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 .
Status of Claims
This office action is in response to the application filed on 08/19/2026. Claims 3 and 21 have been canceled. Claim 22 newly added. Claims 1-2, 4-20, and 22 are pending for examination.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 and corresponding system and computer-implemented method claims 11 and 18, respectively, are objected to as depending from a rejected base claim. However, these claims would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Amendments/Arguments
Applicant’s Amendment filed on August 19, 2024, has been entered and made of record.
Applicant's arguments, as set forth in the Remarks on pages 8-9, filed on August 19, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 9, and 16 under 35 USC § 103 have been considered. Applicant argues that He merely determines a film grain synthesis block size based on a static picture resolution and does not disclose a scaling transform applied to decoded video data or generation of film grain noise data based on such scaling transform.
Regarding the claimed “scaling transform used to scale the resolution of the decoded video data,” under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the Examiner interprets the recited scaling transform as encompassing a scaling/resampling operation, such as up-sampling or down-sampling, that changes the spatial resolution of the decoded video data from one resolution to another.
The Examiner acknowledges that He does not expressly disclose the recited scaling transform. However, Francois et al. (US-20230379482-A1) teaches that a reconstructed picture may need to be up-sampled or down-sampled to a different spatial resolution (¶[0228]) and that the reconstructed picture is resampled as a function of the determined resampling spatial resolution (¶[0229]). Francois expressly provides that the terms “reconstructed” and “decoded” may be used interchangeably (¶[0052]). Francois further teaches applying post-filtering to the picture at the resulting spatial resolution (¶¶[0231]–[0232]) and identifies film-grain synthesis as post-filtering in which film grain is based on a noise model with associated parameters and is preferably derived and added at the display or rendering resolution (¶[0007]).
Therefore, Applicant’s argument directed to He alone does not address the combined teachings of He and Francois. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify He in view of Francois such that the film grain noise data is generated in accordance with the scaling/resampling of the decoded video data to provide film grain appropriate for the scaled spatial resolution. Accordingly, Applicant’s argument has been considered in view of the modified rejection and the additional teachings of Francois.
Furthermore, additional references, such as WO 2013/011485 A2, describe adjusting film grain characteristics, including frequency-related properties, in accordance with scaling and resolution variations of the video signal, which is consistent with the subject matter recited in dependent claim 4.
In view of the foregoing, dependent claim 4 recites a further narrowing feature relative to claim 1, and Applicant may wish to consider incorporating that limitation into independent claim 1.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 7-9, 14-16, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balram et al. (US-9100647-B1) hereinafter “Balram” in view of He et al. (US-2023/0179805-A1) hereinafter “He” further in view of (US-20230379482-A1) Francois et al (Francois).
Regarding claim 1 Balram-He-Francois
Balram discloses 1. (Previously Presented) A computing device, comprising:
at least one circuit (Balram, Fig. 1, “Video processing circuitry 120”, configured to:
prior to applying film grain noise data to decoded video data, scale a resolution of (Balram, See Fig. 5, Module 540 “Image scaling, Module 520 “Down sampling”.” and, Module 550 “upsampling” Col. 6 lines 40-48 “…Module 540 can be used to scale image frames within the video signal and provide frame rate conversion. Module 550 can be used to perform … performing up-sampling duties.” decoded video data; (Balram, Fig. 1, 110 “Digital Video Source” Col. 3 lines 6-8 “The decoded digital video stream (in digital format) is input to video processing circuitry 120)
. . .; and
after scaling the resolution of the decoded video data, (Col. 6, lines 45-46 “Module 540 can be used to scale image frames within the video signal…” See that Fig. 5, 540 “Image Scaling”
apply the film grain noise data to the scaled video data. (See Fig. 5, 560 “Film grain addition” Col. 6 lines 47-49 “Film grain generation can be performed in Module 560 such that the film grain is added to the video signal being processed.”).
