CTNF 19/219,975 CTNF 82825 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-fti AIA The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. 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 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA/25, or PTO/AIA/26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. 08-34 AIA Claim s 1-5 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim s 1-3 of U.S. Patent No. US 11,381,844 B2 (reference patent) . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Consider application claim 1 , claim 1 of reference patent discloses a video decoding method performed by a video decoding apparatus, the method comprising: decoding, from a bitstream, a residual block of a current block; generating a prediction block through intra prediction, the intra prediction being performed by using an intra prediction mode relating to the current block and neighboring pixels adjacent to the current block; determining, based on a direction of the intra prediction mode and based on a size of the current block, whether to perform first filtering on at least one predicted pixel adjacent to a boundary of the prediction block, the direction of the intra prediction mode being used to specify the neighboring pixels used for the intra prediction on the current block and the direction of the intra prediction mode including a vertical direction; determining, based on the direction of the intra prediction mode, a location of the at least one predicted pixel on which the first filtering is performed; performing the first filtering on the at least one predicted pixel adjacent to the boundary of the prediction block when the first filtering is determined to be performed; generating a restored block by summing the residual block and the prediction block subject to the first filtering; performing in-loop filtering on the restored block; and storing the restored block subjected to the in-loop filtering in a frame buffer, wherein the in-loop filtering comprises a de-blocking filtering on the restored block. Claim 1 of reference patent discloses all the limitations in the application claim. Thus, non-statutory double patenting applies. Consider application claim 2 , claim 2 of reference patent discloses the boundary to which the at least one predicted pixel is adjacent is determined to be a top boundary, a bottom boundary, a left boundary or a right boundary of the prediction block in accordance with the intra prediction mode. Claim 2 of reference patent discloses all the limitations in the application claim. Thus, non-statutory double patenting applies. Consider application claim 3 , claim 3 of reference patent discloses a video encoding method performed by a video encoding apparatus, the method comprising: generating a prediction block by performing an intra prediction on a current block, the intra prediction being performed by using an intra prediction mode relating to the current block and neighboring pixels adjacent to the current block; determining, based on a direction of the intra prediction mode and based on a size of the current block, whether to perform first filtering on at least one predicted pixel adjacent to a boundary of the prediction block, the direction of the intra prediction mode being used to specify the neighboring pixels used for the intra prediction on the current block and the direction of the intra prediction mode including a vertical direction; determining, based on the direction of the intra prediction mode, a location of the at least one predicted pixel on which the first filtering is performed; performing the first filtering on the at least one predicted pixel adjacent to the boundary of the prediction block when the first filtering is determined to be performed; generating a residual block by subtracting the prediction block subject to the first filtering from the current block; encoding the residual block into a bitstream; decoding the residual block through inverse quantization and inverse transformation; generating a restored block by summing the decoded residual block and the prediction block subject to the first filtering; performing in-loop filtering on the restored block; and storing the restored block subjected to the in-loop filtering in a frame buffer, wherein the in-loop filtering comprises a de-blocking filtering on the restored block. Claim 3 of reference patent discloses all the limitations in the application claim. Thus, non-statutory double patenting applies. Consider application claim 4 , application claim 4 recites a method for transmitting a bitstream, comprising the method recited in application claim 3. Thus, it is rejected for the same reasons as application claim 3. Consider application claim 5 , application claim 5 recites a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream that is generated by the video encoding method recited in application 3. Thus, it is rejected for the same reasons as application claim 3 . 08-36 AIA Claim s 1-5 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim s 1-3 of U.S. Patent No. US 10,785,503 B2 (reference patent) in view of Jeong et al. (US 11,381,844 B2) Consider application claim 1 , claim 1 of reference patent discloses a video decoding method performed by a video decoding apparatus, the method comprising: generating, from a bitstream, a residual block of a current block through inverse quantization and inverse transformation; generating a prediction block through intra prediction, the intra prediction being performed by using an intra prediction mode relating to the current block and neighboring pixels adjacent to the current block; determining, based on a direction of the intra prediction mode and based on a size of the current block, whether to perform first filtering on at least one predicted pixel adjacent to a boundary of the prediction block, the direction of the intra prediction mode being used to specify the neighboring pixels used for the intra prediction on the current block and the direction of the intra prediction mode including a vertical direction; determining, based on the direction of the intra prediction mode, a location of the at least one predicted pixel on which the first filtering is performed; performing the first filtering on the at least one predicted pixel adjacent to the boundary of the prediction block when the first filtering is determined to be performed; generating a restored block by summing the residual block and the prediction block subject to the first filtering; performing in-loop filtering on the restored block; and storing the restored block subjected to the in-loop filtering in a frame buffer. However, claims of reference patent do not explicitly disclose the in-loop filtering comprise a de-blocking filtering on the restored block. Jeong teaches the in-loop filtering comprise a de-blocking filtering