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 .
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 §§ 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/patent/patents-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 www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Patent US 11,909,998 B2
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 23-25 of US 11,909,998 B2 in view of Xu et al. (US 2020/0037002 A1) (hereinafter Xu).
Instant – 19/272,885
US 11,909,998 B2
1. A non-transitory computer readable medium storing a bitstream, the stored bitstream including an encoded signal and syntax information, wherein the syntax information, when interpreted by processing circuitry of a decoder, causes the decoder to perform a decoding method to decode the encoded signal, the decoding method comprising:
23. A decoding method, comprising:
determining a threshold luma block size for each 64×64 luma virtual pipeline decoding unit (VPDU) of a coding tree unit;
determining a threshold luma block size for each 64×64 luma virtual pipeline decoding unit (VPDU) of a coding tree unit;
comparing a size of a first 64×64 luma VPDU of the coding tree unit to the determined threshold luma block size for the first 64×64 luma VPDU and determining whether the first 64×64 luma VPDU is split into smaller blocks based on the comparison of the size of the first 64×64 luma VPDU to the determined threshold luma block size for the first 64×64 luma VPDU;
comparing a size of a first 64×64 luma VPDU of the coding tree unit to the determined threshold luma block size for the first 64×64 luma VPDU and determining whether the first 64×64 luma VPDU is split into smaller blocks based on the comparison of the size of the first 64×64 luma VPDU to the determined threshold luma block size for the first 64×64 luma VPDU;
comparing a size of a corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU to a threshold chroma block size and determining whether the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU is split into smaller blocks based on the comparison of the size of the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU to the threshold chroma block size;
comparing a size of a corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU to a threshold chroma block size and determining whether the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU is split into smaller blocks based on the comparison of the size of the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU to the threshold chroma block size;
in response to a determination the first 64×64 luma VPDU is not split into smaller blocks and a determination the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU is split into smaller blocks, predicting a block of chroma samples of the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU without using luma samples;
in response to a determination the first 64×64 luma VPDU is not split into smaller blocks and a determination the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU is split into smaller blocks, predicting a block of chroma samples of the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU without using luma samples;
in response to a determination the first 64×64 luma VPDU is split into smaller blocks and the determination the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU is split into smaller blocks, predicting the block of chroma samples of the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU using luma samples;
in response to a determination the first 64×64 luma VPDU is split into smaller blocks and the determination the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU is split into smaller blocks, predicting the block of chroma samples of the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU using luma samples;
in response to the determination the first 64×64 luma VPDU is not split into smaller blocks and a determination the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU is not split into smaller blocks, predicting the block of chroma samples of the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU using luma samples; and
in response to the determination the first 64×64 luma VPDU is not split into smaller blocks and a determination the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU is not split into smaller blocks, predicting the block of chroma samples of the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU using luma samples; and
decoding the block using the predicted chroma samples.
decoding the block using the predicted chroma samples.
Although the claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of the instant application differ from claims (23-25) of US 11,909,998 B2 in that the instant application is a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a bitstream, the stored bitstream including an encoded signal and syntax information, wherein the syntax information, when interpreted by processing circuitry of a decoder, causes the decoder to perform a decoding method to decode the encoded signal that is using/performing the same method of claim 1 and therefore correspond. Furthermore these limitations are known in the art as evidenced by Xu, wherein Xu teaches of a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a bitstream as discussed in Paragraphs [0055]-[0058], [0069], [0083], [0100], [0104] & [0122]-[0124], wherein embodiments may be implemented by processing circuitry executing program stored in a non-transitory computer-readable medium to execute the video decoder, and including a buffer that stores coded video sequences comprising syntax for proper decoding. It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the instant invention to add the teachings of Xu as above, for the decoding of encoded signals with the added benefit of a reduction of redundancy in the input video signal, through compression. Compression can help reduce the aforementioned bandwidth or storage space requirements as Paragraph [0005].
Patent US 12,395,663 B2
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of US 12,395,663 B2 in view of Xu et al. (US 2020/0037002 A1) (hereinafter Xu).