Balram does not explicitly disclose
generate film grain noise data based on a scaling transform used to scale the resolution of the decoded video data based on one or more parameters included with encoded video data from which the decoded video data is generated;
However, in the same field of endeavor He teaches a portion of the above limitation, namely, generating film grain noise data based on resolution-related information associated with
the decoded video data and based on one or more parameters included with encoded video data from which the decoded video data is generated; (He, ¶[0094], ¶[0095],¶[0103] ¶[0085]). In particular, He teaches a “resolution adaptive film grain synthesis block size ” determined based on picture resolution (¶[0094]) and teaches that film grain synthesis parameters, including block size, vary depending on the overall picture resolution (¶[0095]). He further teaches adjusting film grain synthesis parameters according to resolution (¶[0103]) and providing film grain characteristics via SEI messages included with encoded video data and used during decoding. (¶[0085])
Francois further teaches scaling the resolution of decoded video data and generating film grain noise data based on the scaling thereof. In particular, Francois teaches that decoded pictures may be resampled to adjust the output images to display constraints (¶[0084]). Francois further teaches determining that a reconstructed/decoded picture is to be up-sampled or down-sampled to a different spatial resolution (¶[0228]), resampling the reconstructed picture as a function of the determined resampling spatial resolution (¶[0229]), and subsequently applying post-filtering to the resampled picture at the second spatial resolution (¶¶[0231]–[0232]). Francois expressly identifies film-grain synthesis as such post-filtering and teaches that film grain is based on a noise model with associated parameters and is preferably derived and added at the display or rendering resolution (¶[0007]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify He to generate the film grain noise data based on the scaling/resampling of the decoded video data as taught by Francois, such that the film grain is generated and applied at the scaled display or rendering resolution, thereby improving the effectiveness of the synthesized film grain at the scaled resolution.
Note: The motivation that was utilized in the rejection of claim 1 applies equally as well to claims 2, 7-9, 14-16, and 20.
Regarding claim 2 Balram-He-Francois
Balram-He-Francois discloses 2. (Previously Presented) The computing device of claim 1,
wherein the at least one circuit (See Fig. 5, 560 “Film grain addition”) is further configured to:
receive the encoded video data and the one or more parameters. (He, [0140] “The destination device may receive the encoded video data to be decoded…”[0031] “A film grain characteristics (FGC) supplemental enhancement information (SEI) message is specified … to provide a decoder with a parameterized model for film grain synthesis…the decoder may use the FGC SEI message…”)
Regarding claim 3 Canceled
Regarding claim 21 Canceled
Regarding claim 7 Balram-He-Francois
Balram-He-Francois discloses 7. (Previously Presented) The computing device of claim 1,
wherein the at least one circuit is further (Balram, Fig. 1, “Film grain generator 130” the film grain noise application circuitry is configured to:
generate decimated film grain noise data by decimating the film grain noise data in response to downscaling of the decoded video data; (Balram, Col. 4, lines 44-46 “…HPF 220 receives a white noise input and filters out some of the low-frequencies components,….”i.e., thereby disseminating the grain noise data in response to downscaling ) and
apply the decimated film grain noise data to the scaled video data. (Balram, See Fig. 5, 560 “Film grain addition” Col. 6 lines 47-49 “Film grain generation can be performed in Module 560 such that the film grain is added to the video signal being processed.”)
Regarding claim 8 Balram-He-Francois
Balram-He-Francois discloses 8. (Previously Presented) The computing device of claim 7,
wherein the at least one circuit is further (Balram, Fig. 1, “Film grain generator 130” Col. 3. lines 48-49 “Film grain generator 130 includes white noise generator 210, two-dimensional high pass filter 220, ….”) configured to decimate the film grain noise data by at least one of:
down sampling the film grain noise data with a two-dimensional filter; or fitting the film grain noise data to a curve. (Balram, Col. 4, lines 41-46 “The purpose of HPF 220 is merely to filter out some of the low-frequency (i.e., larger) pieces of film grain which can be less visually pleasing than the smaller pieces. Because HPF 220 receives a white noise input and filters out some of the lower frequencies,…” i.e., downsampling the film grain noise data using the two-domination high-pass filter 220, which removes low-frequency (i.e., larger) components of the grain signal consistent with dissemination )
Regarding claim 9-14-15