on the restored block (claim 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the known technique of a de-blocking filtering on the restored block because such incorporation would improve image quality of the encoded or decoded frame. Consider application claim 2 , claim 2 of reference patent discloses the boundary to which the at least one predicted pixel is adjacent is determined to be a top boundary, a bottom boundary, a left boundary or a right boundary of the prediction block in accordance with the intra prediction mode. Claim 2 of reference patent discloses all the limitations in the application claim. Thus, non-statutory double patenting applies. Consider application claim 3 , claim 3 of reference patent discloses A video encoding method performed by a video encoding apparatus, the method comprising: generating a prediction block by performing an intra prediction on a current block, the intra prediction being performed by using an intra prediction mode relating to the current block and neighboring pixels adjacent to the current block; determining, based on a direction of the intra prediction mode and based on a size of the current block, whether to perform first filtering on at least one predicted pixel adjacent to a boundary of the prediction block, the direction of the intra prediction mode being used to specify the neighboring pixels used for the intra prediction on the current block and the direction of the intra prediction mode including a vertical direction; determining, based on the direction of the intra prediction mode, a location of the at least one predicted pixel on which the first filtering is performed; performing the first filtering on the at least one predicted pixel adjacent to the boundary of the prediction block when the first filtering is determined to be performed; generating a residual block by subtracting the prediction block subject to the first filtering from the current block; encoding the residual block into a bitstream through transformation and quantization; decoding the residual block through inverse quantization and inverse transformation; generating a restored block by summing the decoded residual block and the prediction block subject to the first filtering; performing in-loop filtering on the restored block; and storing the restored block subjected to the in-loop filtering in a frame buffer. However, claims of reference patent do not explicitly disclose the in-loop filtering comprise a de-blocking filtering on the restored block. Jeong teaches the in-loop filtering comprise a de-blocking filtering on the restored block (claim 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the known technique of a de-blocking filtering on the restored block because such incorporation would improve image quality of the encoded or decoded frame. Consider application claim 4 , application claim 4 recites a method for transmitting a bitstream, comprising the method recited in application claim 3. Thus, it is rejected for the same reasons as application claim 3. Consider application claim 5 , application claim 5 recites a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream that is generated by the video encoding method recited in application 3. Thus, it is rejected for the same reasons as application claim 3 . 08-36 AIA Claim s 1-5 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim s 1-2 and 7 of U.S. Patent No. US 10,237,577 B2 (reference patent) in view of Jeong et al. (US 11,381,844 B2) Consider application claim 1 , claim 1 of reference patent discloses A video decoding method performed by a video decoding apparatus, the method comprising: obtaining quantized coefficients of a current block by decoding an input bitstream; generating a residual block of the current block by performing an inverse-quantization and an inverse-transform on the quantized coefficients; generating a prediction block by performing an intra prediction on the current block, the intra prediction being performed by using an intra prediction mode relating to the current block and neighboring pixels adjacent to the current block; determining, based on a direction of the intra prediction mode, both whether to perform filtering on at least one predicted pixel adjacent to a boundary of the prediction block and a location of the at least one predicted pixel on which the filtering is performed; performing the filtering on the at least one predicted pixel adjacent to the boundary of the prediction block when the filtering is determined to be performed based on the direction of the intra prediction mode; and generating a restored block based on the residual block and the filtered prediction block. However, claims of reference patent do not explicitly disclose performing in-loop filtering on the restored block; storing the restored block subjected to the in-loop filtering in a frame buffer, wherein the in-loop filtering comprises a de-blocking filtering on the restored block. Jeong teaches performing in-loop filtering on the restored block; storing the restored block subjected to the in-loop filtering in a frame buffer, wherein the in-loop filtering comprise a de-blocking filtering on the restored block. (claim 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the known technique of a de-blocking filtering on the restored block because such incorporation would improve image quality of the encoded or decoded frame. Consider application claim 2 , claim 2 of reference patent discloses the boundary to which the at least one predicted pixel is adjacent is determined to be a top boundary, a bottom boundary, a left boundary or a right boundary of the prediction block in accordance with the intra prediction mode. Claim 2 of reference patent discloses all the limitations in the application claim. Thus, non-statutory double patenting applies. Consider application claim 3 , claim 7 of reference patent discloses a video encoding method performed by a video encoding apparatus, the method comprising: generating a prediction block by performing an intra prediction on a current block, the intra prediction being performed by using an intra prediction mode relating to the current block and neighboring pixels adjacent to the current block; determining, based on a direction of the intra prediction mode, both whether to perform filtering on at least one predicted pixel adjacent to a boundary of the prediction block and a location of the at least one predicted pixel on which the filtering is performed; performing the filtering on the at least one predicted pixel adjacent to the boundary of the prediction block when the filtering is determined to be performed based on the direction of the intra prediction mode; generating a residual block based on the current block and the filtered prediction block; and encoding the residual block by performing transformation