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 Objections
Claims 1-25 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 1-25 recites “ISOBMFF.” The Office suggests changing “ISOBMFF” to -- international ADJ standards ADJ organization ADJ base ADJ media ADJ file ADJ format (ISOBMFF)--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: a processing unit (CPU, Figure 9, 904, paragraph 0322) in claim 25.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter as not falling within one of the four statutory categories of invention because the claimed invention is directed to computer program per se. See MPEP 2106(I). Claim 23 set forth a computer program product for a programmable apparatus. The computer program product comprising instructions (a program).
35 U.S.C. 101 requires that a claimed invention must fall within one of the four eligible categories of invention (i.e. process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter) and must not be directed to subject matter encompassing a judicially recognized exception as interpreted by the courts. MPEP 2106. The four eligible categories of invention include: (1) process which is an act, or a series of acts or steps, (2) machine which is an concrete thing, consisting of parts, or of certain devices and combination of devices, (3) manufacture which is an article produced from raw or prepared materials by giving to these materials new forms, qualities, properties, or combinations, whether by hand labor or by machinery, and (4) composition of matter which is all compositions of two or more substances and all composite articles, whether they be the results of chemical union, or of mechanical mixture, or whether they be gases, fluids, powders or solids. MPEP 2106(I).
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 23 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 23 recites the limitation "the program” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
It is unclear as it is the first recitation of the program if this is the computer program product, if the program comprises the instructions. Please clarify.
The Office assumes the computer program product comprises the program/instructions.
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)(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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7, 10-14, 16, 18, 21-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Oh et al (US 2021/0209806 and hereafter referred to as “Oh”).
Regarding Claim 1, Oh discloses a method of generating a volumetric data bit-stream from an ISOBMFF-based media file, the method comprising:
obtaining, from the media file, a track comprising at least one parameter in a metadata part of the track, the at least one parameter applying to the whole volumetric data bit-stream, the track further comprising at least one sample, a data part of the at least one sample comprising coded volumetric data of at least one frame of a sequence of one or more frames, the sequence of one or more frames pertaining to a segment of coded volumetric data (Page 4, paragraph 0104, 0106, Figure 1, Figure 21, Figure 43, V-PCC unit is a first container, V-PCC Unit 40042 is second container, Page 36-37, paragraph 0713-0718, Page 6, paragraph 0136, sample group description entry, Figure 21, Page 25, paragraph 0467, Figure 20, Page 27, paragraph 0501-0506, 0509, Page 22, paragraph 0434, Page 17, paragraph 0367, );
generating, from at least one sample, a first data container comprising the segment, the segment comprising the coded volumetric data of all the frames of the sequence of one or more frames (Figure 43, V-PCC unit is a second container, V-PCC Unit 40042 is first container, Page 36-37, paragraph 0713-0718);
generating a second data container containing the at least one parameter and the generated first data container (Figure 43, V-PCC unit is a second container, V-PCC Unit 40042 is first container, Page 36-37, paragraph 0713-0718) and;
generating the volumetric data bit-stream, the volumetric data bit-stream comprising the second data container (V-PCC unit is a first container, V-PCC Unit 40042 is second container, Page 36-37, paragraph 0713-0718, Page 6, paragraph 0136, Page 25, paragraph 0467, Figure 20, Page 27, paragraph 0501-0506, 0509).
