Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. This Office Action is sent in response to Applicant’s Communication received on September 26, 2025 for application number 19/342,148. This Office hereby acknowledges receipt of the following and placed of record in file: Specification, Drawings, Abstract, Oath/Declaration, and Claims.
3. Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on September 30, 2025 and July 7, 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Remarks
5. Examiner notes that this application also discloses only subject matter disclosed
in first prior application no 17/219,720, filed on March 31, 2021 and second prior application no 18/217,034, filed on June 30, 2023 and names the inventor or at least one joint inventor named in the prior applications. Accordingly, this application may constitute a continuation or division. Said first prior application was granted a patent, U.S. Patent No. 11,736,701 B2 and said second prior application was granted a patent, U.S. Patent No. 12,452,435 B2. Examiner revised claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,736,701 B2 and claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,452,435 B2 but couldn't find any grounds of rejection of Double Patenting type.
Double Patenting
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2, 4-9, 11-16 and 18-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 in view of Brockmann et al.(US 2013/0272394 A1)(hereinafter Brockmann).
With regards to claim 1, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 claimed in claim 1, a computing device comprising a processing unit and memory, the computing device configured to perform operations for encoding video, the operations comprising:
for each candidate block of multiple candidate blocks of a picture of video data: evaluating whether the candidate block satisfies a complexity criterion based on evaluation of sample values or coefficients of the candidate block to screen-out homogeneous blocks, a homogeneous block being a uniform block; if the candidate block does not satisfy the complexity criterion: evaluating whether the candidate block satisfies a homogeneous selection criterion, wherein the homogeneous selection criterion is satisfied when at least one of an x or a y start coordinate of the candidate block is aligned with a particular division of the picture, wherein the particular division of the picture is a grid with a particular horizontal and vertical spacing, and wherein the candidate block satisfies the homogeneous selection criterion when at least one of the x and the y start coordinate of the candidate block is evenly divisible by a pre-determined value corresponding to the grid; if the candidate block satisfies the homogeneous selection criterion: determining a block hash value for the candidate block; and adding the block hash value to a hash table.
U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 is silent to performing motion estimation, wherein the motion estimation uses a hash table for hash-based block matching; and updating the hash table.
However, Brockmann discloses detecting animations and the use of hash tables for hash-based block matching. More specifically, in process 513, the encoder encodes the rendered pixel data in the pixel buffer to form encoded audiovisual data. Process 513 may be performed according to methods known in the art, or it may be performed according to methods described in further detail below in connection with detecting and encoding animations, and/or performing slice linking and cutting. In process 514, the controller receives the encoded pixel data and stores it in the screen update cache 1592. These encoded data are stored in unique association with the hash value previously received by the controller in process 56. Thus, if a future screen update request causes the shim 1593 to generate an identical hash value, the encoded data will be available in the cache for immediate retrieval. Rather than comparing the image pixel data directly, the hash values of the two images may be compared for improved efficiency. If the hash values are equal, then the current image is the first image of the animation cycle, and it does not need to be re-encoded. Thus, in process 721 the cached, encoded image is transmitted and the method ends [See Brockmann: at least Figs. 5C, 7, par. 78-88].
One of ordinary skill in the art has been motivated to combine the computing device as taught in U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 with Brockmann’s teachings to perform motion estimation, wherein the motion estimation uses a hash table for hash-based block matching; and updating the hash table because this combination has the benefit to lower computational cost of the coding operations [See Brockmann: at least par. 2-20].
With regards to claim 2, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 and Brockmann teach all of the limitations of claim 1, and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Further, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 claimed in claim 2, the operations further comprising: if the candidate block satisfies the complexity criterion: determining a block hash value for the candidate block; and adding the block hash value to the hash table.
With regards to claim 3, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 and Brockmann teach all of the limitations of claim 2, and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Further, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 claimed in claim 4, wherein the candidate block does not satisfy the complexity criterion when the candidate block is one or more of horizontally homogeneous and vertically homogeneous, where the candidate block is horizontally homogeneous when the candidate block has rows of uniform sample values, and wherein the candidate block is vertically homogeneous when the candidate block has columns of uniform sample values.
With regards to claim 4, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 and Brockmann teach all of the limitations of claim 1, and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Further, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 claimed in claim 4, wherein the candidate block does not satisfy the complexity criterion when the candidate block is one or more of horizontally homogeneous and vertically homogeneous, where the candidate block is horizontally homogeneous when the candidate block has rows of uniform sample values, and wherein the candidate block is vertically homogeneous when the candidate block has columns of uniform sample values.
