Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/018,721

REDUCING SLICE HEADER PARSING OVERHEAD IN VIDEO CODING

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Jan 13, 2025
Examiner
NAWAZ, TALHA M
Art Unit
2483
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Texas Instruments Incorporated
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allow Rate
538 granted / 604 resolved
+31.1% vs TC avg
Minimal -1% lift
Without
With
+-0.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
633
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.2%
-32.8% vs TC avg
§103
48.1%
+8.1% vs TC avg
§102
24.9%
-15.1% vs TC avg
§112
11.0%
-29.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 604 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Priority This application discloses and claims only subject matter disclosed in prior application, and names the inventor or at least one joint inventor named in the prior application. Accordingly, this application may constitute a continuation or divisional. Should applicant desire to claim the benefit of the filing date of the prior application, attention is directed to 35 U.S.C. 120, 37 CFR 1.78, and MPEP § 211 et seq. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/02/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see amendment, filed 09/26/2025, with respect to claim amendments have been fully considered. 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. Instant Application US10341653 Claim 1: A system comprising: a memory configured to store a first reference picture; and an encoder coupled to the memory and configured to: signal, in a header in a bit stream, a first luminance weight flag corresponding to the first reference picture; signal, in the header in a bit stream, a first chrominance weight flag corresponding to the first reference picture, wherein the first chrominance weight flag follows the first luminance weight flag; signal, in the header in a bit stream, a first luminance weighting factor corresponding to the first reference picture in the bit stream when the first luminance weight flag is set to indicate luminance component weighted prediction of the first reference picture is enabled, wherein the first luminance weighting factor follows the first chrominance weight flag in the bit stream; and signal, in the header in a bit stream, a first chrominance weighting factor corresponding to the first reference picture when the first chrominance weight flag is set to indicate chrominance component weighted prediction of the first reference picture is enabled, wherein the first chrominance weighting factor follows the first luminance weighting factor in the bit stream. Claim 11: A method for encoding a picture of a video sequence in a bit stream, the method comprising: determining weighted prediction parameters for a first plurality of reference pictures, wherein the weighted prediction parameters may be used for weighted prediction in encoding at least one slice of the picture, and wherein the weighting prediction parameters comprise first luminance weight flags, first luminance weighting factors, first chrominance weight flags, and first chrominance weighting factors for the first plurality of reference pictures; and signaling the weighted prediction parameters in a slice header in the bit stream, wherein signaling comprises: signaling the first luminance weight flags sequentially in the bit stream; signaling the first chrominance weight flags sequentially in the bit stream following the first luminance weight flags; signaling the first luminance weighting factors sequentially in the bit stream following the first chrominance weight flags; and signaling the first chrominance weighting factors sequentially in the bit stream following the first luminance weighting factors Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 of U.S. Patent No. 10341653. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claim is reciting the system performing the encoding method as described in US10341653 claim 11. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-20 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 including the resolution of any double patenting, 35 USC 101/112 matters. The closes prior art of record is Holcomb et al. (US20050053155) (hereinafter Holcomb). Holcomb discloses video coding that discloses weighted prediction. The weighted prediction flag also includes a plurality of parameters. These parameters include signaling luma weight and chroma weight parameters for the reference picture. However, the prior arts of record individually nor in combination do not explicitly disclose wherein the first luminance weighting factor follows the first chrominance weight flag in the bit stream; and signal, in the header in a bit stream, a first chrominance weighting factor corresponding to the first reference picture in the bit stream when the first chrominance weight flag is set to indicate chrominance component weighted prediction of the first reference picture is enabled, wherein the first chrominance weighting factor follows the first luminance weighting factor in the bit stream, when taken in the environment of the independent claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TALHA M NAWAZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5439. The examiner can normally be reached Flex, M-R 6:30am-3:30pm; F 8:30am-12:30pm. 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, Joe G Ustaris can be reached at 571-272-7383. 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. /TALHA M NAWAZ/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 13, 2025
Application Filed
Sep 26, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593023
Electronic Device with Reliable Passthrough Video Fallback Capability and Hierarchical Failure Detection Scheme
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587631
Motion Dependent Display
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587673
METHOD FOR DECODER-SIDE MOTION VECTOR DERIVATION USING SPATIAL CORRELATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581024
IMAGE PROCESSING DEVICE AND IMAGE PROCESSING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573203
MEDICAL OBSERVATION SYSTEM, INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
89%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (-0.8%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 604 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