Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/972,057

Encoder, a Decoder and Corresponding Methods Restricting Size of Sub-Partitions from Intra Sub-Partition Coding Mode Tool

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Dec 06, 2024
Examiner
BENNETT, STUART D
Art Unit
2481
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
54%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allow Rate
245 granted / 355 resolved
+11.0% vs TC avg
Minimal -15% lift
Without
With
+-15.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
386
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.7%
-35.3% vs TC avg
§103
48.4%
+8.4% vs TC avg
§102
12.7%
-27.3% vs TC avg
§112
22.1%
-17.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 355 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
DETAILED ACTION The present Office action is in response to the application filing on 6 DECEMBER 2024 and the Information Disclosure Statements. 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 . Information Disclosure Statement The Information Disclosure Statements (IDS) submitted on 12/06/2024, 03/07/2025, 08/22/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the Information Disclosure Statements are being considered by the Examiner. Response to Amendment Claims 1, 3-5, 7-9, 12, 14-19 have been amended. Claim 20 has been added. No claims have been cancelled. Claims 1-20 are pending and herein examined. Claim Interpretation: The subject matter of claim 1 concerns intra sub-partitioning (ISP), both how to generate a variable for partitioning direction of ISP and the application thereof to a block. For clarity purposes, support in the originally filed specification is provided for the following limitation: “determining a first value of a variable of the current block based on a second value of a first flag and on a third value of a second flag, wherein the first value is 0 when the second value is 0, and wherein the first value is equal to the third value plus 1 when the second value is 1.” PNG media_image1.png 288 642 media_image1.png Greyscale The above disclosure of ¶¶ [0227-0228] and Table 4 provide support for the subject matter of claim 1. The “first value of a variable” is IntraSubPartitionsSplitType, the “second value of a first flag” is intra_subpartitions_mode_flag[x0][y0], and the “third value of a second flag” is intra_subpartitions_split_flag[x0][y0]. The limitations will be interpreted as per ¶¶ [0227-0228], recognizing the nomenclature of the variable and flags are broadly claimed and not limited by the naming conventions in the instant application. Claim Objections Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 18, “one or more processors coupled to the memory” should read --one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories-- Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claim 8 is 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. With regard to claim 8, recites the number of partitions can be 1; however, it is unclear how the number of partitions can be 1, when claim 1 requires the number of partitions to be either 2 or 4. For examination purposes, the interpretation of claim 8 includes an alternative where no partitioning occurs (e.g., number of partitions is 1) because of a minimum restriction on block size (e.g., 4x4). 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)(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. Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Publication No. 2020/0252608 A1 (hereinafter “Ramasubramonian”). Regarding claim 1, Ramasubramonian discloses a method of video coding ([0009], “a method of encoding video data”) and comprising: obtaining block size information of a current block ([0216], “obtaining a current block of a picture of video data.” [0217], “determining whether at least one of a width of the current block […] and a heigh of the current block […].” FIGS. 2 and 3 illustrate a current block has a width (W) and height (H), and FIGS. 4 and 5 illustrate a coding block has a width (cbWidth) and heigh (cbHeight). Additionally, see the coding unit syntax of Table 2 for determining ISP flag based on block size); determining a first value of a variable ([0135], “IntraSubPartitionsSplitType”) of the current block based on a second value of a first flag ([0134], “intra_subpartitions_mode_flag[x0][y0]”) and on a third value of a second flag ([0135], “intra_subpartitions_split_flag[x0][y0]”), wherein the first value is 0 when the second value is 0 ([0134], “If intra_subpartitions_mode_flag[x0][y0] is equal to 0, IntraSubPartitionsSplitType is set equal to 0”), and wherein the first value is equal to the third value plus 1 when the second value is 1 ([0135], “Otherwise, the IntraSubPartitionsSplitType is set equal to 1+intra_subpartitions_split_flag[x0][y0].” Note, the “otherwise” is directed to intra_subpartitions_mode_flag[x0][y0] equaling 1); determining a partitioning direction of the current block based on the block size information and the first value, wherein the first value being 1 indicates the partitioning direction is horizontal partitioning, and wherein the first value being 2 indicates the partitioning direction is vertical partitioning ([0164], “if the variable IntraSubPartitionsSplitType has a value equal to 1 (horizontal split ISP_HOR_SPLIT) or 2 (vertical split ISP_VER_SPLIT), the value of the variable NumIntraSubPartitions is set equal to 2 or 4 based on the dimensions of the coding unit or current block.” FIGS. 2 and 3 