Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 19/235,502

METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR VIDEO CODING

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Jun 11, 2025
Priority
Nov 17, 2015 — continuation of PCTRU2015000796 +3 more
Examiner
HUBER, JEREMIAH CHARLES
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
Est. Remaining
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allowance Rate
473 granted / 678 resolved
+9.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+12.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
720
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.5%
-37.5% vs TC avg
§103
82.0%
+42.0% vs TC avg
§102
7.6%
-32.4% vs TC avg
§112
2.7%
-37.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 678 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
CTNF 19/235,502 CTNF 81626 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-34-01 Claims 1-5 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. Independent claims 1, 3 and 5 each recite a reference samples filter flag that may have a value of TRUE or FALSE. Each independent claim also provides two sets of conditions to be implemented based on that state of the reference samples filter flag. In the first conditional set a value of TRUE causes filtering by a [1, 2, 1] filter and a value of false results in no reference sample filtering. In the second conditional set a value of TRUE selects either a Gaussian filter or a Cubic filter dependent on transform block size and a value of FALSE selects a Cubic filter for reference sample filtering. The independent claims present two conflicting sets of conditions to be implemented based on the state of the reference samples filter flag, as the reference samples cannot be simultaneously not be filtered and also be filtered using a Cubic interpolation filter. Thus the meets and bounds of the claim are unclear. For the purposes of examination the examiner will use treat the first set of conditions as being included in the claims, and will address the second set of conditions as not being included in the claims. 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-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-12-aia AIA (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 application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Joshi et al . A coder comprising: a sequence of filters that are configurable by one or more primary parameters and one or more secondary parameters (Joshi Figs 3-4 and pars 110-135, note pars 134-135 for mode dependent intra smoothing filters including a [1 2 1]/4 reference sample filter and further 1/32-pel bi-linear interpolation filter) wherein the sequence of filters comprises: a reference sample filter configured to adaptively filter one or more neighboring samples of a current video block to obtain one or more reference samples (Joshi par. 134 note mode dependent intra smoothing that uses a [1 2 1]/4 filter for certain block sizes, further note a stronger filter may be used for larger blocks), and an interpolation filter configured to predict one or more samples of the current video block using an interpolation of the one or more reference samples (Joshi par. 135 note 1/32 pel interpolation filter used to generate predictors for the current block); wherein the one or more primary parameters comprise a reference samples filter flag signalling a value FALSE for predicted blocks subject to no reference samples filtering and signalling a value TRUE for predicted block subject for filtering by a {1, 2, 1} filter, and the one or more secondary parameters comprise a selected parameter of the interpolation filter (Joshi pars 134-134 note intra prediction using a [1 2 1]/4 smoothing filter according to JCTVC-M1005-v2, further note pars 152-176 for details of JCTVC-M1005-v2, particularly note pars 152-164 determining whether a filterFlag is set equal to 0 or 1 note par 176 when filterFlag is 0, or FALSE, no filtering is performed, finally note pars 152 and 165-175 when filterFlag is 1, or TRUE and biIntFlag is 0 then the [1 2 1]/4 smoothing filter is applied). In regard to claim 2 Joshi further discloses that the reference sample filter is located in the sequence of filters before the interpolation filter (Joshi pars 134-135 note references smoothing filter described in par 134 and 1/12 pel bi-linear interpolation filter in par. 135, further note pars 113-129 that bi-linear interpolation is performed on reference samples and is hence performed after the reference sample smoothing in par. 134). Claims 3-5 describe a coding method and a non-transitory medium storing instructions that cause a processor to execute method steps corresponding to the processes performed by the video coding device of claims 1-2. Refer to the statements made in the regard to claims 1-2 above for the rejection of claims 3-5 which will not be repeated here for brevity. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEREMIAH CHARLES HALLENBECK-HUBER whose telephone number is (571)272-5248. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 9 A.M. to 5 P.M. 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. /JEREMIAH C HALLENBECK-HUBER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2481 Application/Control Number: 19/235,502 Page 2 Art Unit: 2481 Application/Control Number: 19/235,502 Page 3 Art Unit: 2481 Application/Control Number: 19/235,502 Page 4 Art Unit: 2481 Application/Control Number: 19/235,502 Page 5 Art Unit: 2481
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 11, 2025
Application Filed
Nov 12, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12684164
MOTION COMPENSATION CONSIDERING OUT-OF-BOUNDARY CONDITIONS IN VIDEO CODING
2y 1m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12666037
DECODER SIDE MOTION INFORMATION DERIVATION
2y 1m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12652403
ENCODER, DECODER, ENCODING METHOD, AND DECODING METHOD
3y 7m to grant Granted Jun 09, 2026
Patent 12652381
METHOD, APPARATUS, AND MEDIUM FOR VIDEO PROCESSING
2y 5m to grant Granted Jun 09, 2026
Patent 12634473
OVERLAPPED DECODER SIDE MOTION REFINEMENT
2y 6m 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
70%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+12.8%)
3y 6m (~2y 5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 678 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