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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 April 20, 2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on April 20, 2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
Applicant(s) Response to Official Action
The response filed on April 20, 2026 has been entered and made of record. Claims 1, 8, 15 and 22 have been amended. Claims 6, 13, 20 and 27 have been cancelled. Claims 3, 4, 7, 10, 11, 14, 17, 18, 21, 24, 25 and 28 – 32 were previously cancelled. Accordingly, Claims 1, 2, 5, 8, 9, 12, 15, 16, 19, 22, 23 and 26 are currently pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments see pages 8 – 10 with respect to the rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ANONYMOUS, "Information Technology - MPEG Systems Technologies - Part 11: Energy - Efficient Media Consumption (Green Metadata)", International Organization for Standardization & International Electrotechnical Commission (ISO/IEC), ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11, Final Draft International Standard ISO/IEC 23001-11, 26 January 2018, 64 pages (See IDS filed on August 3, 2023) and in view of XU et al. (US 2022/0232224 A1) has been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of the newly discovered reference to wherein at least one encoding tool or feature is associated to an information representative of a first complexity metric of the set depending on at least one of: a portion of areas covered by inter bi-predicted blocks in the at least one subset of pictures representative of the period of the video data using 4x4 granularity; a portion of areas using the geometric partitioning mode in the at least one subset of pictures representative of the period of the video data using 4x4 granularity; a portion of areas using the bi-directional optical flow mode in the at least one subset of pictures representative of the period of the video data using 4x4 granularity; and a portion of ALF filtered blocks in the at least one subset of pictures representative of the period of the video data using 4x4 granularity, as claimed in the amended Claims 1, 8, 15 and 22.
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 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.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 8, 9, 12, 15, 16, 19, 22, 23 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ANONYMOUS, "Information Technology - MPEG Systems Technologies - Part 11: Energy - Efficient Media Consumption (Green Metadata)", International Organization for Standardization & International Electrotechnical Commission (ISO/IEC), ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11, Final Draft International Standard ISO/IEC 23001-11, 26 January 2018, 64 pages (See IDS filed on August 3, 2023) referred to as IS0/IEC 23001-11 hereinafter, and in view of Ma et al. (US 2014/0376618 A1) referred to as Ma hereinafter.
Regarding Claim 1, IS0/IEC 23001-11 teaches a method (Fig. 1, Section 1 Scope, metadata for energy-efficient decoding, encoding (i.e. encoding tools), presentation, and selection of media, complexity metrics metadata to vary operating frequency and thus reduce decoder power consumption) comprising:
signaling, in a data structure, metadata (Page 11, Section 5.2.3 signaling, SEI messages (i.e. data structure) can be used to signal Green Metadata (i.e. signaling metadata) in an AVC or HEVC stream) representative of a set of complexity metrics (Page 11, Section 5.2.4.1 and 5.2.4.2, period_type specifies the type of upcoming period over which the four complexity metrics (i.e. set of complexity metrics) are applicable and is defined in the following table) of encoding tools, features or a combination thereof implemented (Page 8, Section 5.2.2, syntax (i.e. encoding tools) for AVC bitstream using complexity metrics, such as portion six tap filtering, portion_non_zero_8x8_blocks, portion_alpha_point_deblocking_instances, first_mb_in_slice), to obtain video data representative of a sequence of pictures (page 7, Section 4.1, The bitstream (i.e. sequence of pictures see Section 3.1.3)) will be packetized and delivered to the receiver for decoding and presentation (i.e. obtain video data). At the receiver, the metadata extractor processes the packets and sends the Green Metadata to a power optimization module for efficient power control); and,
associating the data structure to the video data (Page 7, Section 4.2 Green Metadata extractor interprets (i.e. associating) the bitstream syntax information and sends it to the power optimization module in the Receiver) for at least one subset of pictures representative of a period of the video data (Page 11, Section 5.2.3 The message containing the CMs is transmitted at the start of an upcoming period (i.e. period of the video). The upcoming period is a specified time interval or a specified number of pictures (i.e. subset of pictures), the associated message will be transmitted with the first picture in the time interval or with the first picture in the specified number of pictures); wherein at least one encoding tool or feature is associated to an information representative (Page 11, Section 5.2.4.1, AVD semantics, Page 16, Section 5.2.4.2, HEVC semantics, The semantics of various terms are defined below. period_type (i.e. information representative of complexity metric) specifies the type of upcoming period over which the four complexity metrics are applicable and is defined in the following table) of a first complexity metric of the set depending on at least one of:
a portion of areas covered by inter bi-predicted blocks in the at least one subset of pictures representative of the period of the video data using 4x4 granularity;
a portion of areas using the geometric partitioning mode in the at least one subset of pictures representative of the period of the video data using 4x4 granularity;
a portion of areas using the bi-directional optical flow mode in the at least one subset of pictures representative of the period of the video data using 4x4 granularity; and
a portion of filtered blocks in the at least one subset of pictures representative of the period of the video data using 4x4 granularity (page 19-20, portion_blocks_a_c_d_n_filterings (i.e. filtered blocks) indicates the portion of prediction blocks whose luma samples position are located in sub-sample position a, c, d or n, as defined in Annex B of this document, in the specified period, NumBlocksACDNFilterings is the number of prediction blocks whose luma samples position are located in sub-sample position a, c, d or n, (i.e. subset of picture) as defined in Annex B of this document, in the specified period. It is derived from portion_blocks_a_c_d_n_filterings and Tota1Num4x4Blocks in the decoder. Also similarly for portion_blocks_h_b_filterings,portion_blocks_f_i_k_q_filterings,portion_blocks_j_filterings, and portion_blocks_e_g_p_r_filterings).
