DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed on 07/15/2025. Claims 1-20 have been examined.
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 provisional application No. 62/870,892 filed on 07/5/2019.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/17/2025, 02/11/2026 and 03/16/2026 is 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.
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 claims at issue 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 reference 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. 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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/forms/. The 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 http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. patent Application No. 18/494,459. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention that the claims cover substantially the same subject matter. The table below shows only a sample of how each of these claims is anticipated by claims such as claim 1 of U.S. patent application No. 18/494,459.
Instant application
U.S. patent application No. 18/494,459
Claim 1: A method implemented by a decoder, the method comprising: receiving an extracted bitstream comprising a set of sub-pictures; determining a flag in the extracted bitstream, wherein the flag is required to be set to one when the extracted bitstream is a bitstream extracted from an input bitstream by a sub-bitstream extraction process and the extracted bitstream comprises only a subset of the sub-pictures of the input bitstream for the sub-bitstream extraction process, wherein the flag equal to one indicates that sub-picture information relating to the subset of the sub-pictures is present in the extracted bitstream, and wherein the flag is derived from a Sequence Parameter Set (SPS) in the extracted bitstream; obtaining one or more sub-picture Identifiers (IDs) of the subset of the sub-pictures based on the flag; and decoding the subset of the sub-pictures according to the sub-picture IDs.
Claim 1: A method implemented by a decoder, the method comprising: receiving an extracted bitstream comprising a set of sub-pictures, wherein the extracted bitstream is a bitstream extracted from an input bitstream by a sub-bitstream extraction process, and wherein the extracted bitstream comprises only a subset of the sub-pictures of the input bitstream for the sub-bitstream extraction process; determining a flag in the extracted bitstream, wherein the flag is required to be set to one when the flag is contained in the extracted bitstream to indicate sub-picture information relating to the subset of the sub-pictures is present in the extracted bitstream, and wherein the flag is derived from a Sequence Parameter Set (SPS) in the extracted bitstream; obtaining one or more sub-picture Identifiers (IDs) of the subset of the sub-pictures based on the flag; and decoding the subset of the sub-pictures according to the sub-picture IDs.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERRY T JEAN BAPTISTE whose telephone number is (571)272-6189. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5PM EST.
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 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.
/JERRY T JEAN BAPTISTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2481
Prosecution Insights