected mode]. Regarding claim 10, Zhang discloses an image encoding method performed by an image encoding apparatus, the image encoding method comprising: determining a prediction mode of a current block [0207, 0251-0267; selecting from a plurality of prediction modes]. generating a prediction block of the current block based on the prediction mode [0207, 0251-0267, 401; selecting from a plurality of prediction modes and performing and reconstructing video blocks]. reconstructing the current block based on the prediction block, wherein the prediction block is generated based on first information on whether template matching-based motion vector refinement is enabled [0207, 0251-0267, 0271-0287, 0407; based on prediction mode, performing MV refinement of template matched motion vector derivation depending on information such as coding mode]. Regarding claim 11, Zhang discloses wherein the first information is encoded into a bitstream as a sequence parameter set (SPS) [0089, 0105-0110; SPS level signaled]. Regarding claim 12, Zhang discloses a method of transmitting a bitstream generated by an image encoding method, the image encoding method comprising: determining a prediction mode of a current block [0207, 0251-0267; selecting from a plurality of prediction modes]. generating a prediction block of the current block based on the prediction mode [0207, 0251-0267, 401; selecting from a plurality of prediction modes and performing and reconstructing video blocks]. reconstructing the current block based on the prediction block [0207, 0251-0267, 401; selecting from a plurality of prediction modes and performing and reconstructing video blocks]. wherein the prediction block is generated based on first information on whether template matching-based motion vector refinement is enabled [0207, 0251-0267, 0271-0287; based on prediction mode, performing MV refinement of template matched motion vector derivation depending on information such as coding mode]. Regarding claim 13, Zhang discloses a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream generated by the image encoding method of claim 10 [0007-0015, 0378; CRM storing bitstream]. Additionally, regarding claim 13, claim 13 claims a product by process claim limitation where the product is the bitstream and the process is the method steps to generate the bitstream. MPEP §2113 recites “Product-by-Process claims are not limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps”. Thus, the scope of the claim is the storage medium storing the bitstream (with the structure implied by the method steps). The structure includes the information and samples manipulated by the steps. “To be given patentable weight, the printed matter and associated product must be in a functional relationship. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated”. MPEP §2111.05(I)(A). When a claimed “computer-readable medium merely serves as a support for information or data, no functional relationship exists. MPEP §2111.05(III). The memory storing the claimed bitstream in claim 13 merely services as a support for the storage of the bitstream and provides no functional relationship between the stored bitstream and storage medium. Therefore, the bitstream, which scope is implied by the method steps, is non-functional descriptive material and given no patentable weight. MPEP §2111.05(III). Thus, the claim scope is just a storage medium storing data and is anticipated by Zhang which recites a storage medium storing a bitstream. Zhang discloses, a bitstream stored on a non-transitory computer readable medium ABS, 0014, 0378; CRM storing bitstream). Conclusion 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 TALHA M NAWAZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5439. The examiner can normally be reached Flex, M-R 6:30am-3:30pm; F 8:30am-12:30pm. 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, Joe G Ustaris can be reached at 571-272-7383. 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. /TALHA M NAWAZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 21, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 01, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Feb 05, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 13, 2026
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593023
Electronic Device with Reliable Passthrough Video Fallback Capability and Hierarchical Failure Detection Scheme
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587631
Motion Dependent Display
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587673
METHOD FOR DECODER-SIDE MOTION VECTOR DERIVATION USING SPATIAL CORRELATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581024
IMAGE PROCESSING DEVICE AND IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573203
MEDICAL OBSERVATION SYSTEM, INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
89%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (-0.8%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 604 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month