and quantization on coefficients of the residual block. However, claims of reference patent do not explicitly disclose performing in-loop filtering on the restored block; storing the restored block subjected to the in-loop filtering in a frame buffer, wherein the in-loop filtering comprises a de-blocking filtering on the restored block. Jeong teaches performing in-loop filtering on the restored block; storing the restored block subjected to the in-loop filtering in a frame buffer, wherein the in-loop filtering comprises a de-blocking filtering on the restored block. (claim 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the known technique of a de-blocking filtering on the restored block because such incorporation would improve image quality of the encoded or decoded frame. Consider application claim 4 , application claim 4 recites a method for transmitting a bitstream, comprising the method recited in application claim 3. Thus, it is rejected for the same reasons as application claim 3. Consider application claim 5 , application claim 5 recites a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream that is generated by the video encoding method recited in application 3. Thus, it is rejected for the same reasons as application claim 3 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-fti The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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-fti 07-12 (e) the invention was described in (1) an application for patent, published under section 122(b), by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent or (2) a patent granted on an application for patent by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent, except that an international application filed under the treaty defined in section 351(a) shall have the effects for purposes of this subsection of an application filed in the United States only if the international application designated the United States and was published under Article 21(2) of such treaty in the English language. 07-15-03-fti Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e) as being anticipated by Karczewicz et al. (US 2011/0248873 A1) . Consider claim 5 , claim 5 recites a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream that is generated by a video encoding method performed by a video encoding apparatus, the method comprising: determining an intra prediction mode relating to a current block; generating a prediction block by performing an intra prediction on the current block, the intra prediction being performed by using the intra prediction mode and neighboring pixels adjacent to the current block; determining, based on a direction of the intra prediction mode and based on a size of the current block, whether to perform first filtering on at least one predicted pixel adjacent to a boundary of the prediction block, the direction of the intra prediction mode being used to specify the neighboring pixels used for the intra prediction on the current block and the direction of the intra prediction mode including a vertical direction; determining, based on the direction of the intra prediction mode, a location of the at least one predicted pixel on which the first filtering is performed; performing the first filtering on the at least one predicted pixel adjacent to the boundary of the prediction block when the first filtering is determined to be performed; generating a residual block by subtracting the prediction block subject to the first filtering from the current block; generating quantized coefficients of the current block by performing quantization and transformation on the residual block; encoding the quantized coefficients into the bitstream; decoding the residual block through inverse quantization and inverse transformation; generating a restored block by summing the decoded residual block and the prediction block subject to the first filtering; performing in-loop filtering on the restored block; and storing the restored block subjected to the in-loop filtering in a frame buffer, wherein the in-loop filtering comprises a de-blocking filtering on the restored block. A bit stream generated by a method, the method comprising… is a product by process claim limitation where the product is the bit stream and the process is the method steps to generate the bitstream. MPEP §2113 recites “Product-by-Process claims are not limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps”. Thus, the scope of the claim is the computer-readable recording medium storing the bitstream (with the structure implied by the method steps). The structure includes the information and samples manipulated by the steps. “To be given patentable weight, the printed matter and associated product must be in a functional relationship. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated”. MPEP §2111.05(I)(A). When a claimed “computer-readable medium merely serves as a support for information or data, no functional relationship exists. MPEP §2111.05(III). The recording medium storing the claimed bitstream in claim 4 merely services as a support for the storage of the bitstream and provides no fictional relationship between the stored bitstream and storage medium. Therefor the structure bitstream, which scope is implied by the method steps, is non-functional descriptive material and given no patentable weight. MPEP §2111.05(III). Thus, the claim scope is just a computer-readable recording medium storing data and is anticipated by Karczewicz, which recites a storage medium storing a bitstream ([0048] – [0049]; [0113] – [0115]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAT CHI CHIO whose telephone number is (571)272-9563. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10am-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, JAMIE J ATALA can be reached at 571-272-7384. 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. /TAT C CHIO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2486 Application/Control Number: 19/219,975 Page 2 Art Unit: 2486 Application/Control Number: 19/219,975 Page 3 Art Unit: 2486 Application/Control Number: 19/219,975 Page 4 Art Unit: 2486 Application/Control Number: 19/219,975 Page 5 Art Unit: 2486 Application/Control Number: 19/219,975 Page 6 Art Unit: 2486 Application/Control Number: 19/219,975 Page 7 Art Unit: 2486 Application/Control Number: 19/219,975 Page 8 Art Unit: 2486 Application/Control Number: 19/219,975 Page 9 Art Unit: 2486 Application/Control Number: 19/219,975 Page 11 Art Unit: 2486 Application/Control Number: 19/219,975 Page 12 Art Unit: 2486 Application/Control Number: 19/219,975 Page 13 Art Unit: 2486 Application/Control Number: 19/219,975 Page 14 Art Unit: 2486 Application/Control Number: 19/219,975 Page 15 Art Unit: 2486 Application/Control Number: 19/219,975 Page 16 Art Unit: 2486
Prosecution Insights