Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/059,476

POINT CLOUD DECODING DEVICE, POINT CLOUD DECODING METHOD, AND PROGRAM

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Feb 21, 2025
Examiner
VOLENTINE, REBECCA A
Art Unit
2483
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Kddi Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
401 granted / 526 resolved
+18.2% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+17.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
545
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.6%
-37.4% vs TC avg
§103
51.8%
+11.8% vs TC avg
§102
15.5%
-24.5% vs TC avg
§112
16.2%
-23.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 526 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION This office action is in response to an application filed 2/21/2025, wherein claims 1-18 are pending and being examined. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 2/21/2025. 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 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 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. Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 17, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pham Van et al. (US 2022/0210466) (hereinafter Pham Van). In regard to claim 1, Pham Van discloses a point cloud decoding device [¶0005; techniques for coding (encoding and decoding) point cloud data] comprising: a circuit [¶0045; G-PCC encoder 200 and G-PCC decoder 300 each may be implemented as any of a variety of suitable encoder and/or decoder circuitry] that performs inter prediction using a plurality of reference frames during Predictive coding [¶0031; respective point clouds (frames) may be coded relative to each other, e.g., using intra-frame prediction or inter-frame prediction. ¶0076; Geometry arithmetic decoding unit 302 may perform inter-prediction using local or global motion vectors. Fig.5]. In regard to claim 3, Pham Van discloses the point cloud decoding device according to claim 1. Pham Van further discloses, wherein the circuit performs global motion compensation on each of the plurality of reference frames by the inter prediction using a global motion vector for a processing target frame [Fig.5, ¶0076-¶0077, ¶0084-¶0087]. In regard to claim 4, Pham Van discloses the point cloud decoding device according to claim 1. Pham Van further discloses, wherein the circuit: performs global motion compensation on a first reference frame using a first global motion vector on the processing target frame [¶0071, ¶0076-¶0077], and performs global motion compensation on a second reference frame using the first global motion vector and a second global motion vector of the second reference frame for the first reference frame [Fig.5, ¶0076-¶0077, ¶0084-¶0087, ¶0228-¶0231]. In regard to claim 5, Pham Van discloses the point cloud decoding device according to claim 4. Pham Van further discloses, wherein the circuit: holds the first global motion vector [¶0071, ¶0076-¶0077] and reuses the first global motion vector for subsequent processing [Fig.5, ¶0076-¶0077, ¶0084-¶0087, ¶0228-¶0231]. In regard to claim 17, this claim is drawn to a method corresponding to the device of claim 1, wherein claim 17 contains the same limitations as claim 1 and is therefore rejected upon the same basis. In regard to claim 18, Pham Van discloses a program stored on a non-transitory computer-readable medium [¶0045; a device may store instructions for the software in a suitable, non-transitory computer-readable medium and execute the instructions] for causing a computer to function as a point cloud decoding device [¶0005; techniques for coding (encoding and decoding) point cloud data], wherein the point cloud decoding device [¶0045] comprising: a circuit [¶0045; G-PCC encoder 200 and G-PCC decoder 300 each may be implemented as any of a variety of suitable encoder and/or decoder circuitry] that performs inter prediction using a plurality of reference frames during Predictive coding [¶0031; respective point clouds (frames) may be coded relative to each other, e.g., using intra-frame prediction or inter-frame prediction. ¶0076; Geometry arithmetic decoding unit 302 may perform inter-prediction using local or global motion vectors. Fig.5]. 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. 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) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pham Van (US 2022/0210466) in view of Adzic et al. (US 2022/0150515) (hereinafter Adzic). In regard to claim 2, Pham Van discloses the point cloud decoding device according to claim 1. Pham Van further discloses, further comprising: a frame buffer [¶0085], wherein the frame buffer holds a plurality of decoded frames in order from a most recently decoded frame [¶0066-¶0070, ¶0085], and Pham Van does not explicitly disclose rejects an old frame when a number of frames exceeds a maximum number of frames that can be held. However Adzic discloses, the frame buffer holds a plurality of decoded frames in order from a most recently decoded frame [Fig. 2, ¶0030-¶0031], and rejects an old frame when a number of frames exceeds a maximum number of frames that can be held [¶0030-¶0031; buffer may be regularly updated by removing a first frame from the buffer and adding a current frame (Ft) to the buffer, similar to a first in first out (FIFO) queue. The current frame can include a newly decoded frame… determine that unavailable reference buffer has met or exceeds a predefined maximum allowed buffer size, and remove a frame from the unavailable reference buffer]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device disclosed by Pham Van with the buffer organization disclosed by Adzic in order to provide improved frame management in picture encoding/decoding devices [Adzic ¶0030-¶0032, ¶0059]. Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pham Van (US 2022/0210466) in view of Cui (US 2023/0171410). In regard to claim 14, Pham Van discloses the point cloud decoding device according to claim 1. Pham Van does not explicitly disclose, wherein the circuit: allocates indices to predictors belonging to different reference frames based on an order of the reference frames to which the predictors belong, and allocates indices to predictors belonging to a same reference frame based on a parent-child relationship of nodes. However Cui discloses, the circuit [¶0087]: allocates indices to predictors belonging to different reference frames based on an order of the reference frames to which the predictors belong [¶0021; previous frame or a subsequent frame of the to-be-coded image frame… reference index may be frame-level relative location information of a matching block acquired from a reference frame set based on the to-be-coded image frame. ¶0053; frame-level index number of a coding macroblock that is closest to the to-be-coded image frame in the time sequence… generation of a reference index, the reference frame may be a forward reference frame or a backward reference frame], and allocates indices to predictors belonging to a same reference frame based on a parent-child relationship of nodes [¶0056-¶0060; collection of the first reference index, the parent fusion reference index, and the child fusion reference index may be determined as the second reference index]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device disclosed by Pham Van with the index values disclosed by Cui in order to provide more accurate reference frame setting, thereby improving coding performance without increasing complexity [Cui ¶0048, ¶0059, ¶0071-¶0075]. Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pham Van (US 2022/0210466) in view of Oh et al. (US 2023/0388557) (hereinafter Oh). In regard to claim 15, Pham Van discloses the point cloud decoding device according to claim 1. Pham Van does not explicitly disclose, wherein the circuit allocates an index to each of a plurality of predictors based on azimuth angles of the predictors in an Angular mode. However Oh the circuit [¶0139] allocates an index to each of a plurality of predictors based on azimuth angles of the predictors in an Angular mode converting an azimuthal angle into an index [¶0390-¶0392; converting an azimuthal angle into an index… azimuthal angle may be approximated with an index. ¶0700, ¶0738]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device disclosed by Pham Van with the index disclosed by Oh in order to provide sampling adjustment for an azimuthal angle in a cylindrical coordinate system, a spherical coordinate system, or a fan-shaped coordinate system [Oh ¶0004-¶0012, ¶0390-¶0392]. Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pham Van (US 2022/0210466) in view of Lasserre et al. (US 2024/0185472) (hereinafter Lasserre). In regard to claim 16, Pham Van discloses the point cloud decoding device according to claim 1. Pham Van does not explicitly disclose, wherein the circuit allocates an index to each of a plurality of predictors based on similarity between a predictor and a parent node of a processing target node. However Lasserre discloses, the circuit [¶0045] allocates an index to each of a plurality of predictors based on similarity between a predictor and a parent node of a processing target node [¶0191-¶0192; candidate prediction modes by the prediction mode index Isel…. predictor mode index Isel,prec to indicate if a predicted radius depends or not of a parent node of the current point. ¶0032]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the device disclosed by Pham Van with the index disclosed by Lasserre in order to provide improved signaling of prediction modes and predicted azimuthal angles for point cloud data [Lasserre ¶0071-¶0075, ¶0191-¶0192, ¶0195]. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6-13 are 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 REBECCA A VOLENTINE whose telephone number is (571)270-7261. 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, Joe Ustaris can be reached at (571)272-7383. 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. /REBECCA A VOLENTINE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483 February 19, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 21, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12586383
Camera monitor system, vehicle and method
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569124
LIGHT SOURCE AND SYSTEM FOR AND METHOD OF FLUORESCENCE DIAGNOSIS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12567260
VIDEO TRANSMISSION SYSTEM, VEHICLE, AND VIDEO TRANSMISSION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12560796
MICROSCOPE-BASED SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR IMAGE-GUIDED MICROSCOPIC ILLUMINATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12552321
CAMERA MONITOR SYSTEM UTILIZING TRAILER ANGLE DETECTION BASED UPON DOT TAPE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+17.3%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 526 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month