DETAILED ACTION
1. The communication is in response to the application received 08/01/2025, wherein claims 1-20 are pending and are examined as follows. Note, that the instant application is a continuation of 18/386,778 (US Patent No. 12,407,853 B2), 17/850,622 (US Patent No. 11,849,144 B2), 17/112,304 (US Patent No. 11,418,809 B2), 16/546,871 (US Patent No. 10,924,760 B2), 15/952,796 (US Patent No. 10,432,964 B2) and 13/669,380 (US Patent No. 10,003,817 B2), with priority to Provisional application No. 61/556,813 dated 11/07/2011.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statements (IDS) were submitted on 02/12/2026 and 06/11/2026. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Examiner’s Note
4. There are no prior art rejections in the current office action, as the claims disclose subject matter that overcame the art of record in parent applications 18/386,778, 17/850,622, 17/112,304, 16/546,871, 15/952,796, and 13/669,380 (now U.S. Patent Nos. 12,407,853 B2, 11,849,144 B2, 11,418,809 B2, 10,924,760 B2, 10,432,964 B2, and 10,003,817 B2, respectively), i.e. “the syntax elements including identifying information for a given LTRP in the LTRP status information for the current picture, and wherein the identifying information for the given LTRP is a value of picture order count least significant bits ("POC LSBs"), modulo a most significant bit wrapping point” and “wherein the value of the POC LSBs, modulo the most significant bit wrapping point, for the given LTRP is used to at least in part indicate a difference between POC values of the current picture and the given LTRP.” (emphasis added) as recited for e.g. in instant claim 1.
5. Upon examination of independent claim 1 (“One or more non-transitory computer-readable media having programmed thereon a sequence parameter set and coded data for at least part of a bitstream, wherein the bitstream includes”), this is a product by process claim limitation where the product is a bitstream and the process is the method steps to generate the bitstream. Although worded slightly different than “One or more non-transitory computer-readable media having stored thereon a sequence parameter set and coded data for at least part of a bitstream” as was previously noted for claim 60 of parent application no. 18/386,778 (02/06/2025), the limitation of claim 1 above similarly recites storing a bitstream in a CRM.
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 in claim 1 merely serves as a support for the storage of the bitstream and provides no functional relationship between the stored bitstream and storage medium. Therefore 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 any prior art which recites a storage medium storing a bitstream. which recites a storage medium storing a bitstream. Please see below for details. Please see details below with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Deshpande et al. US 2013/0094772 A1, hereinafter referred to as Deshpande.
6. To help advance prosecution, it is recommended that “One or more non-transitory computer-readable media having programmed thereon a sequence parameter set and coded data for at least part of a bitstream, wherein the bitstream includes” be rewritten to also include instructions executed by a processor which cause the processor to perform a video coding method that generates the bitstream, wherein the bitstream includes…
Double Patenting
7. 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. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form 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.
8. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4-6, 9, and 11-13 of U.S. Patent No. 12,407,853 B2, hereinafter referred to as 853. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patented claims of 853 anticipate those in the instant application, since they are analogously directed to setting identifying information for a given LTRP in the signaled LTRP status information for a current picture, “wherein the identifying information for the given LTRP is a value of picture order count least significant bits ("POC LSBs"), modulo a most significant bit wrapping point” and “wherein the value of the POC LSBs, modulo the most significant bit wrapping point, for the given LTRP is used to at least in part indicate a difference between POC values of the current picture and the given LTRP.” The claim mapping between claim sets is shown in table 1 below for reference.
9. Claims 1-20 are further rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over the instant claims of U.S. Patent Numbers 11849144, 11418809, 10924760, 10432964 and 10003817. Considering the rejection over 853 above and noting the non-statutory double patenting rejection that was made for 853 over the claim sets of U.S. Patent Numbers 11849144, 11418809, 10924760, 10432964 and 10003817 (see office action dated 08/05/2024 for Application No. 18/386,778), the remaining patented claim sets are therefore analogous and deemed relevant. For this reason, and in an effort to conserve space, the corresponding claim mappings are not presented in tables as in 853.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the remaining patented claims above anticipate those in the instant application, since they are also analogously directed to setting identifying information for a given LTRP in the signaled LTRP status information for a current picture, “wherein the identifying information for the given LTRP is a value of picture order count least significant bits ("POC LSBs"), modulo a most significant bit wrapping point” and “wherein the value of the POC LSBs, modulo the most significant bit wrapping point, for the given LTRP is used to at least in part indicate a difference between POC values of the current picture and the given LTRP.”
