P53368.A06
`
`US. Pat. Appl. No. 15/699,105
`
`REMARKS
`
`Applicant initially expresses appreciation to the Examiner for the detailed Office Action
`
`provided. Applicant also expresses appreciation for the indication that
`
`the drawings are
`
`accepted, for the acknowledgment of the claim for foreign priority and receipt of the certified
`
`copy of the priority document, and for the acknowledgment and consideration of the Information
`
`Disclosure Statements filed on October 2, 2017, October 24, 2017, February 15, 2018,
`
`September 6, 2018, and May 1, 2019.
`
`Upon entry of the present paper, claims 5-6 will have been added. Thus, claims 1-6 will
`
`be pending in the present application, with claims 1-4 being in independent form.
`
`It is submitted that the amendments contain no prohibited new matter. For example, the
`
`amendments are submitted to be supported at least by 11[0043] of the present application as filed
`
`(11[0090] of corresponding US. Pat. Appl. Pub. No. 2018/0012628).
`
`Applicant addresses the pending objection and rejections below and respectfully requests
`
`reconsideration and withdrawal thereof together with an indication of allowability of claims 1-6
`
`7
`
`(i.e.
`
`all pending claims) in the next Official communication.
`
`Such action is respectfully
`
`requested and submitted to be appropriate for at least the reasons provided below.
`
`Double Patenting Rejection of Claims 1 and 3
`
`Claims 1 and 3 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double
`
`patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of US. Pat. Appl. No. 15/699,091 in view of US.
`
`Pat. Appl. Pub. No. 2014/0125696 to Newton et al.
`
`(hereinafter “NEWTON”). Applicant
`
`respectfully traverses the rejection.
`
`{P53368 04059140.DOC}
`9
`
`

`

`P53368.A06
`
`US. Pat. Appl. No. 15/699,105
`
`In the rejection of claims 1 and 3, the Office Action relies upon NEWTON to teach the
`
`feature of independent claims 1 and 3 relating to reading out and playing the enhanced video
`
`stream based on the third playback control information, in a case of playing the content as a
`
`content of a luminance range that has been extended beyond the high-luminance range.
`
`(See
`
`Office Action at pages 5-7). NEWTON does not, however, disclose such thirdplayback control
`
`information, or any information for extending a luminance range beyond a high-luminance
`
`range.
`
`Indeed, the Office Action explicitly acknowledges such deficiency of NEWTON at page
`
`17, lines 9-16. Thus, it is submitted that this document may not be properly relied upon to cure
`
`any alleged deficiencies of claim 1 of the ‘091 application, and that the grounds of the above-
`
`captioned rejection are improper and should be withdrawn
`
`Alternatively, the scope of the claims in the present application may change upon entry of
`
`future papers. As such, it is further submitted that the above-captioned rejection is premature at
`
`this time, as the scope of the claims of the present application (or the co-pending application)
`
`may change and render the grounds of the rejection moot. While it is asserted that a timely filed
`
`Terminal Disclaimer may be used to overcome the rejection, it is submitted that the filing of a
`
`Terminal Disclaimer is premature until such time as the above-captioned rejection is the sole
`
`rejection remaining in the present application. Thus, should the rejection not be withdrawn,
`
`Applicant requests that the rejection at least be held in abeyance.
`
`Double Patenting Rejection of Claims 2 and 4
`
`Claims 2 and 4 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double
`
`patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of US. Pat. Appl. No. 15/699,068 in view of US.
`
`Pat. Appl. Pub. No. 2013/0279883 to Ogawa et al. (hereinafter “OGAWA”) and NEWTON.
`
`Applicant respectfully traverses the rejection.
`
`{P53368 04059140.DOC}
`lO
`
`

