`
`V i$ T {a
`
`A
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`15/ 172,023
`
`06/02/2016
`
`Wade Wan
`
`58751930002
`
`4984
`
`STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C.
`1100 NEW YORK AVENUE, NW.
`WASHINGTON, DC 20005
`
`SLATER ALISON T
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2487
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`10/01/2018
`
`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):
`e-office @ sternekessler. com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`Off/09 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`15/172,023
`Examiner
`ALISON SLATER
`
`Applicant(s)
`Wan et al.
`Art Unit
`2487
`
`AIA Status
`Yes
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`|f NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from 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, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 07/24/2018.
`[:1 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a). This action is FINAL.
`
`2b) C] This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into 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 Expat/7e Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`5)
`Claim(s)
`
`1—20 is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`E] Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are rejected.
`
`[:1 Claim(s) _ is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[j Claim(s)
`9
`* If any claims have been determined aflowabte. you may be eligible 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 PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`10)[:] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11). The drawing(s) filed on 06/02/2016 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)[:] Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)I:I All
`
`b)D Some”
`
`C)D None of the:
`
`1.[:]
`
`Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.[:]
`
`Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3:] Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in 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) C] Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`2) E] Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date_
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) C] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) CI Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20180925
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/172,023
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the
`
`first inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`2.
`
`Applicant's arguments filed on 07/24/2018 have been fully considered but they are not
`
`persuasive. In response to applicant’s argument on pages 9—14 that the claims are not directed to
`
`an abstract idea, the courts have found RecogniCorp ’s patent claims ineligible subject matter
`
`because the claims were directed to the abstract idea of encoding and decoding image data. It
`
`stated that “the entirety of the ’303 Patent consists of the encoding algorithm itself or purely
`
`conventional or obvious pre—solution activity and post—solution activity insufficient to transform
`
`the unpatentable abstract idea into a patent—eligible application. .
`
`. This method reflects standard
`
`encoding and decoding, an abstract concept long utilized to transmit information. Cf. Intellectual
`
`Ventures ILLC v. Capital One Fin. Corp, 850 F.3d 1332, 1340—41 (Fed. Cir. 2017) (organizing,
`
`displaying, and manipulating data encoded for human— and machine—readability is directed to an
`
`abstract concept). Morse code, ordering food at a fast food restaurant via a numbering system,
`
`and Paul Revere’s “one if by land, two if by sea” signaling system all exemplify encoding at one
`
`end and decoding at the other end. Even the ’303 patent describes “a common technique for
`
`synthesizing single images of faces involv[ing] horizontally dividing the image of a face into
`
`bands for different features,” such that “[p]aper strips containing exemplary features [can] then
`
`be combined to form a composite drawing of a face.” J .A. 27 (col. 1 11. 37—43).” Further the
`
`court stated “This case is similar to Digitech Image Technologies, LLC v. Electronics for
`
`Imaging, Inc., 758 F.3d 1344 (Fed. Cir. 2014). There, the claims of the challenged patent were
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/172,023
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 3
`
`directed to the abstract idea of organizing information through mathematical correlations. Id. at
`
`1350—5 1. We explained that the claim at issue “recites a process of taking two data sets and
`
`combining them into a single data set” simply by organizing existing data into a new form. Id. at
`
`1351. A process that started with data, added an algorithm, and ended with a new form of data
`
`was directed to an abstract idea. Id. In this case, the ’303 patent claims a method whereby a user
`
`starts with data, codes that data using “at least one multiplication operation,” and ends with a
`
`new form of data. We discern no material difference between the Alice step one analysis in
`
`Digitech and the analysis here.” Examiner based the rejection using Digitech. Similar to
`
`RecogniCorp, the current claim recites the steps of decoding, which includes the steps of
`
`receiving data, decoding data, determining data and additional decoding. Applicant cites a
`
`plethora of paragraphs from the instant application to support the argument that the claim is not
`
`abstract. It is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., advanced warnings, details
`
`about the specific encoders, details about the supplemental information) are not recited in the
`
`rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations
`
`from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Gezms, 988 F.2d 1181, 26
`
`USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Since the courts have found encoding and decoding to be
`
`conventional, no additional citations were added to the rejection. MPEP §2106.05(d)(II).
