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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to a continuation application filed in which claims 2-8 of the instant application are pending and ready for examination as of the preliminary amendment filed on 03/06/2026.
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 obviousness-type 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); 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 conflicting 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.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 2-8 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,736,710. The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, as follows: Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,736,710, either singularly or in combination, contain each and every element and/or render each and every element of claims 2-8 of the instant application obvious. The claims of the instant application therefore are not patently distinct from the issued patent claims and as such are unpatentable over obvious-type double patenting.
Claims 2-8 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 1-14 of U.S. Patent No. 11,303,914. The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, as follows: Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-14 of U.S. Patent No. 11,303,914, either singularly or in combination, contain each and every element and/or render each and every element of claims 2-8 of the instant application obvious. The claims of the instant application therefore are not patently distinct from the issued patent claims and as such are unpatentable over obvious-type double patenting.
Claims 2-8 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,382,074. The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, as follows: Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,382,074, either singularly or in combination, contain each and every element and/or render each and every element of claims 2-8 of the instant application obvious. The claims of the instant application therefore are not patently distinct from the issued patent claims and as such are unpatentable over obvious-type double patenting.
Allowable Subject Matter
The closest prior art made of record in regards to applicant’s claimed invention is as follows:
Zhang et al. (US 2022/0038693) discloses devices, systems and methods related to management of syntax flags with respect chroma formats in video processing. In one representative aspect, a video decoding method includes determining, for a conversion between a video and a coded representation of the video, whether a syntax element associated with an adaptive loop filtering (ALF) operation for a chroma component of the video is included in the coded representation based on a condition. The method also includes performing the conversion according to the determining (abstract).
Lee et al. (US 2017/0105014) discloses various aspects related to luma-driven chroma scaling for high dynamic range and wide color gamut contents. For example, a method of video data decoding may include obtaining video data, where the video data includes a scaled chroma component and a luma component, and where the scaled chroma component is scaled based on a chroma scaling factor that is a non-linear function of the luma component. The method may also include obtaining the chroma scaling factor for the scaled chroma component and generating a chroma component from the scaled chroma component based on the chroma scaling factor. In addition, the method may include outputting the chroma component, which may then be used for further processing (abstract).
Hu et al. (US 2021/0160513) discloses a method of decoding video data that may comprise reconstructing a block of video data comprising chroma samples, applying an adaptive loop filter to the chroma samples, and applying a cross-component adaptive loop filter to the chroma samples. Applying the cross-component adaptive loop filter may include determining an offset, and applying the offset to a particular chroma sample being filtered, wherein the offset is a function of a difference between a collocated luma sample that is collocated with the particular chroma sample being filtered and a plurality of neighboring luma samples that are spatial neighbors to the collocated luma sample (abstract).
The closest prior art of record, considered individually or in combination, fails to teach or reasonably suggest all the claimed features of claim 2, structurally and functionally interconnected with other limitations in the manner as cited in the claim and dependent claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHIHAN ZHOU whose telephone number is (571)270-7284. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays-Fridays 8:30am-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, Christopher Kelley can be reached on 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.
/ZHIHAN ZHOU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482
Prosecution Insights