DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
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 1-10 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12413742. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the comparison shown in the chart below.
Instant application
12413742 (app 18517536)
A method in a video decoder the method comprising:
In a video decoder, a method, comprising:
decoding a block of pixels within a picture using intra prediction,
dividing the block into a first group and a second group;
decoding a block in a picture using intra prediction by dividing pixels within the block into at least a first group and a second group and predicting the pixels in the first group using intra prediction from neighboring pixels outside the block, and
predicting pixels in the second group based on the reconstructed pixels in the first group and neighboring blocks;
decoding the predicted pixels of the first group prior to decoding the pixels in the second group,
wherein the prediction of the second group is performed sequentially with respect to the first group.
wherein prediction of the pixels in the second group uses intra prediction from the decoded pixels within the first group and neighboring pixels outside the block that have already been decoded,
a prediction mode for at least one of the pixels within the rest of the block is obtained by using pixels within the first group and in neighboring blocks already decoded, and wherein the first group and the second group are part of a same block, and
reconstructing the second group using the prediction and a decoded residual;
reconstructing pixels in the first group using intra prediction;
division of pixels into groups is based on a method known to a video encoder and the video decoder.
The parent application does not have the following claim limitations in the claims:
reconstructing the second group using the prediction and a decoded residual; reconstructing pixels in the first group using intra prediction;
However, Song (used in rejection below) teaches the following:
reconstructing pixels in the first group using intra prediction (i.e. perform intra prediction on pixel of first area 1120.) [48,68-70,79-80; fig. 5a,b,11];
reconstructing the second group using the prediction and a decoded residual; (i.e. second intrapredictor uses reconstructed data of first area to reconstruct second area shown in fig. 4. Reconstructed picture F’n formed using intra prediction and D’n (predicted block and an error (residual).) [fig. 4,12];
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to perform these steps and would be advantageous because “[0013] The present invention provides a method of and apparatus for video intraprediction encoding and decoding in which a prediction block is formed using not only pixels of neighboring blocks of the current block to be intrapredicted but also pixels included in the current block, in video intraprediction, thereby improving prediction and coding efficiency.”
Claims in the other parent applications (17526423 (US11871005), 17022757 (US11212534), 16106125 (US10805610), 13697563 (US10080024)) are also similarly rejected and require terminal disclaimers.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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 –
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102b as being anticipated by Song US 20070053443.
Regarding claim 1, Song meets the claim limitations, as follows:
A method in a video decoder for decoding a block of pixels within a picture using intra prediction, the method comprising:
dividing the block into a first group and a second group (i.e. divide input block into at least two areas 1110. Areas shown in fig. 5a,b.) [48,68-70,79-80; fig. 5a,b,11];
reconstructing pixels in the first group using intra prediction (i.e. perform intra prediction on pixel of first area 1120.) [48,68-70,79-80; fig. 5a,b,11];
predicting pixels in the second group based on the reconstructed pixels in the first group and neighboring blocks (i.e. perform intra prediction on pixel of first area 1120.) [48,68-70,79-80; fig. 5a,b,11];
reconstructing the second group using the prediction and a decoded residual (i.e. second intrapredictor uses reconstructed data of first area to reconstruct second area shown in fig. 4. Reconstructed picture F’n formed using intra prediction and D’n (predicted block and an error (residual).) [73; fig. 4,12];
wherein the prediction of the second group is performed sequentially with respect to the first group (i.e. first group is used to predict second area so it must be done before the second area prediction) [48,68-70,79-80; fig. 4,11].
Regarding claim 2, Song meets the claim limitations, as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein the first group comprises a horizontal or vertical portion of the block (i.e. first and second area are rows (horizontal portion)) [fig. 5a].
Regarding claim 3, Song meets the claim limitations, as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein the prediction of the second group uses both the reconstructed pixels of the first group and reference samples from neighboring blocks (i.e. The motion compensation unit 1250 and the intraprediction unit 1260 generate a predicted block according to an encoded picture type using the decoded header information, and the predicted block is added to an error D'.sub.n to generate uF'.sub.n. uF'.sub.n is processed by the filter 1270, and thus a reconstructed picture F'.sub.n is generated.) [58, 73; fig. 4,12].
Regarding claim 4, Song meets the claim limitations, as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein the decoder determines the type of grouping (subpartitioning) used based on syntax flags present in the bitstream (i.e. flag indicates division of block and direction information indicating a prediction direction of a pixel of the second area to a header of a bitstream) [65].
Regarding claim 5, Song meets the claim limitations, as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein the second group is reconstructed by adding decoded residual values to predicted sample values (i.e. The motion compensation unit 1250 and the intraprediction unit 1260 generate a predicted block according to an encoded picture type using the decoded header information, and the predicted block is added to an error D'.sub.n to generate uF'.sub.n. uF'.sub.n is processed by the filter 1270, and thus a reconstructed picture F'.sub.n is generated.) [73; fig. 4,12].
Regarding claim 6, Song meets the claim limitations, as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein the prediction for the second group is performed in a raster scan order along the direction of the group [53; fig. 7].
Regarding claim 7, Song meets the claim limitations, as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein the first and second group are predicted using a common intra prediction mode (i.e. predicting pixels of a second area of the at least two areas using the intraprediction-encoded pixels of the first area according to at least one prediction mode of a plurality of prediction modes.) [14].
Regarding claim 8, Song meets the claim limitations, as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein the prediction mode is signaled once for the entire block (i.e. intraprediction mode information includes a flag that is used for the first and second areas. This would mean that it would only be signaled once for the entire block (first and second areas)) [73-74].
Regarding claim 9, Song meets the claim limitations, as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein the first group comprises at least a portion of the right-most column of the block (i.e. figure shows a portion of pixels of the right-most column being in the first group) [fig. 5a].
Regarding claim 10, Song meets the claim limitations, as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein the first group comprises at least a portion of the bottom row of the block (i.e. figure shows a portion of pixels of the bottom-most row being in the first group) [fig. 5b].
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JARED T WALKER whose telephone number is (571)272-1839. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 8:30 - 5:00.
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, Nasser Goodarzi can be reached on 571-272-4195. 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 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 (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.
/Jared Walker/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426
Prosecution Insights