`
`Therefore, the rejection is maintained.
`
`3.
`
`In response to applicant's argument that Wang does not disclose a transition point after
`
`which the encoded data transitions to the second portion, Wang discloses The exact number of
`
`bits in the CPB at the removal time of each picture may depend on which buffering period SEI
`
`message is selected to initialize the HRD; 0126. Thus, the SEI message contains information
`
`about the removal time after the exact number of bits, i.e., a transition point. Therefore, the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/172,023
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 4
`
`rejection is maintained. Since all other arguments depend from this argument, they are rejected
`
`for at least the same reason.
`
`4.
`
`35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 US C § 101
`
`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 requirements of this title.
`
`5.
`
`Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed
`
`to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without
`
`significantly more.
`
`6.
`
`Claim 1 is directed to a method of receiving data, decoding data, determining data has
`
`information, and further decoding data, which are well—understood, routine, conventional
`
`activities that do not necessarily require any specific machine to perform and thus are abstract
`
`ideas. This method corresponds to concepts identified as abstract ideas by the courts, such as
`
`organizing and manipulating information through mathematical correlations (Digitech), and
`
`Recognicorp and are not meaningfully different than the concepts found by the courts to be
`
`abstract ideas. The claims does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to
`
`significantly more than the judicial exception because the recited steps are generic functions that
`
`are well understood, routine, and conventional activities previously known to the industry.
`
`Similarly, dependent claims 2-9 disclose descriptions of the data and the order of the data, which
`
`also do not require any specific machine to perform the acts which are well understood as well.
`
`The additional elements of claims 10-18 disclose an encoder, which is also well understand, and
`
`add no additional elements which are significantly more. Claims 19 and 20 merely add storage,
`
`which is also routine and conventional, and does not add significantly more because it is recited
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/172,023
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 5
`
`as performing generic computer functions routinely used in computer applications. Generic
`
`computer components recited as performing generic computer functions that are well—
`
`understood, routine and conventional activities amount to no more than implementing the
`
`abstract idea with a computerized system and thus taken alone, the additional elements do not
`
`amount to significantly more. Looking at the limitations as a combination adds nothing more
`
`than what is already present when looking at the elements individually. There is no indication
`
`that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other
`
`technology. Their collective functions merely provide conventional computer implementations of
`
`encoding and decoding data. (See Recognicorp discussion above). Accordingly, the claims are
`
`ineligible.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 US C § 102
`
`7.
`
`In the 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—AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the
`
`statutory basis 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.
`
`8.
`
`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)(l) 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.
`
`9.
`
`Claims 1-3, 7, 8 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(l) as being anticipated by
`
`Wang, (US. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0261877 A1), hereinafter (“Wang”).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/172,023
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 6
`
`10.
