DETAILED ACTION
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
Acknowledgement is made of applicant's claim for foreign application number EP21172831.6 filed on 5/7/21.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/7/25 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 7/7/25. These drawings are acceptable.
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 1-3 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 1, 2 and 5 of U. S. Patent No. 12,413,773 since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the "right to exclude" already granted in the patent. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-3 of the present application encompass claims 1, 2 and 5 of U. S. Patent No. 12,413,773.
The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, as follows in the Table below.
Instant Application
12,413,773
1. An encoder comprising: circuitry; and memory coupled to the circuitry, wherein in operation, the circuitry:
wherein the circuitry determines whether to change a resolution of a picture from a resolution of a previous picture preceding the picture, according to a constraint,
encodes at least one first trailing picture belonging to a first group;
subsequently encodes a random access picture belonging to a second group following the first group in display order; subsequently encodes at least one leading picture belonging to the first group; and subsequently encodes at least one second trailing picture belonging to the second group, and the constraint: allows a resolution of the random access picture to be different from a resolution of the at least one first trailing picture; does not allow a resolution of the at least one leading picture to be different from the resolution of the random access picture; and does not allow a resolution of the at least one second trailing picture to be different from the resolution of the at least one leading picture.
1. An encoder comprising: circuitry; and memory coupled to the circuitry, wherein in operation, the circuitry: controls whether to change a resolution of a picture from a resolution of a previous picture preceding the picture in one of display order and encoding order, according to a constraint that allows the changing only when the picture is a random access picture among one or more random access pictures; when a resolution of a reference picture to be used in encoding of an inter-predicted picture is different from a resolution of the inter-predicted picture, resamples a reference image in the reference picture according to a difference between the resolution of the reference picture and the resolution of the inter-predicted picture, and encodes an image in the inter-predicted picture using the reference image resampled;
encodes at least one first trailing picture belonging to a first group of pictures; subsequently encodes a random access picture belonging to a second group of pictures following the first group of pictures in the display order, the random access picture being included in the one or more random access pictures;
subsequently encodes at least one leading picture belonging to the first group of pictures; and subsequently encodes at least one second trailing picture belonging to the second group of pictures, and the constraint: allows a resolution of the random access picture to be different from a resolution of the at least one first trailing picture; does not allow a resolution of the at least one leading picture to be different from the resolution of the random access picture; and does not allow a resolution of the at least one second trailing picture to be different from the resolution of the at least one leading picture.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of the invention was made to modify the cited steps as indicated in claim 1 of the instant US application since the omission/addition/alteration of the cited limitations would not have changed the process according to which the process of random access with resolution changes. Therefore, the ordinary skilled artisan would have been also motivated to modify claim 1 of the cited instant US application by altering the step of patent 12,413,773. Claims 2 and 3 of the instant application are analogous to double patenting of 2 and 5 of patent No. 12,413,773 for the same reason as the claims discussed above. The cited altering elements would not interfere with the functionality of the steps previously claimed and would perform the same function. In re Karlson, 136, USPQ 184 (CCPA 1963).
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)(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.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sanchez De La Fuente et al. (US 2022/0377317).
Regarding claim 3, “a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a bitstream, the bitstream including: a plurality of pictures; and a plurality of parameters to perform a decoding process a bit stream, the process 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 storage 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 storage medium storing the claimed bitstream 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 storage medium storing data and is anticipated by Sanchez De La Fuente which recites a storage medium storing a bitstream (e.g. see ¶ [0151]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 1-3 is/are allowed.
The following is an Examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Claim(s) 1-3 discloses an encoder/decoder comprising: circuitry; and memory coupled to the circuitry, wherein in operation, the circuitry: encodes at least one first trailing picture belonging to a first group; subsequently encodes a random access picture belonging to a second group following the first group in display order; subsequently encodes at least one leading picture belonging to the first group; and subsequently encodes at least one second trailing picture belonging to the second group, wherein the circuitry determines whether to change a resolution of a picture from a resolution of a previous picture preceding the picture, according to a constraint, and the constraint: allows a resolution of the random access picture to be different from a resolution of the at least one first trailing picture; does not allow a resolution of the at least one leading picture to be different from the resolution of the random access picture; and does not allow a resolution of the at least one second trailing picture to be different from the resolution of the at least one leading picture.
The closest prior art Sanchez De La Fuente et al. (US 2022/0377317) discloses resolution of a reference picture changes with random access points based on constraints (see fig. 6a; e.g. see 1 [0093]) but fails to anticipate or render the above underlined limitation obvious.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Citation of Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
1. Xiu et al. (US 2025/0071287), discloses encoding with reference picture resampling.
2. Chen et al. (US 2022/0159262), discloses encoding with reference picture resampling and resizing.
3. Hendry et al. (US 2021/0329226), discloses adaptive resolution changes in video coding.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD T TORRENTE whose telephone number is (571)270-3702. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 6:45-3:15 pm.
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, Jay Patel can be reached at (571) 272-2988. 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.
/RICHARD T TORRENTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2485
Prosecution Insights