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 .
Detailed Action
This office Action is in response to an application filed on 01/17/2025, which is a CON of 18/430,963 filed on 02/02/2024 (PAT 12284367), which is a CON of 17/345,295 filed on 06/11/2021 (PAT 11924438), which is a CON of PCT/CN2019/125393 filed on 12/13/2019, in which claims 1-20 are pending and are being examined.
Priority
Acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C § 119(a)-(d). Claimed foreign priority to CHINA 201811539678.1 filed on 12/15/2018 and CHINA 201811585506.8 filed on 12/24/2018. The certified copy of priority has been filed on 07/15/2021.
Information Disclosure Statement
This information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/17/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 37 CFR 1.98. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1, 4, 7, 8, and similar dependent claims are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of Conflicting Patent PAT US 11,924,438 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the subject matter claimed in the instant application is anticipated by the Conflicting Patent and is covered by the Patent since the Patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, below is a list of limitations that perform the same function, however, different terminology may be used in both sets to describe the limitations, as follows, Claim 8 is used as an example to analyze the common subject matter:
Conflicting Patent No. US 11,924,438 B2
Instant Application:-19/026,849
1. A picture reconstruction method, comprising: obtaining a prediction mode of a current coding unit; obtaining a prediction partition mode of the current coding unit, wherein the current coding unit comprises a luma coding block and a chroma coding block, and the prediction partition mode is a mode of splitting the current coding unit into prediction blocks or prediction units; obtaining a transform block of the current coding unit based on the prediction partition mode and the prediction mode; and generating a reconstructed picture block of the current coding unit based on the transform block, wherein obtaining the transform block of the current coding unit based on the prediction partition mode and the prediction mode further comprises: when the prediction mode is the intra prediction mode and the prediction partition mode of the luma coding block is either a vertical quartering partition or a vertical asymmetric binary split, splitting the luma coding block through the vertical quartering partition to obtain a luma transform block, and skipping splitting the chroma coding block and using the chroma coding block as a chroma transform block; or when the prediction mode is the intra prediction mode and the prediction partition mode of the luma coding block is either a horizontal quartering partition or a horizontal asymmetric binary split, splitting the luma coding block through the horizontal quartering partition to obtain a luma transform block, and skipping splitting the chroma coding block and using the chroma coding block as a chroma transform block, and wherein obtaining the transform block of the current coding unit based on the prediction partition mode and the prediction mode further comprises: when the prediction mode is the inter prediction mode, skipping splitting the current coding unit and using the current coding unit as a transform unit.
8. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing an encoded bitstream for a video signal stored therein, the encoded bitstream including prediction mode of a current coding unit and a prediction partition mode of the current coding unit, wherein the current coding unit comprises a luma coding block and a chroma coding block, and the prediction partition mode is a mode of splitting the current coding unit into at least two prediction blocks or prediction units based on size information of the current coding unit, and wherein the prediction partition mode and the prediction mode are used to obtain a transform block of the current coding unit, and wherein, when the prediction mode is the intra prediction mode and the prediction partition mode of the luma coding block is either a vertical quartering partition, splitting the luma coding block through the vertical quartering partition to obtain a luma prediction block; obtaining the transform block of the current coding unit based on the luma prediction block; and skipping splitting the chroma coding block and using the chroma coding block as a chroma transform block; when the prediction mode is the intra prediction mode and the prediction partition mode of the luma coding block is either a horizontal quartering partition, splitting the luma coding block through the horizontal quartering partition to obtain a luma prediction block; obtaining a transform block of the current coding unit based on the luma prediction block; and skipping splitting the chroma coding block and using the chroma coding block as a chroma transform block; wherein the transform block is used to generate a reconstructed picture block of the current coding unit.
As demonstrated, the claim of US patent US 11,924,438 B2 anticipate the features of the claim of instant application 19/026,849.
A nonstatutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by amending the conflicting claims so they are no longer coextensive in scope or filing of a terminal disclaimer.
Examiner’s Note
Claims 1-3, and 9-10 refer to "A method”, Claims 4-6, and 11-12 refer to "An apparatus”, Claims 7, and 13-14 refers to "A non-transitory storage medium”, and Claim 8 refers to “A non-transitory storage medium”. Claims 4-8 and 11-14 are similarly rejected in light of rejection of claims 1-3, and 9-10, any obvious combination of the rejection of claims 1-3, and 9-10, or the differences are obvious to the ordinary skill in the art. It is well known in the art that encoding and decoding are reverse processes of video coding method/system.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Senzaki et al. (US 20210029363 A1), hereinafter Senzaki, in view of Lee et al. (US 20190028733 A1), hereinafter Lee.
Regarding claim 1, Senzaki discloses a method comprising (Fig. 1): obtaining a prediction mode of a current coding unit and a prediction partition mode of the current coding unit (Fig. 7, element S303), wherein the current coding unit comprises a luma coding block and a chroma coding block ([0011]), and the prediction partition mode is a mode of splitting the current coding unit into at least two prediction blocks or prediction units based on size information of the current coding unit ([0046]).
Senzaki discloses all the elements of claim 1 but Senzaki does not appear to explicitly disclose in the cited section a chroma coding block; obtaining a transform block of the current coding unit based on the prediction partition mode and the prediction mode.
However, Lee from the same or similar endeavor teaches a chroma coding block; obtaining a transform block of the current coding unit based on the prediction partition mode and the prediction mode ([0064], Fig. 5-8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Senzaki to incorporate the teachings of Lee to improve coding efficiency (Lee, [0005]). Similar reasoning/motivation of modification can be applied/extended to the other related/dependent claims.
Regarding claim 2, Senzaki in view of Lee discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein obtaining the prediction mode of the current coding unit further comprises: obtaining the prediction mode from a bitstream through parsing or derivation, wherein the prediction mode comprises an intra prediction mode and an inter prediction mode (Senzaki, Fig. 7, [0046], Lee, Fig. 5-8).
Regarding claim 3, Senzaki in view of Lee discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein obtaining the prediction partition mode of the current coding unit further comprises: determining, based on a size of the current coding unit, candidate prediction partition modes that are allowed to be used for the current coding unit; and determining the prediction partition mode from the candidate prediction partition modes that are allowed to be used (Senzaki, Fig. 7,[0048], Lee, Fig. 5-8).
Regarding claim 4-14, See Examiner’s Note.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-14 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD J RAHMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7190. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-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.
/Mohammad J Rahman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
Prosecution Insights