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.
Claims 34, 44, and 54 are 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 34 recites wherein the additional compression includes two or more sequential compression operations, wherein a last compression operation of the two or more sequential compression operations compresses an intermediate compressed representation of the image data generated by a prior compression operation of the two or more sequential compression operations to the second compressed representation of the image data. Only a cursory of this feature is mentioned at paragraph 0029 (See printed application publication no. 2025/0349034), and would at least put the reader in doubt because it is not clear how each of these features are implemented with the additional compression. A similar limitation also occurs in claims 44 and 54. Please clarify.
Notice re prior art available under both pre-AIA and AIA
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 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.
Examiner's Note
Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers or figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
(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 1-4, 27, 30-32, 35-36, 38-40, 45-46, 48-50, and 55-58 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jun, et al. (US 2024/0073421 A1). Please note, due to the very broad formulation of independent claims 1, 35, 45, and 55 their subject matter is disclosed by a plurality of documents. For procedural efficiency, the examiner has focused the search to prior art that discloses further to independent claims.
With regard to claim 1, Jun, et al. disclose a method comprising: at a device ((See for example, Fig. 1): performing lossy compression on image data to generate a first compressed representation of the image data (See for example, paragraphs 0040-0043); performing additional compression, i.e., repeatedly performing a compression process and/or at least one other compression processing, on at least a portion of the first compressed representation of the image data to generate a second compressed representation of the image data (See for example, paragraph 0044); and outputting the second compressed representation of the image data to a memory (memory 200: See for example, paragraph 0044). Thus, each of the requirements of claim 1 is met.
With regard to claim 2, the method of claim 1, wherein the lossy compression is a fixed rate lossy compression, i.e., a fixed compression ratio or target compression ratio: a fixed rate lossy compression and fixed/target compression ratio refer to essentially the same concept since both force the encoder to use a predetermined amount of data to represent the compressed output (See for example, paragraphs 0043-0046).
With regard to claim 3, the method of claim 1, wherein the additional compression is one of: lossless compression, or lossy compression (See for example, paragraph 0042 and 0048).
With regard to claim 4, the method of claim 1, further comprising, at the device: selecting (via repeatedly performing compression requires selecting one or more blocks compressed image) the at least one portion of the first compressed representation of the image data on which to perform the additional compression (See for example, paragraph 0044).
With regard to claim 27, the method of claim 1, wherein the image data is stored in a frame buffer, i.e., cache (See for example, paragraph 0051).
With regard to claim 30, the method of claim 1, wherein the lossy compression compresses the image data to 50% (See for example, paragraphs 0112 and 0129).
With regard to claim 31, the method of claim 1, wherein the additional compression compresses the at least a portion of the first compressed representation to 25% (See for example, paragraph 0084 and 0129).
With regard to claim 32, the method of claim 1, wherein the additional compression compresses the at least a portion of the first compressed representation to 12.5%.(which breads on compression smaller that targeted compression ratio (50%) (See for example, paragraphs 0121 and 0125).
Claim 35 is rejected the same as claim 1 except claim 35 is an apparatus claim. Thus, argument similar to that presented above for claim 1 is applicable to claim 35. Applicant’s attention is also invited to Figures 2 and 15 and the associated text.
Claim 36 is rejected the same as claim 27 except claim 36 is an apparatus claim. Thus, argument similar to that presented above for claim 27 is applicable to claim 36.
Claims 38, 39, and 40 are rejected the same as claims 2, 3, and 4 respectively, except claims 38, 39, and 40 are apparatus claims. Thus, arguments similar to those presented above for claims 2, 3, and 4 are respectively applicable to claims 38, 39, and 40.
Claim 45 is rejected the same as claim 1. Thus, argument similar to that presented above for claim 1 is applicable to claim 45. Claim 45 distinguishes from claim 1 only in that it recites a non-transitory computer-readable media storing computer instructions. Fortunately, Jun, et al. (See for example, Fig. 15: RAM, and the associated text).
Claims 46 , 48, 49, and 50 are rejected the same as claims 27, 2, 3, and 4 respectively. Thus, arguments similar to those presented above for claims 27, 2, 3, and 4 are respectively applicable to claims 46, 48, 49, and 50.
