DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed on 02/03/2025. Claims 1-20 have been examined.
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 statement (IDS) submitted on 04/14/2026 and 09/12/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
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 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. 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/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 http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. patent Application No. 17/683,140. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention that the claims cover substantially the same subject matter. The table below shows only a sample of how each of these claims is anticipated by claims such as claim 1 of U.S. patent application No. 17/683,140.
Instant Application
U.S. application No. 17/683,140
Claim 1: A method comprising: obtaining data indicating one or more upscaling ratios associated with one or more upscaling algorithms available to a client device; selecting a resolution for one or more streams of video data to the client device based at least on the one or more upscaling ratios; encoding one or more portions of the one or more streams of video data using the resolution based at least on the selection; and transmitting the encoded one or more portions of the one or more streams to the client device, the transmitting causing the client device to upscale one or more video frames represented by the video data using an upscaling algorithm of the one or more upscaling algorithms.
Claim 1: A method comprising: receiving data indicating one or more types of one or more video upscaling algorithms available to a client device; selecting one or more encoding parameters for one or more streams of video data to the client device based at least on identifying, using the data, the one or more types of the one or more video upscaling algorithms, wherein a first configuration for the one or more encoding parameters corresponds to a neural network-based upscaling algorithm being identified and a second configuration for the one or more encoding parameters corresponds to a non-neural network-based upscaling algorithm being identified; encoding one or more portions of the one or more streams of video data using the one or more encoding parameters based at least on the selecting; and transmitting the one or more portions of the one or more streams to the client device, the transmitting causing the client device to generate an upscaled version of one or more video frames represented by the video data using at least one of the one or more video upscaling algorithms.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kum et al., US Pat. No.9,854,020 and in view of Balko, US Pub. No.20160212482
Regarding claim 1, Kum discloses the following claim limitations: a method comprising: selecting a resolution for one or more streams of video data to the client device based at least on the one or more upscaling ratios (Kum, col.3 line 58 to col.4 line 31 discloses adjusting video streams based on client device capabilities),
encoding one or more portions of the one or more streams of video data using the resolution based at least on the selection; and transmitting the encoded one or more portions of the one or more streams to the client device (Kum, decoding video streams at client device, see col.4 lines 32-60).
Kum does not explicitly disclose the following claim limitations: obtaining data indicating one or more upscaling ratios associated with one or more upscaling algorithms available to a client device… the transmitting causing the client device to upscale one or more video frames represented by the video data using an upscaling algorithm of the one or more upscaling algorithms.
However, in the same field of endeavor Balko discloses more explicitly the following:
obtaining data indicating one or more upscaling ratios associated with one or more upscaling algorithms available to a client device… the transmitting causing the client device to upscale one or more video frames represented by the video data using an upscaling algorithm of the one or more upscaling algorithms (Balko, paragraphs 29-30 discloses video conversion component 50 is the part of the video transcoding and processing application, which receives one or a plurality of input video files and parameters from the user interface component 40, transcodes or processes the received input videos according to the parameters and produces status information, and returns the produced output videos to the user interface component 40. The video conversion component 50 contains a video transcoding component 51, which transcodes input videos into output videos, changing their container format, video and audio codecs, bitrate, video resolution, aspect ratio, and other technical parameters characterizing the quality, compatibility, size, etc. of the resulting output video files. The video conversion component 50 may further contain a video processing component 52, which is a software performing other video processing tasks, including video upscaling and downscaling, increasing and decreasing a video's frame rate, etc. The video conversion component 50 may also contain a native fallback component 53, which is a software wrapper around native video transcoding and processing capabilities that are available on the end user computing device 10. For example, some central processing units 12 or graphics processing units 13 provide dedicated hardware support for decoding or encoding videos).
It would have been obvious to one the ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to modify the teachings of Kum with Balko to create client devices with video upscaling and downscaling.
The reasoning being is to provide a client-side Video Transcoding and Processing method that may transcode or process video or audio files residing on the end user client device, thus avoiding to transfer video or audio files to another computing device, such as a server, where the cost and timely delay of transferring a video or audio file is avoided (Balko, paragraph 9).
