DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant's arguments filed 12/29/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 7-9 from Applicant remarks, Applicant stated that the “subpics_present_flag” is obtained from a sequence parameter set according to table 2 of Chen; however, Chen says nothing about the “subpics_present_flag” being obtained from a picture parameter set.
While Applicant’s arguments are understood, Chen clearly teaches the “subpics_present_flag” being obtained from a picture parameter set (the “subpics_present_flag” is signaled using the picture parameter set table on page 9). It is clearly shown under “Method 2” pages 6-9 from the provisional application of Chen that the “subpics_present_flag” is signaled using SPS related table (first table under “Method 2”) and PPS related table (second table under “Method 2”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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.
4. Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by provisional application No. 62/889,068 of Chen et al. (US 2021/0044838) hereinafter “Chen”.
As per claim 1, Chen discloses an image decoding method performed by an image decoding apparatus, the image decoding method comprising:
obtaining (last paragraph of page 11, video decoders are able to decode the bitstream correctly only if the parsing process is complied with the foregoing syntax design), from a picture parameter set, a first signaling flag specifying whether an identifier of a subpicture splitting a current picture is signaled using the picture parameter set (e.g., subpics_present_flag in the picture parameter set table on page 9);
obtaining (last paragraph of page 11, video decoders are able to decode the bitstream correctly only if the parsing process is complied with the foregoing syntax design) subpicture identifier information of the subpicture from the picture parameter set, based on the first signaling flag specifying that the identifier of the subpicture is signaled using the picture parameter set (e.g., subpic_id[i] is based on the signaling of subpics_present_flag as shown in the picture parameter set table on page 9); and
decoding the current picture by decoding a current subpicture identified based on the subpicture identifier information (last paragraph of page 11, video decoders are able to decode the bitstream correctly only if the parsing process is complied with the foregoing syntax design),
wherein identifier number information for specifying the number of subpicture identifier information obtained from the picture parameter set is obtained from the picture parameter set (e.g., num_slices_in_pic_minus1 in the picture parameter set table on page 9),
wherein the subpicture identifier information is obtained from the picture parameter set based on the identifier number information (e.g., subpic_id[i] is based on num_slices_in_pic_minus1 as shown in the picture parameter set table on page 9), and
wherein the identifier number information specifies a value obtained by subtracting 1 from the number of subpicture identifier information obtained from the picture parameter set (page 9, The value of num_slices_in_pic_minus1 can be in the range of 0 to NumBricksInPic−1, inclusive. When num_slices_in_pic_minus1 is not present and single_brick_per_slice_flag is equal to 1, the value of num_slices_in_pic_minus1 is inferred to be equal to NumBricksInPic−1. When single_tile_in_pic_flag is equal to 1, the value of num_slices_in_pic_minus1 is inferred to be equal to 0),
wherein the image decoding method further comprises obtaining (last paragraph of page 11, video decoders are able to decode the bitstream correctly only if the parsing process is complied with the foregoing syntax design) a second signaling flag from a sequence parameter set, the second signaling flag specifying whether information of the subpicture is signaled using the sequence parameter set (e.g., subpics_present_flag in the sequence parameter set table on page 1 or 7), and
wherein the current picture is decoded further based on the second signaling flag (last paragraph of page 11, video decoders are able to decode the bitstream correctly only if the parsing process is complied with the foregoing syntax design).
As per claims 2-3, the claims are related to an encoding method opposite to the decoding method of claim 1; therefore, arguments analogous to those applied for claim 1 are applicable for claims 2-3. In addition, Chen discloses an encoder for implementing said encoding method (see last paragraph of page 11) and transmitting the bitstream including the picture parameter set (FIG. 1 depicts delivering an encoded bitstream to a decoding system).
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 MOHAMMED JEBARI whose telephone number is (571)270-7945. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 09:00am-06:00pm.
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, Chris Kelley can be reached on 571-272-7331. 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.
/MOHAMMED JEBARI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482
Prosecution Insights