DETAILED ACTION
The present Office action is in response to the application filing on 19 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 02/04/2025, 03/17/2025, 04/03/2025, 06/06/2025, 07/24/2025, 09/12/2025, 11/11/2025, 12/11/2025, 01/05/2026, and 02/06/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the Information Disclosure Statements are being considered by the Examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: --VIDEO DECODER AND METHOD OF DECODING FOR CODED PICTURE BUFFER REMOVAL TIME--.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 16-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Publication No. 2016/0337661 A1 (hereinafter “Pang”).
Regarding claim 16, Pang discloses a non-transitory digital storage medium storing a data stream […] ([0047], “encoded data may be output from output interface 22 of source device 12 to a storage device 32. […] The storage device 32 may include […] non-volatile memory, or any other suitable digital storage media for storing encoded video data.” Note, the body of the claim beyond the preamble is non-functional descriptive subject matter under the broadest reasonable interpretation, because the claim is directed to a product (i.e., a non-transitory digital storage medium) storing a data stream and the body of the claim is merely descriptive of said data stream. The data stream provides no functional relationship or defining structure to the product. MPEP § 2111.05(III) states, “where […] the computer-readable medium merely serves as a support for information or data, no functional relationship exists.”).
Regarding claim 17-21, Pang discloses every limitation of claim 16, as outlined above. Each of claims 17-21 recite information pertaining to the stored data stream without establishing a functional relationship. Therefore, the same rationale of claim 16 applies equally as well to claims 17-21.
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 2-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-25 of U.S. Patent No. 11,736,705 B2 (hereinafter “Patent ‘705”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the distinction of the instant application is the description of two conditional if statements that are considered to cover the same subject matter of “wherein the video decoder is configured to decode the video depending at least on a concatenation flag indicating whether or not to use coded picture buffer delay offset information for determining the access unit removal time of the current picture from the coded picture buffer.” A flag is considered to have two values and because Patent ‘705 describes a “whether or not” situation based on the concentration flag, then both if conditional statements (e.g., a flag with a first value and a flag with the second value) from the instant application are considered anticipated by Patent ‘705.
The following table exemplifies the overlapping subject matter of the instant application and Patent ‘705.
Instant Application
Patent ‘705
Claim 2. A video decoder configured to:
receive a video data stream having a video stored therein; and
Claim 19. A video decoder for receiving a video data stream of a video stored therein,
decode the video from the video data stream based on a concatenation flag indicating whether or not to use coded picture buffer delay offset information for determining a removal time of a current picture of the video from a coded picture buffer, wherein:
wherein the video decoder is configured to decode the video from the video data stream,
wherein the video decoder is configured to decode the video depending on an access unit removal time of a current picture of a plurality of pictures of the video from a coded picture buffer,
if the concatenation flag is set to a first value, the coded picture buffer delay offset information is determined to be used for determining the removal time, and
if the concatenation flag is set to a second value, the coded picture buffer delay offset information is determined not to be used to determine the removal of time.
wherein the video decoder is configured to decode the video depending at least on a concatenation flag indicating whether or not to use coded picture buffer delay offset information for determining the access unit removal time of the current picture from the coded picture buffer.
Claims 2-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,200,236 B2 (hereinafter “Patent ‘236”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant application recites the corresponding decoder the encoders recited in Patent ‘236. The decoder is recited with the corresponding inverse operations of the encoder, therefore the decoding aspect is considered anticipated by Patent ‘236.
The following table exemplifies the overlapping subject matter of the instant application and Patent ‘236.
Instant Application
Patent ‘236
Claim 2. A video decoder configured to:
Claim 12. A video encoder,
receive a video data stream having a video stored therein; and
wherein the video encoder is configured to encode a video into a video data stream,
decode the video from the video data stream based on a concatenation flag indicating whether or not to use coded picture buffer delay offset information for determining a removal time of a current picture of the video from a coded picture buffer, wherein:
wherein the video encoder is configured to generate the video data stream such that the video data stream comprises coded picture buffer delay offset information, wherein the video encoder is configured to determine whether or not to use the coded picture buffer delay offset information for determining a removal time of a picture from a coded picture buffer,
if the concatenation flag is set to a first value, the coded picture buffer delay offset information is determined to be used for determining the removal time, and
wherein, if a concatenation flag is set to a first value, the coded picture buffer delay offset information is determined to be used for determining the removal time, and
if the concatenation flag is set to a second value, the coded picture buffer delay offset information is determined not to be used to determine the removal of time.
if the concatenation flag is set to a second value, the coded picture buffer delay offset information is determined not to be used to determine the removal time.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
U.S. Patent No. 10,003,815 B2 (hereinafter “Ramasubramonian”) – Discloses how to determine AuNominalRemovalTime(n) utilizing CpbDelayOffset (i.e., “coded picture buffer delay offset information”) and the role of concatenationflag. See Ramasubramonian, col. 59, ll. 35-53.
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