Table 1
**Note: The items below that are BOLD/UNDERLINED in the Instant Application/Co-pending Application, respectively, indicate differences in the claim limitation.
Instant Application 19/288,463
U.S. Patent No. 12,407,853 B2
(18/386,778)
Claim 1
One or more non-transitory computer-readable media having programmed thereon a sequence parameter set and coded data for at least part of a bitstream, wherein the bitstream includes, as part of the sequence parameter set, a flag that indicates long-term reference picture ("LTRP") status information is present in the bitstream for pictures of a sequence, wherein the bitstream further includes, as part of the coded data, syntax elements that represent LTRP status information for a current picture among the pictures of the sequence, wherein the LTRP status information for the current picture identifies which pictures, if any, among a set of reference pictures available for the current picture, are available for use as LTRPs for the current picture, the syntax elements including identifying information for a given LTRP in the LTRP status information for the current picture, and wherein the identifying information for the given LTRP is a value of picture order count least significant bits ("POC LSBs"), modulo a most significant bit wrapping point, for the given LTRP for the current picture, the sequence parameter set and the coded data being usable to cause a video decoder, when processing the sequence parameter set and the coded data in a computer system that includes one or more processing units, to perform operations comprising [See claim 9 of 853 regarding a decoder]: based at least in part on the flag that indicates the LTRP status information is present in the bitstream for the pictures of the sequence [this is found in 853 “a flag that indicates LTRP status information is present in the bitstream for the pictures of the sequence”] determining that the LTRP status information is present in the bitstream for the pictures of the sequence [Note: since this flag is a part of the SPS in the bitstream, it can be determined whether LTRP status information is present in the bitstream]; and decoding the current picture, including [See claim 9 of 853 regarding a decoder]: determining the set of reference pictures available for the current picture [this is found in 853 “determining a set of reference pictures available for the current picture”]; and based at least in part on the syntax elements that represent the LTRP status information for the current picture, identifying which pictures, if any, among the set of reference pictures available for the current picture, are available for use as LTRPs for the current picture, wherein the value of the POC LSBs, modulo the most significant bit wrapping point, for the given LTRP is used to at least in part indicate a difference between POC values of the current picture and the given LTRP. [See claim 1 of 853]
Note 1: The decoder and decoding above is found in claim 9 of 853.
Claim 1
In a computer system that implements a video encoder, a method comprising: determining to include long-term reference picture (“LTRP”) status information in a bitstream for pictures of a sequence; outputting, as part of a sequence parameter set, a flag that indicates LTRP status information is present in the bitstream for the pictures of the sequence; encoding a current picture among the pictures of the sequence, thereby producing coded data, including:
determining a set of reference pictures available for the current picture, the set of reference pictures including at least one LTRP; determining LTRP status information for the current picture, wherein the LTRP status information for the current picture identifies which pictures, if any, among the set of reference pictures are available for use as LTRPs for the current picture; and setting syntax elements that represent the LTRP status information for the current picture, including setting identifying information for a given LTRP in the LTRP status information for the current picture, wherein the identifying information for the given LTRP is a value of picture order count least significant bits (“POC LSBs”) for the given LTRP for the current picture, the value of the POC LSBs for the given LTRP, modulo a most significant bit wrapping point, at least in part indicating a difference between POC values of the current picture and the given LTRP; and outputting the coded data as part of the bitstream, the coded data including the syntax elements that represent the LTRP status information for the current picture.
Claim 9
A computer system comprising one or more processing units and memory, wherein the computer system implements a video “decoder” configured to perform operations comprising:…
Claim 2
The one or more computer-readable media of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise: using the LTRP status information to manage a decoded picture storage area of a video decoder.