`
`Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses a method performed by a decoding device (a
`
`method of decoding video data; 0008), comprising:
`
`receiving encoded data comprising a first portion that is encoded in accordance
`
`with a first codec and a second portion that is encoded in accordance with a second codec
`
`(multi-layer video decoder 120 may include a de-multiplexer ("de-muX") 118 that
`
`splits a combined encoded bitstream into an enhancement layer bitstream to be
`
`decoded by enhancement layer decoder 30 and a base layer bitstream to be decoded
`
`by base layer decoder 130; 0201);
`
`decoding the first portion of the encoded data in accordance with the first codec
`
`to obtain decoded data (FIG. 5 is a block diagram illustrating an example multi-layer
`
`video decoder 120 that may support codec-hybrid multi-layer video decoding in
`
`accordance With the techniques of this disclosure. Multi-layer video decoder
`
`120 includes a base layer decoder 130 and video decoder 30 from FIG. 3 operating
`
`as an enhancement layer decoder. Base layer decoder 130 may be configured to
`
`decode video data according to a first video codec standard, such as the H.264/AVC
`
`standard; 0200);
`
`determining that the decoded data includes supplemental information that
`
`indicates a transition point after which the encoded data transitions to the second portion
`
`(third type of NAL unit may encapsulate a RBSP for Supplemental Enhancement
`
`Information (SE1); 0055 and NOTE 1--The exact number of bits in the CPB at the
`
`removal time of each picture may depend on which buffering period SEI message is
`
`selected to initialize the HRD; 0126); and
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/172,023
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 7
`
`decoding the second portion of the encoded data in accordance with the second
`
`codec based on the supplemental information (Enhancement layer decoder 30 may be
`
`configured to decode video data according to a different, second video codec
`
`standard, such as the H.265/HEVC standard or one of the multi-layer extensions of
`
`HEVC; 0200).
`
`ll.
`
`Regarding claim 2, Wang discloses all the elements of claim 1, as discussed above,
`
`Wang also discloses wherein the encoded data comprises at least one of encoded video data or
`
`encoded audio data (video data; 0200).
`
`12.
`
`Regarding claim 3, Wang discloses all the elements of claim 1, as discussed above,
`
`Wang also discloses wherein the first portion comprises one or more first pictures that are
`
`encoded in accordance with the first codec (pictures of one or more enhancement layers;
`
`0201) and wherein the second portion comprises one or more second pictures that are encoded in
`
`accordance with the second codec (Base layer decoder 130 may decode video blocks of
`
`pictures of a base layer included in the base layer bitstream; 0202).
`
`13.
`
`Regarding claim 7, Wang discloses all the elements of claim 1, as discussed above,
`
`Wang also discloses wherein the supplemental information also indicates at least one of: the
`
`second codec to be used to decode the second portion of the encoded data (the codec type is
`
`signaled; 0079); one or more of a profile, level, and tier of the second portion of the encoded
`
`data (the profile, tier and level specified in the bitstream using the decoding process
`
`specified in clauses 2 through 10; 0135); or a resolution of the second portion of the encoded
`
`data (Such video
`
`characteristics typically include spatial resolution and quality level (Signal-to-Noise Ratio);
`
`0058).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/172,023
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 8
`
`14.
`
`Regarding claim 8, Wang discloses all the elements of claim 1, as discussed above,
`
`Wang also discloses wherein the supplemental information is a Supplemental Enhancement
`
`Information message (Supplemental Enhancement Information (SEI); 0055).
`
`15.
`
`Regarding claim 19, Wang discloses a method performed by a decoding device (a
`
`method of decoding video data; 0008), comprising:
`
`receiving, from a first source external to the decoding device, a first portion of
`
`encoded data and a second portion of the encoded data, the first portion and the second
`
`portion being encoded in accordance with a first codec (multi-layer Video decoder 120
`
`may include a de-multiplexer ("de-mux") 118 that splits a combined encoded
`
`bitstream into an enhancement layer bitstream to be decoded by enhancement layer
`
`decoder 30 and a base layer bitstream to be decoded by base layer decoder 130;
`
`0201);
`
`decoding the first portion of the encoded data in accordance with the first codec to
`
`obtain decoded data (FIG. 5 is a block diagram illustrating an example multi-layer
`
`video decoder 120 that may support codec-hybrid multi-layer video decoding in
`
`accordance With the techniques of this disclosure. Multi-layer video decoder 120
`
`includes a base layer decoder 130 and video decoder 30 from FIG. 3 operating as an
`
`enhancement layer decoder. Base layer decoder 130 may be configured to decode
`
`video data according to a first video codec standard, such as the H.264/AVC
`
`standard; 0200);
`
`determining that the decoded data includes supplemental information that
`
`indicates a transition point after which encoded data stored locally to the decoding device
`
`is to be decoded instead of the second portion of the encoded data (third type of NAL
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/172,023
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 9
`
`unit may encapsulate a RBSP for Supplemental Enhancement Information (SE1);
`
`0055), the encoded data stored locally to the decoded device being encoded in
`
`accordance with a second codec (The combined bitstream may be transmitted to
`
`another device (e.g., multi-layer video decoder 120 of FIG. 5) or archived for later
`
`transmission or retrieval; 0199); and
`
`in response to reaching the transition point, decoding the encoded data stored
`
`locally to the decoding device instead of the second portion of the encoded data, the
`
`encoded data stored locally to the decoding device being decoded in accordance with the
`
`second codec based on the supplemental information (Enhancement layer decoder 30
`
`may be configured to decode video data according to a different, second video codec
`
`standard, such as the H.265/HEVC standard or one of the multi-layer extensions of
`
`HEVC; 0200).
