CTFR 18/881,255 CTFR 91683 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation Nonfunctional Descriptive Material Claim 13 recites “A non-transitory, computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream”. There are no recitations of a processor or other element-merely a compressed bitstream content (a bitstream generated by an image encoding apparatus). Under MPEP 2111.05(III), this claim is merely machine-readable media. The Examiner finds that there is no disclosed or claimed functional relationship between the stored bitstream and the medium. Instead, the medium is merely a support or carrier for the bitstream being stored. Therefore, the bitstream stored should not be given patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.05 applying In re Lowry, 32 F.3d 1579, 1583-84, 32 USPQ2d 1031, 1035 (Fed. Cir. 1994); and In re Ngai, 367 F.3d 1336, 70 USPQ2d 1862 (Fed. Cir. 2004) . As such, claim 13 is subject to a prior art rejection based on any non-transitory computer readable storage medium known before the earliest effective filing date of the present application. Claim 14 recites “A non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium storing a bitstream”. There are no recitations of a processor or other element-merely a compressed bitstream content (a bitstream for image decoding). Under MPEP 2111.05(III), this claim is merely machine-readable media. The Examiner finds that there is no disclosed or claimed functional relationship between the stored bitstream and the medium. Instead, the medium is merely a support or carrier for the bitstream being stored. Therefore, the bitstream stored should not be given patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.05 applying In re Lowry, 32 F.3d 1579, 1583-84, 32 USPQ2d 1031, 1035 (Fed. Cir. 1994); and In re Ngai, 367 F.3d 1336, 70 USPQ2d 1862 (Fed. Cir. 2004) . As such, claim 14 is subject to a prior art rejection based on any non-transitory computer readable storage medium known before the earliest effective filing date of the present application. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 13-19 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by ZHANG, (US 2019/0246143) . Claim 13 has been interpreted above as nonfunctional descriptive material under MPEP 2111.05(III) and the case law cited therein because claim 13 recites “A non-transitory, computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream”. As such, claim 13 is subject to a prior art rejection based on any non-transitory computer readable storage medium known before the earliest effective filing date of the present application. In other words, the proper interpretation of claim 13 is merely a machine-readable media in which the media is merely a support or carrier for the bitstream being stored wherein the bitstream stored and the way such bitstream is generated should not be given patentable weight. ZHANG, which is analogous art, discloses non-transitory computer readable storage medium having stored therein a bitstream comprising video information [¶0077 teaches: 0233] CPB memory 320 may store video data, such as an encoded video bitstream, to be decoded by the components of video decoder 300. The video data stored in CPB memory 320 may be obtained, for example, from computer-readable medium 110 (FIG. 1). CPB memory 320 may include a CPB that stores encoded video data (e.g., syntax elements) from an encoded video bitstream.] . As such, ZHANG clearly anticipates the non-transitory, computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream. Claim 14 has been interpreted above as nonfunctional descriptive material under MPEP 2111.05(III) and the case law cited therein because claim 14 recites “A non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium storing a bitstream”. As such, claim 14 is subject to a prior art rejection based on any non-transitory computer readable storage medium known before the earliest effective filing date of the present application. In other words, the proper interpretation of claim 14 is merely a machine-readable media in which the media is merely a support or carrier for the bitstream being stored wherein the bitstream stored and the way such bitstream is generated should not be given patentable weight. ZHANG, which is analogous art, discloses non-transitory computer readable storage medium having stored therein a bitstream comprising video information [¶0077 teaches: 0233] CPB memory 320 may store video data, such as an encoded video bitstream, to be decoded by the components of video decoder 300. The video data stored in CPB memory 320 may be obtained, for example, from computer-readable medium 110 (FIG. 1). CPB memory 320 may include a CPB that stores encoded video data (e.g., syntax elements) from an encoded video bitstream.] . As such, ZHANG clearly anticipates the non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium storing a bitstream. Claims 15-19 and 21 are rejected for the same reasons as the dependent claims from which they depend. Conclusion 07-40 AIA Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL . See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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. Prior art not relied upon: Please refer to the references listed in an attached PTO-892 and that are not relied upon for the claim rejections detailed above. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. In particular, LEE (US 20240364892) teaches an image decoding method including obtaining block partitioning information of a current block; based on the block partitioning information, partitioning the current block into a first sub-block and a second sub-block; deriving motion information of the first sub-block and notion information of the second sub-block respectively; based on the notion information of the first sub-block and the motion information of the second sub-block, generating a prediction sample of the first sub-block and a prediction sample of the second sub-block respectively; and through a weighted-sum of the prediction sample of the first sub-block and the prediction sample of the second sub-block, generating a prediction sample of the current block. Herein, the block partitioning information is index information indicating an index of a table including information indicating a plurality of predefined asymmetric partition shapes; LEE et al., (US 2022/0248026) teaches sa ub-block division-based image encoding/decoding method and device. In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Marnie Matt whose telephone number is (303)297-4255. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30-5:00. 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, 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. /MARNIE A MATT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2485 Application/Control Number: 18/881,255 Page 2 Art Unit: 2485
Prosecution Insights