`

`P53368.A06
`
`US. Pat. Appl. No. 15/699,105
`
`In the rejection of claims 2 and 4, the Office Action now relies upon NEWTON and/or
`
`OGAWA to teach the feature of independent claims 2 and 4 relating to reading out and playing
`
`the enhanced video stream based on the thirdplayback control information, in a case of playing
`
`the content as a content of a luminance range that has been extended beyond the high-luminance
`
`range.
`
`(See Office Action at pages 9-14). As discussed above,
`
`it
`
`is acknowledged that
`
`NEWTON fails to disclose such feature. Further, as will be discussed in detail in the following
`
`section, OGAWA similarly fails to disclose or teach such feature. As a result, it is submitted that
`
`NEWTON and/or OGAWA may not be properly relied upon to cure any alleged deficiencies of
`
`claim 1 of the ‘068 application, and that the grounds of the above-captioned rejection are
`
`improper and should be withdrawn
`
`Alternatively, the scope of the claims in the present application may change upon entry of
`
`future papers. As such, it is further submitted that the above-captioned rejection is premature at
`
`this time, as the scope of the claims of the present application (or the co-pending application)
`
`may change and render the grounds of the rejection moot. While it is asserted that a timely filed
`
`Terminal Disclaimer may be used to overcome the rejection, it is submitted that the filing of a
`
`Terminal Disclaimer is premature until such time as the above-captioned rejection is the sole
`
`rejection remaining in the present application. Thus, should the rejection not be withdrawn,
`
`Applicant requests that the rejection at least be held in abeyance.
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103 Claim Rejection
`
`Claims 1 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over NEWTON
`
`in view OGAWA. Applicant respectfully traverses the rejection.
`
`Independent claim 1 is directed to a playback device that reads out and plays a content
`
`from a recording medium in which are recorded the following: (i) a video stream of standard-
`
`{P53368 04059140.DOC}
`ll
`
`

`

`P53368.A06
`
`US. Pat. Appl. No. 15/699,105
`
`luminance range; (ii) a Video stream of high-luminance range that is a broader luminance range
`
`than the standard-luminance range; (iii) a subtitle stream of the standard-luminance range; (iV) a
`
`subtitle stream of the high-luminance range; and (V) a playlist file storing playback control
`
`information of the content; and including a management region and an extended region. The
`
`management region stores first playback control information specifying that the Video stream of
`
`the high-luminance range and the subtitle stream of the high-luminance range are to be played in
`
`combination. The extended region stores second playback control information specifying that
`
`the Video stream of the standard-luminance range and the subtitle stream of the standard-
`
`luminance range are to be played in combination. The playlist flle further includes a sub-playlist
`
`region storing the playback control information relating to a sub-stream played at the same time
`
`with the Video stream of the high-luminance range. Further; third playback control information
`
`relating to an enhanced Video stream for extending the luminance range of the Video stream of
`
`the high-luminance range is stored in the sub-playlist region.
`
`The playback deVice comprises a Video player that reads out and plays the Video stream
`
`of the high-luminance range and the subtitle stream of the high-luminance range; based on the
`
`first playback control information; and also reads out and plays the enhanced Video stream based
`
`on the third playback control information; in a case of playing the content as a content of a
`
`luminance range that has been extended beyond the high-luminance range.
`
`Independent claim 3 is directed to a playback method which generally includes similar
`
`features as independent claim 1.
`
`Applicant first respectfully submits that any proper combination of NEWTON and
`
`OGAWA fails to render obVious at least the features of independent claims 1 and 3 of: (l) the
`
`third playback control information that specifies the enhanced Video stream for extending the
`
`{P53368 04059140.DOC}
`12
`
`