A system comprising: at least one physical processor is a common feature in the claims 9, 14, and 15, and each of these claims lists all the same elements as 1, 7, and 8 respectively. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claims 1,7, and 8 applies equally as well to claims 9, 14, and 15 respectively. Furthermore, regarding the claim limitation of “A system comprising: at least one physical processor; and physical memory comprising computer-executable instructions that, when executed by the at least one physical processor, cause the at least one physical processor to:” (Balram, Col. 6 lines 63-67, Col. 7 lines 1-4 “FIG. 6A, the present invention can be implemented in a hard disk drive 600. The present invention may be implemented as part of the signal processing and/or control circuits, which are generally identified in FIG. 6A at 602. In some implementations, the signal processing and/or control circuit 602 and/or other circuits (not shown) in the HDD 600 may process data, perform coding and/or encryption, perform calculations, and/or format data that is output to and/or received from a magnetic storage medium 606. See fig. 6A”)
Regarding claim 16, 17 and 20
A computer-implemented method is a common feature in the claims 16, 17, and 20, and each of these claims lists the same elements of claims 1, 10, and 7 respectively, but in method form rather than computing device. Therefore, the supporting rationale of the rejection to claims 1,10, and 7 applies equally as well to claims 16, 17, and 20 respectively. Furthermore, regarding the claim limitation of a least one processor (Balram, Col. 9 lines 44-47 , “The disclosed circuits, components, and methods can be implemented using means such as digital circuitry, analog circuitry, and/or a processor architecture with programmable instructions.”)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 5, 10, 12, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balram-He-Francois in view of (WO-2023122039-A1) Kadu H (Kadu) hereinafter “Kadu”
Regarding claim 5 Balram-He-Francois-Kadu
Regarding claims 5, 12 and 19, Balram-He-Francois discloses the invention substantially as claimed. But Balram-He-Francois does not explicitly disclose the computing device of claim 1, wherein the at least one circuit is further configured to: generate interpolated film grain noise data by interpolating the film grain noise data in response to upscaling of the decoded video data; and apply the interpolated film grain noise data to the scaled video data.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kadu discloses the computing device of claim 1, wherein the film grain noise application circuitry is configured to: generate interpolated film grain noise data by interpolating the film grain noise data in response to upscaling of the decoded video data; (Kadu, “The processor: accesses measured viewing parameters (312) for the target display; based on the measured viewing parameters, interpolates (340) parameters from the two or more sets of input film grain information to generate output film grain parameters; generates output film noise based at least on the output film grain parameters; decodes the input video bitstream to generate decoded video pictures; and blends (320) the output film noise with the decoded video pictures to generate output video pictures on the target display and apply the interpolated film grain noise data to the scaled video data ( Kadu [0057]. “The user/decoder can choose the category and apply interpolation techniques to generate the FG model that fits best its actual viewing condition.” [0064] “applies the interpolated parameters to perform film-grain synthesis and blending.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the teachings of Balram with Kadu to create the system of Balram as outlined above in order to have adjusts one or more of the input film grain parameters based on the measured viewing parameters and the reference viewing parameters to generate adjusted film grain parameters as suggested by Kadu. The reasoning being is that “to generate updated film-grain parameters (220) to be used for film-grain synthesis and blending.” (Kadu, [0035]).
Regarding claim 10 Balram-He-Francois-Kadu
Balram-He-Francois discloses claim 10. (Previously Presented) The system of claim 9,
wherein the computer-executable instructions cause the at least one physical processor to generate the film grain noise data and apply the film grain noise data to the scaled video data at least in part by: (Balram, Col. 6 lines 63-67, Col. 7 lines 1-4 “FIG. 6A, the present invention can be implemented in a hard disk drive 600. The present invention may be implemented as part of the signal processing and/or control circuits, which are generally identified in FIG. 6A at 602. In some implementations, the signal processing and/or control circuit 602 and/or other circuits (not shown) in the HDD 600 may process data, perform coding and/or encryption, perform calculations, and/or format data that is output to and/or received from a magnetic storage medium 606. See fig. 6A”)
receiving the encoded video data and the one or more parameters (He, [0140] “The destination device may receive the encoded video data to be decoded…”[0031] “A film grain characteristics (FGC) supplemental enhancement information (SEI) message is specified … to provide a decoder with a parameterized model for film grain synthesis…the decoder may use the FGC SEI message…”). . .; and
applying the adjusted film grain noise data to the scaled video data. (See Fig. 5, 560 “Film grain addition” Col. 6 lines 47-49 “Film grain generation can be performed in Module 560 such that the film grain is added to the video signal being processed.”).
Balram-He-Francois does not explicitly disclose
generating adjusted film grain noise data based on a scaling factor used to generate the scaled video data and the one or more parameters; and applying the adjusted film grain noise data to the scaled video data.
