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
`
`17/980,810
`
`11/04/2022
`
`Takahiro NISHI
`
`2022-2049A
`
`6952
`
`Wenderoth, Lind & Ponack, L.L.P.
`1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW
`Suite 500
`Washington, DC 20036
`
`HALLENBECK-HUBER, JEREMIAH CHARLES
`
`ART UNIT
`2481
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`03/28/2024
`
`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):
`eoa@ wenderoth.com
`kmiller@wenderoth.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`Office Action Summary
`
`Application No.
`17/980,810
`
`Examiner
`JEREMIAH C
`HALLENBECK-HUBER
`
`Applicant(s)
`NISHI et al.
`
`Art Unit
`2481
`
`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 11/4/2022.
`CL} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)L) This action is FINAL. 2b)lv)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 incorporatedinto this action.
`4)() 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*
`1-17 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the aboveclaim(s)
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`( Claim(s)
`is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-4,7-11 and 14-17 is/are rejected.
`Claim(s) 5-6 and 12-13 is/are objected to.
`CL) 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)C) The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11) The drawing(s) filedon__ is/are: a).) 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)2) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`c)C) None ofthe:
`b)™) Some**
`a)Z) All
`1.1) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.0.) 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
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) [9 Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(7) Other:
`
`4)
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20240322
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/980,810
`Art Unit: 2481
`
`Page 2
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA orAIA Status
`
`The presentapplication,filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first
`
`inventorto file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
`
`35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
`
`Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of
`matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the
`conditions and requirementsofthis title.
`
`Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-
`
`statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do notfall within at least one of the four categories of
`
`patenteligible subject matter because the claims relates to a non-transitory medium storing a bitstream
`
`generated by a particular encoding method. The claim does not indicate that the medium stores
`
`instructions for causing a processor to perform specific functions, but rather relate only to a bitstream
`
`storedon acomputer readable medium. Since the bitstream is not claimed as causing a general purpose
`
`computer to function as a specific machine the claims relate only to non-functional descriptive material,
`
`e.g.a video storedon a hard drive. Such non-functional descriptive material is an considered to be an
`
`abstract idea (See MPEP 2111.05). Abstract ideas are judicial exceptions to subject matter eligibility
`
`under 35 U.S.C. 101 (See MPEP 2106(III) note step 2A in the streamlined analysis flowchart). Further the
`
`claim as a whole is entirely directed to the medium storing the non-functional descriptive material and
`
`does not amount to more than the judicial exception (MPEP 2106(III) note step 2B of the streamlined
`
`analysis). Thus the claim is not eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/980,810
`Art Unit: 2481
`
`Page 3
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`Inthe 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-AlA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory
`
`basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AlA) 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 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections
`
`set forth in this Office action:
`
`A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is
`not identically disclosed as set forthin section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention
`and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the
`effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the
`claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention
`was made.
`
`Claim(s) 1-4, 7-11 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Seregin et al (2020/0366888) in view of “Versatile Video Coding (Draft 9)” (hereafter referred to byfirst
`
`authorBross).
`
`In regardto claim 1 Seregin further discloses an encoder (Seregin Figs. 1 and 3) comprising:
`
`circuitry (Seregin Fig. 1 and par. 37 note various processing circuitry); and
`
`memory coupled to the circuitry (Seregin Fig. 1 and pars 29-30 note various types of memory
`
`and storage media),
`
`wherein, in operation, the circuitry:
`
`generates and writes syntax elements and coded video data into a bitstream (Seregin pars. 55-
`
`56 note video encoder 200 outputs parameter sets, including video parameter sets (VPS) and sequence
`
`parameter sets (SPS) among others, with encoded video data); and
`
`writes encoded video andits syntax into a bitstream (Seregin pars 55-56).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/980,810
`Art Unit: 2481
`
`Page 4
`
`Seregin further discloses encoding according to the VVC Draft 9 standard (Seregin par. 38). It is
`
`noted that Seregin does not disclose details of encoding according to VVC Draft 9. However, Bross
`
`discloses that encoding according to VVC Draft 9:
`
`(i) sets a parameter toa value indicating that a multilayer is not allowed, the parameter
`
`indicating whether the multilayer is allowed (Bross section 7.4.3.2 on pg. 94 note
`
`vps_max_layers_minus1 which may be set to 0 to indicate single layer encoding) and(ii) sets first
`
`identifiers to an identical value indicating a layer, the first identifiers respectively identifying respective
`
`layers to which respective network abstraction layer (NAL) units belong (Bross section 7.4.2.2 on pg. 87
`
`note nuh_layer_id is assignedtoeach NAL unit and has the same value for all units of a picture), and can
`
`be configured for single layer encoding process on the NAL units into a an encoded bitstream (Bross
`
`generally Section 7.4.1-7.4.2.3 for encoding of NAL units).
`
`It is therefore considered obvious that one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
`
`date of the invention would recognize the advantageof incorporating the coding techniques of Bross in
`
`the invention of Seregin in order to gainthe expected advantage of compatibility with low capability
`
`decodersthat are suited only for single layer decoding.
`
`In regardto claim 2 refer to the statements made inthe rejection of claim 1 above. Bross further
`
`discloses:
`
`when the multilayer is not allowed,
`
`determines whether to execute(i) a first single layer encoding process in which the NAL units
`
`are encoded without referring to any video parameter set (VPS) (Bross section 7.4.3.3 on pg. 100 note
`
`sps_video_parameter_set_id which may be set to 0 for single layer encoding and indicates encoding
`
`without reference to a VPS)or (ii) a second single layer encoding process in which the NALunits are
`
`encodedby referring to a VPS included in the video sequence(Bross section 7.4.3.3 note when
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/980,810
`Art Unit: 2481
`
`Page5S
`
`sps_video_parameter_set_idhas a non-zero value reference VPS informationis used, further note
`
`section 7.4.3.2 on pg. 94 VPS information includes a plurality of syntax elements used for encoding).
