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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/22/2026 has been entered.
Applicant(s) Response to Official Action
The response filed on 05/22/2026 has been entered and made of record.
Response to Arguments/Amendments
Presented arguments have been fully considered but are held unpersuasive. Examiner’s response to the presented arguments follows below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Summary of Arguments:
Regarding claims 2-6, the Applicant argues:
“… modifying a text description information SEI message to include photosensitive content information is not equivalent to an SEI message which is used to indicate photosensitive content information (i.e., a photosensitive content information supplemental enhancement information message) which is a distinct type from a text description information SEI message, as required by claims 3, 4, and 6 […] the Specification describes, at paragraphs [0065]-[0068], an example where a text description information SEI message provides textual information regarding photosensitive content, and describes, at paragraphs [0069]-[0071], a distinct example where a photosensitive content information SEI message, which has a type which is different from a text description information SEI message, is used to indicate photosensitive content information. As such, Applicant submits that the Examiner's proposed modification of the text description information SEI message in Tan fails to disclose a "a photosensitive content information supplemental enhancement information message," as required by the claims 2, 4, and 6. That is, Applicant submits that a modified text description information SEI message is not equivalent to a photosensitive content information SEI message, which has a type which is different from a text description information SEI message.”. [Remarks: Pages 4-5]
“Applicant notes that the photosensitive content information SEI message in paragraph [0069] of the Specification includes syntax element pci_content_idc and syntax element pci_num_descr_strings may be equal to 0. As such, according the photosensitive content information SEI message in paragraph [0069] of the Specification, photosensitive content information may be indicated by simply using a bitmask provided by pci_content_idc and syntax element pci_descr_string[i] may be used to optionally provide descriptive details about the characteristics of the photosensitive material (e.g., "red flash transition to a saturated red," See [0066]).” [Remarks: Pages 5-6]
“Mooney fails to describe the specific manner in which "metadata may indicate a video frame ... may impact the person with the condition," and further fails to describe where an indication may include "text information about characteristics and description of photosensitive content," as required by claims 2, 4, and 6. As such, Mooney fails to cure the deficiencies of Tan. In particular, for example, Mooney fails to provide a mechanism which would efficiently utilize the text description information SEI message of Tan to indicate photosensitive content information. For at least the reasons provided above, including that each of Tan and Mooney, alone or in combination fail to teach or suggest each and every element of independent claims 3, 4, and 6, Applicant submits that claims 2-6 are patentable over Tan and Mooney and are in condition for allowance”. [Remarks: Page 6]
Examiner’s Response:
Regarding claims 1-20, the Examiner contends:
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “a text description information SEI message provides textual information regarding photosensitive content, and […] where a photosensitive content information SEI message, which has a type which is different from a text description information SEI message, is used to indicate photosensitive content information”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Further, Tan is not used to teach the entirety of the limitation: “a photosensitive content information supplemental enhancement information message”. What Tan does teach are all claim elements associated with a “supplemental enhancement information message”. Mooney is then brought in to modify the encoding decoding multi-language syntax structure system of Tan to include the “photosensitive content information supplemental enhancement information message”.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “photosensitive content information may be indicated by simply using a bitmask provided by pci_content_idc and syntax element pci_descr_string[i] may be used to optionally provide descriptive details about the characteristics of the photosensitive material”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Tan already discloses “the third syntax element specifies text information about characteristics and description of content” as shown in the OA. Both Tan and Mooney disclose SEI messages and Mooney further discloses “text information about characteristics and description of photosensitive content”. For example, Mooney: [0037] discloses “Data may be inserted into the content […] The data may be metadata. The device may encode data into the content. The metadata may be inserted by the device in a Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG) bitstream, MPEG Supplemental Enhancement Information (SEI) messages”; Mooney: [0038] discloses “The metadata may be information associated with whether each video frame contains visual effects that may impact a person having a condition. For example, the condition may be Photosensitive Epilepsy (PSE)”; Mooney: [0075] discloses “mitigation software 216 may analyze (e.g., using image analysis) the portions of the content and/or the frames to determine whether the content and/or the frames may cause a problem for the viewer with the condition […] (e.g., based on the metadata, image analysis, etc.), […] the mitigation software 216 […] may provide a notice to indicate that visual effects that may cause problems for a viewer with the condition have been detected and will not be displayed, and so forth, as well as any combination of the aforementioned modifications”; and Mooney: [0082] discloses “mitigation software 216 may provide a notification indicating […] the content is not being displayed in order to prevent the user from being impacted […] The notification may be a blank screen, text, or any notification.”.
