Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/923,398

Explicit Address Signaling In Video Coding

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Oct 22, 2024
Examiner
LIMA, FABIO S
Art Unit
2486
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
319 granted / 415 resolved
+18.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +15% lift
Without
With
+14.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
447
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.7%
-37.3% vs TC avg
§103
45.8%
+5.8% vs TC avg
§102
19.1%
-20.9% vs TC avg
§112
19.7%
-20.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 415 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the cited references fail to teach, disclose or suggest all limitations of claims 1-15. In particular, Applicant asserts that the cited references fail to disclose “determining a slice address for the first slice from the slice header based on the identifier associated with the sub-picture.” Applicant argues that Sjöberg et al. (US20220150495A1), hereinafter referred to as “Sjöberg495” fails to disclose the aforementioned limitation because the previously cited tile_group_address_idc is allegedly associated with a tile group instead of with a sub-picture. In response, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Although Sjöberg495 states in one embodiment that tile_group_address_idc specifies the tile address of the first tile in the tile group, Sjöberg495 is not limited to that embodiment. Sjöberg495 also discloses decoding a first part of the bitstream to form an address mapping that maps a segment group index value to a segment group address, decoding a first segment group index value, and determining a first segment group address based on the first segment group index value and the address mapping. Further, Sjöberg495 discloses that the segment groups my correspond to tile groups, subpictures, and/or slices. Thus, Sjöberg495’s segment group index value is an identifier associated with the claimed sub-picture, and that identifier is used with the mapping to determine the corresponding address (See ¶¶ [0032], [0048] and [0180]-[0183]). For the above reasons, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive, and the rejections are maintained. 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. (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. Claims 1-3, 5-7, 10-12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sjöberg et al. (US20220150495A1), hereinafter referred to as “Sjöberg495”. Regarding claim 1, Sjöberg495 discloses method implemented in a decoder, characterized in that, the method comprising: receiving a bitstream including: a sub-picture of a picture partitioned into a plurality of slices including a first slice, a parameter set associated with the picture, and a slice header associated with the first slice (See ¶¶[0009]-[0014], [0022]-[0023] and [0028]-[0031] disclosing pictures partitioned into tile and segment groups, each with a group header and payload (regional layer), and decoding from a bitstream with a parameter set control); parsing the parameter set to obtain an identifier associated with the sub-picture (See ¶¶ [0032], [0048], [0070]-[0072], and [0180]-[0183] ); determining a slice address for the first slice from the slice header based on the identifier associated with the sub-picture (See ¶¶ [0032], [0048], [0071]-[0072], and [0180]-[0183]]), wherein a length of the slice address is inferred to be equal to a ceiling of log two of a number of tiles in a picture (Ceil(Log2(NumTilesInPic)) (See ¶[0085] disclosing length of pps_tile_group_address[i] is Ceil(Log2 (NumTilesInPic)) bits); and decoding the bitstream to create a video sequence of sub-pictures including the first slice based on the slice address (See ¶¶ [0009]-[0014] and [0028]-[00031] disclosing a uses the resolved address to position the region for decoding; regions extraction and viewport workflows align with the creation and display of sub-pictures. See also [0180]-[0183] and Fig. 9 ). Regarding claim 2, Sjöberg495 discloses all the limitations of claim 1, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Furthermore, Sjöberg495 discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising forwarding the sub-picture for display (See ¶[0197]) Regarding claim 3, Sjöberg495 discloses all the limitations of claim 1, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Furthermore, Sjöberg495 discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the length of the slice address indicates a number of bits contained in the slice address (See ¶[0085]) Regarding claim 5, Sjöberg495 discloses method implemented in an encoder, the method comprising (See ¶¶[0195]-[0197]. See also ¶¶[0188] and [0189] ): encoding a picture in a bitstream, wherein the picture comprises a plurality of slices including a first slice, and wherein the picture includes a sub-picture (See ¶¶[0009]-[0014] and [0022]-[0023]. See also [0183]); encoding in the bitstream a parameter set associated with the