With regards to claim 5, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 and Brockmann teach all of the limitations of claim 1, and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Further, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 claimed in claim 6, wherein the first pre-determined value is a width of the candidate block and the second pre-determined value is a height of the candidate block.
With regards to claim 6, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 and Brockmann teach all of the limitations of claim 1, and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Further, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 claimed in claim 7, wherein the first pre-determined value is 16 and the second pre-determined value is 16.
With regards to claim 7, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 and Brockmann teach all of the limitations of claim 1, and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Further, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 claimed in claim 5, wherein the candidate block satisfies the homogeneous selection criterion when the x start coordinate of the candidate block is evenly divisible by a first pre-determined value and the y start coordinate of the candidate block is evenly divisible by a second predetermined value, wherein the first and second pre-determined values correspond to the grid.
With regards to claim 8, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 claimed in claim 15, one or more computer-readable storage media storing computer-executable instructions for causing a computing device programmed thereby to perform operations for encoding video, the operations comprising: for each candidate block of multiple candidate blocks of a picture of video data: evaluating whether the candidate block satisfies a complexity criterion based on evaluation of sample values or coefficients of the candidate block to screen-out homogeneous blocks, a homogeneous block being a uniform block; if the candidate block does not satisfy the complexity criterion: evaluating whether the candidate block satisfies a homogeneous selection criterion, wherein the homogeneous selection criterion is satisfied when at least one of an x or a y start coordinate of the candidate block is aligned with a particular division of the picture, wherein the particular division of the picture is a grid with a particular horizontal and vertical spacing, and wherein the candidate block satisfies the homogeneous selection criterion when at least one of the x and the y start coordinate of the candidate block is evenly divisible by a pre-determined value corresponding to the grid; if the candidate block satisfies the homogeneous selection criterion: determining a block hash value for the candidate block; and adding the block hash value to a hash table.
U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 is silent to performing motion estimation, wherein the motion estimation uses a hash table for hash-based block matching; and updating the hash table.
However, Brockmann discloses detecting animations and the use of hash tables for hash-based block matching. More specifically, in process 513, the encoder encodes the rendered pixel data in the pixel buffer to form encoded audiovisual data. Process 513 may be performed according to methods known in the art, or it may be performed according to methods described in further detail below in connection with detecting and encoding animations, and/or performing slice linking and cutting. In process 514, the controller receives the encoded pixel data and stores it in the screen update cache 1592. These encoded data are stored in unique association with the hash value previously received by the controller in process 56. Thus, if a future screen update request causes the shim 1593 to generate an identical hash value, the encoded data will be available in the cache for immediate retrieval. Rather than comparing the image pixel data directly, the hash values of the two images may be compared for improved efficiency. If the hash values are equal, then the current image is the first image of the animation cycle, and it does not need to be re-encoded. Thus, in process 721 the cached, encoded image is transmitted and the method ends [See Brockmann: at least Figs. 5C, 7, par. 78-88].
One of ordinary skill in the art has been motivated to combine one or more non-transitory computer-readable media as taught in U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 with Brockmann’s teachings to perform motion estimation, wherein the motion estimation uses a hash table for hash-based block matching; and updating the hash table because this combination has the benefit to lower computational cost of the coding operations [See Brockmann: at least par. 2-20].
With regards to claim 9, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 and Brockmann teach all of the limitations of claim 8, and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Further, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 claimed in claim 16, the operations further comprising: if the candidate block satisfies the complexity criterion: determining a block hash value for the candidate block; and adding the block hash value to the hash table.
With regards to claim 10, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 and Brockmann teach all of the limitations of claim 9, and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Further, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 claimed in claim 18, wherein the candidate block does not satisfy the complexity criterion when the candidate block is one or more of horizontally homogeneous and vertically homogeneous, where the candidate block is horizontally homogeneous when the candidate block has rows of uniform sample values, and wherein the candidate block is vertically homogeneous when the candidate block has columns of uniform sample values.
With regards to claim 11, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 and Brockmann teach all of the limitations of claim 8, and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Further, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 claimed in claim 18, wherein the candidate block does not satisfy the complexity criterion when the candidate block is one or more of horizontally homogeneous and vertically homogeneous, where the candidate block is horizontally homogeneous when the candidate block has rows of uniform sample values, and wherein the candidate block is vertically homogeneous when the candidate block has columns of uniform sample values.
With regards to claim 12, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 and Brockmann teach all of the limitations of claim 8, and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Further, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 claimed in claim 20, wherein the first pre-determined value is a width of the candidate block and the second pre-determined value is a height of the candidate block.
With regards to claim 13, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 and Brockmann teach all of the limitations of claim 8, and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Further, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 claimed in claim 7, wherein the first pre-determined value is 16 and the second pre-determined value is 16.
