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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 10 and 19 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.
The claims appear to include an incomplete limitation “selecting at least one of the plurality of intra-prediction modes and the additional intra- prediction mode added to the table for decoding the video sequence comprising , the 20/32, 23/32, 26/32, 29/32, 32/32;” as there appears to be a space with missing text. Further, it is unclear what selecting intra prediction modes…comprising the “the 20/32, 23/32, 26/32, 29/32, 32/32” means.
The same issue occurs in independent claims 10 and 19. Further, all dependent claims include the same issue as they include the limitations of the independent claims.
See double patenting rejection below for what appear to be limitations related to the missing portions of the current claim limitations relating the numbers to a tan(α) function.
The preamble of claims 1, 10 and 19 state “encoding” while claims 1 and 10 are directed towards “decoding” and claim 19 includes a decoding limitation at the end (see last “selecting” limitation of each independent claim).
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.
Claim 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-9 and 11-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,355,986, claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 11,240,514 and claims 1-7 and 9-16 of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,845 in view of Zhao al. (U.S. 2016/0373770), hereinafter Zhao. Zhao was cited on the Applicant's IDS dated 7/7/25.
Current Application
U.S. Patent No. 12,355,986
Claim 1
Claim 1
1. A method of controlling intra prediction for encoding of a video sequence, the method being performed by at least one processor, and the method comprising: determining a ratio of a width to a height of a coding unit; adding a first wide angle toward a bottom left side of the coding unit, a second wide angle toward a top right side of the coding unit, and additional intra prediction mode corresponding to the first wide angle and the second wide angle to a table, the table comprising a plurality of intra prediction modes corresponding to intra prediction angles based on the determined ratio being different from 1; selecting at least one of the plurality of intra-prediction modes and the additional intra- prediction mode added to the table for decoding the video sequence comprising , the 20/32, 23/32, 26/32, 29/32, 32/32; and decoding the video sequence based on the at least one of the plurality of intra-prediction modes and the additional intra-prediction modes.
1. A method of controlling intra prediction for decoding a video sequence, the method being performed by at least one processor, and the method comprising: determining a ratio of a width to a height of a coding unit; based on the ratio being different than one, determining that a table comprises a plurality of intra prediction modes corresponding to intra prediction angles, first wide angles toward a left portion of bottom edge of the coding unit, second wide angles toward a top portion of right edge of the coding unit, and additional intra prediction modes respectively corresponding to the first wide angles and the second wide angles, wherein each of the intra prediction angles included in the table has an angular direction α with tan(α) equal to {0/32, 1/32, 2/32, 3/32, 4/32, 6/32, 8/32, 10/32, 12/32, 14/32, 16/32, 18/32, 20/32, 23/32, 26/32, 29/32, 32/32}; and determining, for decoding the video sequence, one of the plurality of intra prediction modes and the additional intra prediction modes comprised in the table.
The instant application's limitation encoding method, generating and transmitting a bitstream according to an encoding process are additional features. However, Zhao teaches both encoding and decoding methods (Zhao [0042]-[0043] and fig. 1) and generating and transmitting a bitstream according to an encoding process (Zhao fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the abovementioned Patent's method with the missing limitations as taught by Zhao to transmit, receive, encode, decode, and/or store digital video information more efficiently (Zhao [0003]).
The same analysis can be used for claim 10 and 19 which are analogous to claims 11 and 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,355,986. Claims 2-9 and 11-18 are analogous to claims 2-9 and 12-19 of U.S. Patent No. 12,355,986. Claim 20 is analogous to claim 3 of U.S. Patent No. 12,355,986.
The same analysis can be used for claims 1-19 when compared to claims 1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 11,240,514. Claim 20 is analogous to claim 3 of U.S. Patent No. 11,240,514.
The same analysis can be used for claims 1, 10 and 19 when compared to claims 1, 9 and 16 of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,845. Claims 2-3 are analogous to claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,845. Claims 4-9 are analogous to claims 2-7 of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,845. Claims 11-12 are analogous to claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,845. Claims 13-18 are analogous to claims 10-15 of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,845. Claim 20 is analogous to claim 3 of U.S. Patent No. 10,469,845.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW KWAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7073. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-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, Chris Kelley can be reached at (571)272-7331. 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.
/MATTHEW K KWAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482
Prosecution Insights