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.
Claims 2-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan et al., hereinafter referred to as Tan (WO 2026/010324 A1) in view of Mooney (US 2021/0168346 A1).
As per claim 2, Tan discloses a device comprising one or more processors configured to (Tan: [0117] discloses an encoding/decoding device comprising a multi-core processor.):
receive a (Tan: Paras. [0007], [1052]-[1054] disclose a device (encoding/decoding device) configured to signal/obtain a "Text Description Information SEI message" for pictures.); and
parse a first syntax element in the (Tan: Paras. [0238], [0240], [1052] disclose parsing a first syntax element in the supplemental enhancement information message.), wherein the first syntax element indicates a number of entries of a second syntax element and a third syntax element in the message (Tan: Paras. [1067], [1085], [1096] disclose the Text Description Information SEI message including a first syntax element `txt_num_strings_minus1` (plus 1) that represents "the number of items in `txt_descr_string_lang[ i ]` [second syntax element] and the `txt_descr_string[ i ]` [third syntax element] that follows it."),
wherein the second syntax element specifies a language of the third syntax element (Tan: Paras. [1068], [1086], [1097] disclose the second syntax element `txt_descr_string_lang[ i ]` which "represents the language of `txt_descr_string[ i ]`" (e.g., IETF RFC 5646 language tag).), and the third syntax element specifies text information about characteristics and description of (Tan: Paras. [1069]-[1076], [1088]-[1094] disclose the third syntax element `txt_descr_string[ i ]` which represents a "text description information string" interpreted based on a purpose (e.g., application-defined, general text label, or content recommendation rating).).
However, Tan does not explicitly disclose “… photosensitive content information … description of photosensitive content …”.
Further, Mooney is in the same field of endeavor and teaches photosensitive content information (Mooney: Paras. [0001], [0037]-[0038] disclose signaling metadata, specifically using MPEG Supplemental Enhancement Information (SEI) messages, containing information about Photosensitive Epilepsy (PSE) and visual effects (photosensitive content) that may impact a viewer. Further, Mooney: Paras. [0001], [0038], [0069] disclose that the metadata (in the SEI message) indicates information about characteristics of the content, such as intensity, duration, or specific visual effects related to Photosensitive Epilepsy (PSE).);
description of photosensitive content (Mooney: Paras. [0037], [0075], [0082] disclose the metadata that is inserted into the SEI message includes description of photosensitive content.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, and having the teachings of Tan and Mooney before him or her, to modify the encoding decoding multi-language syntax structure system of Tan to include the photosensitive content information and description feature as described in Mooney. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve user experience by providing a configuration that ensures specific safety information is conveyed and accessible to users of a system.
As per claim 3, Tan-Mooney disclose the device of claim 2, wherein the device includes a video decoder (Tan: Para. [0008] discloses a video encoding/decoding method and device.).
As per claim 4, Tan discloses a device comprising one or more processors configured to (Tan: [0117] discloses an encoding/decoding device comprising a multi-core processor.):
signal a (Tan: Paras. [0007], [1052]-[1054] disclose a device (encoding/decoding device) configured to signal/obtain a "Text Description Information SEI message" for pictures.), wherein the
a first syntax element, wherein the first syntax element indicates a number of entries of a second syntax element and a third syntax element in the (Tan: Paras. [1067], [1085], [1096] disclose the Text Description Information SEI message including a first syntax element `txt_num_strings_minus1` (plus 1) that represents "the number of items in `txt_descr_string_lang[ i ]` [second syntax element] and the `txt_descr_string[ i ]` [third syntax element] that follows it."),
the second syntax element specifies a language of the third syntax element (Tan: Paras. [1068], [1086], [1097] disclose the second syntax element `txt_descr_string_lang[ i ]` which "represents the language of `txt_descr_string[ i ]`" (e.g., IETF RFC 5646 language tag).), and
the third syntax element specifies text information about characteristics and description of (Tan: Paras. [1069]-[1076], [1088]-[1094] disclose the third syntax element `txt_descr_string[ i ]` which represents a "text description information string" interpreted based on a purpose (e.g., application-defined, general text label, or content recommendation rating).).
