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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-12 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 11,856,232. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the method recited in U.S. Patent No. 11,856,232 omits the nominal step of explicitly receiving the coded bitstream.
Application No. 18/936,809 Claim 1
U.S. Patent No. 11,856,232 Claim 1
An apparatus to reconstruct coded data, the apparatus comprising:
A method to decode a coded video bitstream with a processor, the method comprising:
means for receiving a coded bitstream comprising one or more coded pictures, wherein each picture comprises a luminance component, a first chroma component, and a second chroma component;
means for extracting syntax parameters from the coded bitstream to determine a chroma quantization parameter (QP) table, wherein the chroma QP table maps input luminance QP values to corresponding chroma QP values; and
extracting from the coded video bitstream syntax elements to determine a chroma quantization parameter (Qpc) table mapping luma quantization parameter (QP) values qP(i) to corresponding chroma QP values Qpc(i)
means for decoding the one or more coded pictures based on the chroma QP table, wherein the syntax parameters comprise a start luminance QP value and one or more offset parameters to determine a mapping of the luminance QP values to the chroma QP values using a piece-wise linear representation.
wherein ‘i’ denotes an index value in the Qpc table ranging from an integer start-index value startID to an integer end-index value endID, wherein the syntax elements comprise: the integer start-index value startID of the Qpc table; a starting mapped chroma QP value Qpc(startID) for a starting input luma QP value qP(startID); and one or more delta-Qpc values dQpc(i), wherein for two consecutive index values, i−1 and i, a delta-Qpc value dQpc(i) denotes the difference dQpc(i)=Qpc(i)−Qpc(i−1); and generating a decoded output signal based on the determined Qpc table and the coded video bitstream.
Claims 2-12 are similarly unpatentable over claims 2-15 of U.S. Patent No. 11,856,232.
Claims 1-12 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,244,867. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the outstanding application removes the limitation “and wherein the syntax parameters comprise a flag indicating whether using a single chroma QP table for Cb and Cr chroma or whether using separate tables for the Cb and Cr chroma”.
Application No. 18/936,809 Claim 1
U.S. Patent No. 12,244,867 Claim 1
An apparatus to reconstruct coded data, the apparatus comprising:
A method to reconstruct coded data with one or more processors, the method comprising:
means for receiving a coded bitstream comprising one or more coded pictures, wherein each picture comprises a luminance component, a first chroma component, and a second chroma component;
receiving a coded bitstream comprising one or more coded pictures, wherein each picture comprises a luminance component, a first chroma component, and a second chroma component;
means for extracting syntax parameters from the coded bitstream to determine a chroma quantization parameter (QP) table, wherein the chroma QP table maps input luminance QP values to corresponding chroma QP values; and
extracting syntax parameters from the coded bitstream to determine a chroma quantization parameter (QP) table from one or more chroma QP tables, wherein each of the one or more chroma QP tables maps input luminance QP values to corresponding chroma QP values; and
means for decoding the one or more coded pictures based on the chroma QP table, wherein the syntax parameters comprise a start luminance QP value and one or more offset parameters to determine a mapping of the luminance QP values to the chroma QP values using a piece-wise linear representation.
decoding the one or more coded pictures based on the determined chroma QP table, wherein the syntax parameters comprise a start luminance QP value and one or more offset parameters to determine a mapping of the luminance QP values to the chroma QP values using a piece-wise linear representation
Claims 2-12 are similarly unpatentable over claims 2-6 of U.S. Patent No. 12,244,867.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-12 are allowable over the prior art. The prior art does not appear to teach or reasonably suggest at the time of effective filing applicant's claimed invention of interpolating quantization parameters for luminance values from tabulated chrominance values. The prior art provided by applicant appear to reinforce this conclusion, as the prior found by the examiner similarly teaches that luminance QP values are determined independently from chrominance QP values or chrominance QP values are derived from luminance QP values (see for example Lim et al. 10,609,371). Applicant's invention claims the opposite, wherein luminance QP are derived from the chrominance QP values.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOMINIC D SALTARELLI whose telephone number is (571)272-7302. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm EST.
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, Nathan Flynn can be reached at (571) 272-1915. 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.
/DOMINIC D SALTARELLI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2421
Prosecution Insights