CTNF 19/090,056 CTNF 90233 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. DETAILED ACTION This office action is in response to a continuation application filed in which claims 2-21 of the instant application are pending and ready for examination as of the preliminary amendment filed on 04/09/2025. Double Patenting 08-33 AIA 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 2-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 10,785,486. The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, as follows: Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 10,785,486, either singularly or in combination, contain each and every element and/or render each and every element of claims 2-19 of the instant application obvious. The claims of the instant application therefore are not patently distinct from the issued patent claims and as such are unpatentable over obvious-type double patenting. More specifically, the subject matter in claims 1, 7, and 16 of U.S. Patent Number 10,785,486 discloses all the elements and steps of independent claims 2 and 9 of the instant application and, as such, anticipate each and every feature of the aforementioned independent claims of the instant application. Claims 2-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 2-19 of copending Application No. 19/089,845. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 2-19 of copending Application No. 19/089,845, either singularly or in combination, contain each and every element and/or render each and every element of claims 2-19 of the instant application obvious. The claims of the instant application therefore are not patently distinct from the copending application claims and as such are unpatentable over obvious-type double patenting. More specifically, the subject matter in claims 4 and 11 of copending Application No. 19/089,845 discloses all the elements and steps of independent claims 2 and 9 of the instant application and, as such, anticipate each and every feature of the aforementioned independent claims of the instant application. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Claims 2-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 2-19 of copending Application No. 19/089,900. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 2-19 of copending Application No. 19/089,900, either singularly or in combination, contain each and every element and/or render each and every element of claims 2-19 of the instant application obvious. The claims of the instant application therefore are not patently distinct from the copending application claims and as such are unpatentable over obvious-type double patenting. More specifically, the subject matter in claims 4 and 11 of copending Application No. 19/089,900 discloses all the elements and steps of independent claims 2 and 9 of the instant application and, as such, anticipate each and every feature of the aforementioned independent claims of the instant application. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Claims 2-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 2-19 of copending Application No. 19/089,953. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 2-19 of copending Application No. 19/089,953, either singularly or in combination, contain each and every element and/or render each and every element of claims 2-19 of the instant application obvious. The claims of the instant application therefore are not patently distinct from the copending application claims and as such are unpatentable over obvious-type double patenting. More specifically, the subject matter in claims 2 and 9 of copending Application No. 19/089,953 discloses all the elements and steps of independent claims 2 and 9 of the instant application and, as such, anticipate each and every feature of the aforementioned independent claims of the instant application. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Claims 2-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 2-21 of copending Application No. 19/090,011. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 2-21 of copending Application No. 19/090,011, either singularly or in combination, contain each and every element and/or render each and every element of claims 2-19 of the instant application obvious. The claims of the instant application therefore are not patently distinct from the copending application claims and as such are unpatentable over obvious-type double patenting. More specifically, the subject matter in claims 2, 9, and 20 of copending Application No. 19/090,011 discloses all the elements and steps of independent claims 2 and 9 of the instant application and, as such, anticipate each and every feature of the aforementioned independent claims of the instant application. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-12-aia AIA (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. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim s 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Pang (US 2015/0271515) . As to claim 20, Pang teaches one or more non-transitory computer-readable media having stored therein a sequence parameter set and encoded data for a current picture, wherein the sequence parameter set includes a first syntax element indicating whether intra block copy (BC) prediction mode is enabled or disabled for a sequence, wherein the encoded data includes a second syntax element for a current block of the current picture, the second syntax element indicating prediction mode for the current block is inter prediction mode, the second syntax element being signaled for a coding unit associated with the current block (see [0019], [0038]-[0050], [0052], [0055], [0063], [0066], [0128], [0135]-[0137], and [0465]-[0470]; more particularly, see [0161]-[0303] for SPS semantics involving intra BC flag and (inter) prediction mode flag), and wherein the sequence parameter set and encoded data are organized to facilitate processing, with a computer-implemented video decoder, by operations comprising: decoding the current picture using the encoded data, including: incrementing a counter that indicates a number of reference pictures active; adding the current picture to a reference picture list (RPL), wherein the current picture is added at a last position of the RPL; marking the current picture as a long-term reference picture; and decoding the current block, including performing intra BC prediction for the current block, wherein the intra BC prediction uses the inter prediction mode with the current picture, marked as a long-term reference picture, for reference; and after the decoding the current picture finishes, marking the current picture as a short-term reference picture (this portion of the claim is not given patentable weight). As to claim 21, Pang further teaches wherein: the current block is part of a current slice (this portion of the claim is not given patentable weight); a reference picture index in the encoded data identifies the current picture (see [0064]-[0065] and [0072]); and the current slice is a P slice or B slice (this portion of the claim is not given patentable weight). Allowable Subject Matter The closest prior art made of record in regards to applicant’s claimed invention is as follows: Kwon et al. (US 2014/0301465) discloses a method for decoding encoded blocks of pixels from an encoded video bit stream that includes decoding a block vector corresponding to an encoded block of pixels from the encoded bit stream, verifying that the block vector indicates a block of reconstructed pixels in a search area including reconstructed pixels of a largest coding unit (LCU) including the encoded block of pixels and N left neighboring reconstructed LCUs of the LCU, and decoding the encoded block of pixels, wherein the block of reconstructed pixels is used as a predictor for the encoded block of pixels (abstract). Li et al. (US 2015/0271487) discloses a method for encoding or decoding video data that includes storing, by a video coder and in a reference picture buffer, a version of a current picture of the video data, including the current picture in a reference picture list (RPL) used to predict the current picture, and coding, by the video coder and based on the RPL, a block of video data in the current picture based on a predictor block of video data included in the version of the current picture stored in the reference picture buffer (abstract). Chen et al. (US 2013/0322531) discloses a video encoder that generates a syntax element that indicates whether a video unit of a current picture is predicted from an external picture. The external picture is in a different layer than the current picture. Furthermore, the video encoder outputs a video data bitstream that includes a representation of the syntax element. The video data bitstream may or may not include a coded representation of the external picture. A video decoder obtains the syntax element from the video data bitstream. The video decoder uses the syntax element in a process to reconstruct video data of a portion of the video unit (abstract). Takahashi et al. (US 2014/0085418) discloses an image processing device and image processing method whereby prediction efficiency of disparity prediction can be improved. A resolution converting device converts images of two viewpoints or more, out of images of three viewpoints or more, into a packed image, by performing packing following a packing pattern in which images of two viewpoints or more are packed into one viewpoint worth of image, in accordance with a predetermined encoding mode at the time of encoding an image to be encoded which is to be encoded. An encoding device generates a prediction image of the image to be encoded, by performing disparity compensation with the packed image as the image to be encoded or a reference image, and encodes the image to be encoded in the predetermined encoding mode, using the prediction image. The present technology can be applied to encoding and decoding of images of multiple viewpoints (abstract). The closest prior art of record, considered individually or in combination, fails to teach or reasonably suggest all the claimed features of claims 2 and 9, structurally and functionally interconnected with other limitations in the manner as cited in the claims and dependent claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHIHAN ZHOU whose telephone number is (571)270-7284. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays-Fridays 8:30am-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, Christopher Kelley can be reached on 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. /ZHIHAN ZHOU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482 Application/Control Number: 19/090,056 Page 2 Art Unit: 2482 Application/Control Number: 19/090,056 Page 3 Art Unit: 2482 Application/Control Number: 19/090,056 Page 4 Art Unit: 2482 Application/Control Number: 19/090,056 Page 5 Art Unit: 2482 Application/Control Number: 19/090,056 Page 6 Art Unit: 2482 Application/Control Number: 19/090,056 Page 7 Art Unit: 2482 Application/Control Number: 19/090,056 Page 8 Art Unit: 2482
Prosecution Insights