picture, the parameter set including an identifier, associated with the sub-picture, for deriving a length of a slice address of the first slice, wherein the length of the slice address is inferred to be equal to a ceiling of log two of a number of tiles in a picture (Ceil(Log2(NumTilesInPic)) (See ¶¶[0070]-[0072], [0079]-[0085], [0183], [0188]-[0189] and [0195]); and encoding in the bitstream the slice address of the first slice based on the length of the slice address(See ¶¶[0079]-[0085], [0188]-[0189] and [0195]). The Examiner notes that it is well-known in the art that video compression involves a complementary pair of systems: a compressor (encoder) and a decompressor (decoder). The encoder converts the source data into a compressed form, occupying a reduced number of bits prior to transmission or storage, while the decoder converts the compressed form back into a representation of the original video data by performing a reciprocal process to that of the encoder, decoding the encoded video data from the bitstream. Regarding claim 6, Sjöberg495 discloses all the limitations of claim 5, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Furthermore, Sjöberg495 discloses the method of claim 5, wherein further comprising storing the bitstream for communication toward a decoder. (See Fig. 14 and ¶[0197]) Regarding claim 7, Sjöberg495 discloses all the limitations of claim 5, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Furthermore, Sjöberg495 discloses the method of claim 5, wherein the length of the slice address indicates a number of bits contained in the slice address. (See ¶[0085]) Regarding claim 10, Sjöberg495 discloses all the limitations of claim 5, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Furthermore, Sjöberg495 discloses the method of claim 5, further comprising extracting the sub-picture of the picture, wherein the sub-picture includes the first slice, and wherein the bitstream comprises the sub-picture and a slice header (See ¶¶[0010]-[0014], [0028]-[0031] and Table 7). Regarding claim 11, Sjöberg495 discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a bitstream that, when parsed by a coding device, is used by the coding device to generate a video, the bitstream comprising (See Fig. 14 and ¶¶ [0197]-[0199]): data representing a sub-picture of a picture partitioned into a plurality of slices including a first slice (See ¶¶[0009]-[0014] and [0022]-[0023]); a parameter set associated with the picture (See Table 6 and ¶¶ [0070]-[0072], [0079]-[0085] and [0122]-[0123]); a slice header associated with the first slice (See Table 7 and ¶¶ [0070]-[0072] and [0088]-[0091]); and an identifier associated with the sub-picture, in the parameter set, for deriving a length of a slice address of the first slice, wherein the length of the slice address is inferred to be equal to a ceiling of log two of a number of tiles in a picture (Ceil(Log2(NumTilesInPic)), and the length of the slice address is used to determine the slice address for the first slice (See Table 7 and ¶¶ [0070]-[0072], [0079]-[0085], [0088]-[0091], [0180]-[0183] and [0197]-[0199]). Regarding claim 12, Sjöberg495 discloses all the limitations of claim 11, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Furthermore, Sjöberg495 discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11, wherein the length of the slice address indicates a number of bits contained in the slice address (See ¶¶[0085]) Regarding claim 15, Sjöberg495 discloses all the limitations of claim 11, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Furthermore, Sjöberg495 discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11, wherein the picture includes the sub-picture, wherein the sub-picture includes the first slice, and wherein a sub-bitstream comprises the sub-picture and the slice header (See ¶¶[0010]-[0014] and [0028]-[0031]) 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 4, 9 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sjöberg495, in view of Sjöberg et al. (US20140362912A1), hereinafter referred to as Sjöberg912 Regarding claim 4, Sjöberg495 discloses all the limitations of claim 2, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Sjöberg495 does not explicitly disclose method of claim 2, wherein determining the slice address for the first slice comprises: employing the length to determine bit boundaries for interpreting the slice address from the slice header; and employing the slice address to map slice addresses from a picture based position to a sub-picture based position. However, Sjöberg912 from the same or similar endeavor of image processing discloses method of claim 2, wherein determining the slice address for the first slice comprises: employing the length to determine bit boundaries for interpreting the slice address from the slice header (See ¶¶[0073] and [0074]); and employing the slice address to map slice addresses from a picture based position to a sub-picture based position (See Fig. 9 and ¶¶[0067]-[0069], [0073]-[0074] and [0153]-[0154]). It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute Sjöberg912 direct address value into Sjöberg495 index based approach to achieve deterministic bit boundary parsing without requiring indexing. A simple substitution of known alternatives yielding predictable results. Regarding claim 9, Sjöberg495 and Sjöberg912 disclose all the limitations of claim 5, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Sjöberg495 does not explicitly disclose the method of claim 5, wherein the slice address comprises a defined value and does not comprise an index. However, Sjöberg912 from the same or similar endeavor of image processing discloses the method of claim 5, wherein the slice address comprises a defined value and does not comprise an index (See Fig. 6 and ¶¶[0042]-[0044] [0073] -[0074]). The motivation for combining Sjöberg495 and Sjöberg912 has been discussed in connection with claim 4, above. Regarding claim 14, Sjöberg495 and Sjöberg912 disclose all the limitations of claim 11, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Sjöberg495 does not explicitly disclose the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11, wherein the slice address comprises a defined value and does not comprise an index. However, Sjöberg912 from the same or similar endeavor of image processing discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11, wherein the slice address comprises a defined value and does not comprise an index (See Fig. 6 and ¶¶[0042]-[0044] [0073] -[0074]). The motivation for combining Sjöberg495 and Sjöberg912 has been discussed in connection with claim 4, above. Claims 8 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sjöberg495, in view of Huang (US20120106652A1), hereinafter referred to as Huang. Regarding claim 8, Sjöberg495 discloses all the limitations of claim 5, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Furthermore, Sjöberg495 discloses the method of claim 5, further comprising encoding in the parameter set an identifier (ID) [syntax] indicating a mapping is available to map the slice address from a picture based position to a sub-picture based position (See ¶¶[0079]-[0085], [0088] and [0090]).. Sjöberg495 does not explicitly disclose a flag disclosing this capability . However, Huang from the same or similar endeavor of image processing discloses flag disclosing this capability (See ¶¶[0033], [0038] and [0042]) It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings disclosed by Sjöberg495 a to add the teachings of Huang as above, in order to include a PPS flag expressly indicating that mapping availability so the encoder signals and the decoder knows when to apply the index (address mapping) (Huang, ¶¶[0033], [0038] and [0042]). Regarding claim 13, Sjöberg495 discloses all the limitations of claim 11, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Furthermore, Sjöberg495 discloses the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 11, wherein the parameter set further comprises an identifier (ID) [syntax]in a parameter set indicating a mapping is available to map the slice address from a picture based position to a sub-picture based position (See ¶¶[0079]-[0085], [0088] and [0090]).. Sjöberg495 does not explicitly disclose a flag disclosing this capability . However, Huang from the same or similar endeavor of image processing discloses flag disclosing this capability (See ¶¶[0033], [0038] and [0042]) The motivation for combining Sjöberg495 and Huang has been discussed in connection with claim 8, above. 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 extension fee 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 FABIO S LIMA whose telephone number is (571)270-0625. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8 am - 4 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, Jamie Atala can be reached on (571) 272-7384. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /FABIO S LIMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2486
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 22, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 31, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jan 29, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 08, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604015
METHOD, APPARATUS, AND MEDIUM FOR VIDEO PROCESSING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593038
TEMPORAL PREDICTION OF PARAMETERS IN NON-LINEAR ADAPTIVE LOOP FILTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593045
ENTROPY CODING-BASED FEATURE ENCODING/DECODING METHOD AND DEVICE, RECORDING MEDIUM HAVING BITSTREAM STORED THEREIN, AND METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING BITSTREAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12581099
INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12581094
IMAGE SIGNAL ENCODING/DECODING METHOD AND DEVICE THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+14.8%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 415 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month