Regarding Claim 12, Oh discloses a method of encapsulating a volumetric data bit-stream into an ISOBMFF-based media file, the method comprising
obtaining, from the volumetric data bit-stream, a first data container containing at least one parameter applying to the whole volumetric data bit-stream and containing a second data container comprising a segment of coded volumetric data, the segment of coded volumetric data comprising a sequence of one or more frames (Figure 1, 10003, Page 3, paragraph 0098, Page 4, paragraph 0102, Page 6, paragraph 0136, Page 25, paragraph 0467, Figure 20, Page 27, paragraph 0501-0506, 0509, Page 22, paragraph 0434, Figure 21, Figure 43, V-PCC unit is a first container, V-PCC Unit 40042 is second container, Page 36-37, paragraph 0713-0718);
obtaining the at least one parameter from the first data container (Page 36-37, paragraph 0713-0718, Page 27, paragraph 0501-0506, 0509);
obtaining coded volumetric data of at least one frame of the sequence of one or more frames from the second data container (Page 27, paragraph 0501-0506, 0509, Page 36-37, paragraph 0713-0718,);
generating a track comprising the at least one parameter in a metadata part of the track and comprising at least one sample, a data part of the at least one sample comprising coded volumetric data of at least one frame of the sequence of one or more frames (Page 20-21, paragraph 0399-0402, Page 27, paragraph 0501-0506, 0509, Page 36-37, paragraph 0713-0718); and
encapsulating the generated track in the media file (Figure 1, 10003, Page 3, paragraph 0098, Page 4, paragraph 0102, Page 6, paragraph 0136, Page 25, paragraph 0467, Figure 20, Page 27, paragraph 0501-0506, 0509, Page 22, paragraph 0434, Figure 21).
Regarding Claim 2, Oh discloses all the limitations of the Claim 1. Oh discloses
wherein the coded volumetric data of at least one frame of the sequence of one or more frames comprises a key frame containing geometry information and/or comprises at least one inter-frame (Page 20-21, paragraph 0402, Figure 25, paragraph 0154, Figure 15, paragraph 0297, 0558, 0562).
Regarding Claim 3, Oh discloses all the limitations of the Claim 1. Oh discloses wherein the volumetric data bit-stream comprises coded mesh data (Page 22, paragraph 0418).
Regarding Claim 5, Oh discloses all the limitations of the Claim 1. Oh discloses generating a third data container comprising the coded volumetric data of at least one frame of the sequence of one or more frames, the third data container being contained in the first data container (Figure 43, V-PCC unit is a second container, V-PCC Unit 40042 is first container, Page 36-37, paragraph 0713-0718, geometry video data is the third container, paragraph 0154, Figure 15, paragraph 0297, 0558, 0562).
Regarding Claim 7, Oh discloses all the limitations of the Claim 1. Oh discloses wherein the at least one sample comprises the coded volumetric data of all the frames of the sequence of one or more frames (Page 6, paragraph 0136, Page 25, paragraph 0467, Figure 20, Page 27, paragraph 0501-0506, 0509, Page 22, paragraph 0434, Figure 21, Figure 43, V-PCC unit is a first container, V-PCC Unit 40042 is second container, Page 36-37, paragraph 0713-0718).
Regarding Claim 10 and 21, Oh discloses all the limitations of the Claim 1 and 12 respectively. Oh discloses wherein the at least one parameter applying to the whole volumetric data bit-stream is determined from a sample entry of the track (Page 6, paragraph 0136, Page 25, paragraph 0467, Figure 20, Page 27, paragraph 0501-0506, 0509, Page 22, paragraph 0434, Figure 21, Figure 43, V-PCC unit is a first container, V-PCC Unit 40042 is second container, Page 36-37, paragraph 0713-0718, Page 39-40, paragraph 0776, 0779, 0782, 0905, Table 17).
Regarding Claim 11 and 22, Oh discloses all the limitations of the Claim 1 and 12 respectively. Oh discloses wherein at least one parameter applying to a plurality of samples is determined from a sample group of the track (Page 6, paragraph 0136, Page 25, paragraph 0467, Figure 20, Page 27, paragraph 0501-0506, 0509, Page 22, paragraph 0434, Figure 21, Figure 43, V-PCC unit is a first container, V-PCC Unit 40042 is second container, Page 36-37, paragraph 0713-0718).
Regarding Claim 13, Oh discloses all the limitations of the Claim 12. Oh discloses the data part of the at least one sample comprises a key frame containing geometry information and/or comprises at least one inter-frame (Page 9, paragraph 0175, Page 26, paragraph 00488, video coded geometry bitstream compresses a geometry frame, Page 13, paragraph 0297 – intra predictor and inter predictor Figure 25).