Instant – 19/272,885
US 12,395,663 B2
1. A non-transitory computer readable medium storing a bitstream, the stored bitstream including an encoded signal and syntax information, wherein the syntax information, when interpreted by processing circuitry of a decoder, causes the decoder to perform a decoding method to decode the encoded signal, the decoding method comprising:
1. A method for generating a bitstream, comprising:
determining a threshold luma block size for each 64×64 luma virtual pipeline decoding unit (VPDU) of a coding tree unit;
determining a threshold luma block size for each 64×64 luma virtual pipeline decoding unit (VPDU) of a coding tree unit;
comparing a size of a first 64×64 luma VPDU of the coding tree unit to the determined threshold luma block size for the first 64×64 luma VPDU and determining whether the first 64×64 luma VPDU is split into smaller blocks based on the comparison of the size of the first 64×64 luma VPDU to the determined threshold luma block size for the first 64×64 luma VPDU;
comparing a size of a first 64×64 luma VPDU of the coding tree unit to the determined threshold luma block size for the first 64×64 luma VPDU and determining whether the first 64×64 luma VPDU is split into smaller blocks based on the comparison of the size of the first 64×64 luma VPDU to the determined threshold luma block size for the first 64×64 luma VPDU;
comparing a size of a corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU to a threshold chroma block size and determining whether the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU is split into smaller blocks based on the comparison of the size of the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU to the threshold chroma block size;
comparing a size of a corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU to a threshold chroma block size and determining whether the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU is split into smaller blocks based on the comparison of the size of the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU to the threshold chroma block size;
in response to a determination the first 64×64 luma VPDU is not split into smaller blocks and a determination the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU is split into smaller blocks, predicting a block of chroma samples of the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU without using luma samples;
in response to a determination the first 64×64 luma VPDU is not split into smaller blocks and a determination the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU is split into smaller blocks, predicting a block of chroma samples of the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU without using luma samples;
in response to a determination the first 64×64 luma VPDU is split into smaller blocks and the determination the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU is split into smaller blocks, predicting the block of chroma samples of the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU using luma samples;
in response to a determination the first 64×64 luma VPDU is split into smaller blocks and the determination the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU is split into smaller blocks, predicting the block of chroma samples of the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU using luma samples;
in response to the determination the first 64×64 luma VPDU is not split into smaller blocks and a determination the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU is not split into smaller blocks, predicting the block of chroma samples of the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU using luma samples; and
in response to the determination the first 64×64 luma VPDU is not split into smaller blocks and a determination the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU is not split into smaller blocks, predicting the block of chroma samples of the corresponding second 32×32 chroma VPDU using luma samples; and
decoding the block using the predicted chroma samples.
encoding the block using the predicted chroma samples into the bitstream.
Although the claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of the instant application differ from claim 1 of US 12,395,663 B2 in that the instant application is a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a bitstream, the stored bitstream including an encoded signal and syntax information, wherein the syntax information, when interpreted by processing circuitry of a decoder, causes the decoder to perform a decoding method to decode the encoded signal is using/performing the method similar and reciprocal to claim 1 and therefore correspond. Furthermore these limitations are known in the art as evidenced by Xu, wherein Xu teaches of a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a bitstream as discussed in Paragraphs [0051]-[0058], [0069], [0083], [0100], [0104] & [0122]-[0124], wherein embodiments may be implemented by processing circuitry executing program stored in a non-transitory computer-readable medium to execute the video decoder, and including a buffer that stores coded video sequences comprising syntax for proper decoding. It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the instant invention to add the teachings of Xu as above, for the decoding of encoded signals with the added benefit of a reduction of redundancy in the input video signal, through compression. Compression can help reduce the aforementioned bandwidth or storage space requirements as Paragraph [0005].
This is a nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
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.
(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) 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xu et al. (US 2020/0037002 A1) (hereinafter Xu).
Regarding claim 1, “[a] non-transitory computer readable medium storing a bitstream, the stored bitstream including an encoded signal and syntax information, wherein the syntax information, when interpreted by processing circuitry of a decoder, causes the decoder to perform a decoding method to decode the encoded signal, the decoding method comprising […],” …is a product by process claim limitation where the product is the bitstream 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, “non-transitory computer readable medium,” merely serves as a support for information or data, no functional relationship exists. MPEP §2111.05(III). The non-transitory computer readable recording medium storing a claimed bitstream in claim 1 merely services as a support for the storage of the bitstream and provides no functional relationship between the stored bitstream and storage medium. Thus, the claim scope is just a storage medium storing data and is anticipated by Xu which recites in Paragraphs [0055]-[0058], [0069], [0083], [0100], [0104] & [0122]-[0124], wherein embodiments may be implemented by processing circuitry executing program stored in a non-transitory computer-readable medium to execute the video decoder, and including a buffer that stores coded video sequences comprising syntax for proper decoding.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 would be allowable over prior art upon overcoming the rejections outlined above on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting rejection and under 35 USC 102(a)(1) of the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL CHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-5707. The examiner can normally be reached M-Sa, 12PM - 10 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, David Czekaj can be reached at 571-272-7327. 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.
/DANIEL CHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
Prosecution Insights