Claim 11
The computer system of claim 9, wherein the operations further comprise: using the LTRP status information to manage a decoded picture storage area of a video decoder.
Claim 3
The one or more computer-readable media of claim 1, wherein the syntax elements further include a flag for the given LTRP, the flag for the given LTRP indicating whether the given LTRP is used for decoding of the current picture.
Claim 12
The computer system of claim 9, wherein the syntax elements further include a flag for the given LTRP, the flag for the given LTRP indicating whether the given LTRP is used for decoding of the current picture.
Claim 4
The one or more computer-readable media of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise: sending feedback information for use by a video encoder during encoding, wherein the feedback information represents decoder state information that identifies which pictures are available for use as reference pictures by the video decoder.
Claim 13
The computer system of claim 9, wherein the operations further comprise: sending feedback information for use by a video encoder during encoding, wherein the feedback information represents decoder state information that identifies which pictures are available for use as reference pictures by a video decoder.
Claim 5
The one or more computer-readable media of claim 1, wherein the syntax elements that represent the LTRP status information for the current picture further include a flag for the given LTRP that facilitates reuse of the value of POC LSBs for the given LTRP as a value of POC LSBs for another reference picture while the given LTRP remains distinctly identified compared to the other reference picture.
Claim 4
The method of claim 1, wherein the setting the syntax elements that represent the LTRP status information for the current picture further includes: setting a flag for the given LTRP in the LTRP status information for the current picture, wherein the flag for the given LTRP facilitates reuse of the value of POC LSBs for the given LTRP as a value of POC LSBs for another reference picture while the given LTRP remains distinctly identified compared to the other reference picture.
Claim 6
The one or more computer-readable media of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise: reusing the value of POC LSBs for the given LTRP as a value of POC LSBs for another reference picture, wherein the other reference picture is a short-term reference picture ("STRP").
Claim 5
The method of claim 1, further comprising: reusing the value of POC LSBs for the given LTRP as a value of POC LSBs for another reference picture, wherein the other reference picture is a short-term reference picture (“STRP”).
Claim 7
The one or more computer-readable media of claim 6, wherein the operations further comprise: marking the given LTRP as used for long-term reference to distinguish between the given LTRP and the STRP.
Claim 6
The method of claim 5, further comprising: marking the given LTRP as used for long-term reference to distinguish between the given LTRP and the STRP.
Claim 8
In a computer system, a method comprising: receiving a sequence parameter set and coded data for at least part of a bitstream, wherein the bitstream includes, as part of the sequence parameter set, a flag that indicates long-term reference picture ("LTRP") status information is present in the bitstream for pictures of a sequence, wherein the bitstream further includes, as part of the coded data, syntax elements that represent LTRP status information for a current picture among the pictures of the sequence, wherein the LTRP status information for the current picture identifies which pictures, if any, among a set of reference pictures available for the current picture, are available for use as LTRPs for the current picture, the syntax elements including identifying information for a given LTRP in the LTRP status information for the current picture, and wherein the identifying information for the given LTRP is a value of picture order count least significant bits ("POC LSBs"), modulo a most significant bit wrapping point, for the given LTRP for the current picture; storing the at least part of a bitstream, the sequence parameter set and the coded data being usable to cause a computer-implemented video decoder, when processing the sequence parameter set and the coded data, to perform operations comprising: based at least in part on the flag that indicates the LTRP status information is present in the bitstream for the pictures of the sequence, determining that the LTRP status information is present in the bitstream for the pictures of the sequence; and decoding the current picture, including: determining the set of reference pictures available for the current picture; and based at least in part on the syntax elements that represent the LTRP status information for the current picture, identifying which pictures, if any, among the set of reference pictures available for the current picture, are available for use as LTRPs for the current picture, wherein the value of the POC LSBs, modulo the most significant bit wrapping point, for the given LTRP is used to at least in part indicate a difference between POC values of the current picture and the given LTRP.
