www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`17/947,733
`
`09/19/2022
`
`Ru Ling LIAO
`
`735256.452C6
`
`7121
`
`Seed IP Law Group LLP/Panasonic (PIPCA)
`701 5th Avenue, Suite 5400
`Seattle, WA 98104
`
`PHAM, NAM D
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2487
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`02/16/2024
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e-mail address(es):
`USPTOeAction @ SeedIP.com
`
`pairlinkdktg @seedip.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`Office Action Summary
`
`Application No.
`17/947,733
`Examiner
`NAM D PHAM
`
`Applicant(s)
`LIAO et al.
`Art Unit
`2487
`
`AIA (FITF) Status
`Yes
`
`-- The MAILING DATEof this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORYPERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensionsof time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing
`date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHSfrom the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s) filed on 09/19/2022.
`C} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)() This action is FINAL. 2b)¥)This action is non-final.
`3) An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4)(2) Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-3 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) _ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`C] Claim(s)
`is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected.
`(] Claim(s)__ is/are objectedto.
`C] Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`Application Papers
`10) The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)0) The drawing(s) filedon__ is/are: a)(J accepted or b)( objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121(d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12)7) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`c)Z None ofthe:
`b)() Some**
`a)C All
`1.1.) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.2) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.1.) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`*“ See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date 09/19/2022.
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3)
`
`4)
`
`(LJ Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20231205
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/947,733
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 2
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA 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.
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Summary
`
`1. This office action for US Patent application 17/947733 is responsive to communicationsfiled on
`
`September 19, 2022. Currently, claims 1-3 are pending are presented for examination.
`
`2. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in
`
`Double Patenting
`
`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 obviousness-type 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 examinedapplication
`
`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
`
`USPQe2d 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); and 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 a nonstatutory double patenting
`
`ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with
`
`this application, or claims an invention made asa result of activities undertaken within the scope
`
`of a joint research agreement.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/947,733
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 3
`
`Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record maysign a terminal
`
`disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee mustfully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
`
`Claims 1-3 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double
`
`patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 copending Application No 17/946784, 17/945629,
`
`17/944866, 17/943971, 17/137061. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not
`
`patentably distinct from each other becauseit is merely in the terminology used in both sets of
`
`claims.
`
`This is a provisional obviousness-type double patenting rejection becausethe conflicting
`
`claims have notin fact been patented. Belowisa list of limitations that perform the same function.
`
`However different terminology is used in both sets to describe the limitations.
`
`Co-pending Application-17/946784
`
`Instant Application 17/947733
`
`prediction mode, wherein encoding the current
`
`1. An encoder which encodesa video, comprising:
`
`1. An encoding methodfor encodinga video
`
`circuitry; and memory coupledto thecircuitry,
`
`comprising: storing a first parameterinto a
`
`wherein thecircuitry, in operation, obtains a current bitstream,the first parameterindicating,
`
`asa
`
`block from a coding tree unit (CTU); stores a first
`
`prediction mode, oneof(i) a multiple prediction
`
`parameterinto a bitstream, the first parameter
`
`modein which a prediction image is generated by
`
`indicating, as a prediction mode,oneof(i) a multiple overlapping an inter prediction imageof a current
`
`prediction modein whicha prediction imageis
`
`block and anintra prediction image of the current
`
`of the current block and an intra prediction image of including a non-rectangular mode in which a
`
`the current block and(ii) one of a plurality of
`
`prediction imageis generated for each non-
`
`prediction modesincluding a non-rectangular mode rectangularpartition in the current block; and
`
`in which a prediction image is generated for each
`
`encoding the current block according to the
`
`non-rectangularpartition in the current block; and
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/947,733
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 4
`
`encodes the current block according to the
`
`block using the multiple prediction mode and
`
`prediction mode, wherein encoding the current
`
`encoding the current block using the non-
`
`block using the multiple prediction mode and
`
`rectangular mode are mutually exclusive.
`
`encoding the current block using the non-rectangular
`
`mode are mutually exclusive, the first parameter is a
`
`flag, and the circuitry disables the non-rectangular
`
`modeasthe prediction mode according to whether
`
`the current block satisfies a determined condition.
`
`Claim 1
`
`Claims 2-3
`
`
`
`Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other
`
`because claims 1-3 are generic to all that is recited in claim 1 of co-pending application. That is, claims 1-
`
`3 is anticipated by claim 1 of co-pending applications.
`
`Claims 1-3 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double
`
`patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Applications.
`
`Allowable Subject Matter
`
`3. Claims 1-3 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting.
`
`However, these claims would be allowable if the obvious-type double patenting is overcome.
`
`Conclusion
`
`Anyinquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications form the examiner
`
`should be directed to Nam Pham, whose can be contacted by phone at (571)270-7352. The
`
`examiner can normally be reached on Mon—Thurs.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's
`
`supervisor, CZEKAJ DAVID, can be reached on (571)272-7327.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/947,733
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 5
`
`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 accessto the Private PAIR
`system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) AT 866-217-9197 (too 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.
`
`/NAM D PHAM/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
`
`