`

`P53368.A06
`
`US. Pat. Appl. No. 15/699,105
`
`luminance range of the video stream of the high-luminance range, and (2) the first playback
`
`control information that specifies that the Video stream of the high-luminance range and the
`
`subtitle stream of the high-luminance range are to be played in combination, together with the
`
`second playback control
`
`information that specifies that
`
`the Video stream of the standard-
`
`luminance range and the subtitle stream of the standard-luminance range are to be played in
`
`combination.
`
`Applicant secondly respectfully submits that any proper combination of NEWTON and
`
`OGAWA fails to render obvious at least the features of independent claims 1 and 3 of: (3) the
`
`management region that stores the first playback control information (specifying that the Video
`
`stream of the high-luminance range and the subtitle stream of the high-luminance range are to be
`
`played in combination); and (4) the extended region that stores the second playback control
`
`information (specifying that the Video stream of the standard-luminance range and the subtitle
`
`stream of the standard-luminance range are to be played in combination).
`
`With respect to the above-mentioned first submission, on page 17 of the Office Action, it
`
`appears to be acknowledged that NEWTON fails to disclose above-mentioned features (1) and
`
`(2), which relate to the third playback control information and the first and second playback
`
`control information. The portion of page 17 of the Office Action is reproduced below for
`
`convenience:
`
`Regarding ctaim 1, Newton discloses all {he claim-ed liamiiafiona with the
`
`axoeptien of :9. Diagram: iziie storing playback control information of shear content, and
`
`ineiuding a management region and an extended region, the piesyfis: We further including
`
`a sudplayflst region storing the playback; comm! h‘slan‘natéon rel-easing so a Sub~3ueam
`
`played at the same. time with the video stream of the high» luminance range, and third
`
`playback comm! information rotating to am enhanced video stream Em emanfling the
`
`luminance range: of the video sit-ream of the mghnluminame range being stored in the
`
`sumpiayiiet region,
`
`{P53368 04059140.DOC}
`l3
`
`

`

`P53368.A06
`
`US. Pat. Appl. No. 15/699,105
`
`It is asserted, however, that OGAWA cures the acknowledged deficiencies of NEWTON.
`
`Specifically, it is asserted that 111l[0314]—[0316] and 11[0125] of OGAWA disclose such features.
`
`Applicant respectfully disagrees and submits that OGAWA fails to disclose or teach third
`
`playback control information for extending the luminance range of the video stream of the high-
`
`luminance range, and also submits that OGAWA fails to disclose or teach first and second
`
`playback control information as recited by independent claims 1 and 3, to the extent it is being
`
`relied upon to teach such features.
`
`First, 111l[0314]—[0316] and 11[0125] of OGAWA may disclose a sub-playlist region (sub-
`
`path) to register the extended stream, which includes resolution extension information 331
`
`necessary for extending each full HD video frame included in the primary video stream 301 in
`
`the main TS to a 4K3K video frame.
`
`In this regard, the “extended stream” in Ogawa extends
`
`resolution of the video stream. On the contrary, the third playback control information of
`
`independent claims 1 and 3 relates to an “enhanced video stream” that extends the luminance
`
`range of the video stream.
`
`In other words, OGAWA targets 2D, 3D, or 2D extension of
`
`resolution and is completely silent about extension of a luminance range. As a result, it is
`
`submitted that OGAWA fails to cure the acknowledged deficiencies of NEWTON with respect
`
`to above-mentioned feature (1). Thus, even if the skilled artisan was to modify NEWTON in
`
`view of OGAWA as asserted,
`
`it is submitted that one would not arrive at above-mentioned
`
`feature (1) of independent claims 1 and 3, in which the third playback control information relates
`
`to an enhanced video stream for extending the luminance range of the video stream of the high-
`
`luminance range.
`
`Additionally to the above, 111l[0314]—[0316] of OGAWA reference the 2D playlist file
`
`241, which merely includes the main path 3001 and the two sub-paths 3002 and 3003.
`
`(See, e. g.,
`
`{P53368 04059140.DOC}
`l4
`
`

