DETAILED ACTION
The present Office action is in response to the Request for Continued Examination (RCE) filed on 9 DECEMBER 2025.
Notice of Pre-AIA 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 .
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 6-8, 15, 19, and 20 have been amended. Claim 10 has been cancelled. Claim 21 has been added. Claims 1, 6-8, 11, 12, 14, 15, and 17-21 are pending and herein examined
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 14 NOVEMBER 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 19, and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of previously presented prior-arts and U.S. Publication No. 2021/0211700 A1 (hereinafter “Li”).
With regard to claim 1, previously rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 2022/0053186 A1 (hereinafter “Paluri”) in view of U.S. Publication No. 2022/0116598 A1 (hereinafter “Stepin”), further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2022/0060703 A1 (hereinafter “Kotra”), and even further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2021/0392381 A1 (hereinafter “Wang”), Applicant alleges the following:
“Paluri does not teach or suggest the above-emphasized claim 1 feature. Indeed, as shown in [Table] 7 of Paluri, which is reproduced below for convenience and illustrative purposes, the alf_chroma_filter_signal_flag is always decoded, without any conditional dependency on another flag or parameter [Table 7].” Remarks, p. 2.
Examiner recognizes Paluri does not condition alf_chroma_filter_signal_flag dependent on another flag, such as the now claimed “chroma parameter present flag.” The current rejection relies on Li’s disclosure, which describes incorporating aps_chroma_present_flag in the APS RBSP and subsequently used for conditioning alf_chroma_filter_signal_flag in the ALF data syntax. See Li, FIGS. 15 and 16. Therefore, Paluri and Li disclose the above-emphasized limitation of claim 1.
Examiner’s Note: The use of a chroma parameter present flag (i.e., aps_chroma_present_flag) is first present in the PCT application PCT/KR2020/007856 dated 2020-06-07. The claims do not get the benefit of any of the foreign priorities because they do not include said flag. The prior-art Li has a priority date of 01/08/2020 and therefore constitutes as prior-art. Furthermore, the first VVC draft to include the chroma parameter present flag is VVC Draft 9 and the proposal for the syntax originates from JVET-R0301-v1 (14-24 April 2020), which is the same inventor and assignee as Li.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
With regard to claim 8, the subject matter therein is not present in the original disclosure. The Remarks state that support for the amendments can be found in at least ¶ [0762] of U.S. Publication No. 2022/0248006. See Remarks (11/14/2025), p. 1. Upon review of ¶ [0762], there is disclosure for aps_chroma_present_filter_flag, but not in combination with chroma ALF index information decoded individually for Cb and Cr components.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 6-8, 11, 12, 14, 15, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 2022/0053186 A1 (hereinafter “Paluri”) in view of U.S. Publication No. 2021/0211700 A1 (hereinafter “Li”).
