DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The last limitations of claims 1-2 “… wherein the first clipping widths are threshold is different from the second clipping widths.” are object because the grammatically using of “… are threshold is …” is not clear. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 –
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 (b) as being anticipated by Norkin et al. (US 20130051480 A1, hereinafter “Norkin”, Applicant Admitted Prior Art).
Regarding claim 1. Norkin discloses a decoding device (0101; Figure 9; ‘decoder 60’) comprising:
a memory (0092 and 0101; Figures 7 and 10; ‘memory 72’); and
circuitry coupled to the memory (0093; Figure 7; ‘memory 72’) and configured to:
select a filter adapted to a boundary between a first block and a second block, from among candidates, the candidates including a first filter and a second filter (0031 and 0037; Figures 3 and 14; “[0037] Adaptive de-blocking filtering is conducted over a boundary, edge or border between neighboring blocks. As a consequence, such boundaries can be vertical boundaries 1, see FIG. 3A, between two neighboring blocks 10, 20 present side by side in the video frame. Alternatively, the boundaries are horizontal boundaries 1, see FIG. 3B, between two neighboring block 10, 20, where one block 10 is positioned above the other block 20 in the video frame. In a particular embodiment, vertical boundaries are filtered first starting from the left-most boundary and proceeding through the boundaries towards the right-hand side in their geometrical order. Then, horizontal boundaries are filtered starting with the boundary on the top and proceeding through the boundaries towards the bottom in their geometrical order. The embodiments are, however, not limited to this particular filtering order and can actually be applied to any predefined filtering order. … the boundaries at the edge of the video frame are preferably not filtered and thereby excluded from the de-blocking filtering.”);
in response to selecting the first filter, change values of first pixels using clipping such that change amounts of the respective values of the first pixels are within respective first clipping widths (0032, 0044-0045, 0050, 0064 and 0089; Figures 1-3; “[0032] FIG. 1 is a schematic overview of an embodiment of the de-blocking filtering. The embodiment determines two different types of filter decision values for a block of multiple pixels in a video frame. A first filter decision value is a block-specific or block-wise filter decision value that is calculated once for the current block and a current boundary to a neighboring block of multiple pixels in the video frame. This block-specific filter decision value is employed to determine whether any de-blocking filtering should be applied at all to the current block with regard to the boundary to the neighboring block. If it is concluded, based on the block-specific filter decision value, that de-blocking filtering should be applied, the second type of filter decision value is calculated for each line of pixels in the pixel block. The second type of filter decision is, thus, a line-wise or line-specific filter decision employed to select whether strong de-blocking filtering or weak de-blocking filtering should be applied to the current line of pixels in the pixel block. Thus, a block-specific filter decision value is calculated once and applies to all lines in the block with regard to the boundary to the neighboring block. If de-blocking filtering should be applied as determined based on the block-specific filter decision value, a respective line-specific filter decision value is calculated for each line to select between strong and weak de-blocking filtering. This means that it could be possible that strong de-blocking filtering is selected for all lines in the block, weak de-blocking filtering is selected for all lines in the block or some lines will use strong de-blocking filtering whereas other use weak de-blocking filtering.”); and
in response to selecting the second filter, change values of second pixels using clipping such that change amounts of the respective values of the second pixels are within respective second clipping widths (0032, 0043-0045, 0050, 0064 and 0089; Figures 1-3; “[0032] FIG. 1 is a schematic overview of an embodiment of the de-blocking filtering. The embodiment determines two different types of filter decision values for a block of multiple pixels in a video frame. A first filter decision value is a block-specific or block-wise filter decision value that is calculated once for the current block and a current boundary to a neighboring block of multiple pixels in the video frame. This block-specific filter decision value is employed to determine whether any de-blocking filtering should be applied at all to the current block with regard to the boundary to the neighboring block. ... The second type of filter decision is, thus, a line-wise or line-specific filter decision employed to select whether strong de-blocking filtering or weak de-blocking filtering should be applied to the current line of pixels in the pixel block. Thus, a block-specific filter decision value is calculated once and applies to all lines in the block with regard to the boundary to the neighboring block. If de-blocking filtering should be applied as determined based on the block-specific filter decision value, a respective line-specific filter decision value is calculated for each line to select between strong and weak de-blocking filtering. ...”, “[0044] The calculated line-specific filter decision value (LS FDV) is compared to a line-specific threshold (T.sub.LS) in step S4. If the line-specific filter decision value is below the line-specific threshold the method continues to step S5, where a second or strong de-blocking filter is selected to be applied to pixels in the current line of pixels to filter and change the value of at least one pixel value in the current line. ...”),
wherein a total number of the second pixels being larger than a total number of the first pixels (0045, 0052 and 0064-0090; Figures 1 and 4; wherein the second pixels uses a strong filter have a pixel number is larger than the amount of the first pixels that uses the weak filter), and
wherein the first clipping widths are threshold is different from the second clipping widths (0045, 0052 and 0064-0090; Figures 1 and 4; wherein the first clip width is the strong filter is and the second clip is the weak filtering and the strong filtering and the weak filtering have different clipping equations).
