Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/100,225

VARIABLE INTRA-FRAME (I-FRAME) TIME INTERVAL AND GROUP OF PICTURE (GOP) LENGTH FOR VIDEO CODING

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Jan 31, 2025
Examiner
MAHMUD, FARHAN
Art Unit
2483
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Qualcomm Incorporated
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
55%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
65%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 55% of resolved cases
55%
Career Allow Rate
212 granted / 386 resolved
-3.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
426
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.6%
-35.4% vs TC avg
§103
43.7%
+3.7% vs TC avg
§102
38.0%
-2.0% vs TC avg
§112
9.8%
-30.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 386 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/31/2025 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 § 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. Claims 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 28 depends on “The method of claim 27”. Claim 27 has been cancelled, and therefore renders claim 28 an improper dependent claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Applicant is required to correct. 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. Claim(s) 1-2, 4-6, 8-10, 12-14, 16-17, 19, 21, 23-25, and 28-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (US 20150281705 A1). Regarding Claim 1, Wang et al. teaches an apparatus for processing video data, comprising: at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled to the at least one memory (Paragraph 13), the at least one processor configured to: obtain a frame of video data associated with a display of a computing device, wherein the frame of video data includes one or more layers (Paragraphs 12-13; Paragraphs 134-147); compare layer information associated with the one or more layers included in the frame of video data and layer information associated with one or more layers included in a previous frame of video data (Paragraph 84; Paragraphs 108-118; Paragraphs 134-148); generate, based on determining a frame geometry change associated with the frame of video data, an inter-predicted frame using the frame of video data (Paragraphs 104-112; Paragraphs 134-147; Paragraphs 164-168; since geometry information is clearly used to determine activity in images within scenes, the detection of scene change necessarily is also a geometry change); and determine an updated group of pictures (GOP) length based on the layer information associated with the one or more layers included in the frame of video data (Paragraphs 104-122; Paragraphs 134-147). Regarding Claim 2, Wang et al. teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to determine the updated GOP length based on layer information associated with a primary layer included in the frame of video data (Paragraphs 104-122; Paragraphs 134-147). Regarding Claim 4, Wang et al. teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the layer information includes, for each respective layer included in the one or more layers, at least one of a layer name associated with each respective layer, a layer format associated with each respective layer, and one or more coordinates associated with each respective layer (Paragraphs 134-147). Regarding Claim 5, Wang et al. teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the layer information includes at least one of a quantity of layers or a frame layer number (Paragraphs 134-147). 6. (Original) The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is configured to determine the frame geometry change associated with the frame of video data based on comparing the layer information associated with the one or more layers included in the frame of video data and the layer information associated with the one or more layers included in the previous frame of video data (Paragraphs 104-122; Paragraphs 134-147). Regarding Claim 8, Wang et al. teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: determine that a frame geometry change is not associated with the frame of video data, based on the layer information associated with the one or more layers included in the frame of video data changing by less than a threshold amount compared to the layer information associated with the one or more layers included in the previous frame of video data (Paragraphs 104-122; Paragraphs 134-147). Regarding Claim 9, Wang et al. teaches the apparatus of claim 8, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: detect a display idle state associated with the frame of video data, based on the frame of video data and a pre-determined quantity of previous frames of video data not being associated with a frame geometry change; and apply a display idle GOP length, wherein the display idle GOP length is greater than the updated GOP length (Paragraphs 104-122; Paragraphs 134-147). Regarding Claim 10, Wang et al. teaches the apparatus of claim 8, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: encode the frame of video data as a predicted frame (P-frame) or a bidirectional frame (B- frame) based on the frame of video data not being associated with a frame geometry change (Paragraph 80; Paragraph 85; Paragraphs 104-122). Regarding Claim 12, Wang et al. teaches the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the frame of video data is a frame of captured video display data associated with wireless display sharing from the computing device to a second computing device (Paragraph 45). Regarding Claim 13, Wang et al. teaches the apparatus of claim 12, wherein the frame of video data and the previous frame of video data are sequential frames included in a plurality of frames of captured video display data (Paragraphs 12-13). Regarding Claim 14, Wang et al. teaches the apparatus of claim 13, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: encode at least a portion of the plurality of frames of captured video display data using the inter-predicted frame (Paragraphs 73-80; Paragraph 85-87). Method claims 16-17, 19, 21, 23-25, and 28-29 are drawn to the method of using corresponding apparatus of claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-10, and 12-14 and are rejected for the same reasons as used above. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARHAN MAHMUD whose telephone number is (571)272-7712. The examiner can normally be reached 10-7. 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, Joseph Ustaris can be reached at 5712727383. 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. /FARHAN MAHMUD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 31, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604019
SYSTEM AND APPARATUS FOR VIDEO DISPLAY ON A PORTABLE DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12581077
ENCODER, DECODER, ENCODING METHOD, AND DECODING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12563229
3D PREDICTION METHOD FOR VIDEO CODING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12542908
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR FACILITATING MACHINE-LEARNING BASED MEDIA COMPRESSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12537951
METHOD FOR IMAGE PROCESSING AND APPARATUS FOR IMPLEMENTING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 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
55%
Grant Probability
65%
With Interview (+10.1%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 386 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