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 US C § 103
`
`16.
`
`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 forth in 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.
`
`17.
`
`Claims 4-6 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang as
`
`applied to claims 1, 3 and 19 above, and further in View of Rhyu et al., (US. Patent Application
`
`Publication No. 2013/0322628 A1), hereinafter (“Rhyu”).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/172,023
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 10
`
`18.
`
`Regarding claim 4, Wang discloses all the elements of claim 3, as discussed above.
`
`However, Wang does not explicitly disclose wherein the supplemental information is located
`
`after a last picture in a sequence of the one or more first pictures.
`
`19.
`
`Rhyu suggests wherein the supplemental information is located after a last picture in a
`
`sequence of the one or more first pictures (SEI message 525 includes the encryption key 535 that
`
`encrypts the movie fragment 452b located after the movie fragment 452a; 0067 and Fig. 5).
`
`20.
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time the invention was filed to incorporate
`
`the decoder of Wang with the SEI message location of Rhyu. The motivation would be to
`
`supplement the weak points, such that the present embodiment places an encryption key between
`
`the video and audio data, as opposed to the file format structure so even when a client device is
`
`hacked, a key is still obtained and an advertisement is played. Rhyu at 0056.
`
`21.
`
`Regarding claim 5, Wang discloses all the elements of claim 3, as discussed above.
`
`However, Wang does not explicitly disclose wherein the supplemental information is located
`
`after a picture before a last picture in a sequence of the one or more first pictures.
`
`22.
`
`Rhyu suggests wherein the supplemental information is located after a picture before a
`
`last picture in a sequence of the one or more first pictures (Fig. 5).
`
`23.
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time the invention was filed to incorporate
`
`the decoder of Wang with the SEI message location of Rhyu. The motivation would be to
`
`supplement the weak points, such that the present embodiment places an encryption key between
`
`the video and audio data, as opposed to the file format structure so even when a client device is
`
`hacked, a key is still obtained and an advertisement is played. Rhyu at 0056.
`
`24.
`
`Regarding claim 6, Wang, further in view of Rhyu, hereinafter (“Wang-Rhyu”),
`
`suggests all the elements of claim 5, as discussed above. Wang suggests wherein the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/172,023
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 11
`
`supplemental information further indicates a number of pictures of the one or more first pictures
`
`that are to be decoded before the transition point (NOTE 1--The exact number of bits in the
`
`CPB at the removal time of each picture may depend on which buffering period SEI
`
`message is selected to initialize the HRD. Encoders must take this into account to ensure
`
`that all specified constraints must be obeyed regardless of which buffering period SEI
`
`message is selected to initialize the HRD, as the HRD may be initialized at any one of the
`
`buffering period SEI messages; 0126).
`
`25.
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time the invention was filed to incorporate
`
`the decoder of Wang with the SE1 message location of Rhyu. The motivation would be to
`
`supplement the weak points, such that the present embodiment places an encryption key between
`
`the video and audio data, as opposed to the file format structure so even when a client device is
`
`hacked, a key is still obtained and an advertisement is played. Rhyu at 0056.