`

`P53368.A06
`
`US. Pat. Appl. No. 15/699,105
`
`OGAWA at FIG. 30.) The Office Action appears to interpret the main path 3001 and the two
`
`sub-paths 3002 and 3003 as relating to a management region and an extended region.
`
`In other
`
`words,
`
`the Office Action appears to be applying the main path 3001 as “the first playback
`
`control information” recited in independent claims 1 and 3 and the two sub-paths 3002 and 3003
`
`as “the secondplayback control information” of independent claims 1 and 3. OGAWA, however,
`
`discloses in 1][03 16] that the 2D Video stream of main path and other 2D Video stream of the two
`
`sub-paths are played back simultaneously.
`
`fl[03l6] of OGAWA is reproduced and annotated
`
`below for convenience:
`
`[0316] Each of the sub-paths 3002 and 3003 is a sequence
`of sub-playitem information pieces (hereinafter abbreviated
`as SUB_PI) that defines a playback path that can be associ-
`ated in parallel With the main playback path for the file 2D
`221. Such a playback path is a different section of the file 2D
`221 than is represented by the main path 3001, or is a section
`of stream data multiplexed in another file 2D, along With the
`corresponding playback order. The stream data indicated by
`the playback path represents other 2D Video images to be
`played back simultaneously with 2D Video images played
`
`back from the file 2D 221 in accordance with the main path
`
`In contrast, according to independent claims 1 and 3, the first and second playback
`
`control
`
`information
`
`are
`
`not
`
`played
`
`simultaneously,
`
`but
`
`rather,
`
`are
`
`played
`
`indiVidually/independently. For example, the first playback control information specifies that
`
`the Video stream of the high-luminance range is to be played in combination with the subtitle
`
`stream of the high-luminance range, not with the Video stream of the standard-luminance range.
`
`Thus, it is further submitted that the main path 3001 and the two sub-paths 3002 and 3003 of
`
`OGAWA may not be properly interpreted to disclose the first and second playback control
`
`information of independent claims 1 and 3, as recited by the claimed combinations.
`
`In this
`
`regard, OGAWA further appears to be silent as to any regions in which the main path 3001 and
`
`the two sub-paths 3002 and 3003 are stored (as generally will be discussed below with respect to
`
`{P53368 04059140.DOC}
`15
`
`

`

`P53368.A06
`
`US. Pat. Appl. No. 15/699,105
`
`above-mentioned features (3) and (4)). Even further, as generally mentioned above, OGAWA
`
`targets 2D, 3D, or 2D extension, but is completely silent regarding being applicable to standard-
`
`luminance range (e. g., SDR) and high-luminance range (e. g., HDR), which are recited in relation
`
`to the first and second playback control
`
`information of independent claims
`
`1 and 3.
`
`Accordingly,
`
`to the extent that OGAWA is being relied upon,
`
`it is further submitted that
`
`OGAWA fails to cure the deficiencies of NEWTON with respect to above-mentioned feature (2).
`
`With respect to the above-mentioned second submission, it is asserted that NEWTON
`
`discloses above-mentioned features (3) and (4), relating to the management region (that stores
`
`the first playback control information) and the extended region (that stores the second playback
`
`control information).
`
`(See Office Action at page 15, line 18 to page 16, line 8). Applicant
`
`respectfully disagrees, and also again notes that OGAWA is silent as to any regions in which the
`
`main path 3001 and the two sub-paths 3002 and 3003 are stored. As a result, it is submitted that
`
`OGAWA may not be properly interpreted to cure any deficiencies of NEWTON in this regard.
`
`NEWTON generally discloses a system for displaying video information in which an
`
`overlay is adaptable to a preferred display mode.
`
`(See, e.g., NEWTON at 11[0008]). According
`
`to NEWTON, the video information comprises low dynamic range [LDR] video data and/or high
`
`dynamic range [HDR] video data.
`
`(NEWTON at 11[0010]). The video information further
`
`comprises graphics processing control data, which comprises a subtitle process descriptor
`
`defining a HDR processing instruction for overlaying subtitle graphic data in an HDR display
`
`mode.
`
`(NEWTON at 11[0010] and 11[0025]). The video information further appears to be
`
`provided with an LDR graphics stream and an HDR graphics stream. (NEWTON at 11[0070]).
`
`{P53368 04059140.DOC}
`16
`
`

