DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claims 3-4 canceled.
Response to Arguments
Response for rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b): rejection has been withdrawn, because amended claims 1-2, 4, 10-12, 15-17 and 19-20 overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112(b): rejection; therefore 35 U.S.C. 35 U.S.C. 112(b): rejection has been withdrawn.
Response to applicant argues on pages 8-11 Hannuksela fails to disclose “… supplementary video track where for each supplementary-main video pair, a main video track is a track that is a reference track of the first track reference or any track in an alternate group to which the referenced track belongs, if any.” [See applicant's argument: pages 8-11]; while the applicant points are understood the examiner respectfully disagrees. Hannuksela discloses picture-in-picture(pip) include low resolution over a picture with high resolution. The picture with the higher resolution is referred to as the main picture or the background picture or the primary picture. The picture with the lower resolution, which is overlaid on the background picture, is referred to as the foreground or overlay picture or secondary picture, and Hannukesela further teach, wherein the second track comprises a track reference box comprising a reference type to indicate that the second track comprises the picture-in-picture video and a main video is comprises in a referenced track or any track in an alternate group to which the referenced track belongs. a subset of subpictures in the second encoded bitstream comprised in the second track participate in the picture-in-picture feature, the second track further comprises at least one of following: a map entry which is used to assign a unique identifier, by using the group ID, to each data unit within the second track; or an extract and merge sample group, wherein the extract and merge sample group comprise the group ID of the data units that are used to replace the corresponding data units of the first encoded bitstream comprised in the first track[See abstract and Paragraphs 13, 36-56, 250-271 and 289-292].
Regarding dependent claims, in response to applicants’ arguments, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See in re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071,5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR international Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Hannuksela meets all rejected limitations of the instant application.
Applicant is reminded that although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re
Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
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)(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.
(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 applications the case maybe, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2 and 5-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hannuksela et.al. (US 2025/0254403) (Miska Matias Hannuksela).
Regarding Claim 1, Hannuksel a discloses a method for processing media data, comprising: determining a referencing track that contains a first track reference, wherein the first track reference indicates that a video in the referencing track or in any track in an alternate group to which the referencing track belongs, if any, is usable as a supplementary video [See abstract Paragraphs 45-53 and 250-271 e.g. picture-in-picture(pip) include low resolution over a picture with high resolution. The picture with the higher resolution is referred to as the main picture or the background picture or the primary picture. The picture with the lower resolution, which is overlaid on the background picture, is referred to as the foreground or overlay picture or secondary picture]; and performing a conversion between a visual media data and a visual media data file based on the determining [See Paragraphs 258-272], wherein for each pair of supplementary video and main video, a track containing the supplementary video is referred to as a supplementary video track [See Paragraphs 36-56 and 251-264], and wherein for each pair of supplementary video and main video, a main video track is a track that is a referenced track of the first track reference or any track in an alternate group to which the referenced track of the first track reference belongs, if any track [See Paragraphs 13, 36-56, 251-264 and 289-292].
Regarding Claim 2, Hannuksela discloses wherein the first track reference indicates that a corresponding main video is contained at least in the referenced track or in any track in the alternate group to which the referenced track belongs, if any [See Paragraphs 36-56 and 251-257].
Regarding Claim 5, Hannuksela discloses wherein when a video codec used for the main video is versatile video coding (VVC), the main video is contained in a single track, wherein the main video track is the single track [See Paragraphs 251-259].
Regarding Claim 6, Hannuksela discloses wherein when a video codec used for a main video is versatile video coding (VVC), the main video is contained in multiple tracks including a VVC merge base track and a number of VVC subpicture tracks referenced by the VVC merge base track through a ‘subp’ track reference, wherein the main video track is the VVC merge base track [See Paragraphs 250-265].
Regarding Claim 7, Hannuksela discloses wherein when a video codec used for the main video track is versatile video coding (VVC), a sample entry type is ‘vvc1’ or ‘vvi1’ [See Paragraphs 553-574].
Regarding Claim 8, Hannuksela discloses wherein when a video codec used for themain video is high efficiency video coding (HEVC) or layered HEVC (L-HEVC), the main video is contained in a single track, wherein the main video track is the single track [See Paragraphs 318-329].