`
`26.
`
`Regarding claim 20, Wang discloses all the elements of claim 19, as discussed above.
`
`However, wherein the supplemental information is encoded into the first portion of the encoded
`
`data by the decoding device. Rhyu suggests wherein the supplemental information is encoded
`
`into the first portion of the encoded data by the decoding device (Fig. 5).
`
`27.
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time the invention was filed to incorporate
`
`the decoder of Wang with the SE1 message location of Rhyu. The motivation would be to
`
`supplement the weak points, such that the present embodiment places an encryption key between
`
`the video and audio data, as opposed to the file format structure so even when a client device is
`
`hacked, a key is still obtained and an advertisement is played. Rhyu at 0056.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/172,023
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 12
`
`28.
`
`Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang as applied to
`
`claim 1 above, and further in view of Uger, (US. Patent Application Publication No.
`
`2016/0381385 A1), hereinafter (“Uger”).
`
`29.
`
`Regarding claim 9, Wang discloses all the elements of claim 1, as discussed above.
`
`However, Wang does not explicitly disclose wherein the supplemental information is User Data.
`
`30.
`
`Uger suggests wherein the supplemental information is User Data (Several SEI
`
`messages are specified in H.264/AVC and HEVC, and the user data SEI messages enable
`
`organizations and companies to specify SEI messages for their own use (i.e., user data);
`
`0127).
`
`3 1.
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time the invention was filed to incorporate
`
`the decoder of Wang with the SE1 message concepts of Uger. The motivation would be so that
`
`the process for handling particular SE1 messages in the recipient can be specified. Uger at 0127.
`
`32.
`
`Claims 10-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang, and
`
`further in view of Rusert, et al., (US. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0287123 A1),
`
`hereinafter (“Rusert”).
`
`33.
`
`Regarding claim 10, Wang discloses a method performed by an encoding device (video
`
`encoding; 0010), comprising: inserting supplemental information in a first portion of data
`
`(third type of NAL unit may encapsulate a RBSP for Supplemental Enhancement
`
`Information (SEI); 0055), the first portion to be encoded in accordance with a first codec, the
`
`supplemental information indicating a transition point after which a second portion of data is to
`
`be encoded in accordance with a second codec (multi-layer video decoder 120 may include a
`
`de-multiplexer ("de-mux") 118 that splits a combined encoded bitstream into an
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/172,023
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 13
`
`enhancement layer bitstream to be decoded by enhancement layer decoder 30 and a base
`
`layer bitstream to be decoded by base layer decoder 130; 0201). However, Wang does not
`
`explicitly disclose inserting a marker in the first portion of data, the marker corresponding to the
`
`transition point.
`
`34.
`
`Rusert suggests inserting a marker in the first portion of data, the marker corresponding
`
`to the transition point (The bit stream marker subdivides the bit stream into video packets,
`
`each video packet containing compressed video data, e.g., a video frame, supplemental
`
`information, or, generally, an NAL unit. Then, each video packet is marked With a single
`
`subset identifier, using a syntaX element stream_id in the NAL unit header; 0127).
`
`35.
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time the invention was filed to incorporate
`
`the decoder of Wang with the marker concepts of Rusert. The motivation would be to subdivide
`
`the bit stream into video packets. Rusert at 0127.
`
`36.
`
`Regarding claim 11, Wang, further in view of Rhyu, hereinafter (“Wang-Rhyu”),
`
`suggests all the elements of claim 10, as discussed above. Wang also suggests wherein the data
`
`comprises at least one of video data or audio data (video data; 0200).
`
`37.
`
`Regarding claim 12, Wang-Rhyu suggests all the elements of claim 10, as discussed
`
`above. Wang also suggests wherein the first portion comprises one or more first pictures that are
`
`to be encoded in accordance with the first codec (pictures of one or more enhancement layers;
`
`0201) and wherein the second portion comprises one or more second pictures that are to be
`
`encoded in accordance with the second codec (Base layer decoder 130 may decode video
`
`blocks of pictures of a base layer included in the base layer bitstream; 0202).
