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 .
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 of this title, 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 1-3 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 2025/0211738).
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses a decoding apparatus for decoding coded data (see 124 in fig. 1), the decoding apparatus comprising: a header decoder circuitry that decodes characteristics information of a neural network post-filter (e.g. see ¶ [0131]) and activation information of the neural network post-filter from the coded data (e.g. see ¶ [0132]); an attribute image decoder circuitry that decodes an attribute image (see output of 301 to 302-303 in fig. 3) from the coded data; and an attribute image filter circuitry that performs post-filtering processing of the attribute image (e.g. see ¶ [0130]), wherein: the header decoder circuitry further decodes a target identifier (e.g. see ¶ [0131]), cancel information (e.g. see ¶ [0130]), and persistence information from the activation information (e.g. see ¶ [0135]), a value of the persistence information being equal to zero specifies that a target neural-network post-filter indicated by the target identifier is used for refining a current picture only (e.g. see ¶ [0135]), and the value of the persistence information being equal to one specifies that the target neural-network post-filter indicated by the target identifier is used for refining the current picture and all subsequent pictures (e.g. see ¶ [0135]), and in the activation information (e.g. see “NNPFA SEI message” in ¶ [0132]), an attribute image count is decoded (e.g. see “set of pictures” in ¶ [0132], wherein it is obvious that activating a post-processing filter would require determining how many image count to apply the filtering), followed by the target identifier (e.g. see “target neural-network post-processing filter” in ¶ [0132], wherein it is obvious that activating a post-processing filter would require determining a target identifier to know which type of neural-network post-processing filter to apply for post-filtering (e.g. see ¶ [0093])).
Regarding claim 2, Wang further discloses wherein the cancel information indicates whether a persistence of the target neural-network post-filter is canceled (e.g. see ¶ [0130]).
Regarding claim 3, although Wang discloses wherein the target identifier, the cancel information, and the persistence information are, decoded for attribute images count, it is noted that Wang does not provide the particular of decoding for attribute images I, where i=0…attribute count-1.
Although it is not explicitly recited, it is conventional in the art for respectively decoding coded information and decoding to count-1. The Examiner takes official notice that respectively decoding coded information and decoding to count-1 is well known in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to implement such practice for the benefit of compatibility to properly process coded images in industries standard decoding systems.
Regarding claim 10, the claim(s) recite a coding apparatus (see 114 in fig. 1) with analogous limitations to claim 1, and is/are therefore rejected on the same premise.
Regarding claim 11, the claim(s) recite analogous limitations to claim 1, and is/are therefore rejected on the same premise.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US 2025/0211738) in view of Srinivasan et al. (US 2005/0053288).
Regarding claim 8, although Wang discloses wherein the header decoder circuitry further decodes a syntax element in the activation information (e.g. see ¶ [0132]), it is noted that Wang does not disclose wherein the wherein syntax element is a strength syntax element, wherein the strength syntax element specifies a strength for the target neural-network post-filter.
However, Srinivasan discloses a post-filtering system wherein the wherein syntax element is a strength syntax element (e.g. see ¶ [0103]), and wherein the strength syntax element specifies a strength for the target post-filter (see 730 in fig. 7; e.g. see ¶ [0103]).
Given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate Srinivasan teachings of filter strength into Wang filtering for the benefit of improving the target neural-network post-filter video quality compression on a scene-by-scene basis.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments with respect to claims 1-3, 8 and 10-11 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Citation of Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
1. Xie (US 2025/0150584), discloses coding/decoding with activating neural network filtering.
2. Pham Van et al. (US 2023/0108175), discloses coding/decoding with activating filtering.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 RICHARD T TORRENTE whose telephone number is (571)270-3702. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 6:45-3:15 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, Jay Patel can be reached at (571) 272-2988. 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.
/RICHARD T TORRENTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2485
Prosecution Insights