Regarding claim 2, Kum and Balko discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: identifying, using the data, at least one upscaling algorithm of the one or more upscaling algorithms; and based at least on the identifying, determining at least one upscaling ratio of the one or more upscaling ratios, wherein the resolution is selected based at least on the at least one upscaling ratio (Balko, paragraphs 29-30 discloses video conversion component 50 is the part of the video transcoding and processing application, which receives one or a plurality of input video files and parameters from the user interface component 40, transcodes or processes the received input videos according to the parameters and produces status information, and returns the produced output videos to the user interface component 40. The video conversion component 50 contains a video transcoding component 51, which transcodes input videos into output videos, changing their container format, video and audio codecs, bitrate, video resolution, aspect ratio, and other technical parameters characterizing the quality, compatibility, size, etc. of the resulting output video files. The video conversion component 50 may further contain a video processing component 52, which is a software performing other video processing tasks, including video upscaling and downscaling, increasing and decreasing a video's frame rate, etc. The video conversion component 50 may also contain a native fallback component 53, which is a software wrapper around native video transcoding and processing capabilities that are available on the end user computing device 10. For example, some central processing units 12 or graphics processing units 13 provide dedicated hardware support for decoding or encoding videos). The same motivation that was utilized in claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 2.
Regarding claim 3, Kum and Balko discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: determining, using the data, a set of upscaling ratios based at least on an indication that the set of upscaling ratios are compatible with at least one upscaling algorithm of the one or more upscaling algorithms; and based at least on the determining, selecting, for the one or more streams, the one or more upscaling ratios as a subset of the set of upscaling ratios (Balko, paragraphs 29-30 discloses video conversion component 50 is the part of the video transcoding and processing application, which receives one or a plurality of input video files and parameters from the user interface component 40, transcodes or processes the received input videos according to the parameters and produces status information, and returns the produced output videos to the user interface component 40. The video conversion component 50 contains a video transcoding component 51, which transcodes input videos into output videos, changing their container format, video and audio codecs, bitrate, video resolution, aspect ratio, and other technical parameters characterizing the quality, compatibility, size, etc. of the resulting output video files. The video conversion component 50 may further contain a video processing component 52, which is a software performing other video processing tasks, including video upscaling and downscaling, increasing and decreasing a video's frame rate, etc. The video conversion component 50 may also contain a native fallback component 53, which is a software wrapper around native video transcoding and processing capabilities that are available on the end user computing device 10. For example, some central processing units 12 or graphics processing units 13 provide dedicated hardware support for decoding or encoding videos). The same motivation that was utilized in claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 3.
Regarding claim 4, Kum and Balko discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the selecting is based at least on the one or more upscaling ratios being capable of upscaling the resolution to one or more of: a current resolution being used by the client device to present the one or more streams, or one or more supported resolutions that are usable by the client device to present the one or more streams (Balko, paragraphs 29-30 discloses video conversion component 50 is the part of the video transcoding and processing application, which receives one or a plurality of input video files and parameters from the user interface component 40, transcodes or processes the received input videos according to the parameters and produces status information, and returns the produced output videos to the user interface component 40. The video conversion component 50 contains a video transcoding component 51, which transcodes input videos into output videos, changing their container format, video and audio codecs, bitrate, video resolution, aspect ratio, and other technical parameters characterizing the quality, compatibility, size, etc. of the resulting output video files. The video conversion component 50 may further contain a video processing component 52, which is a software performing other video processing tasks, including video upscaling and downscaling, increasing and decreasing a video's frame rate, etc. The video conversion component 50 may also contain a native fallback component 53, which is a software wrapper around native video transcoding and processing capabilities that are available on the end user computing device 10. For example, some central processing units 12 or graphics processing units 13 provide dedicated hardware support for decoding or encoding videos). The same motivation that was utilized in claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 4.
Regarding claim 5, Kum and Balko discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the selecting is based at least on the resolution being less than or equal to a maximum resolution that is supported by one or more of: at least one upscaling algorithm of the one or more upscaling algorithms, or one or more displays of the client device (Balko, paragraph 29 discloses video conversion component 50 may further process video files by applying video and image processing algorithms on the given input video, including image upscaling and downscaling, where the size of the video frames is increased or reduced, respectively; increasing or decreasing the frame rate, where the number of video frames per second is increased or lowered. When increasing the frame rate, extra frames are inserted, where the video conversion component 50 computes the new frames using suitable algorithms. Other video processing algorithms may include different image and audio filters, such as image distortions, insertion of stereoscopic effects, color adjustments and others). The same motivation that was utilized in claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 5.
Regarding claim 6, Kum and Balko discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the selecting is based at least on the resolution being greater than or equal to a minimum resolution that is supported by at least one upscaling algorithm of the one or more upscaling algorithms (Balko, paragraph 29 discloses video conversion component 50 may further process video files by applying video and image processing algorithms on the given input video, including image upscaling and downscaling, where the size of the video frames is increased or reduced, respectively; increasing or decreasing the frame rate, where the number of video frames per second is increased or lowered. When increasing the frame rate, extra frames are inserted, where the video conversion component 50 computes the new frames using suitable algorithms. Other video processing algorithms may include different image and audio filters, such as image distortions, insertion of stereoscopic effects, color adjustments and others). The same motivation that was utilized in claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 6.
