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 . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. There are a total of 20 claims and claims 16-35 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/08/2025 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 § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 16-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sudak et al. (US 2020/0107069 A1 ) in view of LIU et al. (EP 3448082 B1 ).
Regarding claim 16, Sudak discloses a method, implemented by an encoding system, the method comprising ([see in Fig. 8-9]- video encoding system): receiving a report from a decoding system, wherein the report: identifies a packet comprising a first video portion of a video stream ([abstract and [0008-0010]]- a data packet over a wireless link to a sink electronic device to present the data packet as part of a video stream. The source electronic device may also include encoder circuitry that encodes the data packet for transmission through the wireless link and a feedback path communicatively coupling the encoder circuitry directly to the first interface circuitry).
However, Sudak does not explicitly disclose comprises feedback indicating whether the first video portion was successfully received by the decoding system; and responsive to determining that the feedback indicates that the first video portion was successfully received, configuring a video encoder in the encoding system to encode a second video portion of the video stream using a video frame comprising the first video portion as a reference frame.
In an analogous art, LIU discloses feedback indicating whether the first video portion was successfully received by the decoding system ([0006], [0007], [0024]-[0025], [0037]- early packet loss determination at MAC layer based on ACK and NACK messages sent by the receiver); and responsive to determining that the feedback indicates that the first video portion was successfully received, configuring a video encoder in the encoding system to encode a second video portion of the video stream using a video frame comprising the first video portion as a reference frame([0008],[0065]-[0069]- may include a receiver, a sender, a WTRU, an access point, a device in a mesh network, a device on a transmission path between the receiver and the sender, or the like. The device may determine, at the MAC layer, that a transmission of a MAC packet has failed prior to receiving a receiver transmission feedback message associated with the transmission. The receiver transmission feedback message may include a receiver report, a negative acknowledgment message from a receiver, or an acknowledgement message from the receiver). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of LIU to the modified system of Sudak a method associated with packet loss in a video transmission are provided which to determine at a media access control, MAC, layer, that a transmission, of a MAC packet has failed, wherein the failed transmission of the MAC packet is determined prior to receiving a receiver transmission feedback message associated with the transmission and a video packet associated with the failed transmission of the MAC packet is identified to minimize transmission errors [LIU; abstract].
Regarding claim 17, LIU discloses wherein configuring the video encoder based on the feedback comprises configuring the video encoder to encode the second video portion without reference to the first video portion in response to the feedback indicating that the first video portion was not successfully received([0008],[0065]-[0069]- may include a receiver, a sender, a WTRU, an access point, a device in a mesh network, a device on a transmission path between the receiver and the sender, or the like. The device may determine, at the MAC layer, that a transmission of a MAC packet has failed prior to receiving a receiver transmission feedback message associated with the transmission. The receiver transmission feedback message may include a receiver report, a negative acknowledgment message from a receiver, or an acknowledgement message from the receiver).
Regarding claim 18, LIU discloses wherein configuring the video encoder to encode the second video portion without reference to the first video portion comprises configuring the video encoder to designate a video slice comprising the first video portion as intra-frame encoded(see in Fig. 4a and [0008], [0065]- FIG. 4(b) depicts an example of reference picture selection (RPS) based feedback - based video coding. In RPS video coding, the encoder may predict a frame 430 (e.g., the next frame). The predicted frame may be based on a previously transmitted and/or uncorrupted reference frame 440 (e.g., upon receiving packet loss notification). The RPS video coding may use fewer bits than IR coding).
Regarding claim 19, LIU discloses wherein configuring the video encoder to encode the second video portion without reference to the first video portion comprises configuring the video(see in Fig. 4a and [0008], [0065]).
Regarding claim 20, LIU discloses wherein configuring the video encoder to encode the second video portion as an IDR frame is responsive to the feedback and at least one further feedback received from the decoding system together indicating that an entirety of a video frame comprising the first video portion was not successfully received([0055]-[0056]- the "XR packets" (clearly generated on the basis of the MAC-level ACK and NACK messages issued by the receiver) include information as to whether entire frames are lost and, in response, the video sender encodes a subsequent frame as an IDR frame).
