DETAILED ACTION
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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. EP19162403, filed on 3/12/2019.
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 1-26 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of U.S. Patent No. 12,010,337 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Instant Application
Issued U.S. Patent No. 12,010,337 B2
Claim 1
A video decoder comprising:
at least one hardware processor configured to perform operations comprising:
decoding, from a video bitstream, a plurality of syntax elements;
setting, based on the syntax elements, an adaptive motion vector resolution (AMVR);
determining, for a coding unit, that the AMVR is a half sample resolution;
based on the determining, selecting an interpolation filter that includes six non- zero filter coefficients having values of 3, 9, 20, 20, 9, and 3; and
obtaining a predicted sample value of a coding unit by applying the selected interpolation filter to samples of a reference picture.
Claim 2
A video decoder configured to:
decode from a video bit stream syntax elements, the syntax elements comprising an indication of an adaptive motion vector resolution (AMVR) mode and an indication of whether an inter prediction mode is translational or affine for a coding block of a picture;
select, depending on the indicated AMVR mode and the indication of whether the inter prediction mode is translational or affine, a finite impulse response (FIR) interpolation filter from a plurality of FIR interpolation filters for obtaining a sample corresponding to a half-sample position of a reference picture of the coding block, the plurality of FIR interpolation filters comprising an interpolation filter with 6 nonzero coefficients of 3, 9, 20, 20, 9, 3 and an interpolation filter with 8 nonzero coefficients of −1, 4, −11, 40, 40, −11, 4, −1;
apply the selected FIR interpolation filter to samples of the reference picture to obtain the sample corresponding to the half-sample position; and
predict a sample of the coding block using the sample corresponding to the half-sample position.
Claim 7
Claims analogous limitations in the form of a method of video decoding, rejected on the same premise as claim 1.
Claim 9
Claims analogous limitations in the form of a method of video decoding, rejected on the same premise as claim 2.
Claim 14
Claims analogous limitations in the form of a video encoder, rejected on the same premise as claim 1.
Claim 1
Claims analogous limitations in the form of a video encoder, rejected on the same premise as claim 2.
Claim 20
Claims analogous limitations in the form of a method of video encoding, rejected on the same premise as claim 1.
Claim 8
Claims analogous limitations in the form of a method of video encoding, rejected on the same premise as claim 2.
Claim 26
Claims analogous limitations in the form of a non-transitory computer-readable medium having instructions which when executed perform the method of video encoding, rejected on the same premise as claim 1.
Claim 13
Claims analogous limitations in the form of a non-transitory computer-readable medium having instructions which when executed perform the method of video encoding, rejected on the same premise as claim 2.
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1, 7, 14, 20, and 26 of the instant application generic to all that is recited in claims 1, 2, 9, 8, and 13 of the U.S. Patent No. 12,010,337 B2.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK E DEMOSKY whose telephone number is (571)272-8799. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7-4 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, Jamie Atala can be reached at 5712727384. 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.
/PATRICK E DEMOSKY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2486
Prosecution Insights