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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 16/498392, filed on 3/13/2028.
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 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.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-8, 10-11 and 13-16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-8, 10-11 and 13-16 of U.S. Patent No. 11,917,146. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the instant application are entirely encompassed by the limitations of the claims of the ‘146 application. The examiner notes that the claims of the ‘146 application include additional limitations regarding picture boundaries not required by the claims of the instant application. However, a rejection for double patenting of broader later filed claims is proper in view of narrower, earlier filed claims.
Claims 1-20are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-10 of U.S. Patent No. 12,363,295. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the instant application are entirely encompassed by the limitations of the claims of the ‘295 application.
Claim Objections
Claims 18 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities: 41
Claims 18 and 20 recite “The non-transitory machine readable medium of claim” in the preamble of the claim, where the respective independent claims 17 and 19 refer to an apparatus, not a machine readable medium. Appropriate correction is required.
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 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 person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(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) 1-2, 4-5, 7-8, 10-11 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fuldseth et al (2016/0373766).
In regard to claim 1 Fuldseth discloses a decoding method (Fuldseth Fig. 2) comprising:
obtaining a current block of a picture (Fuldseth Fig. 2 and 3A and par 18 note receiving input bitstream comprised of blocks);
determining a current split mode to be applied to the current block in a set of split modes, each split mode of the set of split modes specifying a single decomposition of a first block into a plurality of second blocks (Fuldseth Figs 3A-C and pars 21-37 note pars 22-28 a plurality of modes and block sizes available to ordinary blocks, also note pars 34-38 only certain modes and block sizes allowed at frame boundary also note par. 43 note receiving partitioning information) ; and
decoding the current block according to the determined split mode (Fuldseth Figs. 2 and 5 and par. 43 note 530 decoding the block using the partitioning information)
wherein responsive to the current block extending beyond a single boundary of the picture (Fuldseth par. 34 determining that the block extends beyond a bottom boundary of the picture also note pars 22-28 a plurality of modes and block sizes available to ordinary blocks, also note pars 34-38 only certain modes and block sizes allowed at frame boundary) , determining the current split mode comprises:
decoding information to identify the split mode in a plurality of split modes for which a split direction is parallel to a direction of the single boundary of the picture (Fuldseth pars 33-37 note for blocks extending beyond the boundary a bit is transmitted to indicate whether to split the block in a direction parallel to the border ash shown in Fig. 3C or to split the block both parallel and perpendicular to the border as shown in Fig 3D),
wherein the information comprises a flag indicating a number of second blocks resulting rom a decomposition of the current block according to the current split mode (Fuldseth par 35 note one bit used to indicate whether a current 64x64 block is split into a 64x56 block inside the frame and a 64x8 block outside the frame or to split the current block into four smaller blocks pars 36 and 37 including a similar flag for progressively smaller starting blocks), and
wherein the set of split modes comprises the plurality of split modes (Fuldseth Figs 3A-C and pars 21-37 note pars 22-28 a plurality of modes and block sizes available to ordinary blocks, also note pars 34-38 only certain modes and block sizes allowed at frame boundary).
In regard to claim 2 refer to the statements made in the rejection of claim 1 above. Fuldseth further discloses that wherein h is a height of said current block and w is a width of said current bloc, and the plurality of split modes comprises:
splitting said block horizontally into one bottom sub-block of height h/4 and one upper sub-block of height 3h/4 (Fuldseth Fig. 3D note 32x32 block is split into a 32x24 block within the picture and 32x8 block outside of the picture);
splitting said block vertically into two sub-blocks of width w/2 (Fuldseth Fig. 3D note border block is split in half vertically into 32x32 sub-blocks).
In regard to claim 3 refer to the statements made in the rejection of claim 1 above. Fuldseth further discloses that splitting a block horizontally and vertically into two sub-blocks of half of the relevant dimension is allowed if the current block does not extend beyond a boundary of the picture at the right/left or top/bottom respectively (Fuldseth Fig. 3B and par. 22 note splitting blocks into various patterns including horizontal into two blocks of half height as shown in on the left side, second and third blocks from the bottom and vertical splitting into two blocks of half width as shown by the two topmost blocks on the right hand side).