Regarding claim 1, Paluri discloses a video decoding method ([0011], “video/image decoding method”) comprising:
obtaining adaptation parameter sets (APSs) from a bitstream, each of APS includes an adaptive in-loop filter (ALF) set and a luma mapping chroma scaling (LMCS) set(Table 5 describes the adaptation_parameter_set_rbsp() including the parameter “adaptation_parameter_set_id” for identifying the plurality of adaptation parameter sets and “aps_params_type” for identifying the type of parameters including “ALF_APS” that invokes “alf_data(adaptation_parameter_set_id)” or otherwise invokes “lmcs_data();” Table 6 further illustrates the two APS including ALF_APS and LMCS_APS. FIG. 6 depicts the data received for decoding, including parameter sets and FIG. 10 illustrates identifying APS data);
determining at least one APS, including an ALF set, applied to a current picture or slice from the APSs (Tables 3 and 4 disclose slice syntax for identifying an adaptation parameter set ID and ALF APSs the slice refers to, see num_alf_aps_ids, slice_alf_aps_id_luma, slice_alf_aps_chroma_idc, and slice_alf_aps_id_chroma);
determining an APS including an ALF set for a current coding tree block (CTB) included in the current picture or slice ([0170], “Once the layer information from the APS and slice header is decoded, the coding tree unit (CTU) is decoded. One Network Abstraction Layer (NAL) unit may include a slice header and slice data. Slice data may facilitate decoding of a coding tree unit.” See Tables 9 and 10 implementing the coding_tree_unit() syntax, which includes the CTB, for instance, “if( slice_alf_enabled_flag ){ alf_ctb_flag[…] if( alf_ctb_flag[…] ){ if( num_alf_aps_ids > 0) alf_ctb_use_first_aps_flag […] }}”); and
filtering the current CTB based on the ALF set of the determined APS ([0142], “determine whether to apply the ALF, and when determining to apply the ALF, may derive a filter including filter coefficients for the ALF.” ALF filtering is applied to the current CTB based on Tables 9 and 10),
wherein obtaining an APS comprises:
decoding adaptation parameter set type information indicating a parameter type included in the APS, the parameter type being one of an ALF parameter, a LMCS parameter(Table 5 includes aps_param_type with ALF_APS and LMCS_APS. See Table 6. Parsing the APS RBSP for the signaled APS parameter set type results in the decoding thereof);
in response to the adaptation parameter set type information indicates the ALF parameter, decoding luma filter signal flag indicating whether an ALF set for a luma component is present in the APS (Table 7 describes the ALF data for the identified APS ID and includes alf_luma_filter_signal_flag. The ALF data is parsed when aps_param_type is true for ALF_APS and parsing the luma parameter is the decoding thereof);
decoding a chroma filter signal flag indicating whether an alternative filter for a chroma component in present in the APS (Table 7 describes the ALF data for the identified APS ID and includes alf_chroma_filter_signal_flag. The ALF data is parsed when aps_param_type is true for ALF_APS and parsing the chroma parameter is the decoding thereof);
obtaining at least one ALF set from the APS in response to the luma filter signal flag indicates that the luma ALF set is present in the APS (Table 7 discloses “if( alf_luma_filter_signal_flag ) { […] alf_luma_num_filters_signalled_minus_1.” Table 8, “alf_luma_signaled_flag equal to 1 specifies that a luma filter set is signalled […] alf_luma_num_filter_signalled_minus1 plus 1 specifies the number of adaptive loop filter classes for which luma coefficients can be signalled. The value of alf_luma_num_filters_signalled_minus1 shall be in the range of 0 to NumAlfFilters − 1, inclusive”)
.
Paluri fails to expressly disclose a scaling list parameter;
decoding chroma parameter present flag indicating whether the APS comprises a parameter for a chroma component;
and
obtaining at least one alternative filter from the APS in response to the chroma filter signal flag indicates that the alternative filter is present in the APS (),
wherein the chroma filter signal flag is decoded only when the chroma parameter present flag indicates that the APS comprises a parameter for the chroma component, and
wherein in response to the chroma parameter present flag indicates that the APS does not comprise a parameter for the chroma component, decoding the chroma filter signal flag is omitted and it is inferred that the alternative filter for the chroma component is not present in the APS.