Regarding claim 21, LIU discloses wherein configuring the video encoder to encode the second video portion using the video frame as the reference frame is in further response to the feedback and at least one further feedback received from the decoding system together indicating that an entirety of the video frame was successfully received at the decoding system([0008],[para 0055]-[0056]- The encoder may use, as reference for predictive coding, any previous frame that has been correctly received by the receiver).
Regarding claim 22, LIU discloses wherein the feedback indicates that the first video portion was successfully received by indicating that a video slice comprising the first video portion was successfully received at the decoding system. ([0008],[para 0055]-[0056]- The encoder may use, as reference for predictive coding, any previous frame that has been correctly received by the receiver; see also ([0029], [0033]- packet identifiers SNRTP can be mapped to one or more video frames or video slices)).
Regarding claim 23, LIU discloses further comprising storing, in a datastore for each of a plurality of packets carrying respective portions of the video stream, an entry that associates: a packet identifier that identifies the packet([see in Fig. 3 and para 0004]- FIG. 3 depicts the structure of an RTP packet); and a frame identifier that identifies a video frame comprising the respective portion([0029], [0033]- packet identifiers SNRTP can be mapped to one or more video frames or video slices); with decoder feedback indicating whether the respective portion is decodable by the decoding system([0029], [0033]- packet identifiers SNRTP can be mapped to one or more video frames or video slices).
Regarding claim 24, LIU discloses adding a further entry to the datastore for the packet based on the report ([0008], [0066]) implies that the encoder keeps track of which frames are "uncorrupted" which are not. To this end, storing the "mapping" between packet identifiers SNRTP and video frames or slices ( [0029], [0033]) together with information as to whether said frames and/or packets have been correctly received by the decoder is an obvious design option).
Regarding claim 25, LIU discloses determining a one-way network delay between a transmission time of the packet from the encoding system and a reception time of the packet at the decoding system; interpreting the feedback as indicating that the first video portion is either decodable or not decodable based respectively on whether or not the one-way network delay is less than a threshold ([0008], [0066]) implies that the encoder keeps track of which frames are "uncorrupted" which are not. To this end, storing the "mapping" between packet identifiers SNRTP and video frames or slices ([0029], [0033]) together with information as to whether said frames and/or packets have been correctly received by the decoder is an obvious design option).
Regarding claim 26, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 16. Hence; all limitations for system claim 26 have been met in method claim 16.
Regarding claim 27, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 17.
Regarding claim 28, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 18.
Regarding claim 29, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 19.
Regarding claim 30, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 20.
Regarding claim 31, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 21.
Regarding claim 32, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 22.
Regarding claim 33, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 23.
Regarding claim 34, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 25.
Regarding claim 35, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 16. Hence; all limitations for claim 35 have been met in method claim 16.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art are made of record and not relied upon but considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
1. Andgart ;Niklas, US 2021/0211242 A1, discloses transmitting and receiving messages acknowledging reception and successful decoding of a transport block in a wireless device. The disclosure also relates to a wireless device providing transmission feedback and to a radio network node receiving the transmission feedback.
2. FUJISHIRO; Masato, US 2020/0382994 A1, discloses a communication method for controlling a first radio communication apparatus and a second radio communication apparatus.
3. Hui; Ronald, US 2020/0322691 A1, discloses a methods and systems that execute video streaming.
4. IMAI et al., US. 2018/0007095 A1, discloses a communication control device is configured to control data communication between terminals using a communication network.
5. Ito et al., US 2006/0269226 A1, discloses a video receiving apparatus to receive and three-dimensionally display video data which has been provided by taking a three-dimensional video using binocular parallax and transmitted via a communication channel, and a video reproducing apparatus to read and three-dimensionally display video data which has been provided by taking a 3D video using binocular parallax and recorded in a recording medium.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MD NAZMUL HAQUE whose telephone number is (571)272-5328. The examiner can normally be reached IFW.
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 5712727327. 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.
/MD N HAQUE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
Prosecution Insights