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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the 35 USC 103 rejections of claim(s) 1, 8, and 9 have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Applicant's arguments regarding the motivation to combine the cited prior art references have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues both of the prior art references Hannuksela and Drugeon are related to performing padding by adding dummy pixels and one having in the ordinary skill in the art would not contemplate resizing using a ratio between the size of the image and a size of the resized image (see remarks pg. 6 para. 1, pg. 7, para. 1). The examiner respectfully disagrees. First, the examiner notes the process of padding is defined by adding or removing pixels from a boundary edge, thus any method of padding involves the adding or removing of pixels from a boundary of a block or image. Second, padding is a process well known in the art and combining different methods of padding and signaling padding syntax would be obvious to one of ordinary skill dependent upon the system design choice. For example, Hannuksela, in [0746] teaches performing both a horizontal and a vertical padding process and signaling the applied padding method while Drugeon teaches in [0082] padding may be applied in one or more vertical/horizontal directions by signaling padding direction information. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to improve upon the teachings of Hannuksela by incorporating the separable padding and direction signaling for more efficient padding by only applying padding to desired regions and signaling said padding as opposed to applying padding to an entire image/block. Further, in [0746], Hannuksela teaches “any other type of a padding process may be applied alternatively”. Thus substituting various methods for signaling a resizing of an image/block, as claimed in the amended claim limitations in claim 1, 8, and 9, would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for performing more efficient image encoding/decoding. The examiner notes, only the types of padding information taught in the Drugeon reference is relied upon for the combination of Hannuksela and Dugeon as opposed to the padding method (i.e. how the padding pixels are determined or calculated) taught by Drugeon.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 8, and 9 recite the limitation “the resizing being a scaling using a ratio between a size of the image and a size of the resized image”. The applicant’s originally filed specification fails to disclose this limitation. In the applicant’s remarks filed 3/19/2026, the applicant cites [0240] of the applicant’ specification as disclosing said limitation (see remarks pg. 5, para. 1-3). The examiner respectfully disagrees. [0240] recites resizing of an image is performed by performing multiplication or division based on an image size. [0240] however is silent about the use of a ratio between an original image and its resized version for performing the resizing. The examiner notes the examiner is interpreting this limitation to mean a scale factor is used for resizing an image (See claim rejections below).
Claims 2-7 are rejected based on their respective dependencies upon claim 1.
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 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-10 of copending Application No. 19/273,908 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because any differences between the application’s claims and the co-pending application’s claims are not patentably distinct as shown by the prior art rejections below
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
19/273,908 (Differences are highlighted in BOLD)
19/302,723 (Differences are highlighted in BOLD)
1. An image decoding method, comprising:
reconstructing an image based on information on the image included in a bitstream;
obtaining resizing information for resizing the image; and
resizing the image to generate a resized image based on the resizing information,
wherein the resizing information specifies whether to perform the resizing and a direction of the resizing.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein in case of the direction of the resizing being horizontal, a scaling is applied in a horizontal direction of the image and no scaling is applied in a vertical direction of the image.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein in case of the direction of the resizing being all directions, a scaling is applied in both a horizontal direction and a vertical direction of the image.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein samples of the resized image are generated based on a data processing method selected from among a plurality of data processing methods.
5. The method of claim 4, wherein the data processing method is selected from among the plurality of data processing methods based on a selection information for the data processing method.
6. The method of claim 4, wherein the plurality of data processing methods includes a first method which copies a sample of the image onto the samples of the resized image.
7. The method of claim 4, wherein the plurality of data processing methods includes a second method which interpolates samples of the image to generate the samples of the resized image.
8. An image encoding method, comprising: reconstructing an image, information on the image being encoded into a bitstream; determining resizing information for resizing the image; resizing the image to generate a resized image based on the resizing information; and encoding the resizing information, wherein the resizing information specifies whether to perform the resizing and a direction of the resizing.
9. A method of transmitting a bitstream, comprising: reconstructing an image, information on the image being encoded into the bitstream; determining resizing information for resizing the image; resizing the image to generate a resized image based on the resizing information; encoding the resizing information; and transmitting the bitstream, wherein the resizing information specifies whether to perform the resizing and a direction of the resizing.
10. A non-transitory computer-readable recording method storing encoded data which is generated by an image encoding method, the image encoding method comprising: reconstructing an image, information on the image being encoded into the bitstream; determining resizing information for resizing the image; resizing the image to generate a resized image based on the resizing information; and encoding the resizing information, wherein the resizing information specifies whether to perform the resizing and a direction of the resizing.