However, Li teaches a scaling list parameter (FIG. 15 discloses an APS RBSP with ALF_APS, LMCS_APS, and SCALING_APS);
decoding chroma parameter present flag indicating whether the APS comprises a parameter for a chroma component (FIG. 15 discloses the syntax “aps_chroma_present_flag.” [0137], “The APS chroma present flag (e.g., the aps_chroma_present_flag) can specify whether a chroma component is present”); and
obtaining at least one alternative filter from the APS in response to the chroma filter signal flag indicates that the alternative filter is present in the APS (FIG. 16 discloses the ALF data syntax, including “if( alf_chroma_filter_signal_flag ) { alf_chroma_num_alt_filters_minus1.” See FIG. 18),
wherein the chroma filter signal flag is decoded only when the chroma parameter present flag indicates that the APS comprises a parameter for the chroma component (FIG. 16 discloses the ALF data syntax, including “if( alf_chroma_filter_signal_flag ) { alf_chroma_num_alt_filters_minus1.” FIG. 18 describes when adaptive parameter set chroma present flag is checked in S1810 the process continues to S1820 when “no” and the chroma filter signal flag is not decoded and instead inferred to be 0), and
wherein in response to the chroma parameter present flag indicates that the APS does not comprise a parameter for the chroma component, decoding the chroma filter signal flag is omitted and it is inferred that the alternative filter for the chroma component is not present in the APS ([0158], “At (S1810), whether the APS chroma present flag is 1 can be determined. When the APS chroma present flag is determined not to be 1, and thus a chroma component is not present, the process (1800) proceeds to (S1820).” [0159], “At (S1820), the ALF chroma filter signal flag can be inferred to be 0.” See FIGS. 16 and 18).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have used a chroma filter present flag for conditionally depending the chroma filter signal flag, as taught by Li (FIGS. 15 and 16), in Paluri’s disclosure. One would have been motivated to modify Paluri’s disclosure, by incorporating Li’s disclosure, to reduce signaling overhead and improve coding efficiency (Li: [0139]).
Regarding claim 6, Paluri and Li disclose every limitation of claim 1, as outlined above. Additionally, Paluri discloses wherein an identification number of each of APSs is determined by an adaptation parameter set identifier decoded from the bitstream ([0163], “he syntax element adaptation_parameter_set_id may indicate the identifier of the corresponding APS. That is, the APS may be identified based on the syntax element adaptation_parameter_set_id. The syntax element adaptation_parameter_set_id may be referred to as APS ID information. Also, the APS may include an ALF data field. The ALF data field may be parsed/signaled after the syntax element adaptation_parameter_set_id”).
Regarding claim 7, Paluri and Li disclose every limitation of claim 6, as outlined above. Additionally, Paluri discloses wherein the determining of the at least one APS, including an ALF set, applied to the current picture or slice comprises:
obtaining luma ALF set number information of the current picture or slice (See Table 3, including “if( slice_alf_enabled_flag ) num_alf_aps_ids for(i = 0; i<num_alf_aps_ids; i++) slice_alf_aps_id_luma+i+ slice_alf_chroma_idc […].” See Table 7); and
obtaining identifiers of APSs including a luma ALF set, the number of APSs corresponding to the luma ALF set number information (See Table 3, including “if( slice_alf_enabled_flag ) num_alf_aps_ids for(i = 0; i<num_alf_aps_ids; i++) slice_alf_aps_id_luma+i+ slice_alf_chroma_idc […].” See Table 7).
Regarding claim 8, Paluri and Li disclose every limitation of claim 1, as outlined above. Additionally. Paluri discloses wherein the chroma ALF index information is decoded individually for a Cb component and a Cr component (Table 9 discloses alf_ctb_flag[i] for identifying either Cb or Cr individually with [i] set to [1] or [2], in accordance to the slice_alf_chroma_idc syntax. Note, this information is decoded after ALF data and is therefore in response to).
Li teaches the following limitations not disclosed by Paluri wherein in response to the chroma filter signal flag indicates that the alternative filter for the chroma component is present in the APS, obtaining chroma ALF number information indicating a number of alternative filters for the chroma component is further decoded, the APS comprises alternative filters as many as the number indicated by the chroma ALF number information (FIG. 16 discloses the ALF data syntax, including “if( alf_chroma_filter_signal_flag ) { alf_chroma_num_alt_filters_minus1”),
wherein when the chroma ALF number information indicates that plural alternative filters for the chroma component are included, chroma ALF index information is further decoded from a bitstream to specify one of the alternative filters for the chroma component of the current CTB (FIG. 16 discloses the ALF data syntax, including “if( alf_chroma_filter_signal_flag ) { alf_chroma_num_alt_filters_minus1” and using altIdx to identify the filter). The same motivation of claim 1 applies to claim 8.
