DETAILED ACTION
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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 26 February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues Chuang does not disclose “a run type of a previously scanned pixel and is silent on a comparison for run types of a pixel in the coding unit and the previously scanned pixel and much less the comparison for run types is used to trigger a decision”. Examiner respectfully disagrees and respectfully submits the “receiving a flag” of the claims does not constitute a comparison as argued, any decision is explicitly decided by the received flag. Secondly, Examiner respectfully directs Applicant’s attention to Chuang: ¶ [0026] which discloses a run copy flag which must come from a previously scanned section which includes a pixel. Chuang: ¶ [0027] then discloses “receiving a flag associated with a palette index of the pixel in the coding unit when the pixel in the coding unit has a different run type” (not copy above run).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 21, 26-27, 29, and 34-35, 37-39, 42, 44, and 46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (US 2018/0288415 A1) in view of Haase et al. (US 2021/0029360 A1) and Chuang et al. (US 2019/0116380 A1).
Regarding Claims 21, 29, and 37, Li discloses a method of decoding video data, the method comprising: receiving, from a bitstream, video data corresponding to a coding unit encoded in a palette mode [Li: Abstract: Approaches to robust encoding and decoding of escape-coded pixels in a palette mode are described. For example, sample values of escape-coded pixels in palette mode are encoded/decoded using a binarization process that depends on a constant value of quantization parameter (“QP”) for the sample values. Or, as another example, sample values of escape-coded pixels in palette mode are encoded/decoded using a binarization process that depends on sample depth for the sample values. Or, as still another example, sample values of escape-coded pixels in palette mode are encoded/decoding using a binarization process that depends on some other fixed rule. In example implementations, these approaches avoid dependencies on unit-level QP values when parsing the sample values of escape-coded pixels, which can make encoding/decoding more robust to data loss]; determining a 5th order Exp-Golomb binarization scheme associated with a first binarization parameter [Li: ¶ [0066]: As shown in FIGS. 4a and 4b, the header formatter/entropy coder (490) formats and/or entropy codes the general control data (422), quantized transform coefficient data (432) (or, for escape mode of palette mode, quantized sample values), intra prediction data (442), motion data (452), palette mode data (482), and filter control data (462). Thus, the entropy coder of the video encoder (340) compresses quantized transform coefficient values as well as certain side information (e.g., … parameter choices]decoding, from the video data, a first codeword for an escape sample within the coding unit [Li: Abstract]; and obtaining a value corresponding to the first codeword for the escape sample within the coding unit by using the 5th order Exp-Golomb binarization scheme associated with a parameter [Li: ¶ [0162]: The media decoder determines (1710) a k.sup.th-order Exponential-Golomb binarization, which depends on an input value k. The media decoder entropy decodes (1720) a string of one or more binary values for the quantized sample value. The entropy decoding uses the k.sup.th-order Exponential-Golomb binarization. Then, the media decoder inverse quantizes (1730) the quantized sample value using a quantization step size based on a slice-level QP for the slice, unit-level QP for the unit, or other QP].
Li may not explicitly disclose receiving a run copy flag indicating whether a pixel in the coding unit has a same run type as a previously scanned pixel; receiving a flag associated with a palette index of the pixel in the coding unit when the pixel in the coding unit has a different run type from the previously scanned pixel; determining a binarization scheme associated with a first binarization parameter using a look-up table according to one or more syntax elements.
However, Haase discloses determining a first binarization parameter using a look-up table according to one or more syntax elements [Haase: ¶ [0138]: A look-up table may be used in order to map the sum of absolute values of the quantization levels of the one or more previously encoded/decoded transform coefficients within the local template 132 onto the binarization parameter]; and obtaining a value corresponding to the first codeword for the escape sample within the coding unit by using the 5th order Exp-Golomb binarization scheme associated with the first binarization parameter [Haase: ¶ [0179]: In HEVC, the order of the Exponential-Golomb code is equal to k+1. The transition between the codes are referred to as binarization bounds and both bounds, i.e., the transition from truncated Unary to Rice and the transition from Rice to Exponential-Golomb, are adaptive depending on the number of coded syntax elements for the first bound and the Rice parameter k for the second bound].
Haase may not explicitly disclose receiving a run copy flag indicating whether a pixel in the coding unit has a same run type as a previously scanned pixel; receiving a flag associated with a palette index of the pixel in the coding unit when the pixel in the coding unit has a different run type from the previously scanned pixel.
However, Chuang discloses receiving a run copy flag indicating whether a pixel in the coding unit has a same run type as a previously scanned pixel; receiving a flag associated with a palette index of the pixel in the coding unit when the pixel in the coding unit has a different run type from the previously scanned pixel [Chuang: ¶ [0026]: For a run of indices in the index map, there are several elements that need to be signaled, including: [0027] 1) Run type: it is either a copy above run or a copy index run. [0028] 2) Palette index: it is used to signal which index is used for this run in a copy index run. [0029] 3) Run length: it represents the length of this run for both copy above and copy index type].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the binarization parameter of Haase with the binarization signaling of Li as well as the signaling of Chuang in order to make the coding more robust and efficient.
Regarding Claims 26, 34, and 38, Li in view of Haase and Chuang disclose(s) all the limitations of Claims 21, 29, and 37, respectively, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Furthermore, Li in view of Haase and Chuang discloses wherein the one or more syntax elements are signaled at one level selected from the group consisting of sequence, picture, slice, tile, coding tree unit (CTU), coding unit (CU), transform unit (TU), and transform block (TB) [Li: ¶ [0051]].
Regarding Claims 27, 35, and 39, Li in view of Haase and Chuang disclose(s) all the limitations of Claims 21, 29, and 37, respectively, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Furthermore, Li in view of Haase and Chuang discloses wherein the one or more syntax elements are signaled in the bitstream [Li: ¶ [0002]].
Regarding Claims 42, 44, and 46, Li in view of Haase and Chuang disclose(s) all the limitations of Claims 41, 43, and 45, respectively, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Furthermore, Li in view of Haase and Chuang discloses wherein the one or more syntax elements include quantization parameter (QP) values and threshold values [Haase: ¶ [0205]: In an embodiment concerning binarization, the first binarization bound 164 is variable for each transform block depending on the block size, or the color component, or the prediction mode, or the selected transforms. In this configuration, the first bound may be five when another transform mode that involves a signaling in the bitstream].
Conclusion
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 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN R MESSMORE whose telephone number is (571)272-2773. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5 EST/EDT.
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, Chris Kelley can be reached at 571-272-7331. 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.
/JONATHAN R MESSMORE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482