1. An image decoding method, comprising:
obtaining an image by decoding a bitstream;
obtaining resizing information for resizing the image;
resizing the image to generate a resized image based on the resizing information,
wherein the resizing information specifies whether to perform the resizing and a direction of the resizing.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein in case of the direction of the resizing being horizontal, a scaling is applied in a horizontal direction of the image and no scaling is applied in a vertical direction of the image.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein in case of the direction of the resizing being all directions, a scaling is applied in both a horizontal direction and a vertical direction of the image.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein samples of the resized image are generated based on a data processing method selected from among a plurality of data processing methods.
5. The method of claim 4, wherein the data processing method is selected from among the plurality of data processing methods based on a selection information for the data processing method.
6. The method of claim 4, wherein the plurality of data processing methods includes a first method which copies a sample of the image onto the samples of the resized image.
7. The method of claim 4, wherein the plurality of data processing methods includes a second method which interpolates samples of the image to generate the samples of the resized image.
8. An image encoding method, comprising: obtaining an image, the image being encoded into a bitstream;
determining resizing information for resizing the image;
resizing the image to generate a resized image based on the resizing information; and
encoding the resizing information
wherein the resizing information specifies whether to perform the resizing and a direction of the resizing.
9. A method of transmitting encoded data which is generated by an image encoding method, the image encoding method comprising: obtaining an image, the image being encoded into a bitstream; resizing the image to generate a resized image based on the resizing information; and encoding the resizing information, wherein the resizing information specifies whether to perform the resizing and a direction of the resizing.
10. A non-transitory computer-readable recording method storing encoded data which is generated by an image encoding method, the image encoding method comprising: obtaining an image, the image being encoded into a bitstream; determining resizing information for resizing the image;
resizing the image to generate a resized image based on the resizing information; and encoding the resizing information
wherein the resizing information specifies whether to perform the resizing and a direction of the resizing.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hannuksela et al. (Hannuksela) (US 2014/0168362) in view of Drugeon et al. (Drugeon) (US 2012/0320970), and further in view of Li et al. (Li) (US Pat. No. 6,704,358).
Regarding claim 1, Hannuksela discloses an image decoding method, comprising:
obtaining an image by decoding a bitstream ([0238], [0287], [0301], [0533], [0538], the decoder reconstructs and stores images as reference images according to decoded information; [0746], the decoder receives and decodes one or more indications of the applied padding method from the bitstream and performs the padding process accordingly);
obtaining resizing information for resizing the image ([0746], the decoder receives and decodes one or more indications of the applied padding method from the bitstream and performs the padding process accordingly); and
resizing the image to generate a resized image based on the resizing information ([0746], the decoder receives and decodes one or more indications of the applied padding method from the bitstream and performs the padding process accordingly),
wherein the resizing information specifies whether to perform the resizing ([0746], the encoder indicates whether or not padding is used and/or the applied padding method within the bitstream and the decoder receives and decodes one or more indications).
Hannuksela is silent about wherein the resizing information specifies a direction of the resizing; and the resizing being a scaling using a ratio between a size of the image and a size of the resized image.
Drugeon from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses wherein the resizing information specifies a direction of the resizing ([0082], [0084], [0160], [0161], padding direction indicating a vertical and/or horizontal padding direction is signaled).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Drugeon into the teachings of Hannuksela for more efficient encoding/decoding by allowing padding to be performed only necessary sides of a block/image.
Hannuksela in view of Drugeon is silent about the resizing being a scaling using a ratio between a size of the image and a size of the resized image.
Li from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses the resizing being a scaling using a ratio between a size of the image and a size of the resized image (col. 4, lns. 17-20, 34-45, col. 7, lns. 62-67, a scale factor signaling a ratio between the current image and a resized version of the current image is used for scaling an image).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Li into the teachings of Hannuksela in view of Drugeon for more efficient encoding/decoding.
Regarding claim 2, Drugeon further discloses wherein in case of the direction of the resizing being horizontal, a scaling is applied in a horizontal direction of the image and no scaling is applied in a vertical direction of the image ([0082], [0084], [0160], [0161], padding is able to be applied to only the vertical or horizontal direction).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Drugeon into the teachings of Hannuksela for more efficient encoding/decoding by allowing padding to be performed only necessary sides of a block/image.