Regarding claim 11, Paluri and Li disclose every limitation of claim 1, as outlined above. Additionally, Paluri discloses wherein the adaptation parameter set comprises:
luma signaling ALF number information indicating the number of luma signaling ALFs (See Table 7, in particular “alf_luma_num_filters_signalled_minus1”), and
a luma ALF delta index indicating an index of a luma signaling ALF referred to by a luma ALF of a luma ALF set, when the luma signaling ALF number information indicates that the number of luma signaling ALFs is greater than 1 (See Table 7, in particular “alf_luma_coeff_delta_idx” and note the index is conditioned on “if( alf_luma_num_filters_signalled_minus1 > 0)”).
Regarding claim 12, Paluri and Li disclose every limitation of claim 11, as outlined above. Additionally, Paluri discloses wherein the adaptation parameter set includes one or more luma signaling ALFs, and wherein the luma ALFs is determined from the one or more luma signaling ALFs according to the luma ALF delta index (See Table 7, where “alf_luma_coeff_delta_idx[filtIdx] depends on “if(alf_luma_num_filters_signalled_minus1 > 0)” and filtIdx represents the number of ALF filters - 1).
Regarding claim 14, Paluri and Li disclose every limitation of claim 1, as outlined above. Additionally, Paluri discloses wherein ALF coding tree block flag indicating whether adaptive in-loop filtering is applied or not is decoded for each of the luma component, a Cb component and a Cr component (Table 9 discloses coding_tree_unit syntax including alf_ctb_flag[i], where [0] is for luma and [1,2] is for Cb and Cr components).
Regarding claim 15, Paluri and Li disclose every limitation of claim 14, as outlined above. Additionally, Paluri discloses wherein the method further comprises: obtaining an adaptation parameter set application flag indicating whether the ALF set of the adaptation parameter set is applied to the current CTB or not (See Tables 3, 7 and 9, where Tables 3 and 9 describes the luma ALF parameters using the APS and then applying to the CTB at Table 9, such as by “alf_use_aps_flag”),
wherein when the adaptation parameter set application flag indicates that the ALF set of the adaptation parameter set is applied to the current CTB, a first filter index is further decoded from the bitstream to indicate one of APSs applied to the current picture or slice, the first filter index indicating one of first to last APSs applied to the current picture or slice (See Table 9 and [0203], “if alf_use_aps_flag is true (value of 1), the filter set from APS may be applied to (luma) CTB (reconstructed samples) and based on information about the previous filter (eg alf_luma_prev_filter_idx_minus1 or alf_prev_filter_idx) Filter coefficients may be derived. When alf_use_aps_flag is false (a value of 0), a fixed filter may be applied to (luma) CTB (reconstructed samples). For example, the value of alf_luma_fixed_filter_idx may be in the range of 0 to 15”), and
wherein when the adaptation parameter set application flag indicates that the ALF set of the APS is not applied to the current CTB, a second filter index is further decoded from the bitstream to indicate one of fixed ALF sets for the luma component (See Table 9 and [0203], “if alf_use_aps_flag is true (value of 1), the filter set from APS may be applied to (luma) CTB (reconstructed samples) and based on information about the previous filter (eg alf_luma_prev_filter_idx_minus1 or alf_prev_filter_idx) Filter coefficients may be derived. When alf_use_aps_flag is false (a value of 0), a fixed filter may be applied to (luma) CTB (reconstructed samples). For example, the value of alf_luma_fixed_filter_idx may be in the range of 0 to 15”).
Regarding claim 19, the limitations are the same as those in claim 1; however, written in encoder form instead of decoder form, which is the known inverse operations. Therefore, the same rationale of claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 19.
Regarding claim 20, the limitations are the same as those in claim 19; however, written in machine form instead of process form. Therefore, the same rationale of claim 19 applies equally as well to claim 20. Additionally, Paluri discloses a processor ([0256], “processor”) and a transmitter ([0044], “The transmitter may transmit the encoded image/image information of data output in the form of a bitstream”).
