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 12/05/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Response to the first reason:
Tsou inherently discloses in figure 4, S344 that the scaling factor is not equal to 1, comparing to figure 4, S345 ([0027] If sub-picture scaling is prohibited, a second horizontal scaling factor (SF2h) and a second vertical scaling factor (SF2v) of the second scaling factor are both 1 (S345)), therefore, the range includes values greater than 1.
GEORGE in [0195] discloses that for higher picture resolutions an additional step size might be useful to scale width and height of the CA partitions, therefore, inherently, the scale factor is greater than 1, to obtain higher picture resolutions.
Response to the second reason:
A scaling factor, by definition, inherently involves the operation of product/multiplication.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-10, 13-19, 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DRUGEON et al. (US 20220408100 A1) in view of Tsou et al. (US 20070292113 A1) and GEORGE et al. (US 20210127111 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 10, 13. DRUGEON discloses A method for decoding a position and a size for a subpicture (SP) in a picture from a bitstream (abstract, derives a size of a subpicture included in a picture using a size of the picture, a position of the subpicture; figure 67), the method comprising:
decoding a coding tree unit (CTU) size from a first syntax element (S1) in the bitstream ([0785] variable CTUsize indicating the width and height of the CTU, sps_log 2_ctu_size_minus5 is included in the syntax in the SPS);
deriving a position value for the subpicture (SP), wherein deriving the position value comprises: i) obtaining a position value based on information in the bitstream ([0748] subpic_ctu_top_left_x[i] indicates the horizontal position of the CTU located at the upper-left of an i-th subpicture, using a CTB size unit; [0750] subpic_ctu_top_left_y[i] indicates the vertical position of the CTU located at the upper-left of the i-th subpicture, using the CTB size unit); and
deriving a size of the subpicture based on the position value (abstract, derives a size of a subpicture included in a picture using a size of the picture, a position of the subpicture).
Tsou in view of GEORGE discloses
obtaining a scale factor value (F) wherein the scale factor value (F) is greater than 1 (Tsou figure 2, S34; Tsou figure 4, S344, [0023] generate a second scaling factor according to the size of the output picture, the size of the DSP and a sub-picture aspect ratio; GEORGE [0195] For higher picture resolutions an additional step size might be useful to scale width and height of the CA partitions (inherently, the scale factor is greater than 1));
deriving a scaled position value for the subpicture (SP), wherein deriving the scaled position value comprises: i) obtaining a position value based on first information in the bitstream and ii) setting the scaled position value equal to the product of the position value and the obtained scale factor (F) (figure 2, S35; [0010], [0023], [0028] sets the position of the decoded sub-picture according to the second scaling factor);
deriving a scaled initial size value for the subpicture (SP), wherein deriving the scaled initial size value for the subpicture (SP) comprises: i) obtaining a size value based on second information in the bitstream and ii) setting the scaled initial size value for the subpicture (SP) equal to the product of the size value, which is based on the second information in the bitstream, and the obtained scale factor (F) (figure 5, S354, claim 18 and [0029] inherently discloses deriving a size of the decoded subpicture. In order to determine whether the decoded sub-picture (DSP) exceeds the border of the picture, the size of the DSP needs to be derived first; figure 2, S35 and [0028] discloses that the size and the position of the DSP is set according to the second scaling factor, the DV and the DSP are combined. And then in [0029] Tsou discloses that the flow of combining the DV and the DSP is depicted in FIG. 5. Hence, the DSP in figure 5 and [0029] is the scaled DSP in figure 2 and [0028]).
DRUGEON in view of Tsou discloses
deriving a size of the subpicture based on: (i) the scaled position value, (ii) the scaled initial size value, and (iii) a picture size value (DRUGEON [0792]-[0794]; Tsou figure 5, S354; claim 18, the decoded sub-picture is prevented from exceeding the border of the output picture).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the inventions of DRUGEON, Tsou and GEORGE, to apply scaling in subpictures, in order to completely display the subpictures (Tsou [0007]).
GEORGE discloses decoding a scale factor value (F) from a syntax element (S2) in a bitstream ([0092] embodiments provide a more flexible spatial region definition concept, which may, e.g., be referred to as Coding Area (CA). This is an advantageous concept for the spatial subdivision of pictures into rectangular regions; [0195] For higher picture resolutions an additional step size might be useful to scale width and height of the CA partitions; [0197]-[0200] coding_area_scaling_factor_minus1 scaling factor used to scale CA position and size parameters; [0217]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the inventions of DRUGEON and Tsou according to the invention of GEORGE, to signal the scale factor value as a syntax element in the bitstream, in order to reduce computational overhead.