In regard to claim 4 Fuldseth discloses a decoding method (Fuldseth Fig. 1) comprising:
obtaining a current block of a picture (Fuldseth Fig. 1 and 3A and par 18 note receiving input bitstream comprised of blocks);
determining a current split mode to be applied to the current block in a set of split modes, each split mode of the set of split modes specifying a single decomposition of a first block into a plurality of second blocks (Fuldseth Figs 3A-C and pars 21-37 note pars 22-28 a plurality of modes and block sizes available to ordinary blocks, also note pars 34-38 only certain modes and block sizes allowed at frame boundary also note par. 43 note receiving partitioning information) ; and
encoding the current block in video data according to the determined split mode (Fuldseth Figs. 2 and 5 and par. 43 note 530 decoding the block using the partitioning information)
wherein responsive to the current block extending beyond a single boundary of the picture (Fuldseth par. 34 determining that the block extends beyond a bottom boundary of the picture also note pars 22-28 a plurality of modes and block sizes available to ordinary blocks, also note pars 34-38 only certain modes and block sizes allowed at frame boundary) , determining the current split mode comprises:
selecting the current split mode in a plurality of split modes for which a split direction is parallel to a direction of the single boundary of the picture (Fuldseth pars 33-37 note for blocks extending beyond the boundary a bit is transmitted to indicate whether to split the block in a direction parallel to the border ash shown in Fig. 3C or to split the block both parallel and perpendicular to the border as shown in Fig 3D),
wherein the set of split modes comprises the plurality of split modes (Fuldseth Figs 3A-C and pars 21-37 note pars 22-28 a plurality of modes and block sizes available to ordinary blocks, also note pars 34-38 only certain modes and block sizes allowed at frame boundary).
wherein encoding the current block in the video data comprises encoding information to identify the current split mode (Fuldseth par 43 note partitioning information, further note pars 33-37 for additional information provided for blocks extended beyond a block boundary) and wherein the information comprises a flag indicating a number of second blocks resulting from a decomposition of the current block according to the current split mode (Fuldseth par 35 note one bit used to indicate whether a current 64x64 block is split into a 64x56 block inside the frame and a 64x8 block outside the frame or to split the current block into four smaller blocks pars 36 and 37 including a similar flag for progressively smaller starting blocks).
In regard to claim 5 refer to the statements made in the rejection of claim 4 above. Fuldseth further discloses that wherein h is a height of said current block and w is a width of said current bloc, and the plurality of split modes comprises:
splitting said block horizontally into one bottom sub-block of height h/4 and one upper sub-block of height 3h/4 (Fuldseth Fig. 3D note 32x32 block is split into a 32x24 block within the picture and 32x8 block outside of the picture);
splitting said block vertically into two sub-blocks of width w/2 (Fuldseth Fig. 3D note border block is split in half vertically into 32x32 sub-blocks).
In regard to claim 6 refer to the statements made in the rejection of claim 4 above. Fuldseth further discloses that splitting a block horizontally and vertically into two sub-blocks of half of the relevant dimension is allowed if the current block does not extend beyond a boundary of the picture at the right/left or top/bottom respectively (Fuldseth Fig. 3B and par. 22 note splitting blocks into various patterns including horizontal into two blocks of half height as shown in on the left side, second and third blocks from the bottom and vertical splitting into two blocks of half width as shown by the two topmost blocks on the right hand side).
Claims 7-12 describe coding apparatuses substantially corresponding to the decoding and encoding methods of claims 1-2 and 4-5 above. Refer to the statements made in regard to claims 1-2 and 4-5 for the rejection of claims 7-8 and 10-11 which will not be repeated here for brevity. Fuldseth further discloses an apparatus (Fuldseth Figs 1-2).
Claims 13-16 describe non transitory machine readable media having instructions stored thereon that when executed perform a method substantially corresponding to the decoding and encoding methods of claims 1-2 and 4-5 above. Refer to the statements made in regard to claims 1-2 and 4-5 for the rejection of claims 13-16 which will not be repeated here for brevity. Fuldseth further discloses a non-transitory machine readable medium storing instructions for implementing the method (Fuldseth pars 51-53)
Claims 17-20 describe an apparatus comprising a processor and a memory implementing a method substantially corresponding to the decoding and encoding methods of claims 1-2 and 4-5 above. Refer to the statements made in regard to claims 1-2 and 4-5 for the rejection of claims 15-16 which will not be repeated here for brevity. Fuldseth further discloses an apparatus including a processor and a memory (Fuldseth pars 51-53).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20100177821 A1 Kadoto; Tadakazu et al.
US 20130034153 A1 Song; Jinhan et al.
US 20130034154 A1 Song; Jinhan et al.
US 20130266067 A1 SONG; Jinhan et al.
US 20150092862 A1 Yu; Yue et al.
US 20150350566 A1 Hu; Meng-Jye et al.
US 20190075328 A1 HUANG; Han et al.
US 20190246106 A1 PARK; Min-woo et al.
US 20210211699 A1 PARK; Min-woo et al.
US RE47243 E Alshina; Elena et al.
US RE47254 E Alshina; Elena et al.
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 on 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 on (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 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-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.
/JEREMIAH C HALLENBECK-HUBER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2423
Prosecution Insights