With regards to claim 14, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 and Brockmann teach all of the limitations of claim 8, and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Further, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 claimed in claim 19, wherein the candidate block satisfies the homogeneous selection criterion when the x start coordinate of the candidate block is evenly divisible by a first pre-determined value and the y start coordinate of the candidate block is evenly divisible by a second predetermined value, wherein the first and second pre-determined values correspond to the grid.
With regards to claim 15, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 claimed in claim 8, a method, implemented by a computing device, for encoding video, the method comprising: for each candidate block of multiple candidate blocks of a picture of video data: evaluating whether the candidate block satisfies a complexity criterion based on evaluation of sample values or coefficients of the candidate block to screen-out homogeneous blocks, a homogeneous block being a uniform block; if the candidate block does not satisfy the complexity criterion: evaluating whether the candidate block satisfies a homogeneous selection criterion, wherein the homogeneous selection criterion is satisfied when at least one of an x or a y start coordinate of the candidate block is aligned with a particular division of the picture, wherein the particular division of the picture is a grid with a particular horizontal and vertical spacing, and wherein the candidate block satisfies the homogeneous selection criterion when at least one of the x and the y start coordinate of the candidate block is evenly divisible by a pre-determined value corresponding to the grid; if the candidate block satisfies the homogeneous selection criterion: determining a block hash value for the candidate block; and adding the block hash value to a hash table.
U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 is silent to performing motion estimation, wherein the motion estimation uses a hash table for hash-based block matching; and updating the hash table.
However, Brockmann discloses detecting animations and the use of hash tables for hash-based block matching. More specifically, in process 513, the encoder encodes the rendered pixel data in the pixel buffer to form encoded audiovisual data. Process 513 may be performed according to methods known in the art, or it may be performed according to methods described in further detail below in connection with detecting and encoding animations, and/or performing slice linking and cutting. In process 514, the controller receives the encoded pixel data and stores it in the screen update cache 1592. These encoded data are stored in unique association with the hash value previously received by the controller in process 56. Thus, if a future screen update request causes the shim 1593 to generate an identical hash value, the encoded data will be available in the cache for immediate retrieval. Rather than comparing the image pixel data directly, the hash values of the two images may be compared for improved efficiency. If the hash values are equal, then the current image is the first image of the animation cycle, and it does not need to be re-encoded. Thus, in process 721 the cached, encoded image is transmitted and the method ends [See Brockmann: at least Figs. 5C, 7, par. 78-88].
One of ordinary skill in the art has been motivated to combine a method, implemented by a computing device, for encoding video as taught in U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 with Brockmann’s teachings to perform motion estimation, wherein the motion estimation uses a hash table for hash-based block matching; and updating the hash table because this combination has the benefit to lower computational cost of the coding operations [See Brockmann: at least par. 2-20].
With regards to claim 16, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 and Brockmann teach all of the limitations of claim 15, and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Further, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 claimed in claim 9, further comprising: if the candidate block satisfies the complexity criterion: determining a block hash value for the candidate block; and adding the block hash value to the hash table.
With regards to claim 17, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 and Brockmann teach all of the limitations of claim 15, and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Further, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 claimed in claim 11, wherein the candidate block does not satisfy the complexity criterion when the candidate block is one or more of horizontally homogeneous and vertically homogeneous, where the candidate block is horizontally homogeneous when the candidate block has rows of uniform sample values, and wherein the candidate block is vertically homogeneous when the candidate block has columns of uniform sample values.
With regards to claim 18, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 and Brockmann teach all of the limitations of claim 15, and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Further, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 claimed in claim 13, wherein the first pre-determined value is a width of the candidate block and the second pre-determined value is a height of the candidate block.
With regards to claim 19, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 and Brockmann teach all of the limitations of claim 15, and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Further, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 claimed in claim 14, wherein the first pre-determined value is 16 and the second pre-determined value is 16.
With regards to claim 20, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 and Brockmann teach all of the limitations of claim 15, and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim. Further, U.S. Patent No. 11,025,923 B2 claimed in claim 12, wherein the candidate block satisfies the homogeneous selection criterion when the x start coordinate of the candidate block is evenly divisible by a first pre-determined value and the y start coordinate of the candidate block is evenly divisible by a second predetermined value, wherein the first and second pre-determined values correspond to the grid.
Conclusion
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANA J PICON-FELICIANO whose telephone number is (571)272-5252. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00-5:00.
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, Christopher Kelley can be reached at 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.
/Ana Picon-Feliciano/Examiner, Art Unit 2482
/CHRISTOPHER S KELLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2482
Prosecution Insights