Regarding claim 3, Drugeon further discloses wherein in case of the direction of the resizing being all directions, a scaling is applied in both a horizontal direction and a vertical direction of the image ([0082], [0084], [0160], [0161], padding direction indicating a vertical and/or horizontal padding direction is signaled, padding at the top, bottom, left, and right is possible).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Drugeon into the teachings of Hannuksela for more efficient encoding/decoding by allowing padding to be performed only necessary sides of a block/image.
Regarding claim 4, Hannuksela discloses wherein samples of the resized image are generated based on a data processing method selected from among a plurality of data processing methods ([0746], horizontal/vertical pixel copying or any other type of padding may be applied).
Regarding claim 5, Hannuksela discloses wherein the data processing method is selected from among the plurality of data processing methods based on a selection information for the data processing method ([0746], the applied padding method is indicated in the bitstream).
Regarding claim 6, Hannuksela discloses wherein the plurality of data processing methods includes a first method which copies a sample of the image onto the samples of the resized image ([0746], horizontal/vertical pixel copying may be applied for padding).
Regarding claim 7, Hannuksela discloses wherein the plurality of data processing methods includes a second method which interpolates samples of the image to generate the samples of the resized image ([0747], [0748], interpolation is performed to generate unavailable samples during padding).
Regarding claim 8, Hannuksela discloses an image encoding method, comprising:
obtaining an image, the image being encoded into a bitstream ([0238], [0287], [0301], [0533], [0538], the decoder reconstructs and stores images as reference images according to decoded information; [0746], the decoder receives and decodes one or more indications of the applied padding method from the bitstream and performs the padding process accordingly);
determining resizing information for resizing the image ([0746], the decoder receives and decodes one or more indications of the applied padding method from the bitstream and performs the padding process accordingly);
resizing the image to generate a resized image based on the resizing information ([0746], the decoder receives and decodes one or more indications of the applied padding method from the bitstream and performs the padding process accordingly); and
encoding the resizing information ([0746], the encoder indicates whether or not padding is used and/or the applied padding method within the bitstream),
wherein the resizing information specifies whether to perform the resizing ([0746], the encoder indicates whether or not padding is used and/or the applied padding method within the bitstream and the decoder receives and decodes one or more indications).
Hannuksela is silent about wherein the resizing information specifies a direction of the resizing; and the resizing being a scaling using a ratio between a size of the image and a size of the resized image.
Drugeon from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses wherein the resizing information specifies a direction of the resizing ([0082], [0084], [0160], [0161], padding direction indicating a vertical and/or horizontal padding direction is signaled).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Drugeon into the teachings of Hannuksela for more efficient encoding/decoding by allowing padding to be performed only necessary sides of a block/image.
Hannuksela in view of Drugeon is silent about the resizing being a scaling using a ratio between a size of the image and a size of the resized image.
Li from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses the resizing being a scaling using a ratio between a size of the image and a size of the resized image (col. 4, lns. 17-20, 34-45, col. 7, lns. 62-67, a scale factor signaling a ratio between the current image and a resized version of the current image is used for scaling an image).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Li into the teachings of Hannuksela in view of Drugeon for more efficient encoding/decoding.
Regarding claim 9, the limitations of claim 9 are rejected in the analysis of claim 8. Hunnuksela further discloses method of transmitting a bitstream, comprising… transmitting the bitstream (FIG. 9, the encoded bitstream 207 is transmitted to decoder 210).
Regarding claim 10, the limitations of claim 10 are rejected in the analysis of claim 8. Hunnuksela further discloses a non-transitory computer-readable recording method storing encoded data which is generated by an image encoding method (FIG. 4b, [0270], decoded images are stored for reference in reference frame buffer 404, [0756], [0761], the invention is embodied as software).
Claim 10’s recitation of “encoded data which is generated by an encoding method, the encoding method comprising…” is a product by process claim limitation where the product is the bit stream 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 encoded data and information 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 18 merely services as a support for the storage of the bitstream and provides no functional relationship between the stored bitstream and storage medium. Therefor 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 Hannuksela recites a storage medium storing a bitstream (FIG. 4b, [0270], decoded images are stored for reference in reference frame buffer 404, [0756], [0761], the invention is embodied as software).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFERY A WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)270-7579. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Sath Perungavoor can be reached at 571-272-7455. 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.
/JEFFERY A WILLIAMS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488
Prosecution Insights