Regarding Claim 9, Hannuksela discloses wherein when a video codec used for the main video is high efficiency video coding (HEVC) or layered HEVC (L-HEVC), the main video is contained in multiple tracks including an HEVC or L-HEVC tile base track and a number of HEVC or L-HEVC tile tracks containing ‘tbas’ track references that refer to the tile base track, wherein a main video track is the tile base track [See Paragraphs 318-329 e.g. PictureInPictureGroupBox extends TrackGroupTypeBox(‘pipt’)].
Regarding Claim 10, Hannuksela discloses wherein a TrackReferenceTypeBox with reference_type equal to the first track reference, when present, contains only a track identifier and does not contain any track group identifier, or wherein a TrackReferenceTypeBox with reference_type equal to the first track reference, when present, contains in a first entry a track identifier and other entries, if any, contain track group identifiers m [See Paragraphs 33-34 and 299-310].
Regarding Claim 11, Hannuksela discloses wherein a first entry in a TrackReferenceTypeBox with reference_type equal to the first track reference is a track identifier, and wherein a referenced track is a track for which a track identifier is the first entry in the TrackReferenceTypeBox with reference_type equal to the first track reference [See Paragraphs 434-39 and 533-74].
Regarding Claim 12, Hannuksela discloses wherein when PicInPicRegionReplacementEntry is present in the supplementary video track, it indicates that network abstraction layer (NAL) units representing a target supplementary region in a corresponding main video that has a same coded picture width and coded picture height, respectively, as a video contained in a referenced track of a the first track reference is capable of being replaced with corresponding NAL units of supplementary video [See Paragraphs 24-41 and 258-264 e.g. replacement of coded region in the main track with the PiP video track.].
Regarding Claim 13, Hannuksela discloses wherein the conversion includes encoding the visual media data into the visual media data file [See Paragraphs 312-323 and 459-484 and Figs. 12-14].
Regarding Claim 14, Hannuksela discloses wherein the conversion includes decoding the visual media data from the visual media data file [See Paragraphs 312-323 and 459-484 and Figs. 12-14].
Regarding Claim 15, the limitations claimed are substantially similar to claim 1 above, therefore the ground for rejecting claim l also applies here.
Regarding Claim 16, Hannuksela discloses wherein the first track reference indicates that a corresponding main video is contained at least in the referenced track or in any track in an alternate group to which the referenced track belongs, if any [See Paragraphs 36-56 and 251-257].
Regarding Claim 17, Hannuksela discloses wherein when a video codec used for the main video track is versatile video coding (VVC), a sample entry type is ‘vvc1’ or ‘vvi1’ [See Paragraphs 13, 36-56, 250-265 and 289-292].
Regarding Claim 18, Hannuksela discloses wherein when a video codec used forthemain video is versatile video coding (VVC), either: a) the main video is contained in a single track, wherein the main video track is the single track; or b) the main video is contained in multiple tracks including a VVC merge base track and a number of VVC subpicture tracks referenced by the VVC merge base track through a ‘subp’ track reference, wherein a main video track is the VVC merge base track, and wherein when a video codec used for a main video is high efficiency video coding (HEVC) or layered HEVC (L-HEVC), either: c) the main video is contained in a single track, wherein a main video track is the single track; or d) the main video is contained in multiple tracks including an HEVC or L-HEVC tile base track and a number of HEVC or L-HEVC tile tracks containing ‘tbas’ track references that refer to the tile base track, wherein a main video track is the tile base track [See Paragraphs 13, 36-56, 250-265, 318-329 and 553-574].
Regarding Claim 19, the limitations claimed are substantially simila0r to claim 1 above, therefore the ground for rejecting claim l also applies here.
Regarding Claim 20, the limitations claimed are substantially similar to claim 1 above, therefore the ground for rejecting claim l also applies here.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicants are reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a.
A shortened statutory period for replying 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 extension fee 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 TSION B OWENS whose telephone number is (571)272-3934. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:00.
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.
/TSION B OWENS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
Prosecution Insights