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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 depends on claim 2 but it is not clear how the apparatus comprising at least one processor configured to transmit a bitstream is further limited by how the bitstream is generated, i.e. “generated according to the video encoding method of claim 2” because “generated according to the video encoding method of claim 2” is part of intended use “configured to transmit a bitstream generated according to the video encoding method of claim 2” and it does not specifically recite any structural limitation to the apparatus comprising at least one processor. Thus, it is not clear whether the video encoding method steps recited in claim 2 are required even though claim 3 depends on claim 2. For the purpose of examination, claim 3 is interpreted as “An apparatus comprising at least one processor configured to transmit a bitstream”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(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.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2015/0016537 A1 (“Karczewicz”).
Regarding claim 3, Karczewicz discloses an apparatus comprising at least one processor configured to transmit a bitstream generated according to the video encoding method of claim 2 (e.g. see source device shown in Fig. 1 transmitting and/or storing encoded video, i.e. bitstream, to a destination device, i.e. bitstream, paragraph [0033]) (Note: claim 3 is interpreted as “an apparatus comprising at least one processor configured to transmit a bitstream”; thus, even though claim 2 is allowed, claim 3 is rejected under 102 based on this interpretation).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-2 and 4 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/17/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts on page 7 that the application is in condition of allowance in in view of the submitted Terminal Disclaimer and amendments to claim 3.
However, the examiner respectfully disagrees. Although claims 1-2 and 4 are allowed, the amendments to claim 3 appear to introduce 112(b) issues and remain anticipated by Karczewicz based on it’s interpretation as explained above.
Conclusion
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANCIS G GEROLEO whose telephone number is (571)270-7206. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 am - 3:30 pm.
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, Anna M Momper can be reached on (571) 270-5788. 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.
/Francis Geroleo/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619