With regard to claim 55, a method comprising: at a device: compressing image data over at least two compression operations, i.e., lossy, lossless and other compression, to form compressed image data, wherein at least one compression operation of the at least two compression operations is a lossy compression. Please note, the claim does not identify the remaining compression being different form a lossy compression or the same as the lossy compression (See for example, paragraphs 0040-0044); and outputting the compressed image data to a memory (See for example, paragraph 0044). Thus, each of the requirements of claim 55 is met.
With regard to claim 56, the method of claim 55, wherein a first compression operation of the at least two compression operations includes the lossy compression (See for example, paragraph 0042).
With regard to claim 57, the method of claim 56, wherein a second compression operation of the at least two compression operations includes a lossless compression. Please note, the claim does not specifically identify the lossless compression performing a compression operation on the image compressed by the lossy or any other compression, and as a result Jun, et al. ( (See for example, paragraph 0042) teach this feature.
With regard to claim 58, the method of claim 56, wherein a second compression operation, i.e., repeatedly perform compression processing, of the at least two compression operations includes a lossy compression (See for example, paragraph 0044).
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 28-29, 37, 42, 47, and 52 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jun, et al. ‘421 in view of Akenine-Moller, et al. (US 2018/0089091 A1).
With regard to claim 29, Jun, et al. (hereinafter “Jun”) discloses all of the claimed subject matter as already addressed above in paragraph 7, and incorporated herein by reference. While June, et al. discloses a multimedia IP 110 that may include a graphics processing unit (GPU) that calculates and generate two-dimensional or three-dimensional graphics. The GPU 114 may be specialized in processing graphic data to process graphic data in parallel (See for example, paragraph 0030 and 0036), Jun does not expressly call for wherein the lossy compression and the additional compression are performed by a graphics processing unit (GPU). However, Akenine-Moller, et al. (See for example, paragraph 0122) teach this feature. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to incorporate the teaching as taught by Akenine-Moller, et al. into the system of Jun, and to do so would at least allow implementing the compression operation using a graphical processing unit. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Jun with Akenine-Moller, et al. to obtain the invention as specified in claim 29.
With regard to claim 28, Akenine-Moller, et al. teach wherein the image data is texture data (See for example, 0122 and 01480. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to incorporate the teaching as taught by Akenine-Moller, et al. into the system of Jun, if for no other reason than to introduce texture data instead of or in addition to the image data in the compression process.
Claim 37 is rejected the same as claim 28 except claim 37 is an apparatus claim. Thus, argument similar to that presented above for claim 28 is applicable to claim 37.
Claim 42 is rejected the same as claim 29 except claim 42 is an apparatus claim. Thus, argument similar to that presented above for claim 29 is applicable to claim 42.
Claim 47 is rejected the same as claim 28. Thus, argument analogous to that presented above for claim 28 is applicable to claim 47.
Claim 52 is rejected the same as claim 29. Thus, argument analogous to that presented above for claim 29 is applicable to claim 52.
Claims 33, 43, and 53 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jun ‘421 in view of Jin, et al. (US 2025/014876 A1) .
With regard to claim 33, Jun discloses all of the claimed subject matter as already addressed above in paragraph 7, and incorporated herein by reference. Jun does not expressly call for wherein the additional compression is a single compression operation that compresses the at least a portion of the first compressed representation of the image data directly to the second compressed representation of the image data. However, Jin, et al. (See for example, item S106, in Fig. 1b and the associated text) teach this feature. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to incorporate the teaching as taught by Jin, et al. into the system of Jun in order to employ an image compression scheme that compresses a compressed image using only one lossy compression operation. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Jun with Jin, et al. to obtain the invention as specified in claim 33.
Claim 43 is rejected the same as claim 33 except claim 43 is an apparatus claim. Thus, argument similar to that presented above for claim 33 is applicable to claim 43.
Claim 53 is rejected the same as claim 33. Thus, argument analogous to that presented above for claim 33 is applicable to claim 53.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-26, 41 and 51 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US Patent No. 9,489,659 (See for example, Fig. 2 and the associated text); and US Application Publication number 2015/0172681 (See for example, Fig. 1 and the associated text)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL G MARIAM whose telephone number is (571)272-7394. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:00 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, ANDREW MOYER can be reached at (571)272-9523. 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.
/DANIEL G MARIAM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2675
Prosecution Insights