Regarding Claim 14, Oh discloses all the limitations of the Claim 12. Oh discloses wherein the volumetric data bit-stream comprises coded mesh data (Page 22, paragraph 0418).
Regarding Claim 16, Oh discloses all the limitations of the Claim 12. Oh discloses obtaining the coded volumetric data of the at least one frame of the sequence of one or more frames from a third data container of the volumetric data bit-stream, the third data container being contained in the second data container (Figure 43, V-PCC unit is a first container, V-PCC Unit 40042 is second container, geometry video data is the third container, Page 36-37, paragraph 0713-0718).
Regarding Claim 18, Oh discloses all the limitations of the Claim 12. Oh discloses wherein the data part of the at least one sample comprises coded volumetric data of all the frames of the sequence of one or more frames (Page 6, paragraph 0136, Page 25, paragraph 0467, Figure 20, Page 27, paragraph 0501-0506, 0509, Page 22, paragraph 0434, Figure 21, Figure 43, V-PCC unit is a first container, V-PCC Unit 40042 is second container, Page 36-37, paragraph 0713-0718).
Regarding Claim 23, Oh discloses a computer program product for a programmable apparatus, the computer program product comprising instructions for carrying out each step of the method according to claim 1 when the program is loaded and executed by a programmable apparatus (Figure 1, Page 5, paragraph 0118, 0120, Page 55, paragraph 1171). See rejection of claim 1.
Regarding Claim 24, Oh discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions of a computer program for implementing the method according to claim 1(Figure 1, Page 5, paragraph 0118, 0120, Page 55, paragraph 1171). See rejection of claim 1.
Regarding Claim 25, Oh discloses a processing device comprising a processing unit configured for carrying out each step of the method according to claim 1 (Figure 1, Page 5, paragraph 0118, 0120, Page 55, paragraph 1171). See rejection of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh in view of Hellge et al (US 2023/0260215 and hereafter referred to as “Hellge”).
Regarding Claim 9, Oh discloses all the limitations of the Claim 1. Oh discloses generating the first data container further comprises obtaining, from a sample of another track, coded volumetric data (Page 6, paragraph 0136, Page 25, paragraph 0467, Figure 20, Page 27, paragraph 0501-0506, 0509, Page 22, paragraph 0434, Figure 21, Figure 43, V-PCC unit is a first container, V-PCC Unit 40042 is second container, Page 36-37, paragraph 0713-0718). Oh is silent on wherein coded volumetric data corresponding to user vertex properties or further comprises obtaining, from a sample of another track, coded volumetric data corresponding to vertex skinning data. Hellge discloses generating the first data container further comprises obtaining, from a sample of another track, coded volumetric data corresponding to user vertex properties or further comprises obtaining, from a sample of another track, coded volumetric data corresponding to vertex skinning data (Page 13-14, paragraph 0201-0202, Page 5, paragraph 0219, 0229, Page 21, paragraph 0312, Figure 9 Figure 11, data container in boxes). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Oh to include the missing limitation as taught by Hellge in order to render volumetric video coding more efficiently (Page 1, paragraph 0014) as disclosed by Hellge.
Regarding Claim 20, Oh discloses all the limitations of the Claim 12. Oh is silent on wherein the segment of coded volumetric data further comprises user vertex properties and the user vertex properties are encapsulated in a sample of another track and/or further comprises vertex skinning data and the vertex skinning data are encapsulated in a sample of another track. Hellge discloses wherein the segment of coded volumetric data further comprises user vertex properties and the user vertex properties are encapsulated in a sample of another track and/or further comprises vertex skinning data and the vertex skinning data are encapsulated in a sample of another track (Page 13-14, paragraph 0201-0202, Page 5, paragraph 0219, 0229, Page 21, paragraph 0312). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Oh to include the missing limitations as taught by Hellge in order to render volumetric video coding more efficiently (Page 1, paragraph 0014) as disclosed by Hellge.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 6, 8, 15, 17, 19 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARZANA HOSSAIN whose telephone number is (571)272-5943. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am to 5:00 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, Christopher Kelley can be reached at 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.
/FARZANA HOSSAIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482
March 13, 2026