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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Summary
This office action for US Patent application 19/237021 is responsive to communications filed on August 25th, 2025. Currently, claims 1-20 are pending are presented for examination.
Double Patenting
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 obviousness-type 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); and 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 1-20 inprovisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-4, 6-13, 15-18 of copending application 18/412588, now US Patent No. 12,363,296 and claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-12 of copending Application No 17/357684, now US Patent No. 11,895,297. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because it is merely in the terminology used in both sets of claims.
This is an inprovisional obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have in fact been patented. Below is a list of limitations that perform the same function. However different terminology is used in both sets to describe the limitations.
Instant Application-18/412588-
Instant Application-19/237021-
1.(New) A prediction mode determining method implemented by a coding device, comprising: determining a split mode for a current picture block, wherein the split mode includes quadtree (QT) split mode, binary tree (BT) split mode, ternary tree (TT) split mode, or extended quadtree (QT) split mode; determining whether a first picture subblock that meets a preset condition is obtained in case that the current picture block is split in the split mode; and determining that a same prediction mode is used for a plurality of picture subblocks that are obtained by splitting the current picture block in the split mode, wherein the plurality of picture subblocks comprise the first picture subblock, and wherein the prediction mode for the plurality of picture subblocks is an intra prediction mode or an inter prediction mode wherein the inter prediction mode includes a skip mode, a direct mode, or a common inter mode.
Claims 2-4, 6, 8-14, 16-19
1.A prediction mode determining method implemented by a coding device, comprising: determining splitting a current picture block; determining a split mode for the current picture block, wherein the split mode includes quadtree (QT) split mode, binary tree (BT) split mode, ternary tree (TT) split mode, or extended quadtree (QT) split mode; determining whether a first picture subblock that meets a preset condition is obtained; and determining that a same prediction mode is used for a plurality of picture subblocks that are obtained by splitting the current picture block in the split mode, wherein the plurality of picture subblocks comprise the first picture subblock, wherein the prediction mode for the plurality of picture subblocks is an intra prediction mode or an inter prediction mode, and wherein the inter prediction mode includes a skip mode, a direct mode, or a common inter mode.
Claims 2-4, 6-13, 15-18
Conflicting Co-pending Application 17/357684
Instant Application-19/237021-
1.(Currently amended) A prediction mode determining method implemented by a coding device, comprising: determining a split mode for a current picture block; determining that a first picture subblock that meets a preset condition is obtained after the current picture block is split in the split mode; splitting the current picture block in the split mode to obtain a plurality of picture subblocks in response to determining that the first picture subblock is obtained after the current picture block is split, wherein the plurality of picture subblocks comprise the first picture subblock; and determining that a same prediction mode is used for the plurality of picture subblocks, wherein the prediction mode for the plurality of picture subblocks is an intra prediction mode or an inter prediction mode, and wherein the inter prediction mode includes a skip mode, a direct mode, or a common inter mode, wherein the first picture subblock is obtained when an area of the current picture block meets following condition: in response to the split mode being a binary tree (BT) split mode, a size C/2 is less than S, wherein the size C is the area of the current picture block, and S is a preset area threshold; or in response to the split mode being a quadtree (QT) split mode, a size C/4 is less than S; or in response to the split mode being an extended quadtree (EQT) split mode, a size C/4 is less than S.
Claims 1
Claims 2-3, 5-7, 9-12
1.A prediction mode determining method implemented by a coding device, comprising: determining splitting a current picture block; determining a split mode for the current picture block, wherein the split mode includes quadtree (QT) split mode, binary tree (BT) split mode, ternary tree (TT) split mode, or extended quadtree (QT) split mode; determining whether a first picture subblock that meets a preset condition is obtained; and determining that a same prediction mode is used for a plurality of picture subblocks that are obtained by splitting the current picture block in the split mode, wherein the plurality of picture subblocks comprise the first picture subblock, wherein the prediction mode for the plurality of picture subblocks is an intra prediction mode or an inter prediction mode, and wherein the inter prediction mode includes a skip mode, a direct mode, or a common inter mode.
Claims 11, 20
Claims 2-10, 12-19
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-20 are generic to all that is recited in claims of the co-pending applications. That is, claims 1-20 is/are anticipated by claims of the co-pending applications.
Claims 1-20 inprovisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of the co-pending applications.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting. However, these claims would be allowable if the obvious-type double patenting, the 102 rejection and the objection are overcome.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications form the examiner should be directed to Nam Pham, whose can be contacted by phone at (571)270-7352. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon—Thurs.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, CZEKAJ DAVID, can be reached on (571)272-7327.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) AT 866-217-9197 (too free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NAM D PHAM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
Prosecution Insights