DETAILED ACTION
Summary
This office action for US Patent application 19/082607 is responsive to communications filed on October 21, 2025. Currently, claims 1-14 are pending are presented for examination.
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 obviousness-type 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); 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 conflicting 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.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 1-14 inprovisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2, 4- 5 of copending Application No 17/463146, now US Patent 11,882,304 and provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2, 4- 5 of copending Application No 18/527169. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because it is merely in the terminology used in both sets of claims.
This is an obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented. Below is a list of limitations that perform the same function. However different terminology is used in both sets to describe the limitations.
Conflicting Co-pending Application 17/463146
Instant Application-19/082607-
1. A picture decoding method, applicable to a decoder, the method comprising: decoding a bitstream to obtain a size, a coding mode, and residuals of a current block; when the coding mode of the current block is a Matrix-based Intra Prediction (MIP) mode, calculating a second offset based on the size of the current block, a first offset and reconstructed values of adjacent pixels corresponding to the current block; determining a first prediction value of the current block according to the second offset; and determining a reconstructed value of the current block based on the first prediction value.
5. The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining an MIP block size index number corresponding to the current block according to the size of the current block; and determining the first offset according to the MIP block size index number.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: calculating a second prediction value of a pixel at a preset position in the current block through the second offset, wherein the preset position is a particular position in the current block; and performing linear interpolation on the second prediction value to obtain first prediction values in the current block.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the first offset is a constant.
Claims 1-2, 4-5
1. A picture decoding method, applicable to a decoder, the method comprising: decoding a bitstream to obtain a size and a coding mode of a current block; when the coding mode of the current block is a Matrix-based Intra Prediction (MIP) mode, determining a value of a MIP block size index corresponding to the current block according to the size of the current block; calculating a second offset based on the MIP block size index, a first offset and reconstructed values of adjacent pixels corresponding to the current block; determining a first prediction value of the current block according to the second offset; and determining a reconstructed value of the current block based on the first prediction value.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: calculating a second prediction value of a pixel at a preset position in the current block through the second offset, wherein the preset position is a particular position in the current block; and performing linear interpolation on the second prediction value to obtain first prediction values in the current block.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the first offset is a constant.
Claims 4-14
Instant Application-18/527169-
Instant Application-19/082607-
1. A picture decoding method, applicable to a decoder, the method comprising: decoding a bitstream to obtain a size, a coding mode, and residuals of a current block; when the coding mode of the current block is a Matrix-based Intra Prediction (MIP) mode, determining a value of a MIP block size index number corresponding to the current block according to the size of the current block; determining a first offset for calculating a second offset; calculating the second offset based on the MIP block size index number, the first offset and reconstructed values of adjacent pixels corresponding to the current block; determining a first prediction value of the current block according to the second offset; and determining a reconstructed value of the current block based on the first prediction value.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: calculating a second prediction value of a pixel at a preset position in the current block through the second offset, wherein the preset position is a particular position in the current block; and performing linear interpolation on the second prediction value to obtain first prediction values in the current block.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the first offset is a constant.
Claims 4-12
1. A picture decoding method, applicable to a decoder, the method comprising: decoding a bitstream to obtain a size and a coding mode of a current block; when the coding mode of the current block is a Matrix-based Intra Prediction (MIP) mode, determining a value of a MIP block size index corresponding to the current block according to the size of the current block; calculating a second offset based on the MIP block size index, a first offset and reconstructed values of adjacent pixels corresponding to the current block; determining a first prediction value of the current block according to the second offset; and determining a reconstructed value of the current block based on the first prediction value.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: calculating a second prediction value of a pixel at a preset position in the current block through the second offset, wherein the preset position is a particular position in the current block; and performing linear interpolation on the second prediction value to obtain first prediction values in the current block.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the first offset is a constant.
Claims 4-14
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-14 are generic to all that is recited in claims of the co-pending applications. That is, claims 1-14 is anticipated by claims of the co-pending applications.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-14 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting. However, these claims would be allowable if the obvious-type double patenting and the claim objection is addressed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications form the examiner should be directed to Nam Pham, whose can be contacted by phone at (571)270-7352. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon—Thurs.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, CZEKAJ DAVID, can be reached on (571)272-7327.
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 (too 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.
/NAM D PHAM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
Prosecution Insights