DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the application filed on 8/18/2025.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The references listed on the Information Disclosure Statement submitted on 8/18/2025 has/have been considered by the examiner (see attached PTO-1449).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 6. 1, 1, 3, 8, 7, 8, 1, 1, 6, 1, 1 and 17-19 of patent No. 11871003 (hereinafter reference patent).
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Claims of the present application are anticipated by the claims of the reference patent.
Claims of the present application recite elements that are same in substance as the claims 1, 3, 6-8 and 17-19 of the reference patent except that the claims of the present application are found as essentially a sub combinations of the claims of the reference patent.
Claim Mapping Notation
In this office action, following notations are being used to refer to the paragraph numbers or column number and lines of portions of the cited reference.
In this office action, following notations are being used to refer to the paragraph numbers or column number and lines of portions of the cited reference.
[0005] (Paragraph number [0005])
C5 (Column 5)
Pa5 (Page 5)
S5 (Section 5)
Furthermore, unless necessary to distinguish from other references in this action, “et al.” will be omitted when referring to the reference.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) and (a2) as being anticipated by Leontaris et al. (US 20130028316 A1)
1. An electronic device comprising:
a network interface configured to stream image data to another electronic device; and
“[0003] Satisfying constraint (a) ensures that the compressed video bitstream will fit the communication pipe or storage space. For example, a wireless network may only allow up to 768 kbps for video transmission.”
Network interface is inherent for video transmission.
video encoder circuitry configured to prepare the image data for streaming using operations comprising performing three passes of rate control on the image data.
“[0053] A first coding pass is performed that only considers the base layer. Coding statistics are gathered from each coded frame. A pre-analysis stage may also precede this pass to provide information that will help with selecting coding parameters and prediction structure(s) for this pass. This first coding pass (or passes) may be of lower complexity compared to the final coding pass. Subsequent passes may have to account for this discrepancy using techniques such as those outlined in Appendix A.”
See also Fig. 8.
2. The electronic device of claim 1, wherein the video encoder circuitry is configured to, in a first pass of rate control, perform a first size estimation for respective slices of the image data.
“[0033] In a multi-layered video coding system, a rate control model may model an individual layer or multiple layers: for the former the number of bits required to code the given layer is estimated given the coding parameters of the layer, and equivalently the coding parameters are determined so as to code the given layer with the allocated number of bits. For the latter (joint model) the number of bits required to code the given layer is estimated given the coding parameters of the given layer and the layers (base and enhancement) on which it depends.”
1 3. The electronic device of claim 2, wherein the video encoder circuitry is configured to, in a second pass of rate control occurring after the first pass, assign first quantization parameters and perform a second size estimation for the respective slices of the image data.
“[0033] In a multi-layered video coding system, a rate control model may model an individual layer or multiple layers: for the former the number of bits required to code the given layer is estimated given the coding parameters of the layer, and equivalently the coding parameters are determined so as to code the given layer with the allocated number of bits. For the latter (joint model) the number of bits required to code the given layer is estimated given the coding parameters of the given layer and the layers (base and enhancement) on which it depends.”
4. The electronic device of claim 1, wherein the video encoder circuitry is configured to, in a third pass of rate control occurring after a first pass of rate control and a second pass of rate control, perform rate control using one or more image frame statistics collected during the second pass of rate control.
“[0033] In a multi-layered video coding system, a rate control model may model an individual layer or multiple layers: for the former the number of bits required to code the given layer is estimated given the coding parameters of the layer, and equivalently the coding parameters are determined so as to code the given layer with the allocated number of bits. For the latter (joint model) the number of bits required to code the given layer is estimated given the coding parameters of the given layer and the layers (base and enhancement) on which it depends.”
5. The electronic device of claim 4, wherein the video encoder circuitry is configured to, in the third pass of rate control, scale a target coefficient size and a maximum coefficient size based on the one or more image frame statistics.
“[0063] Prior to the final coding pass, bit rate, complexity and inter-layer relationships are derived as in the last step of example 2. During the final coding pass, given the BL modulated QP offset constraint, the QP and bit allocation is selected so that the overall base and enhancement layer(s) bit target is satisfied. Statistics from all layers are used to allocate bits and QPs.”
Scaling is an inherent part of QPs.
“[0064] In practice, apart from the overall base and enhancement layer bit rate target, one may also wish to constrain the ratio of bits allocated to each layer. For example, one may wish to constrain the ratio to a maximum value of say 10%. This constraint may be enforced on a sequence level or even a frame level.”
6. The electronic device of claim 5, wherein the maximum coefficient size is scaled based on a ratio of the maximum coefficient size and the target coefficient size values.
“[0064] In practice, apart from the overall base and enhancement layer bit rate target, one may also wish to constrain the ratio of bits allocated to each layer. For example, one may wish to constrain the ratio to a maximum value of say 10%. This constraint may be enforced on a sequence level or even a frame level.”