`
`In regardto claim 3 refer to the statements madein the rejection of claim 2 above. Bross further
`
`discloses:
`
`performs the first single layer encoding process when a second identifier for identifying a VPS to
`
`be referred to is set to a value indicating that no VPSis referred to (Bross section 7.4.3.3 on pg. 100 note
`
`sps_video_parameter_set_idas secondidentifier which precludes the use of VPS when it has a value of
`
`0); and
`
`performs the second single layer encoding process by referring to the VPS specified by the
`
`second identifier, when the second identifier is set to a value different from the value indicating that no
`
`VPS is referredto (Bross section 7.4.3.3 on pg. 100 note sps_video_parameter_set_idas second
`
`identifier which permits the of VPS when it has a non-zero value).
`
`In regardto claim 4 refer to the statements madeinthe rejection of claim 3 above. Bross
`
`Further discloses:
`
`in the second single layer encoding process,
`
`performs the second single layer encoding process by referring to a second parameter which
`
`indicates a maximum number of sublayers regarding temporal scalability and is included in the VPS
`
`specified by the second identifier (Bross section 7.4.3.3 note when sps_video_parameter_set_idhasa
`
`non-zero value VPSinformation is used, further note section 7.4.3.2 on pg. 94 VPSinformation including
`
`vps_max_sublayers_minus1 which may indicate a number of sub-layers to be usedin single layer
`
`encoding).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/980,810
`Art Unit: 2481
`
`Page 6
`
`In regardto claim 7 refer to the statements madeinthe rejection of claim 3 above. Bross further
`
`discloses that the first identifier is nuh_layer_id and the secondidentifier is
`
`sps_video_parameter_set_id (Bross section 7.4.2.2 on pg. 87 note nuh_layer_id, and section 7.4.3.3 0n
`
`pg.100 note sps_video_parameter_set_id).
`
`Claims 8-11 and 14 relate to a decoder that substantially correspond to the encoder of claims 1-
`
`4 and 7 above. Referto the statements made inregardto claims 1-4 and 7 above for the rejection of
`
`claims 8-11 and 14 which will not be repeated here for brevity. In particular regard to claim 8 Seregin
`
`further discloses a decoder (Seregin Figs 1 and 4 note decoder 300).
`
`Claims 15-17 describe an encoding method, decoding method an non-transitory medium storing
`
`a bitstream substantially corresponding to the steps performed by the encoder and decoder ofclaims 1
`
`and 8 above. Refer to the statements made in regardto claims 1 and 8 above for the rejection of claims
`
`15-17 which will not be repeated here for brevity. Seregin further discloses non-transitory media
`
`(Seregin Fig. 1 and par. 30 note media 110).
`
`Allowable Subject Matter
`
`Claims 5-6 and 12-13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would
`
`be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any
`
`intervening claims.
`
`The following isa statement of reasonsfor the indication of allowable subject matter:
`
`Claims 5-6 and 12-13 in addition to the requirements of the claims from which they depend,
`
`require a third parameter included in the VPS, the use of which is indicated by the secondidentifier, that
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/980,810
`Art Unit: 2481
`
`Page 7
`
`indicates a maximum number of layers in the video sequence, and setting the value of that parameter to
`
`indicate a maximum of 1 layer.
`
`The closest arts are Sereginin view of Bross. Seregin discloses encoding according to VVC Draft
`
`9. Bross discloses several syntax related tothe number layers used for encoding including a VPS syntax
`
`element vps_max_layers_minus1 (Bross pg. 94) that may have a value of zeroto indicate a maximum of
`
`1 layer. Bross further discloses an SPS syntaxsps_video_parameter_set_id (Bross pg. 100) which may
`
`have a value of zero and indicate that VPS syntax is not referredto and indicates a maximum of1 layer.
`
`Finally Bross discloses a single_layer_constraint_flag (Bross pg. 139), which, when set to a value of 1,
`
`forces the value of sps_video_parameter_set_idtobe equal to zeroand thus prevent use of VPS
`
`parameters.
`
`However, neither Seregin nor Bross disclose using all of a parameter that indicates whether or
`
`not multilayer is enabled, and when multilayer is not enabled, a second indicator that indicates whether
`
`or not VPSis referred to during encoding and when VPSis referred to during encoding a the VPS
`
`includes both anindication of a maximum number of sub-layers used during encoded and a third
`
`parameter included in a VPS that indicates a maximum number of layers in the coded video sequence
`
`(emphasis added).
`
`The prior art made of recordand notrelied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
`
`Conclusion
`
`disclosure.
`
`US 20230145618 A1
`
`LAROCHE; Guillaume etal.
`
`US 20170347166 A1 Wang; Ye-Kui
`
`US 20160191931 A1
`
`Hannuksela; Miska Matias
`
`US 20150312584 A1—Boyce;Jill
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/980,810
`Art Unit: 2481
`
`Page 8
`
`US 20150264369 A1
`
`RAMASUBRAMONIAN; Adarsh Krishnan etal.
`
`US 20140301458 A1~—RAPAKA;Krishnakanth etal.
`
`Anyinquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
`
`should be directed to JEREMIAH CHARLES HALLENBECK-HUBER whose telephone number is (571)272-
`
`5248. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 9 A.M. to 5 P.M.
`
`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 reachthe 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 published or unpublished applications may be obtained from
`
`Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To
`
`file and managepatent submissionsin Patent Center,visit: https://patentcenter.us pto.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 aboutfiling 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.
`
`/JEREMIAH C HALLENBECK-HUBER/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2481
`
`