Regarding claim 2. The encoding device claim 2 is drawn to the reverse of the encoding device of using the corresponding decoding device claimed in claim 1. Therefore encoding device claim 2 corresponds to decoding device claim 1 and is rejected for same reasons of anticipated as used above.
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 1-2 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2 of U.S. Patent No. 12,250,398 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the pending claims are broader than the patented claim.
19043694 (Instant Application)
US 12,250,398 B2
1. A decoding device comprising:
a memory; and
circuitry coupled to the memory and configured to:
select a filter adapted to a boundary between a first block and a second block, from among candidates, the candidates including a first filter and a second filter;
in response to selecting the first filter, change values of first pixels using clipping such that change amounts of the respective values of the first pixels are within respective first clipping widths; and
in response to selecting the second filter, change values of second pixels using clipping such that change amounts of the respective values of the second pixels are within respective second clip widths,
wherein a total number of the second pixels being larger than a total number of the first pixels, and
wherein the first clipping widths are threshold is different from the second clipping widths.
1. A decoding device comprising:
a memory; and
circuitry coupled to the memory and configured to:
select a filter adapted to a boundary between a first block and a second block, from among candidates, the candidates including a first filter and a second filter;
in response to selecting the first filter, change values of first pixels using clipping such that change amounts of the respective values of the first pixels are within respective first clipping widths, the respective values of the first pixels being changed using the change amounts of the respective values of the first pixels; and
in response to selecting the second filter, change values of second pixels using clipping such that change amounts of the respective values of the second pixels are within respective second clip widths, the respective values of the second pixels being changed using the change amounts of the respective values of the second pixels,
wherein a total number of the second pixels being larger than a total number of the first pixels, and
wherein the first clipping widths are different from the second clipping widths.
2.An encoding device comprising:
a memory; and
circuitry coupled to the memory and configured to:
select a filter adapted to a boundary between a first block and a second block, from among candidates, the candidates including a first filter and a second filter;
in response to selecting the first filter, change values of first pixels using clipping such that change amounts of the respective values of the first pixels are within respective first clipping widths; and
in response to selecting the second filter, change values of second pixels using clipping such that change amounts of the respective values of the second pixels are within respective second clip widths,
wherein a total number of the second pixels being larger than a total number of the first pixels, and
wherein the first clipping widths are threshold is different from the second clipping widths.
2. An encoding device comprising:
a memory; and
circuitry coupled to the memory and configured to:
select a filter adapted to a boundary between a first block and a second block, from among candidates, the candidates including a first filter and a second filter;
in response to selecting the first filter, change values of first pixels using clipping such that change amounts of the respective values of the first pixels are within respective first clipping widths, the respective values of the first pixels being changed using the change amounts of the respective values of the first pixels; and
in response to selecting the second filter, change values of second pixels using clipping such that change amounts of the respective values of the second pixels are within respective second clip widths, the respective values of the second pixels being changed using the change amounts of the respective values of the second pixels,
wherein a total number of the second pixels being larger than a total number of the first pixels, and
wherein the first clipping widths are different from the second clipping widths.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASMAMAW TARKO whose telephone number is (571)272-9205. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 9:00AM-5:00PM 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, Chris Kelley can be reached at (571) 272-7331. 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.
/ASMAMAW G TARKO/ Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2482