7. The electronic device of claim 5, wherein the video encoder circuitry is configured to, in the third pass of rate control, calculate a final quantization parameter value based on the scaled target coefficient size and the scaled maximum coefficient size values.
“[0067] In the final coding pass, the rate control method loops through a set of possible fixed QP offset constraints. For each QP constraint, the QP and bit allocation is selected so that the overall base and enhancement layer bit target is satisfied. The fixed QP constraint, which also satisfies the base/enhancement layer bit rate ratio is selected to code the entire multi-layer/multi-view sequence. Statistics from both layers are used to allocate bits and QPs.”
8. The electronic device of claim 7, wherein the video encoder circuitry is configured to encode one or more slices of the image data based on the final quantization parameter value.
“[0067] In the final coding pass, the rate control method loops through a set of possible fixed QP offset constraints. For each QP constraint, the QP and bit allocation is selected so that the overall base and enhancement layer bit target is satisfied. The fixed QP constraint, which also satisfies the base/enhancement layer bit rate ratio is selected to code the entire multi-layer/multi-view sequence. Statistics from both layers are used to allocate bits and QPs.”
Slice is an inherent area of a frame.
9. The electronic device of claim 5, wherein the video encoder circuitry is configured to:
determine, based on the one or more image frame statistics, whether one or more slices are above a size threshold value; and encode the one or more slices that are above the size threshold value to a smaller size based on scaling the target coefficient size and the maximum coefficient size.
“[0035] Coding statistics include picture or slice coding type (such as I, P or B), bit usage per category (such as texture, header, and motion), coding mode statistics (e.g. how many skip or intra coding modes), block type statistics, spatial statistics such as variance, histograms, coding parameters (QP and Lagrangian lambda used), coding tool settings (indicating which of them were enabled), motion vector information, motion-compensated and intra prediction errors, weighted prediction parameters, frame and block level distortion, frame classifications (e.g. scene change), among others.”
“[0064] In practice, apart from the overall base and enhancement layer bit rate target, one may also wish to constrain the ratio of bits allocated to each layer. For example, one may wish to constrain the ratio to a maximum value of say 10%. This constraint may be enforced on a sequence level or even a frame level.”
10. The electronic device of claim 4, wherein the video encoder circuitry is configured to, in the third pass of rate control, reserve DC coefficient bytes corresponding to the one or more slices based on one or more image frame statistics collected during the second pass of rate control.
“[0035] Coding statistics include picture or slice coding type (such as I, P or B), bit usage per category (such as texture, header, and motion), coding mode statistics (e.g. how many skip or intra coding modes), block type statistics, spatial statistics such as variance, histograms, coding parameters (QP and Lagrangian lambda used), coding tool settings (indicating which of them were enabled), motion vector information, motion-compensated and intra prediction errors, weighted prediction parameters, frame and block level distortion, frame classifications (e.g. scene change), among others.”
“[0067] In the final coding pass, the rate control method loops through a set of possible fixed QP offset constraints. For each QP constraint, the QP and bit allocation is selected so that the overall base and enhancement layer bit target is satisfied. The fixed QP constraint, which also satisfies the base/enhancement layer bit rate ratio is selected to code the entire multi-layer/multi-view sequence. Statistics from both layers are used to allocate bits and QPs.”
One of ordinary skilled in the art understands that reserving DC coefficients are inherent in rate control method discussed throughout the disclosure of the reference, especially the discussed coding standards such as the H.264.
11. The electronic device of claim 4, wherein the video encoder circuitry is configured to: determine, based on the one or more image frame statistics, whether the one or more slices are below a size threshold value; and re-encode the one or more slices below the size threshold value based on quantization parameters assigned during the second pass of rate control.
“[0030] Rate control is often performed by maintaining, updating, and using a rate control model. A rate control model may yield the bits required to code a frame given certain coding parameters or may yield the coding parameters required to code the frame with the allocated number of bits.”
“[0063] Prior to the final coding pass, bit rate, complexity and inter-layer relationships are derived as in the last step of example 2. During the final coding pass, given the BL modulated QP offset constraint, the QP and bit allocation is selected so that the overall base and enhancement layer(s) bit target is satisfied. Statistics from all layers are used to allocate bits and QPs.”
Scaling is an inherent part of QPs.
“[0064] In practice, apart from the overall base and enhancement layer bit rate target, one may also wish to constrain the ratio of bits allocated to each layer. For example, one may wish to constrain the ratio to a maximum value of say 10%. This constraint may be enforced on a sequence level or even a frame level.”
12. The electronic device of claim 11, wherein a size of the one or more slices is determined based on a header size of the one or more slices, number of bits corresponding to DC coefficients of the one or more slices, number of bits corresponding to AC coefficients of the one or more slices, and number of bits used for levels for the AC coefficients of the one or more slices.