exemplify the number of splits and direction of the split based on current block size); when the value of the variable indicates the horizontal or vertical partitioning, partitioning, based on the first value, the current block into a plurality of sub-partitions according to the partitioning direction and a number of the sub-partitions, wherein the number is 2 or 4 ([0164], “if the coding block 402 is a 4×8 block (cbWidth is equal to 4 and cbHeight is equal to 8) or an 8×4 block (cbWidth is equal to 8 and cbHeight is equal to 4), then the NumIntraSubPartitions is set to 2, to implement splitting the coding block 402 into two ISP blocks which have the minimum number of 16 samples each, based on a horizontal or a vertical split which can be indicated by the variable IntraSubPartitionsSplitType. On the other hand, if the dimensions cbWidth and cbHeight of the coding block 402 correspond to other than (greater than) the 8×4, 4×8, and 4×4 block sizes, then the NumIntraSubPartitions is set equal to 4”); and coding the sub-partitions ([0235], “Encoding device 104 may perform intra-prediction.” Note, ISP is a form of intra-prediction and therefore when ISP is enabled, the encoding is of the resulting sub-partitions). Regarding claim 2, Ramasubramonian discloses every limitation of claim 1, as outlined above. Additionally, Ramasubramonian discloses further comprising coding the current block using an intra sub-partition (ISP) coding mode ([0005], “the use of an intra-subpartitioning (ISP) mode for splitting coding blocks of video data into sub-blocks.” Note, the coding of claim 1 already represents an ISP coding mode). Regarding claim 3, Ramasubramonian discloses every limitation of claim 1, as outlined above. Additionally, Ramasubramonian discloses further comprising partitioning the current block into the sub-partitions according to the number and the partitioning direction ([0164], “if the coding block 402 is a 4×8 block (cbWidth is equal to 4 and cbHeight is equal to 8) or an 8×4 block (cbWidth is equal to 8 and cbHeight is equal to 4), then the NumIntraSubPartitions is set to 2, to implement splitting the coding block 402 into two ISP blocks which have the minimum number of 16 samples each, based on a horizontal or a vertical split which can be indicated by the variable IntraSubPartitionsSplitType. On the other hand, if the dimensions cbWidth and cbHeight of the coding block 402 correspond to other than (greater than) the 8×4, 4×8, and 4×4 block sizes, then the NumIntraSubPartitions is set equal to 4.” FIGS. 2 and 3 depict the application of splitting a coding block using ISP for splitting into 2 or 4, respectively). Regarding claim 4, Ramasubramonian discloses every limitation of claim 1, as outlined above. Additionally, Ramasubramonian discloses wherein the number is 2 when the block size information is 4 x 8 or 8 x 4 or is 4 when the block size information is another size ([0164], “if the coding block 402 is a 4×8 block (cbWidth is equal to 4 and cbHeight is equal to 8) or an 8×4 block (cbWidth is equal to 8 and cbHeight is equal to 4), then the NumIntraSubPartitions is set to 2, to implement splitting the coding block 402 into two ISP blocks which have the minimum number of 16 samples each, based on a horizontal or a vertical split which can be indicated by the variable IntraSubPartitionsSplitType. On the other hand, if the dimensions cbWidth and cbHeight of the coding block 402 correspond to other than (greater than) the 8×4, 4×8, and 4×4 block sizes, then the NumIntraSubPartitions is set equal to 4”). Regarding claim 5, Ramasubramonian discloses every limitation of claim 1, as outlined above. Additionally, Ramasubramonian discloses wherein the partitioning direction is the horizontal partitioning ([0025], “determining the height of the current block is greater than the size threshold; and based on the determination that the height of the current block is greater than the size threshold, determining a second split value for the intra-subpartitions split flag, the second split value corresponding to a horizontal split type”). Regarding claim 6, Ramasubramonian discloses every limitation of claim 1, as outlined above. Additionally, Ramasubramonian discloses wherein each of the sub-partitions comprises 16 samples ([0139], “implement splitting the current block 202 into two ISP blocks which have the minimum number of 16 samples each, based on a horizontal or a vertical split.” Note, the 16 samples define the minimum number of samples, therefore splitting 8×4 or 4×8 will result in two sub-partitions of 16 samples each). Regarding claim 7, Ramasubramonian discloses every limitation of claim 1, as outlined above. Additionally, Ramasubramonian discloses wherein the partitioning direction is the horizontal partitioning when the block size information is 4 x 8, 4 x N1, or 8 x N2, wherein N1 > 8, and wherein N2 > 4 ([0025], “determining the height of the current block is greater than the size threshold; and based on the determination that the height of the current block is greater than the size threshold, determining a second split value for the intra-subpartitions split flag, the second split value corresponding to a horizontal split type.” Note, each of 4x8, 4xN1, and 8xN2 can satisfy the condition of the heigh being greater than a max size, resulting in the horizontal split. [0164], “if the coding block 402 is a 4×8 block (cbWidth is equal to 4 and cbHeight is equal to 8) […], then the NumIntraSubPartitions is set to 2:” e.g., horizontal