DETAILED ACTION
1. This office action is in response to U.S. Patent Application No.: 18/977,404 filed on 12/11/2024 with effective filing date 10/4/2010. Claims 1-19 are pending.
Double Patenting
2. 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 1-19 are rejected on ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable overs claims 1-19 of US 12,225,223, claims 1-19 of US 11,223,839 and claims 1-16 of 11,706,430. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Current application
US 12,225,223
1. A video decoding method, comprising: decoding integrated code block information; decoding split information based on the integrated code block information and size information for a transform block; and decoding code block information for the transform block in a case that the transform block is not additionally split based on the split information, wherein the code block information is decoded based on the integrated code block information,
and the code block information for the transform block comprises luminance code block information for a luminance signal of the transform block.
1. A video decoding method, comprising: decoding integrated code block information; decoding a split information based on the integrated code block information and size information for a transform block; and decoding code block information for the transform block in a case that the transform block is not additionally split based on the split information, wherein the code block information is decoded based on the integrated code block information,
and wherein the code block information for the transform block comprises a luminance code block information for a luminance signal of the transform block.
7. A video encoding method, comprising: encoding integrated code block information; encoding split information based on the integrated code block information and size information for a transform block; and encoding code block information for the transform block in a case that the transform block is not additionally split based on the split information, wherein the code block information is encoded based on the integrated code block information, and the code block information for the transform block comprises luminance code block information for a luminance signal of the transform block.
7. A video encoding method, comprising: encoding integrated code block information; encoding split information based on the integrated code block information and size information for a transform block; and encoding code block information for the transform block in a case that the transform block is not additionally split based on the split information, wherein the code block information is encoded based on the integrated code block information, and wherein the code block information for the transform block comprises a luminance code block information for a luminance signal of the transform block.
14. A non-transitory computer readable medium storing a bitstream, the bitstream comprising: integrated code block information, wherein the bitstream includes split information in a case that a value of the integrated code block information is equal to a predetermined value and a size of a transform block corresponds to a predetermined range, code block information for the transform block is present in the bitstream in a case that the transform block is not additionally split based on the split information, whether to the transform block is additionally split is determined based on a value of a split information, the code block information is decoded based on the integrated code block information, and the code block information for the transform block comprises luminance code block information for a luminance signal of the transform block.
14. A non-transitory computer readable medium storing a bitstream, the bitstream comprising: integrated code block information, wherein the bitstream includes a split information in a case that a value of the integrated code block information is equal to a predetermined value and a size of a transform block corresponds to a predetermined range, wherein code block information for the transform block is present in the bitstream in a case that the transform block is not additionally split based on the split information, whether to the transform block is additionally split is determined based on a value of a split information, wherein the code block information is decoded based on the integrated code block information, and wherein the code block information for the transform block comprises a luminance code block information for a luminance signal of the transform block.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
4. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
5. Claim 1-19 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Jung et al. US 2011/0038412 A1 in view of Sasai et al. US 2013/0156099 A1.
Per claims 1, 7 & 13-14, Jung et al. discloses a video decoding method, comprising: decoding integrated code block information (para: 109-110, e.g. decoder receives encoded data and extracts encoded image data for each coding unit); decoding split information based on the integrated code block information and size information for a transform block (para: 185, e.g. if the flag=0 than result is element 1342, and if flag=1 result is element 1344 in fig. 13); TU size flag is split into plurality of blocks, hence frame is divided into plurality of blocks).
Jung et al. fails to explicitly disclose the remaining claim limitation.
Sasai et al. however in the same field of endeavor teaches decoding code block information for the transform block in a case that the transform block is not additionally split based on the split information, wherein the code block information is decoded based on the integrated code block information (para: 151 & fig. 11, e.g. when it is determined that the current CU to be decoded does not have the size of minimum quantization unit (No in Step S3), the image decoding apparatus 2000 further determines whether or not the flag of the current CU to be decoded (split_coding_unit flag) is zero and the size of the current CU to be decoded is larger than the size of minimum quantization unit (Step S5)), and the code block information for the transform block comprises luminance code block information for a luminance signal of the transform block (para: 153, e.g. the image decoding apparatus 2000 determines, by summing coded_block_flag (CBF) in each TU in the quartered processing unit, whether or not the TU for luminance and chrominance included in the current TU to be decoded is coded (Steps S11 and S12)).
Therefore, in view of disclosures by Sasai et al., it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine Jung et al. and Sasai et al. in order to improve image quality and encoding efficiency for decoding the encoded stream generated by encoded image can be improved by image decoding process.
Per claims 2, 8, & 15, Jung et al. further teaches the video decoding method of claim 1, wherein the split information is not decoded in a case that transform coefficients of the transform block are not present in a bitstream (para: 151 & fig. 11, e.g. when it is determined that the current CU to be decoded does not have the size of minimum quantization unit (No in Step S3), the image decoding apparatus 2000 further determines whether or not the flag of the current CU to be decoded (split_coding_unit flag) is zero and the size of the current CU to be decoded is larger than the size of minimum quantization unit (Step S5)).
Per claims 3, 9 & 16, Jung et al. further teaches the video decoding method of claim 1, wherein the code block information for the transform block comprises chrominance code block information for a chrominance signal of the transform block (para: 153, e.g. the image decoding apparatus 2000 determines, by summing coded_block_flag (CBF) in each TU in the quartered processing unit, whether or not the TU for luminance and chrominance included in the current TU to be decoded is coded (Steps S11 and S12)).
Per claims 4, 10, & 17 Jung et al. further teaches the video decoding method of claim 1, wherein the split information is not decoded in a case that a size of the transform block is not greater than a predetermined size (para: 151).
Per claims 5, 11, & 18 Sasai et al. further teaches the video decoding method of claim 1, wherein: the integrated code block information indicates whether transform coefficients of a luminance component and transform coefficients of a chrominance component of the transform block are present in a bitstream (para: 153).
Per claims 6, 12, & 19 Jung et al. further teaches the video decoding method of claim 1, wherein the code block information indicates whether there is at least one transform coefficient other than 0 in the transform block (para: 188-189, e.g. para: 188-189, e.g. depending on if flag=0 or 1, blocks are decoded and split in plurality of blocks).
Conclusion
6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lee et al. US 2009/0232204 A1, e.g. a first transform coefficient having an absolute
value greater than a predetermined threshold value exists in the transform coefficients in the current block, generating first flag information indicating whether the first transform coefficient exists, dividing the first transform coefficient from information of a second transform coefficient.
Srinivasan, US 2009/026835 A1, e.g. an encoder and decoder process the binary information and, in some embodiments, switch coding modes. For example, the encoder and decoder use normal, row-skip, column-skip, or differential modes, or other and/or additional modes.
Nguyen et al. US 2013/0188735 A1, e.g. methods of encoding and decoding for video data are described for encoding or decoding coefficients for a transform unit; the significant-coefficient flags for a coefficient group are encoded and decoded based upon a context determination, and the context is determined based upon the values of neighboring flags.
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IRFAN HABIB whose telephone number is (571)270-7325. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Th 9AM-7PM.
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, Jay Patel can be reached at 5712722988. 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.
/Irfan Habib/Examiner, Art Unit 2485