DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as not falling within one of the four statutory categories of invention because the broadest reasonable interpretation of the instant claims in light of the specification encompasses transitory signals. But transitory signals are not within one of the four statutory categories ((i.e. process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter).
However, claims directed toward a non-transitory computer readable medium may qualify as a manufacture and make the claim patent-eligible subject matter. Therefore, amending the claims to recite a “non-transitory computer-readable medium” would resolve this issue.
Double Patenting
The no statutory 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 no statutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue 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); and 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form 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 http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
US Patent No. 12231694
Claim 1-3 of the instant application is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2 and 4 of US Patent No. 12231694 (Application Number: 18/504748) in view of SÁNCHEZ DE LA FUENTE et al. (US 20230345051, hereinafter SÁNCHEZ DE LA FUENTE).
Regarding Claim 1:
INSTANT – 16/057691, Claim1
US Patent: 12231694, Claim 1
receiving a buffering period message;
receiving a buffering period message;
parsing a first flag, from the buffering period message, having one of:
a first value specifying decoding unit level decoded picture buffer output delay parameters are present in picture timing (PT) messages and not in decoding unit (DU) information messages, or
a second value specifying decoding unit level decoded picture buffer output delay parameters are present in DU information messages and not in PT messages;
parsing a first flag, from the buffering period message, having one of:
a first value specifying decoding unit level decoded picture buffer output delay parameters are present in picture timing messages and not in decoding unit (DU) information messages, or
a second value specifying decoding unit level decoded picture buffer output delay parameters are present in DU information messages and not in picture timing messages;
receiving a PT message corresponding to a current access unit (AU);
parsing a pt_dpb_output_du_delay, from the PT message, which is used to compute the DPB output time of the current AU;
receiving a DU information message corresponding to a decoding unit (DU) of the current AU, wherein the current AU consists of more than one or more decoding unit (DU);
receiving a DU information message corresponding to a decoding unit (DU) of a current access unit (AU), wherein the current AU consists of more than one or more decoding unit (DU);
parsing a second flag, from the DU information message, having one of: a first value specifying a presence of a decoding unit information (DUI) decoded picture buffer (DPB) output decoding unit (DU) delay syntax element used to compute a decoded picture buffer output time of the current AU in the DU information message, or
a second value specifying an absence of the DUI DPB output DU delay syntax element in the DU information message;
parsing a second flag, from the DU information message, having one of:
a first value specifying a presence of a decoding unit information (DUI) decoded picture buffer (DPB) output decoding unit (DU) delay syntax element used to compute a decoded picture buffer output time of the current AU in the DU information message, or
a second value specifying an absence of the DUI DPB output DU delay syntax element in the DU information message;
determining whether or not the DUI DPB output DU delay syntax element is present in the DU information message;
determining whether or not the DUI DPB output DU delay syntax element is present in the DU information message; and
in a case that the first flag is equal to the second value, and the current AU consists of at least one of a first DU with a first DU information message and a second DU, if exist, with a second DU information message, where the first DU information message has the second flag equal to the first value and the second DU information message has the second flag equal to the second value,
in a case that the first flag is equal to the second value, and the current AU consists of at least one of a first DU with a first DU information message and a second DU, if exist, with a second DU information message, where the first DU information message has the second flag equal to the first value and the second DU information message has the second flag equal to the second value,
if the DU is the first DU, parsing a first DUI DPB output DU delay syntax element, and
if the DU is the first DU, parsing a first DUI DPB output DU delay syntax element; and
if the DU is the second DU, inferring a value of a second DUI DPB output DU delay syntax element to be equal to the first DUI DPB output DU delay syntax element,
if the DU is the second DU, inferring a value of a second DUI DPB output DU delay syntax element to be equal to the first DUI DPB output DU delay syntax element,
wherein all of the first DU information messages that are associated with the current AU and apply to a same operation point have a same value of the first DUI DPB output DU delay syntax element; and
wherein all of the first DU information messages that are associated with the current AU, and apply to a same operation point have a same value of the first DUI DPB output DU delay syntax element.
calculating a DPB output time by using a variable, which is set equal to a value of the DUI DPB output DU delay syntax element if the first flag is equal to the second value, and is set equal to a value of the pt_dpb_output_du_delay if the first flag is equal to the first value.
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of the instant application differ from claim 1 of the US Patent No. 12231694 in that the instant application includes receiving a PT message corresponding to a current access unit (AU); parsing a pt_dpb_output_du_delay, from the PT message, which is used to compute the DPB output time of the current AU; calculating a DPB output time by using a variable, which is set equal to a value of the DUI DPB output DU delay syntax element if the first flag is equal to the second value, and is set equal to a value of the pt_dpb_output_du_delay if the first flag is equal to the first value.
However, this is known in the art as evidenced by SÁNCHEZ DE LA FUENTE, which is in the same field of endeavor, discloses receiving a PT message corresponding to a current access unit (AU); parsing a pt_dpb_output_du_delay, from the PT message, which is used to compute the DPB output time of the current AU; calculating a DPB output time by using a variable, which is set equal to a value of the DUI DPB output DU delay syntax element if the first flag is equal to the second value, and is set equal to a value of the pt_dpb_output_du_delay if the first flag is equal to the first value ( [0111] using syntax and semantics for parsing pt_dpb_output_du_delay; [0112] The PT SEI message provides CPB removal delay and DPB output delay information for the AU associated with the SEI message; [0148] pt_dpb_output_du_delay is used to compute the DPB output time of the picture when DecodingUnitHrdFlag is equal to 1)
PNG
media_image1.png
196
520
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of parsing a pt_dpb_output_du_delay, from the PT message as taught by SÁNCHEZ DE LA FUENTE ([0148]) in order to provide systems for video encoders and video decoders are provided for encoding a video sequence into a video bitstream allowing temporal scalability resulting in the predictable result of improving encoding efficiency (SÁNCHEZ DE LA FUENTE, [0004]).
Regarding Claims 2 and 3:
Independent claims 2 and 3 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of the US Patent No. 10075714 in view of SÁNCHEZ DE LA FUENTE with the same reason as claim 1 detailed as above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Samuel D Fereja whose telephone number is (469)295-9243. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-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.
/SAMUEL D FEREJA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487