IS0/IEC 23001-11 does not specifically teach ALF filtered blocks. Therefore, IS0/IEC 23001-11 fails to explicitly teach a portion of ALF filtered blocks in the at least one subset of pictures representative of the period of the video data using 4x4 granularity.
However, Ma teaches a portion of ALF filtered blocks in the at least one subset of pictures representative of the period of the video data using 4x4 granularity (Par. [0066] The complexity of the buffer initialization is linearly related to the block numbers n.sub.total (4.times.4, or 8.times.8). The adaptive loop filter and de-ringing filter complexities are proportional to the number of blocks which require the filtering (i.e., n.sub.alf and n.sub.drf). C.sub.alf=k.sub.alfn.sub.alf (13) where n.sub.alf can be derived from the encoding process and used to compute the various complexity metrics for the segment. Correspondingly, k.sub.alf ).
References IS0/IEC 23001-11 and Ma are considered to be analogous art because they relate to video coding. Therefore, it would have been obvious that one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would recognize the advantage of further specifying ALF filtered blocks as suggested by Ma in the invention of IS0/IEC 23001-11 in order to estimate the complexity for next coming frame, GOP (group of picture), scene, and time interval, and this complexity is used to adjust the voltage and frequency for upcoming period (See Ma, Par. [0080]).
Regarding Claim 2, IS0/IEC 23001-11 in view of Ma teaches Claim 1. IS0/IEC 23001-11 further teaches wherein the data structure is a supplemental enhancement information (SEI) message ((Page 11, Section 5.2.3 signaling, SEI messages (i.e. data structure) can be used to signal Green Metadata in an AVC or HEVC stream).
Regarding Claim 5, IS0/IEC 23001-11 in view of Ma teaches Claim 1. IS0/IEC 23001-11 further teaches wherein the information representative of the first complexity metric is applicable to a single picture or to all pictures in decoding order up to a next picture containing an intra slice, or over a specified time interval, or over a specified number of pictures counted in decoding order, or to a single picture with a slice (Page 11, Section 5.2.3 The message containing the complexity metrics CMs is transmitted at the start of an upcoming period (i.e. specified time interval). The next message containing CMs will be transmitted at the start of the next upcoming period. Therefore, when the upcoming period is a picture or the interval up to the next I-slice (i.e. single picture with a slice), a message will be transmitted for each picture or interval, respectively. However, when the upcoming period is a specified time interval or a specified number of pictures (i.e. specified number of pictures), the associated message will be transmitted with the first picture in the time interval or with the first picture in the specified number of pictures), or tile granularity (Page 11, section 5.2.4.1, period_type specifies the type of upcoming period over which the four complexity metrics are applicable and is defined in the following table, with scalable slice granularity), or to a single picture with subpicture granularity (Page 11, section 5.2.4.1, period_type specifies the type of upcoming period over which the four complexity metrics are applicable and is defined in the following table, with scalable layer granularity, i.e. subpicture).
Regarding Claims 8, 9 and 12, the limitations are similar to those treated in the above rejection(s) of claims 1, 2 and 5, respectively, and are met by the reference as discussed above. Claims 8, 9 and 12, however recite a decoding method, rather than an encoding method, which is similar in structure expect in reverse operation. Therefore, claims 8, 9 and 12 are rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Apparatus claims 15, 16 and 19 are drawn to the apparatus corresponding to the method of using same as claimed in claims 1, 2 and 5, respectively. Therefore apparatus claims 15, 16 and 19 correspond to method claims 1, 2 and 5, respectively, and are rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Regarding Claims 22, 23 and 26, the limitations are similar to those treated in the above rejection(s) of claims 15, 16 and 19, and are met by the reference as discussed above. Claims 22, 23 and 26, however recite a decoding apparatus, rather than an encoding apparatus, which is similar in structure expect in reverse operation. Therefore, claims 22, 23 and 26 are rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Conclusion
The prior art references made of record are not relied upon but are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Leontaris et al. (US 9,445,110 B2) teaches methods involving deriving a plurality of candidate coding parameter sets from a plurality of metrics associated with the estimate of the complexity of the current picture, minimizing or maximizing one or more of the metrics based upon a plurality of rate control models that utilize a plurality of complexity metrics, and selecting at least one of the candidate coding parameter sets for the coding based upon the minimization or maximization of the one or more metrics.
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to SUSAN E HODGES whose telephone number is (571)270-0498. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday from 8:00 am (EST) to 4:00 pm (EST).
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner's supervisor, Brian T. Pendleton, can be reached on (571) 272-7527. 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Susan E. Hodges/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425
Prosecution Insights