However, in the same field of endeavor Kadu discloses more explicitly the following:
generating adjusted film grain noise data based on a scaling factor used to generate the scaled video data and the one or more parameters; and applying the adjusted film grain noise data to the scaled video data. ; (Kadu, [0019] “The processor: parses the input film grain information to generate input film grain parameters (301) for generating film noise for a target display; accesses reference viewing parameters for a reference display; adjusts (315) one or more of the input film grain parameters based on the measured viewing parameters and the reference viewing parameters to generate adjusted film grain parameters;”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the teachings of Balram with Kadu to create the system of Balram as outlined above in order to have adjusts one or more of the input film grain parameters based on the measured viewing parameters and the reference viewing parameters to generate adjusted film grain parameters as suggested by Kadu. The reasoning being is that “to generate updated film-grain parameters (220) to be used for film-grain synthesis and blending.” (Kadu, 0035).
Note: The motivation that was utilized in the rejection of claim 10, applies equally as well to claim 17.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 6 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balram-He-Francois-Kadu and further in view of (US- 20240323453-A1), Radosavljevic et al (Radosavljevic).
Regarding claim 6 Balram-He-Francois-Kadu-Radosavljevic
Regarding claims 6 and 13, Balram-He-Francois-Kadu discloses the invention substantially as claimed in claim 5. However, Balram-He-Francois-Kadu does not explicitly disclose the computing device of claim 6, wherein the at least one circuit is further configured to interpolate the film grain noise data by at least one of: up sampling the film grain noise data with a two-dimensional filter; or fitting the film grain noise data to a curve.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Radosavljevic discloses the computing device of claim 5, wherein the film grain noise application circuitry is configured to interpolate the film grain noise data by at least one of: up sampling the film grain noise data with a two-dimensional filter; or fitting the film grain noise data to a curve. (Radosavljevic, [0018] “FIG. 3 illustrates a piece wise constant scaling function for film grain in a video coding/decoding framework.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the teachings Balram with Radosavljevic to
to create the system of Balram-Radosavljevic as outlined above in order to interpolate the film grain noise data by at least one of: up sampling the film grain noise data with a two-dimensional filter; or fitting the film grain noise data to a curve as suggested by Radosavljevic.
The reasoning is that “the film grain analysis and parameter estimation advantageously provide to the synthesis part information about the film grain so the synthesizer can produce film grain samples that simulate the appearance of the original film grain in the decoder.” (Radosavljevic, [0071])
Note: The motivation that was utilized in the rejection of claim 6, applies equally as well to claim 13.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balram-He-Francois in view of (US-20230308667-A1) Gadgil et al. (Gadgil)
Regarding claim 22 Balram-He-Francois-Gadgil
Balram-He-Francois discloses 22. (New) The computing device of claim 1, wherein the at least one circuit is further configured to generate the film grain noise data by adjusting one or more film grain synthesis parameters based on the scaling transform used to scale the resolution of the decoded video data. (He further teaches adjusting one or more film grain synthesis parameters according to picture resolution (He, ¶¶[0094]–[0095]). In particular, He teaches a resolution-adaptive film grain synthesis block size determined based on picture resolution and that the film grain synthesis parameters, including block size, vary depending on the overall picture resolution.
Gadgil further teaches adapting such film grain synthesis parameters in accordance with chang in spatial resolution. Gadgil teaches resizing images to respective target spatial resolutions and, for each resized spatial resolution, adjusting film grain parameters and injecting film grain noise using the adjusted parameters (Gadgil, ¶[0091]). Gadgil further teaches adjusting film grain synthesis parameters, including starting and ending frequencies, according to image spatial resolution such that smaller film grains may be used for smaller spatial resolutions (¶[0186]), and individually setting optimal film grain settings for a respective spatial resolution (¶[0187]).)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify He in view of Gadgil to adjust one or more film grain synthesis parameters based on the scaling used to obtain the target spatial resolution, because Gadgil teaches that film grain parameters are selected and adjusted according to the resized spatial resolution, including adapting film grain frequencies and grain size for different resolutions. Such a modification would have predictably provided film grain characteristics better matched to the scaled video resolution, thereby improving the visual consistency and effectiveness of the synthesized film grain after scaling.
Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
MCCARTHY et al. US-20240179330-A1
ROSSATO LUCA WO-2013011495-A
Conclusion.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASTEWAYE GETTU ZEWEDE whose telephone number is (703)756-1441. The examiner can normally be reached Mo-Fr 8:30 am to 5:30 pm.
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 on (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.upto.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.
/ASTEWAYE GETTU ZEWEDE/Examiner, Art Unit 2481 /WILLIAM C VAUGHN JR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2481
Prosecution Insights