However, Tan does not explicitly disclose “… photosensitive content information … description of photosensitive content …”.
Further, Mooney is in the same field of endeavor and teaches photosensitive content information (Mooney: Paras. [0001], [0037]-[0038] disclose signaling metadata, specifically using MPEG Supplemental Enhancement Information (SEI) messages, containing information about Photosensitive Epilepsy (PSE) and visual effects (photosensitive content) that may impact a viewer. Further, Mooney: Paras. [0001], [0038], [0069] disclose that the metadata (in the SEI message) indicates information about characteristics of the content, such as intensity, duration, or specific visual effects related to Photosensitive Epilepsy (PSE).);
description of photosensitive content (Mooney: Paras. [0037], [0075], [0082] disclose the metadata that is inserted into the SEI message includes description of photosensitive content.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, and having the teachings of Tan and Mooney before him or her, to modify the encoding decoding multi-language syntax structure system of Tan to include the photosensitive content information and description feature as described in Mooney. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve user experience by providing a configuration that ensures specific safety information is conveyed and accessible to users of a system.
As per claim 5, Tan-Mooney disclose the device of claim 4, wherein the device includes a video encoder (Tan: Para. [0008] discloses a video encoding/decoding method and device.).
As per claim 6, Tan discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions stored thereon that, when executed, cause one or more processors of a device to (Tan: Para. [1142] discloses “The executable instructions for performing the methods/operations of the devices of the embodiments may be stored in non-transitory CRMs or other computer program products configured to be executed by one or more processors”.):
signal a bitstream (Tan: Para. [0052] discloses “signaling a content event in an SEI message for a coded video bitstream”.), wherein the bitstream includes:
a (Tan: Paras. [0007], [1052]-[1054] disclose a device (encoding/decoding device) configured to signal/obtain a "Text Description Information SEI message" for pictures.), wherein the
a first syntax element, wherein the first syntax element indicates a number of entries of a second syntax element and a third syntax element in the (Tan: Paras. [1067], [1085], [1096] disclose the Text Description Information SEI message including a first syntax element `txt_num_strings_minus1` (plus 1) that represents "the number of items in `txt_descr_string_lang[ i ]` [second syntax element] and the `txt_descr_string[ i ]` [third syntax element] that follows it."),
the second syntax element specifies a language of the third syntax element (Tan: Paras. [1068], [1086], [1097] disclose the second syntax element `txt_descr_string_lang[ i ]` which "represents the language of `txt_descr_string[ i ]`" (e.g., IETF RFC 5646 language tag).), and
the third syntax element specifies text information about characteristics and description of (Tan: Paras. [1069]-[1076], [1088]-[1094] disclose the third syntax element `txt_descr_string[ i ]` which represents a "text description information string" interpreted based on a purpose (e.g., application-defined, general text label, or content recommendation rating).).
However, Tan does not explicitly disclose “… photosensitive content information … description of photosensitive content …”.
Further, Mooney is in the same field of endeavor and teaches photosensitive content information (Mooney: Paras. [0001], [0037]-[0038] disclose signaling metadata, specifically using MPEG Supplemental Enhancement Information (SEI) messages, containing information about Photosensitive Epilepsy (PSE) and visual effects (photosensitive content) that may impact a viewer. Further, Mooney: Paras. [0001], [0038], [0069] disclose that the metadata (in the SEI message) indicates information about characteristics of the content, such as intensity, duration, or specific visual effects related to Photosensitive Epilepsy (PSE).);
description of photosensitive content (Mooney: Paras. [0037], [0075], [0082] disclose the metadata that is inserted into the SEI message includes description of photosensitive content.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, and having the teachings of Tan and Mooney before him or her, to modify the encoding decoding multi-language syntax structure system of Tan to include the photosensitive content information and description feature as described in Mooney. The motivation for doing so would have been to improve user experience by providing a configuration that ensures specific safety information is conveyed and accessible to users of a system.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and can be viewed in the list of references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PEET DHILLON whose telephone number is (571)270-5647. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 5am-1:30pm.
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, Sath V. Perungavoor can be reached at 571-272-7455. 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.
/PEET DHILLON/Primary Examiner
Art Unit: 2488
Date: 06-13-2026
Prosecution Insights