partitioning. [0164], “On the other hand, if the dimensions cbWidth and cbHeight of the coding block 402 correspond to other than (greater than) the 8×4, 4×8, and 4×4 block sizes, then the NumIntraSubPartitions is set equal to 4.” Note, 4xN1 where N1 equals 16 is horizontally split into 4 sub-partitions of 16 samples and 8xN2 where N2 equals 32 (MaxTbSizeY is 64) is horizontally split into 4 sub-partitions of 64 samples, satisfying the 16 sample minimum). Regarding claim 8, Ramasubramonian discloses every limitation of claim 7, as outlined above. Additionally, Ramasubramonian discloses wherein the number is 1, the current block does not comprise the partitioning direction when the block size information is 4 x 4 ([0164], “if the variable IntraSubPartitionsSplitType has a value equal to 0, indicating ISP_NO_SPLIT, then the value of the variable NumIntraSubPartitions is set equal to 1 (which is a default value indicating that there is no ISP applied to the coding block.” [0121], “A dimension of 4×4 for the current block 302, which would be the smallest allowable size for coding blocks in some implementations may also be excluded from splitting into sub-blocks using the ISP mode”), wherein the number is 2 and the partitioning direction is either the horizontal partitioning or the vertical partitioning when the block size information is 8 x 4 ([0164], “if the coding block 402 is a 4×8 block (cbWidth is equal to 4 and cbHeight is equal to 8) or an 8×4 block (cbWidth is equal to 8 and cbHeight is equal to 4), then the NumIntraSubPartitions is set to 2, to implement splitting the coding block 402 into two ISP blocks which have the minimum number of 16 samples each, based on a horizontal or a vertical split”), or wherein the number is 4 and the partitioning direction is either the horizontal partitioning or the vertical partitioning when the block size information is another size ([0164], “if the dimensions cbWidth and cbHeight of the coding block 402 correspond to other than (greater than) the 8×4, 4×8, and 4×4 block sizes, then the NumIntraSubPartitions is set equal to 4”). Regarding claim 9, Ramasubramonian discloses every limitation of claim 1, as outlined above. Additionally, Ramasubramonian discloses wherein the partitioning direction is the horizontal partitioning and the number is 2 when the block size information is 4 x 8 ([0164], “if the coding block 402 is a 4×8 block (cbWidth is equal to 4 and cbHeight is equal to 8) or an 8×4 block (cbWidth is equal to 8 and cbHeight is equal to 4), then the NumIntraSubPartitions is set to 2, to implement splitting the coding block 402 into two ISP blocks which have the minimum number of 16 samples each, based on a horizontal or a vertical split.” Note, a block size of 4 x 8 can only be split into two horizontally to satisfy the minimum 16 samples), wherein the partitioning direction is the horizontal partitioning and the number is 4 when the block size information is 4 x N1 or 8 x N2, wherein N1 > 8, and wherein N2 > 4 ([0164], “if the dimensions cbWidth and cbHeight of the coding block 402 correspond to other than (greater than) the 8×4, 4×8, and 4×4 block sizes, then the NumIntraSubPartitions is set equal to 4.” [0118], “an ISP sub-block may be required to have a minimum number of samples, such as 16 samples.” Note, to satisfy the 16 sample minimum and partitioning of 4, then both N1 and N2 can be at least 16, which causes horizontal splitting when height is greater than a max size). Regarding claim 10, Ramasubramonian discloses every limitation of claim 1, as outlined above. Additionally, Ramasubramonian discloses further comprising: coding the partitioning direction into a first bitstream comprises coded data of the current block when encoding (FIG. 9, step 908, “generate, based on determining whether the intra-subpartitions mode flag is to be signaled for the current block, an encoded bitstream including at least the current block.” [0142] describes signaling IntraSubPartitionsSplitType); and parsing, from a second bitstream that comprises the coded data and information on the partitioning direction, the partitioning direction when decoding (FIG. 8, step 802, “obtain an encoded video bitstream including video data” and step 804, “determine that an intra-subpartitioning mode for partitioning a current block of the video data is enabled for the current block.” [0142] describes signaling IntraSubPartitionsSplitType). Regarding claim 11, Ramasubramonian discloses every limitation of claim 1, as outlined above. Additionally, Ramasubramonian discloses wherein the sub-partitions are intra prediction blocks ([0045], “the current block is an intra-predicted block.” As per [0071], the sub-partitioning of ISP is intra sub-partitioning and is based on the transform, a property of intra prediction). Regarding claim 12, the limitations are the same as those in claim 1, as outlined above; however, written in machine form instead of process form. Therefore, the same rationale of claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 12. Additionally, Ramasubramonian discloses an encoder (FIG. 1, encoding device 104), one or more memories configured to store instructions ([0272], “computer-readable data storage medium comprising program code including instructions”); and one or more processors coupled to the one or more memories and configured to execute the instructions ([0272], “computer-readable data storage medium comprising program code including instructions that, when executed, performs