Regarding claim 7, Kum and Balko discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the transmitting further causes the client device to switch from using a second upscaling algorithm to present the one or more streams to using the upscaling algorithm to present the one or more streams (Balko, paragraphs 29-30 discloses video conversion component 50 is the part of the video transcoding and processing application, which receives one or a plurality of input video files and parameters from the user interface component 40, transcodes or processes the received input videos according to the parameters and produces status information, and returns the produced output videos to the user interface component 40. The video conversion component 50 contains a video transcoding component 51, which transcodes input videos into output videos, changing their container format, video and audio codecs, bitrate, video resolution, aspect ratio, and other technical parameters characterizing the quality, compatibility, size, etc. of the resulting output video files. The video conversion component 50 may further contain a video processing component 52, which is a software performing other video processing tasks, including video upscaling and downscaling, increasing and decreasing a video's frame rate, etc. The video conversion component 50 may also contain a native fallback component 53, which is a software wrapper around native video transcoding and processing capabilities that are available on the end user computing device 10. For example, some central processing units 12 or graphics processing units 13 provide dedicated hardware support for decoding or encoding videos). The same motivation that was utilized in claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 7.
Regarding claim 8, Kum and Balko discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the selecting is based at least on the resolution being greater than or equal to a minimum resolution that is selected by the client device (Balko, paragraph 29 discloses video conversion component 50 may further process video files by applying video and image processing algorithms on the given input video, including image upscaling and downscaling, where the size of the video frames is increased or reduced, respectively; increasing or decreasing the frame rate, where the number of video frames per second is increased or lowered. When increasing the frame rate, extra frames are inserted, where the video conversion component 50 computes the new frames using suitable algorithms. Other video processing algorithms may include different image and audio filters, such as image distortions, insertion of stereoscopic effects, color adjustments and others). The same motivation that was utilized in claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 8.
Regarding claim 9, Kum and Balko discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the selecting of the resolution is further based at least on the data indicating the one or more upscaling algorithms include at least one artificial intelligence-based upscaling algorithm (Balko, paragraphs 29-30 discloses video conversion component 50 is the part of the video transcoding and processing application, which receives one or a plurality of input video files and parameters from the user interface component 40, transcodes or processes the received input videos according to the parameters and produces status information, and returns the produced output videos to the user interface component 40. The video conversion component 50 contains a video transcoding component 51, which transcodes input videos into output videos, changing their container format, video and audio codecs, bitrate, video resolution, aspect ratio, and other technical parameters characterizing the quality, compatibility, size, etc. of the resulting output video files. The video conversion component 50 may further contain a video processing component 52, which is a software performing other video processing tasks, including video upscaling and downscaling, increasing and decreasing a video's frame rate, etc. The video conversion component 50 may also contain a native fallback component 53, which is a software wrapper around native video transcoding and processing capabilities that are available on the end user computing device 10. For example, some central processing units 12 or graphics processing units 13 provide dedicated hardware support for decoding or encoding videos). The same motivation that was utilized in claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 9.
Regarding claim 10, Kum and Balko discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the video data comprises game content from one or more instances of a game application, the game content is included in the one or more streams, and the method further includes applying input from the client device to at least one instance of the one or more instances of the game application (Balko, paragraphs 29-30 discloses video conversion component 50 is the part of the video transcoding and processing application, which receives one or a plurality of input video files and parameters from the user interface component 40, transcodes or processes the received input videos according to the parameters and produces status information, and returns the produced output videos to the user interface component 40. The video conversion component 50 contains a video transcoding component 51, which transcodes input videos into output videos, changing their container format, video and audio codecs, bitrate, video resolution, aspect ratio, and other technical parameters characterizing the quality, compatibility, size, etc. of the resulting output video files. The video conversion component 50 may further contain a video processing component 52, which is a software performing other video processing tasks, including video upscaling and downscaling, increasing and decreasing a video's frame rate, etc. The video conversion component 50 may also contain a native fallback component 53, which is a software wrapper around native video transcoding and processing capabilities that are available on the end user computing device 10. For example, some central processing units 12 or graphics processing units 13 provide dedicated hardware support for decoding or encoding videos). The same motivation that was utilized in claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 10.
With regard to claims 11-20, claim lists all the same elements and features to claims 1-10 as outlined above. Therefore, the same rationale that was utilized in claims 1-10 applies equally as well to claims 11-20.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERRY T JEAN BAPTISTE whose telephone number is (571)272-6189. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5PM 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, William Vaughn can be reached at 571-272-3922. 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.
/JERRY T JEAN BAPTISTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2481
Prosecution Insights