Claim(s) 17, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 2022/0053186 A1 (hereinafter “Paluri”) in view of U.S. Publication No. 2021/0211700 A1 (hereinafter “Li”), and further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2022/0060703 A1 (hereinafter “Kotra”).
Regarding claim 17, Paluri and Li disclose every limitation of claim 1, as outlined above. Li fails to expressly disclose wherein filtering of the current CTB comprises allocating a block classification index to a basic filtering unit block of the current CTB, and wherein the block classification index is determined using directional information and activity information.
However, Kotra teaches wherein filtering of the current CTB comprises allocating a block classification index to a basic filtering unit block of the current CTB, and wherein the block classification index is determined using directional information and activity information ([0250-0262] describes the process for block classification, including [0251], “The classification index C is derived based on its directionally D and a quantized value of activity A.” [0269], “The filtering process can be controlled at CTB level”). The same motivation of claim 1 applies to claim 17.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have used block classification for filtering, as taught by Kotra ([0250-0262]), in Paluri and Li’s disclosure. One would have been motivated to modify Paluri and Li’s disclosure, by incorporating Kotra’s disclosure, to improve compression ratio with minimizing picture quality loss (Kotra: [0004]).
Regarding claim 18, Paluri and Li disclose every limitation of claim 17, as outlined above. Additionally, Kotra discloses wherein at least one of the directional information or the activity information is determined based on a gradient value of at least one of a vertical, horizontal, first diagonal or second diagonal direction ([0252], “To calculate D and A, gradients of the horizontal, vertical and two diagonal directions are first calculated using 1-D Laplacian”). The same motivation of claim 17 applies to claim 18.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 2022/0053186 A1 (hereinafter “Paluri”) in view of U.S. Publication No. 2021/0211700 A1 (hereinafter “Li”), further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2022/0116598 A1 (hereinafter “Stepin”), even further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2022/0060703 A1 (hereinafter “Kotra”), and even further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2021/0392381 A1 (hereinafter “Wang”).
Regarding claim 21, Paluri and Li disclose every limitation of claim 1, as outlined above. Additionally, Paluri discloses wherein obtaining the APS further comprises:
decoding a luma clipping flag indicating whether non-linear adaptive in-loop filtering is performed with respect to the luma component (Table 7 describes “alf_luma_clip_flag” and “alf_chroma_clip_flag,” where the clipping generates non-linearity to the ALF, also described as selectively implemented as linear or non-linear);
decoding a chroma clipping flag indicating whether non-linear adaptive in-loop filtering is performed with respect to the chroma component (Table 7 describes “alf_luma_clip_flag” and “alf_chroma_clip_flag,” where the clipping generates non-linearity to the ALF, also described as selectively implemented as linear or non-linear);
decoding a luma clipping index indicating one of clipping value candidates for non-linear adaptive in-loop filtering for the luma component, the luma clipping index being decoded when the luma clipping flag indicates that non-linear adaptive in-loop filtering is performed with respect to the luma component (Table 7 describes the use of alf_luma_clip_flag in conjunction with alf_luma_clip_idx[]); and
obtaining a chroma clipping index indicating one of clipping value candidates for non-linear adaptive in-loop filtering for the chroma component, the chroma clipping index being decoded when the chroma clipping flag indicates that non-linear adaptive in-loop filtering is performed with respect to the chroma component (Table 7 describes the use of alf_chroma_clip_flag in conjunction with alf_chroma_clip_idx[]),
wherein the luma clipping index and the chroma clipping index are decoded based on a 2-bit (Table 8 describes the index to be in the range of 0 to 3, which is two bits in length)
.
Paluri and Li fail to expressly disclose fixed length without decoding any information on an order of exponential-golomb for the luma clipping index and the chroma clipping index,
wherein a number of the clipping value candidates is fixed as 4 regardless of a bit depth of a current sequence, but a value of each of the clipping value candidates is varied according to the bit depth of the current sequence,
wherein the clipping value candidates are shared both for the luma component and the chroma component, and
wherein a maximum number of the first adaptation parameter sets including ALF set is greater than a maximum number of second adaptation parameter sets including LMCS set.