one or more of the methods” [0273], “The program code may be executed by a processor, which may include one or more processors”). Regarding claim 13, the limitations are the same as those in claim 6, as outlined above. Therefore, the same rationale of claim 6 applies equally as well to claim 13. Regarding claim 14, the limitations are the same as those in claim 7, as outlined above. Therefore, the same rationale of claim 7 applies equally as well to claim 14. Regarding claim 15, the limitations are the same as those in claim 8, as outlined above. Therefore, the same rationale of claim 8 applies equally as well to claim 15. Regarding claim 16, the limitations are the same as those in claim 9, as outlined above. Therefore, the same rationale of claim 9 applies equally as well to claim 16. Regarding claim 17, the limitations are the same as those in claim 10, as outlined above. Therefore, the same rationale of claim 10 applies equally as well to claim 17. Regarding claim 18, the limitations are the same as those in claim 12, as outlined above; however, written in view of the decoder instead of the encoder, which is well-known as implementation the same operations inversely. Therefore, the same rationale of claim 11 applies equally as well to claim 18. Additionally, Ramasubramonian discloses a decoder (FIG. 1, decoding device 112), one or more memories configured to store instructions ([0272], “computer-readable data storage medium comprising program code including instructions”); and one or more processors coupled to the memory and configured to execute the instructions ([0272], “computer-readable data storage medium comprising program code including instructions that, when executed, performs one or more of the methods” [0273], “The program code may be executed by a processor, which may include one or more processors”). Regarding claim 19, Ramasubramonian discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having an encoded bitstream for use in decoding a video signal stored therein, wherein the encoded bitstream causes a coding device to […] (MPEP § 2111.05(I)(A), “[t]o be given patentable weight, the printed matter and associated product must be in a function relationship. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to eh product to which it is associated.” MPEP § 2111.05(III), when a claimed “computer-readable medium merely serves as a support for information or data, no functional relationship exists.” The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing the claimed bitstream merely serves as support for storage of the bitstream and provides no function relationship between the stored bitstream and storage medium. Therefore, the bitstream structure, which scope is implied by the parsing of the decoder, is non-functional descriptive material and given no patentable weight. Additionally, the decoder is recited as intended use and the steps of “obtain” and “parse” of the claim amount to generic functionalities, not imparting any particular structure to the product of the preamble. See MPEP § 2111.02(II). Ramasubramonian discloses [0107], “the encoding device 104 may store encoded bitstream data in storage 108.” Note, as per the rejection of claim 18, Ramasubramonian additionally discloses each limitation if the claim were to be interpreted as storing instructions that create functionality with the decoder and the same rationale of claim 18 applies). Regarding claim 20, the same analysis of claim 19 applies, because the claim further expands on data within the bitstream. Additionally, Ramasubramonian discloses the limitation, seen in claim 4, if the claim were to be interpreted as storing instructions that create functionality with the decoder and the same rationale of claim 4 applies. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: U.S. Publication No. 2021/0289197 A1 – Paragraph [0313] discloses the use of IntraSubPartitionsSplitType, intra_subpartitions_split_flag, and intra_subpartitions_mode_flag. U.S. Publication No. 2020/0260078 A1 – FIGS. 1A-1B illustrate intra sub-partitions (ISP). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STUART D BENNETT whose telephone number is (571)272-0677. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday from 9:00 AM - 5PM 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, William Vaughn can be reached at 571-272-3922. 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. /STUART D BENNETT/Examiner, Art Unit 2481
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 06, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 24, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12574559
ENCODER, A DECODER AND CORRESPONDING METHODS FOR ADAPTIVE LOOP FILTER ADAPTATION PARAMETER SET SIGNALING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12568300
ELECTRONIC APPARATUS, METHOD FOR CONTROLLING ELECTRONIC APPARATUS, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM FOR GUI CONTROL ON A DISPLAY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12563191
CROSS-COMPONENT SAMPLE OFFSET
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12542925
METHOD AND DEVICE FOR INTRA-PREDICTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12542934
ZERO-DELAY PANORAMIC VIDEO BIT RATE CONTROL METHOD CONSIDERING TEMPORAL DISTORTION PROPAGATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
69%
Grant Probability
54%
With Interview (-15.0%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 355 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