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 .
Detailed Action
This office Action is in response to an application filed on 12/02/2024 is a CON of 18/476,309 09/28/2023 PAT 12192534, is a CON of 17/211,638 03/24/2021 PAT 11800154, is a CON of PCT/CN2019/107409 09/24/2019, claiming priority to 62/735,712 09/24/2018, in which claims 1-20 are pending and are being examined.
Information Disclosure Statement
This information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/24/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 37 CFR 1.98. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1, 8, 15 and similar dependent claims are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of Conflicting Patent PAT US 11,800,154 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the subject matter claimed in the instant application is anticipated by the Conflicting Patent and is covered by the Patent since the Patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, below is a list of limitations that perform the same function, however, different terminology may be used in both sets to describe the limitations, as follows, Claim 1 is used as an example to analyze the common subject matter:
Conflicting Patent No. US 11,800,154 B2
Instant Application:-18/966,042
1. An image processing device deblocking a block edge between a first block and a second block of an image, the image processing device comprising: at least one processor; and one or more memories coupled to the at least one processor and storing programming instructions for execution by the at least one processor to cause the device to: generate a filtered first pixel value from an original first pixel value of a first pixel, the first pixel being within a deblocking range from the block edge, the deblocking range comprising a number of pixels in a line perpendicular to the block edge, and the number of pixels comprises the first pixel and a second pixel; determine a clipping value for the first pixel depending upon a distance of the first pixel from the block edge, using a lookup table; clip the filtered first pixel value using the clipping value of the first pixel, resulting in a deblocked first pixel value; generate a filtered second pixel value from an original second pixel value, the second pixel being within the deblocking range from the block edge; and clip the filtered second pixel value using a constant clipping value, resulting in a deblocked second pixel value.
1. An image processing device for use in an image encoder and/or an image decoder for deblocking a block edge between a first block and a second block of an image, the image processing device comprising: a memory storing instructions; and at least one processor in communication with the memory, the at least one processor configured, upon execution of the instructions, to perform the following steps: generate filtered pixel values from original pixel values of pixels, wherein the pixels comprise at least two decision pixels in a decision pixel line and at least one non-decision pixel in a non-decision pixel line, the filtered pixel values including at least two filtered decision pixel values and at least one filtered non-decision pixel value; clip the filtered pixel values, wherein the at least two filtered decision pixel values of the at least two decision pixels are clipped using a first clipping value, and the at least one filtered non-decision pixel value of the at least one non-decision pixel is clipped using a second clipping value that depends upon a distance of a first pixel from the block edge.
As demonstrated, the claim of US patent US 11,800,154 B2 anticipate the features of the claim of instant application 18/966,042. Similar rejections can be presented for US 12,192,534 B2.
A nonstatutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by amending the conflicting claims so they are no longer coextensive in scope or filing of a terminal disclaimer.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD J RAHMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7190. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM.
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, David Czekaj can be reached at (571) 272-7327. 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.
/Mohammad J Rahman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487