Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 30, 2026
Application No. 19/069,631

TRANSFORM-BASED IMAGE CODING METHOD AND TRANSMISSION METHOD THEREFOR

Final Rejection §102§112§Other
Filed
Mar 04, 2025
Priority
Sep 21, 2019 — provisional 62/903,825 +4 more
Examiner
BECK, LERON
Art Unit
2487
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Nokia Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 1m
Est. Remaining
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allowance Rate
704 granted / 880 resolved
+22.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
930
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.8%
-31.2% vs TC avg
§103
52.1%
+12.1% vs TC avg
§102
12.4%
-27.6% vs TC avg
§112
12.4%
-27.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 880 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112 §Other
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 . Status of Claims 2. This is a final action on the merits in response to the reply received 7/2/2026. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejections. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claim 10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AlA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AlA the applicant regards as the invention. In addition, the medical observation storage medium storing data generated by the apparatus claimed by independent claim 10 is drafted in a way that does not specify the structural limitations of the storage medium nor the apparatus. For this reason, it is neither possible to give a definite construction to claim10, nor is it possible to ascertain the scope of protection sought by claim 10. The non-compliance with the substantive provisions is such an extent that a meaningful search of the whole claimed subject matter of independent claim 10 could not be carried out. 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102A2 as being anticipated by US 20200396455 A1-Liu et al (Hereinafter referred to as “Liu”). Claim 10 directed to a non-transitory computer readable storage medium (CRM) storing a bitstream generated by an encoding apparatus. The claim does not recite that the CRM contains executable instruction, that when executed, implement the steps by the encoding apparatus. The bitstream is a product produced by the encoding apparatus for the steps. Therefore, the claims are not limited to the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. (See MPEP 2113 - Product-by-Process claims.) Hence, the encoding method steps recited are given patentable weight only to structures in the bitstream that are implied by the steps. To be given patentable weight, the CRM and the bitstream (i.e. descriptive material) must be in a functional relationship. A functional relationship can be found where the descriptive material performs some function with respect to the CRM to which it is associated. See MPEP §2111.05(I)(A). When a claimed “computer-readable medium merely serves as a support for information or data, no functional relationship exists”. MPEP §2111.05(III). The CRM storing the claimed bitstream in claim 10 merely services as a support for the CRM of the bitstream and provides no functional relationship between the stored bitstream and the CRM. Therefore, the structure bitstream, which scope is implied by the method steps, is non-functional descriptive material and given no patentable weight. MPEP §2111.05(III). Thus, the claim scope is just a storage medium storing data and is anticipated by Liu which recites a storage medium storing a bitstream ([0265]). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-9 are allowed. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LERON BECK whose telephone number is (571)270-1175. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-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. LERON . BECK Examiner Art Unit 2487 /LERON BECK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 04, 2025
Application Filed
Apr 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112, §Other
Jul 02, 2026
Response Filed
Jul 15, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112, §Other (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12720103
ENCODER, DECODER, ENCODING METHOD, AND DECODING METHOD
1y 10m to grant Granted Aug 25, 2026
Patent 12711400
System, Method, and Computer Program Product for Testing a Machine Learning Model Based on Simulations in an Offline Environment
3y 10m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Patent 12713001
Prediction methods and a method for bitstream transmission
2y 1m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Patent 12707081
Motion Vector Resolution Based Motion Vector Prediction For Video Coding
1y 11m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12707070
THE METHOD OF EFFICIENT SIGNALLING OF CBF FLAGS
1y 10m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+11.0%)
2y 7m (~1y 1m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 880 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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