Regarding claims 2, 14. Tsou discloses The method of claim 1, wherein:
i) the position value is a horizontal position value (h), the scaled position value is a scaled horizontal position value (H), where H=h×F, and the size of the subpicture is a width of the subpicture (Wsp) (figure 2, S35; [0010], [0023], [0028] sets the position of the decoded sub-picture according to the second scaling factor) or
ii) the position value is a vertical position value (v), the scaled position value is a scaled vertical position value (V), where V=v×F, and the size of the subpicture is a height of the subpicture (Hsp) (figure 2, S35; [0010], [0023], [0028] sets the position of the decoded sub-picture according to the second scaling factor).
The same motivation has been stated in claim 1.
Regarding claims 3, 15. DRUGEON in view of Tsou discloses the amended claims, similar rejection is as cited in the previous office action:
DRUGEON in view of Tsou discloses The method of claim 1, wherein
the position value is a horizontal position value (h), the scaled position value is a scaled horizontal position value (H), where H=h×F, and the size of the subpicture is a width of the subpicture (Wsp) (Tsou figure 2, S35; [0010], [0023], [0028] sets the position of the decoded sub-picture according to the second scaling factor), and
deriving Wsp based on H comprises:
i) obtaining a first width value (w1) based on information in the bitstream;
ii) obtaining an initial width value (Iw), where Iw=(w1)×(F);
iii) comparing (Iw+H) with Pw, where Pw specifies the width of the picture; and
iv) setting Wsp equal to (Pw−H) if (Iw+H>Pw), otherwise setting Wsp equal to Iw (DRUGEON [0792]-[0794]; Tsou figure 5, S354; claim 18, the decoded sub-picture is prevented from exceeding the border of the output picture).
The same motivation has been stated in claim 1.
Regarding claims 4, 16. DRUGEON in view of Tsou discloses the amended claims, similar rejection is as cited in the previous office action:
DRUGEON in view of Tsou discloses The method of claim 1, wherein
the position value is a vertical position value (v), the scaled position value is a scaled vertical position value (V), where V=v×F, and the size of the subpicture is a height of the subpicture (Hsp) (Tsou figure 2, S35; [0010], [0023], [0028] sets the position of the decoded sub-picture according to the second scaling factor), and
deriving Hsp based on V comprises:
i) obtaining a first height value (h1) based on information in the bitstream;
ii) obtaining an initial height value (Ih), where Ih=(h1)×(F);
iii) comparing (Ih+V) with Ph, where Ph specifies the height of the picture; and
iv) setting Hsp equal to (Ph−V) if (Ih+V>Ph), otherwise setting Hsp equal to Ih (DRUGEON [0795]-[0798]; Tsou figure 5, S354; claim 18, the decoded sub-picture is prevented from exceeding the border of the output picture).
The same motivation has been stated in claim 1.
Regarding claims 5, 17. DRUGEON in view of Tsou discloses The method of claim 3, wherein obtaining the horizontal position value (h) based on information in the bitstream comprises:
decoding a syntax element S4 in the bitstream to obtain h, wherein the value of the syntax element S4 represents a horizontal position in number of unit sizes (DRUGEON [0141] the position of the subpicture may be a position of a coding tree unit (CTU) located at an upper left of the subpicture, and the position of the CTU may be indicated by an order of the CTU among CTUs arranged sequentially from left of the picture in a horizontal direction; DRUGEON [0748] subpic_ctu_top_left_x[i] indicates the horizontal position of the CTU located at the upper-left of an i-th subpicture, using a CTB size unit; Tsou figure 2, S35; [0010], [0023], [0028] sets the position of the decoded sub-picture according to the second scaling factor).
The same motivation has been stated in claim 1.
Regarding claim 6, 18. DRUGEON discloses The method of claims 4, wherein obtaining the vertical position value (v) based on information in the bitstream comprises:
decoding a syntax element S5 in the bitstream to obtain v, wherein the value of the syntax element S5 represents a vertical position in number of unit sizes ([0141] the position of the subpicture may be a position of a coding tree unit (CTU) located at an upper left of the subpicture, and the position of the CTU may be indicated by an order of the CTU among CTUs arranged sequentially from left of the picture in a horizontal direction (same applied to a vertical direction); [0750] subpic_ctu_top_left_y[i] indicates the vertical position of the CTU located at the upper-left of the i-th subpicture, using the CTB size unit).