However, Stepin teaches wherein a number of the clipping value candidates is fixed as 4 regardless of a bit depth of a current sequence, but a value of each of the clipping value candidates is varied according to the bit depth of the current sequence ([0034] and [0036] both depict LUT variations for non-linear ALF clipping, where the ALF includes 4 fixed number of candidates and the values change according to the bitdepth), and
wherein the clipping value candidates are shared both for the luma component and the chroma component ([0032], “the respective clipping levels may be chosen from a look-up table (LUT) representing the set of possible clipping levels for the luma and chroma components”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have used a table for retrieving clipping values, as taught by Stepin ([0034-0036]), in Paluri and Li’s disclosure. One would have been motivated to modify Paluri and Li’s disclosure, by incorporating Stepin’s invention, to provide an improved low complexity in-loop filter for reconstructed frame filtering and allow decreasing the complexity of the required multiplications without filtering quality degradation (Stepin: [0013-0014]).
Paluri, Li, and Stepin fail to expressly disclose 2-bit fixed length without decoding any information on an order of exponential-golomb for the luma clipping index and the chroma clipping index, and
wherein a maximum number of the first adaptation parameter sets including ALF set is greater than a maximum number of second adaptation parameter sets including LMCS set.
However, Kotra teaches 2-bit fixed length without decoding any information on an order of exponential Golomb for the luma clipping index and the chroma clipping index ([0390], “the clipping parameters are signaled used fixed length codes and therefore the syntax elements alf_luma_clip_min_eg_order_minus1, alf_luma_clip_eg_order_increase_flag[i] are not used. The syntax element alf_luma_clip_idx is signaled using a fixed length code of 2 bits.” The alf_data table in [0391] describes the alf_luma_clip_idx syntax having the u(2) descriptor and the alf_chroma_clip_idx also having the u(2) descriptor).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have used a 2-bit length descriptor that is not an exponential-Golomb code, as taught by Kotra ([0391]), in Paluri, Li, and Stepin’s invention. One would have been motivated to modify Paluri, Li, and Stepin’s invention, by incorporating Kotra’s invention, to improve coding simplicity and efficiency (Kotra: [0388-0390]).
Paluri, Li, Stepin, and Kotra fail to expressly disclose wherein a maximum number of the first adaptation parameter sets including ALF set is greater than a maximum number of second adaptation parameter sets including LMCS set.
However, Wang teaches wherein a maximum number of the first adaptation parameter sets including ALF set is greater than a maximum number of second adaptation parameter sets including LMCS set (Table 3 depicts APS ID range for ALF_APS from 0 to 63 and MAP_APS from 64-95. Note, Wang interchangeably uses the terms LMCS and reshaper, where the “MAP” is the mapping reshaper. [0106], “For example, the APS IDs 542 of the ALF APS 512 may have a range of zero to seven, the APS IDs 542 of the scaling list APS 513 may have a range of zero to seven, and the APS IDs 542 of the LMCS APS 514 may have a range of zero to three”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have a set maximum APS for ALF greater than LMCS, as taught by Wang (Table 3 and [0106]), in Paluri, Li, Stepin, and Kotra’s invention. One would have been motivated to modify Paluri, Li, Stepin, and Paluri’s invention, by incorporating Wang’s invention, to improve the design of the APS and LMCS (Wang: [0111]) for increasing compression efficiency with little to no sacrifice in image quality (Wang: [0003]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
JVET-R0301-v1 – Discloses including aps_chroma_present_flag in the APS RBSP and conditionally including alf_chroma_filter_signal_flag using the aps_chroma_present_flag in the ALF data syntax. See Sections 2.1 and 2.2.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STUART D BENNETT whose telephone number is (571)272-0677. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday from 9:00 AM - 5PM EST.
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 reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, William Vaughn can be reached at 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 manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.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 about filing 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.
/STUART D BENNETT/Examiner, Art Unit 2481