“[0026] Multi-layer or scalable bitstreams enable scalability in terms of quality/SNR, spatial, and temporal scalability, and even availability of additional views. The first two paradigms are possible when adopting the Scalable Video Coding (SVC) extension (Annex G) of the H.264/MPEG-4 Part 10 AVC video coding standard. For example, the base layer provides a coarse quality version of the image sequence, while the enhancement layer or layers may provide additional increments in terms of visual quality. Similarly, the base layer may provide a low resolution version of the image sequence. The resolution may be improved by decoding additional enhancement layers. Temporal scalability is available with the basic mode (Annex A) of H.264/MPEG-4 AVC through the coding of disposable pictures. In such a scenario, the base layer may provide a version of the image sequence at say 15 frames per second, which can be improved to say 30 frames per second by decoding the temporal enhancement layer. Scalable or multi-layer bitstreams are also useful for providing multi-view scalability. One such application is stereoscopic 3D video that consists of two views, one for the left and a second for the right eye. Two layers may be used, a base for one view and an enhancement layer for the second view. See, for example, FIG. 2.”
The size of a slice in h.264 is based on the four elements defined in the claim.
Regarding the claims 13-17, they recite elements that are at least included in the claims 1, 4, 6, 7 and 3 above but in a different claim form. Therefore, the same rationale for the rejection of the claims 1, 4, 6, 7 and 3 applies.
18. The electronic device of claim 17, wherein the video encoder circuitry is configured to estimate a target size for each Y component, Cb component, and Cr component of the one or more image slices.
“[0036] Inter-layer analysis involves gathering information through some previous coding pass (or previously coded layer) or through some pre-analysis stage like the one shown in FIG. 5. The pre-analysis stage may consider spatial or motion-compensated analysis methods. The analysis may be performed in a spatially or temporally sub-sampled version of the original image sequence. Furthermore, for multi-view applications, the analysis may only consider a subset of the total number of views. Spatial features such as conditional entropy, variance, edges, and luminance and/or chrominance.”
19. The electronic device of claim 18, wherein the video encoder circuitry is configured to calculate a maximum size for each of the Y component, the Cb component, and the Cr component of the one or more image slices.
“[0036] Inter-layer analysis involves gathering information through some previous coding pass (or previously coded layer) or through some pre-analysis stage like the one shown in FIG. 5. The pre-analysis stage may consider spatial or motion-compensated analysis methods. The analysis may be performed in a spatially or temporally sub-sampled version of the original image sequence. Furthermore, for multi-view applications, the analysis may only consider a subset of the total number of views. Spatial features such as conditional entropy, variance, edges, and luminance and/or chrominance.”
“[0063] Prior to the final coding pass, bit rate, complexity and inter-layer relationships are derived as in the last step of example 2. During the final coding pass, given the BL modulated QP offset constraint, the QP and bit allocation is selected so that the overall base and enhancement layer(s) bit target is satisfied. Statistics from all layers are used to allocate bits and QPs.”
Scaling is an inherent part of QPs.
“[0064] In practice, apart from the overall base and enhancement layer bit rate target, one may also wish to constrain the ratio of bits allocated to each layer. For example, one may wish to constrain the ratio to a maximum value of say 10%. This constraint may be enforced on a sequence level or even a frame level.”
20. The electronic device of claim 17, where the video encoder circuitry is configured to remove high frequency coefficients to ensure that each slice size of the slices of image data is below a maximum slice size determined based on the one or more image frame statistics.
“[0053] A first coding pass is performed that only considers the base layer. Coding statistics are gathered from each coded frame. A pre-analysis stage may also precede this pass to provide information that will help with selecting coding parameters and prediction structure(s) for this pass. This first coding pass (or passes) may be of lower complexity compared to the final coding pass. Subsequent passes may have to account for this discrepancy using techniques such as those outlined in Appendix A.”
“[0063] Prior to the final coding pass, bit rate, complexity and inter-layer relationships are derived as in the last step of example 2. During the final coding pass, given the BL modulated QP offset constraint, the QP and bit allocation is selected so that the overall base and enhancement layer(s) bit target is satisfied. Statistics from all layers are used to allocate bits and QPs.”
To satisfy the bit target, one of ordinary skilled in the art understood that coefficients are removed, including the high freq. coefficients during quantization disclosed in the reference and the mentioned h.264 in the disclosure.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Brailovskiy et al. (US 9729889 B2) and Leontaris et al. (US 20090086816 A1) disclose relevant art related to the subject matter of the present invention.
A shortened statutory period for reply to this action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. An extension of time may be obtained under 37 CFR 1.136(a). However, in no event, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
should be directed to JAE N NOH whose telephone number is (571)270-0686.
The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 8:30AM-5PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, William Vaughn can be reached on (571) 272-3922. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/JAE N NOH/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2481
Prosecution Insights