`

`P53368.A06
`
`US. Pat. Appl. No. 15/699,105
`
`In this regard, according to NEWTON, a video processor adapts processing to overlay the
`
`LDR graphics stream or the HDR graphics stream depending on a specific display mode (being
`
`any one of a LDR display mode and a HDR display mode).
`
`(See, e.g., NEWTON at 1][0057]).
`
`Accordingly, while NEWTON discloses HDR video data, an HDR graphics stream, LDR
`
`video data, and an LDR graphics stream, NEWTON does not appear to disclose any management
`
`region and extended region in which first and second playback control
`
`information, which
`
`specify playback of the HDR items in combination or the LDR items in combination, are stored.
`
`The Office Action cites to fl[0025] and fl[0072] of NEWTON as disclosing such
`
`management region and extended region, as recited by independent claims 1 and 3. With regard
`
`to fl[0025], NEWTON discloses, “graphics processing control data comprises a subtitle
`
`descriptor defining a HDR processing instruction when overlaying subtitle graphic data in the
`
`HDR display mode.”
`
`With
`
`regard
`
`to
`
`fl[0072], NEWTON discloses,
`
`“the
`
`HDR_Processing_definition
`
`segment
`
`contains
`
`two
`
`processing
`
`instructions:
`
`a
`
`Pop-
`
`up_process_descriptor 51 and a Subtitle_process descriptor 52. The segment may also contain
`
`HDR palettes 53 to be used when display mode is HDR.
`
`It is to be noted that the original
`
`palettes (now called LDR palettes) are provided in other segments as defined in the BD
`
`standard.”
`
`Applicant respectfully submit that these disclosures of NEWTON do n_0l appear to be
`
`particularly relevant to the recited “management region” and “extended region” of independent
`
`claims 1 and 3 (which are each recited as being recorded in a recording medium), as such
`
`disclosures are silent as to any regions in which the data/information are stored. Absent an
`
`explicit identification of any disclosure of a management region and an extended region in
`
`NEWTON, Applicant respectfully submits that NEWTON may not be properly interpreted as
`
`{P53368 04059140.DOC}
`l7
`
`

`

`P53368.A06
`
`US. Pat. Appl. No. 15/699,105
`
`disclosing the same. As a result,
`
`it
`
`is submitted that NEWTON fails to disclose above-
`
`mentioned features (3) and (4) of independent claims 1 and 3, and again submitted that OGAWA
`
`fails to cure any deficiencies of NEWTON in this regard.
`
`For each of the above reasons, individually and in combination, it is submitted that the
`
`grounds of the above-captioned rejection of independent claims 1 and 3 are improper, and it is
`
`requested that the rejection be withdrawn in the next Official communication.
`
`Allowable Subject Matter
`
`Claims 2 and 4 are indicated to be allowable if the double patenting rejections are
`
`overcome. Applicant expresses appreciate for such indication and requests that it at least be
`
`maintained in the next Official communication, should the double patenting rejections not be
`
`withdrawn.
`
`New Dependent Claims
`
`New dependent claims 5-6 are presented by the present paper to recite further
`
`combinations of features which are not disclosed or rendered obvious by the applied documents.
`
`These claims are submitted to be allowable in view of their dependencies and further
`
`combinations of recited features.
`
`At least in view of the above, it is respectfully submitted that each and every pending
`
`claim of the present application (1'.e., claims 1-6) meets the requirements for patentability. Thus,
`
`the Examiner is respectfully requested to withdraw the outstanding objection and rejections and
`
`to indicate the allowance of each and every pending claim in the present application.
`
`{P53368 04059140.DOC}
`18
`
`

`

`P53368.A06
`
`US. Pat. Appl. No. 15/699,105
`
`CONCLUSION
`
`In View of the fact that none of the art of record, whether considered alone, or in any
`
`proper combination thereof, discloses or renders obvious the pending claims of the present
`
`application, and in further View of the above remarks, reconsideration of the Examiner's action
`
`and allowance of the present application are respectfully requested and submitted to be
`
`appropriate.
`
`Should an extension of time be necessary to maintain the pendency of this application,
`
`including any extensions of time required to place the application in condition for allowance by
`
`an Examiner's Amendment, the Commissioner is hereby authorized to charge any additional fee
`
`to Deposit Account No. 19-0089.
`
`If there should be any questions concerning this application, the Examiner is inVited to
`
`contact the undersigned at the telephone number listed below.
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`Hiroshi YAHATA et al.
`
`/James P. Bonnamy/
`Reg. No. 63,649
`
`James P. Bonnamy
`
`Bruce H. Bernstein
`
`Reg. No. 29027
`
`September 24, 2019
`GREENBLUM & BERNSTEIN, P.L.C.
`1950 Roland Clarke Place
`
`Reston, VA 20191
`(703) 716-1191
`
`{P53368 04059140.DOC}
`l9
`
`