Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 19/205,645

IMAGE DECODING METHOD, IMAGE ENCODING METHOD, AND METHOD FOR TRANSMITTING BITSTREAM

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
May 12, 2025
Priority
Jul 05, 2023 — provisional 63/525,147 +1 more
Examiner
JEAN BAPTISTE, JERRY T
Art Unit
2481
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
LG Electronics Inc.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 1m
Est. Remaining
60%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allowance Rate
506 granted / 578 resolved
+29.5% vs TC avg
Minimal -28% lift
Without
With
+-27.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
598
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.6%
-35.4% vs TC avg
§103
72.7%
+32.7% vs TC avg
§102
6.6%
-33.4% vs TC avg
§112
4.9%
-35.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 578 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
DETAILED ACTION This office action is in response to the RCE filed on 03/18/2026. Claims 1-3, 5, 7-9, and 11-14 have been amended. Claims 1-14 have been examined. 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 . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-13, filed on 03/18/2026, with respect to claims 1-13 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 103 of claims 1-4, 6-10 and 12-13 has been withdrawn. Examiner’s note: Machine readable media: when determining the scope of a claim directed to a computer-readable medium containing certain programming, the examiner should first look to the relationship between the programming and the intended computer system. Where the programming performs some function with respect to the computer with which it is associated, a functional relationship will be found. For instance, a claim to computer-readable medium programmed with attribute data objects that perform the function of facilitating retrieval, addition, and removal of information in the intended computer system, establishes a functional relationship such that the claimed attribute data objects are given patentable weight. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1583-84, 32 USPQ2d at 1035. However, where the claim as a whole is directed to conveying a message or meaning to a human reader independent of the intended computer system, and/or the computer-readable medium merely serves as a support for information or data, no functional relationship exists. For example, a claim to a memory stick containing tables of batting averages, or tracks of recorded music, utilizes the intended computer system merely as a support for the information. Such claims are directed toward conveying meaning to the human reader rather than towards establishing a functional relationship between recorded data and the computer. See section 2111.05 of MPEP. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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. 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)(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) 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Comer (US 2005/0185937). Regarding claim 14, Comer discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a bitstream, wherein the bitstream includes a neural-network post-filter characteristics (NNPFC) supplemental enhancement information (SEI) message as which neural-network to be used as a neural-network post-filter (NNPF) is encoded and a neural-network post-filter activation (NNPFA) SEI message as which whether activating a target NNPF to be applied to a current picture or not is encoded, wherein the NNPFA SEI message includes a NNPFA target flag indicating whether the target NNPF is a base NNPF or another NNPF, [[and]] wherein the NNPFC SEI message includes a NNPFC base flag indicating whether the NNPF is the base NNPF or the another NNPF, andwherein a NNPFA target pictures for which the target NNPF is activated by the NNPFA SEI message is included in a NNPFC target pictures, to which the NNPFC SEI message corresponding to the target NNPF indicated by the NNPFA target flag pertains, and the target NNPF is indicated as the base NNPF by a value of the NNPFA target flag and a value of the NNPFC base flag or the another NNPF by the value of the NNPFA target flag and the value of the NNPFC base flag (Examiner’s note: the “non-transitory computer readable medium” does not establish a functional relationship between the recorded bitstream data and the computer readable medium, therefore the claim will be interpreted as a tangible device being able to store bitstream data; Comer, paragraph 29 discloses the base data bitstream can be recorded onto the DVD as a base layer and assigned a stream identification of 0xE0… the enhancement data bitstream can be recorded onto the DVD as an enhancement layer and assigned a stream identification of 0xBF, 0xFA, 0xFB, 0xFC, 0xFD or 0xFE). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-13 are allowed. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 JERRY T JEAN BAPTISTE whose telephone number is (571)272-6189. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5PM EST. 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, William Vaughn can be reached at 571-272-3922. 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. /JERRY T JEAN BAPTISTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2481
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 12, 2025
Application Filed
Jul 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102
Oct 30, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 18, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §102
Mar 18, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 01, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Apr 08, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12634453
METHOD, APPARATUS AND STORAGE MEDIUM FOR IMAGE ENCODING/DECODING
2y 6m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12634481
METHOD FOR ADAPTIVELY SETTING RESOLUTION, AND IMAGE DECODING APPARATUS
1y 8m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12634482
METHOD FOR ADAPTIVELY SETTING RESOLUTION, AND IMAGE DECODING APPARATUS
1y 8m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12634483
METHOD FOR ADAPTIVELY SETTING RESOLUTION, AND IMAGE DECODING APPARATUS
1y 8m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12634484
METHOD FOR ADAPTIVELY SETTING RESOLUTION, AND IMAGE DECODING APPARATUS
1y 8m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
60%
With Interview (-27.7%)
2y 1m (~1y 1m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 578 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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