Note: comments in claim 1 also pertain to claim 8 above
Claim 9
A computer system comprising one or more processing units and memory, wherein the computer system implements a video decoder configured to perform operations comprising: receiving a sequence parameter set; parsing, from the sequence parameter set, a flag that indicates long-term reference picture (“LTRP”) status information is present in a bitstream for pictures of a sequence; receiving coded data in the bitstream for a current picture among the pictures of the sequence; and decoding the current picture, including determining a set of reference pictures available for the current picture, the set of reference pictures including at least one LTRP, wherein the decoding further includes: parsing syntax elements from the bitstream, wherein the syntax elements represent LTRP status information for the current picture, wherein the LTRP status information for the current picture identifies which pictures, if any, among the set of reference pictures are available for use as LTRPs for the current picture, the syntax elements including identifying information for a given LTRP in the LTRP status information for the current picture, and wherein the identifying information for the given LTRP is a value of picture order count least significant bits (“POC LSBs”), modulo a most significant bit wrapping point, for the given LTRP for the current picture; and using the LTRP status information to identify which pictures, if any, among the set of reference pictures are available for use as LTRPs for the current picture, wherein the value of the POC LSBs for the given LTRP, modulo the most significant bit wrapping point, is used to at least in part indicate a difference between POC values of the current picture and the given LTRP.
Claim 9
Same as instant claim 2
See claim 11 of 853
Claim10
Same as instant claim 3
See claim 12 of 853
Claim11
Same as instant claim 4
See claim 13 of 853
Claim12
Same as instant claim 5
See claim 4 of 853
Claim13
Same as instant claim 6
See claim 5 of 853
Claim14
Same as instant claim 7
See claim 6 of 853
Claim15
Same as instant claim 8
See claim 9 of 853
Claim 16
Same as instant claim 2
See claim 11 of 853
Claim 17
Same as instant claim 3
See claim 12 of 853
Claim 18
Same as instant claim 4
See claim 13 of 853
Claim 19
Same as instant claim 6
See claim 5 of 853
Claim 20
Same as instant claim 7
See claim 6 of 853
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
10. 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 8-14 and 15-20 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.
Regarding claim 8, claim 8 recites “In a computer system, a method comprising:” and
“the sequence parameter set and the coded data being usable to cause a computer-implemented video decoder” (emphasis added). However as written, it is not entirely clear if the video decoder is a part of the same claimed computer system or not. In other words, it is not clear if the computer system implements the video decoder. For this reason, the metes and bounds of the claim cannot be unequivocally ascertained.
Regarding claim 15, claim 15 recites similar limitation as claim 8 above. Thus, for the same reasons given, claim 15 is also 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.
Regarding claims 9-14 and 16-20, these are dependent claims which include all of the feature of their respective independent claims. Thus, for the same reasons given, claims 9-14 and 16-20 are also 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
11. 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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 –
(a) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for a patent.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Deshpande et al. US 2013/0094772 A1, hereinafter referred to as Deshpande.
Regarding Claim 1, Given the claimed bitstream contains non-functional descriptive material, it is not given patentable weight. Please see MPEP §2111.05(III). Claim 1 is therefore read as “One or more non-transitory computer-readable media having programmed thereon a sequence parameter set and coded data for at least part of a bitstream, wherein the bitstream includes”. Deshpande’s teachings in the field of video coding are therefore deemed relevant, since Deshpande recites a storage medium storing an encoded video bitstream. For support please see for e.g. ¶0048-¶0049, where coded bitstream 114 (fig. 1), which includes encoded pictures and overhead data (e.g. parameter set information), may be stored in memory for retrieval by decoder 102. Also please note fig. 15 which illustrates memory 1511 in electronic device 1504, where said memory can store data 1515a.
Regarding Claims 2-7, they depend on Claim 1 above and therefore include all of its limitations. For the same reasons given, Claims 2-7 are also rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see PTO 892 for additional references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD A HANSELL JR. whose telephone number is (571)270-0615. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Fri 10 am- 7 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, Jamie Atala can be reached on 571-272-7384. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/RICHARD A HANSELL JR./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2486
Prosecution Insights