DETAILED ACTION.
This Office Action is in response to the communication filed on 01/17/2025, wherein claims 1-4 have been examined and are pending.
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) were submitted on 05/29/2025 and 01/17/2025.The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 2 and 4 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Bross et al. (Versatile Video Coding (Draft 6) - IDS attached in application 17/678,608) hereinafter Bross.
Regarding claim 2, Bross discloses a decoder comprising:
memory; and circuitry coupled to the memory and configured to (Bross Page 84, Section 7.4.2.3, Page 90, last para.: encoder and memory):
obtain a syntax element with a mode index stored in a sub- bitstream that is a part of a bitstream and includes a multi-layer structure; and decode the encoded bitstream in accordance with the mode index, wherein the mode index of zero indicates that the highest layer included in the sub-bitstream is an output layer (Bross Page 87, Section 7.4.3.2: in bitstream, vps_ouput_layers_mode equal to 0 specifies that only the highest layer is output).
Regarding claim 4, Bross discloses a decoding method comprising:
obtaining a syntax element with a mode index stored in a sub- bitstream that is a part of a bitstream and includes a multi-layer structure; and decoding the bitstream in accordance with the mode index, wherein the mode index of zero indicates that the highest layer included in the sub-bitstream is an output layer (Bross Page 87, Section 7.4.3.2: in bitstream, vps_ouput_layers_mode equal to 0 specifies that only the highest layer is output).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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.
Claims 1 and 3 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bross et al. (Versatile Video Coding (Draft 6) – IDS attached in application 17/678,608) hereinafter Bross, in view of Hannuksela (U.S. 2015/0103927).
Regarding claim 1, Bross discloses an encoder comprising:
memory; and circuitry coupled to the memory (Bross Page 84, Section 7.4.2.3, Page 90, last para.: encoder and memory) and configured to:
generate a syntax element with a mode index; andgenerate a bitstream that includes a multi-layer structure,the syntax element being stored in the bitstream, wherein the mode index of zero indicates that the highest layer included in the sub-bitstream is an output layer (Bross Page 87, Section 7.4.3.2: in bitstream, vps_ouput_layers_mode equal to 0 specifies that only the highest layer is output).
Bross does not explicitly disclose a sub-bitstream extraction is performed.
However, Hannuksela discloses a sub-bitstream extraction is performed (Hannuksela [0507]-[0508]: sub-bitstream extraction process wherein sub-bitstream containing layers included in an output layer set, so at least one layer of sub-bitstream is output layer).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the method and system, as disclosed by Bross, and further incorporate having a sub-bitstream extraction is performed, as taught by Hannuksela, for improvement of scalable and Multiview video coding (Hannuksela [0108]).
Regarding claim 3, Bross discloses an encoding method comprising:
generating a syntax element with a mode index; and generating a bitstream that includes a multi-layer structure, the syntax element being stored in the bitstream, wherein the mode index of zero indicates that the highest layer included in the sub-bitstream is an output layer (Bross Page 87, Section 7.4.3.2: in bitstream, vps_ouput_layers_mode equal to 0 specifies that only the highest layer is output).
Bross does not explicitly disclose a sub-bitstream extraction is performed.
However, Hannuksela discloses a sub-bitstream extraction is performed (Hannuksela [0507]-[0508]: sub-bitstream extraction process wherein sub-bitstream containing layers included in an output layer set, so at least one layer of sub-bitstream is output layer).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the method and system, as disclosed by Bross, and further incorporate having a sub-bitstream extraction is performed, as taught by Hannuksela, for improvement of scalable and Multiview video coding (Hannuksela [0108]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHLEEN V NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-0626. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00am-6:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jamie Atala can be reached on 571-272-7384. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KATHLEEN V NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2486