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 .
Examiner Note
The Examiner has determined that claim 12 is directed to an apparatus for transmitting data for an image. The limitations related to the encoding method performed by an encoding apparatus for image encoding which generates the bitstream are irrelevant in terms of determining patentability of the claimed apparatus. The mere inclusion of the operations that generates the bitstream being claimed does not impart patentability to the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112:
(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 1-12 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, this claim recites the stated conditions “based on a first VCL NAL unit of the current picture having one NAL unit type among predetermined NAL unit types and at least two of the plurality of slices having different NAL unit types, wherein a second VCL NAL unit does not have the others NAL unit types among the predetermined NAL unit types” which cause the claim to be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for indefiniteness because of the following reasons:
It is uncertain from the claim what action is performed “based on” the stated conditions.
It is unclear whether the "second VCL NAL unit" refers to a unit associated with the current picture or a different picture.
It is ambiguous whether the limitation "others NAL unit types among the predetermined NAL unit types" refers to NAL unit types that are different from the predetermined NAL unit types, or whether it refers to NAL unit types different from the “one NAL unit type” in the first VCL NAL unit. As written, the scope of the claim is indefinite and unclear to one skilled in the art.
Therefore, the scope of the claim is indefinite and unclear to one of ordinary skill in the art to determine the boundaries of the claim.
Examiner notes that it is unclear how the stated conditions “based on a first VCL NAL unit of the current picture having one NAL unit type among predetermined NAL unit types and at least two of the plurality of slices having different NAL unit types, wherein a second VCL NAL unit does not have the others NAL unit types among the predetermined NAL unit types” interacts with the rest of the claim. As a result, no patentable weight is given to this limitation in assessing the claims with respect to the prior art.
Regarding claims 7 and 12, these claims present limitations that are analogous to those in independent claim 1, which has been rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. Because these claims present the same deficiencies in terms of clarity and definition, they are likewise rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph.
Regarding claims 2-6 and 8-11, these claims are dependent, either directly or indirectly, on a claim rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. Claims 2-6 and 8-11 do not remedy the deficiency present in the parent claim and thus inherit the rejection applied to the parent claim
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (US 20150373376 A1), hereinafter referred to as Wang.
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses apparatus for transmitting data for an image, the apparatus comprising: at least one processor configured to obtain a bitstream generated by an encoding method performed by an encoding apparatus for image encoding; and a transmitter configured to transmit the bitstream, wherein the encoding method comprising: partitioning a current picture into one or more subpictures; determining a network abstraction layer (NAL) unit type of each of a plurality of slices included in the one or more subpictures; and encoding the plurality of slices based on the determined NAL unit type, wherein the current picture is partitioned into two or more subpictures based on at least two of the plurality of slices having different NAL unit types, wherein each of the two or more subpictures is treated as one picture based on at least two of the plurality of slices having different NAL unit types, wherein all slices in each subpicture included in the current picture have the same NAL unit type, and wherein, based on a first VCL NAL unit of the current picture having one NAL unit type among predetermined NAL unit types and at least two of the plurality of slices having different NAL unit types, a second VCL NAL unit does not have the others NAL unit types among the predetermined NAL unit types. (See ¶¶ [0011] and [0012] - processor configured to obtain an encoded video bitstream; and ¶ [0210] - network entity transmitting the encoded video bitstream to decoding device 112).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 for additional references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FABIO S LIMA whose telephone number is (571)270-0625. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday, 7:30 AM - 4:00 PM (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 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 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.
/FABIO S LIMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2486
Prosecution Insights