Regarding claims 7, 19. DRUGEON discloses The method of claim 1, wherein two separate scale factor values F1 and F2 having different values are obtained, wherein
one scale factor value F1 is used as scale factor value F for deriving at least one of a horizontal position of the subpicture and a width of the subpicture, and
the other scale factor value F2 is used as scale factor value F for deriving at least one of a vertical position of the subpicture and a height of the subpicture ([0751] subpic_width_minus1[i] in FIG. 98 indicates the width of the i-th subpicture. In addition, subpic_heigth_minus1[i] in FIG. 98 indicates the height of the i-th subpicture).
Regarding claim 8. DRUGEON discloses The method of claim 1, wherein S1 is decoded from a sequence parameter set ([0743]; [0744] store, into an SPS or a PPS of a sub-bitstream, a value which is obtained by rewriting a sequence parameter set (SPS) or a picture parameter set (PPS) of the bitstream of the picture; [0783] similarly to the case of the SPS, the PPS stores information regarding (i) the picture size of the picture, (ii) the sizes and positions of the subpictures included in the picture, and (iii) the CTU size used to encode the picture; [0785] variable CTUsize indicating the width and height of the CTU, sps_log 2_ctu_size_minus5 is included in the syntax in the SPS).
Regarding claim 9. DRUGEON discloses The method of claim 1, wherein S1 is decoded from a picture parameter set, a picture header, a slice header, or from a decoding capability information ([0229]-[0230] a picture may include a picture header; a slice includes a slice header; [0744] store, into an SPS or a PPS of a sub-bitstream, a value which is obtained by rewriting a sequence parameter set (SPS) or a picture parameter set (PPS) of the bitstream of the picture; [0783] the PPS stores information regarding (i) the picture size of the picture, (ii) the sizes and positions of the subpictures included in the picture, and (iii) the CTU size used to encode the picture).
Regarding claim 21. The same analysis has been stated in claims 8 and 9.
Regarding claim 22. (New) DRUGEON in view of Tsou discloses The apparatus of claim 13, wherein deriving the size of the subpicture based on the scaled position value comprises:
obtaining a first size value (s1) (Tsou figure 2, S34; figure 4, S344, [0023] generate a second scaling factor according to the size of the output picture, the size of the DSP and a sub-picture aspect ratio; Tsou figure 2, S35 and [0028] the size and the position of the DSP is set according to the second scaling factor) based on information in the bitstream (DRUGEON [0751] the size of the subpicture includes a width of the subpicture and a height of the subpicture. Specifically, subpic_width_minus1[i] in FIG. 98 indicates the width of the i-th subpicture. In addition, subpic_heigth_minus1[i] in FIG. 98 indicates the height of the i-th subpicture; Tsou figure 2, S34; figure 4, S344, [0023] generate a second scaling factor according to the size of the output picture, the size of the DSP and a sub-picture aspect ratio);
obtaining a decision value (D), where D =s1+ SPV, where SPV is the scaled position value (DRUGEON [0792]-[0798] (subpic_top_left_x[idx]+subpic_width_minus1[idx]+1)×CTUsize, (subpic_top_left_y[idx]+subpic_height_minus1[idx]+1)×CTUsize; Tsou figure 5, S354, claim 18 and [0029] inherently in order to determine whether the decoded sub-picture (DSP) exceeds the border of the picture, the size of the DSP needs to be derived first, then the position of the DSP needs to be added to it to compare with the border of the picture, wherein both the size and the position of the DSP are the scaled ones);
setting the size of the subpicture based on the decision value (D) (DRUGEON [0792]-[0798]; Tsou figure 5, S354, claim 18 and [0029]).
The same motivation has been stated in claim 1.
Regarding claim 23. The same analysis has been stated in claims 1 and 3.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: In “decoding a scale factor value (F) from second first syntax element (S2) in the bitstream”, “first” should be deleted. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 23 is objected to because of the following informalities: “if it is determined that the value of ((h x F) + (w x F)) is greater than Pw, then setting the width of the subpicture equal to Pw” should be “and if it is determined that the value of ((h x F) + (w x F)) is greater than Pw, then setting the width of the subpicture equal to (Pw - (h x F))”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 XIAOLAN XU whose telephone number is (571)270-7580. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. to Fri. 9am-5pm.
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, SATH V. PERUNGAVOOR can be reached on (571) 272-7455. 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.
/XIAOLAN XU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488