DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/12/2026 has been entered.
Following prior arts are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20200260063 A1 (Hannuksela)
US 20230057302 A1 (Lim)
US 20190191170 A1 (Zhao)
US 20130202051 A1 (Zhou)
US 20220312009 A1 (Bang)
“High efficiency video coding recommendation ITU-T H.265”, SERIES H: AUDIOVISUAL AND MULTIMEDIA SYSTEMS Infrastructure of audiovisual services – Coding of moving video, April 2013 (Hereinafter HEVC2013)
WIEGAND T ET AL: "Overview of the H.264/AVC video coding standard", IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS FOR VIDEO TECHNOLOGY, INSTITUTE OF ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS, US, vol. 13, no. 7, 1 July 2003 (2003-07-01), pages 560-576 (hereinafter Wiegand),
US 20170353737 A1 (signaling or parsing one or more padding modes assigned to each padding area or region: Para 13)
US 20170214937 A1 (wrap around padding for motion compensation : para 40: Figs10-11, dividing grids into blocks)
US 20190230368 A1 (wrap around padding for motion compensation :para 116, Figs.6-7).
HE et al, "AHG8: Geometry padding for 360 video coding", JVET-D0075, Joint Video Exploration Team (JVET) of ITU-SG 16 WP 3 and ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 29/WG 11, 4th Meeting: Chengdu, CN, Oct 15-21, 2016, 10 pages (repetitive and geometry padding : section 2)
YASUGI, Yukinobu et al, "AGH12: Flexible Tile Partitioning", Document JVET-K0155-v1, Joint Video Experts Team (JVET) of ITU-T SG 16 WP 3 and ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 29WG 11, 11th Meeting: Ljubljana, SI, 10-18 July 2018, 7 pages (partitioning with flexible size CTU, relevant to claims 15-16, 23-24 and 29)
SJOBERG R et al, "Flexible Tiles", 11. JVET Meeting, Jul 11-18, 2018, Ljubljana (The Joint Video Exploration Team of ISOMEC JTC1/SC29/WG11 and ITU-T SG.16), no. JVET-K0260-v2, Jul 14, 2018, 10 pages (partitioning with flexible sizes relevant to claims 15-16, 23-24 and 29)
WANG, Ye-Kui, et al, "WD 2 of ISO/IEC 23090-2 OMAF 2nd edition". INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATION FOR STANDARDISATIONORGANISATION INTERNATIONALE DE NORMALISATION ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11 CODING OF MOVING PICTURES AND AUDIO, SO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11 N17827-v1, July 2018, Ljubljana, Slovenia, 213 pages (OMAF/360 or omnidirectional video coding and signaling DASH, with different projections: Appendix. D)
Response to Remarks/Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim rejection have been fully considered but are moot in view of new ground of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 15, 38, 43, 48, 53-55, 57-59, 61-63, 64-68 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hannuksela in view Lim
Regarding Claims 37, 42, 47 and 52: Hannuksela teaches A method for encoding video information [(extractor track creation in Fig.9a. 10a that is implemented in encoder {para 439}; Fig. 6 describes the details of creating extractor track )], comprising: determining a first set of parameters that defines a plurality of first grid regions in a frame: [(Fig.6a-c, 82 or 83, have 4x2 tile grid region , para 319 )] for each first grid region, determining a second set of parameters that defines a plurality of second grid regions, wherein the plurality of second grid regions partitions the respective first grid region: [(each tile region is 2x2 region, Fig.6 )] partitioning the frame into the plurality of first grid regions based on the first set of parameters: [(Fig.6 )] partitioning each first grid region into plurality of second grid regions based on the respective second set of parameters: [(Fig.6 )] encoding, into a bitstream, image regions based on the partitioned first grid regions and second grid regions of the frame, wherein an image is encoded at a first resolution level and at a second resolution level, wherein coded image regions of the image, coded at the first resolution level, are mapped into respective second grid regions of a first grid region of the frame and coded image regions of the image, coded at the second resolution level, are mapped into respective second grid regions of another first grid region of the frame, and wherein the image regions encoded into the bitstream are the mapped image regions: [(Fig.6, para 318-320 )] and encoding, into the bitstream, the first set of parameters and, for each of the first grid regions [(para 440, Fig.10a )]
Lim does not explicitly show encoding into the bitstream the respective second set of parameters
However, in the same/related field of endeavor, Lim teaches encoding into the bitstream the respective second set of parameters [( see para 44-48; CTU inside tiles {Fig.13 and para 189}:)]:
.
Therefore, in light of above discussion it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of the prior arts because such combination ensure required information is available to decoder and facilitate accurate reconstruction.
Regarding Claims 38, 43, 48: See analysis of claim 42 and para 85 of Lim
Lim teaches w.r.t. Claims 53, 57, 61 & 64: the method of claim 15 wherein the first set of parameters includes a flag indicating that the frame is to be partitioned according to a uniform grid. [(para 192, para 190-191)]
Lim teaches with respect to claims 54, 58, 62, 65. The method of claim 15, wherein, for a first grid region, the respective second set of parameters includes a flag indicating that the first region is to be partitioned according to a uniform grid [(region mapped to tile set, para 190-191)]
Lim teaches with respect to claims 55, 59. The method of claim 15, wherein mapped image regions[(Figs.13-16)]
Lim teaches with respect to claims 63, 66. The method of claim 43, wherein the first set of parameters and the second sets of parameters are received in any of a sequence parameter set, a picture parameter set, or a slice header. [(para 8-9, 47)]
Hannuksela teaches with respect to claim 67. The method of claim 15, wherein the first set of parameters includes column widths and row heights of the first grid regions, and wherein for at least one first grid region, the second set of parameters includes column widths and row heights of the second grid regions. [(para 104; also Fig.6a shows 2x2 split, i.e. 2 height 2 width )]
Hannuksela teaches with respect to claim 68. The method of claim 15, further comprising: converting a Coding Tree Block (CTB) address in a CTB raster scan of the frame to a CTB address in a region-based flexible tile scan based on the first and the second sets of parameters, wherein the conversion accounts for non-uniform region boundaries. [(Hannuksela para 105-106, 110; Lim para 191-192 indicated nonuniform/flexible tiles and region boundaries ; also see para 189 )]
Claims 37, 42, 47 and 52 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hannuksela in view Lim in view of Zhao.
Regarding Claims 37, 42, 47 and 52: Hannuksela in view of Lim does not explicitly show generating a padding flag indicating whether a padding operation is to be performed with respect to each of the edges of a grid region of the plurality of first grid regions: and encoding, into the bitstream, the padding flag
However, in the same/related field of endeavor, Zhao teaches generating a padding flag indicating whether a padding operation is to be performed with respect to each of the edges of a grid region of the plurality of first grid regions: and encoding, into the bitstream, the padding flag [(Zhao para 71)] .
Therefore, in light of above discussion it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of the prior arts because such combination would provide more control/option on encoding.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Shahan Rahaman whose telephone number is (571)270-1438. The examiner can normally be reached on 7am - 3:30pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nasser Goodarzi can be reached at telephone number (571) 272-4195. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/SHAHAN UR RAHAMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426
Prosecution Insights