`
`38.
`
`Regarding claim 13, Wang-Rhyu suggests all the elements of claim 12, as discussed
`
`above. Wang also suggests wherein the supplemental information is inserted after a last picture
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/172,023
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 14
`
`in a sequence of the one or more first pictures (SEI message 525 includes the encryption key
`
`535 that encrypts the movie fragment 452b located after the movie fragment 452a; 0067
`
`and Fig. 5).
`
`39.
`
`Regarding claim 14, Wang-Rhyu suggests all the elements of claim 12, as discussed
`
`above. Wang also suggests wherein the supplemental information is inserted after a picture
`
`before a last picture in a sequence of the one or more first pictures (Fig. 5).
`
`40.
`
`Regarding claim 15, Wang-Rhyu suggests all the elements of claim 14, as discussed
`
`above. Wang also suggests wherein the supplemental information further indicates a number of
`
`pictures of the one or more first pictures that are to be decoded before the marker (NOTE 1--The
`
`exact number of bits in the CPB at the removal time of each picture may depend on which
`
`buffering period SEI message is selected to initialize the HRD. Encoders must take this
`
`into account to ensure that all specified constraints must be obeyed regardless of which
`
`buffering period SEI message is selected to initialize the HRD, as the HRD may be
`
`initialized at any one of the buffering period SEI messages; 0126).
`
`41.
`
`Regarding claim 16, Wang-Rhyu suggests all the elements of claim 10, as discussed
`
`above. Wang also suggests wherein the supplemental information further indicates at least one
`
`of: the second codec to be used to decode the second portion of the encoded data (the codec
`
`type is signaled; 0079); one or more of a profile, level, and tier of the second portion of the
`
`encoded data (the profile, tier and level specified in the bitstream using the decoding process
`
`specified in clauses 2 through 10; 0135); or a resolution of the second portion of the encoded
`
`data (Such video characteristics typically include spatial resolution and quality level
`
`(Signal-to-Noise Ratio); 0058).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/172,023
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 15
`
`42.
`
`Regarding claim 17, Wang-Rhyu suggests all the elements of claim 10, as discussed
`
`above. Wang also suggests wherein the supplemental information comprises a Supplemental
`
`Enhancement Information message (Supplemental Enhancement Information (SEI); 0055).
`
`43.
`
`Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang-Rusert, and
`
`further in view of Ugeréas cited above.
`
`44.
`
`Regarding claim 18, Wang-Rusert suggest all the limitations of claim 10, as discussed
`
`above. However, Wang-Rusert do not explicitly disclose wherein the supplemental information
`
`comprises User Data.
`
`45.
`
`Uger suggests wherein the supplemental information is User Data (Several SEI
`
`messages are specified in H.264/AVC and HEVC, and the user data SEI messages enable
`
`organizations and companies to specify SEI messages for their own use (i.e., user data);
`
`0127).
`
`46.
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time the invention was filed to incorporate
`
`the decoder of Wang-Rusert with the SEI message concepts of Uger. The motivation would be
`
`so that the process for handling particular SEI messages in the recipient can be specified. Uger at
`
`0127.
`
`Conclusion
`
`47.
`
`THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time
`
`policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
`
`A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE
`
`MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/172,023
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 16
`
`MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after
`
`the end of the THREE—MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period
`
`will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37
`
`CFR l.l36(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event,
`
`however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing
`
`date of this final action.
`
`48.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to Alison Slater Whose telephone number is 571—270—0375. The
`
`examiner can normally be reached on MON — FRI: SAM—5PM EST, Alternate FRI.
`
`49.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
`
`supervisor, David Czekaj can be reached on 571—272—7327. The fax phone number for the
`
`organization Where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571—273—8300.
`
`50.
`
`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.