DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the Amendments and Remarks received 06/23/2026 in which no claims are cancelled, claims 1, 6–9, and 19–21 are amended, and no claims are added as new claims.
Response to Arguments
On pages 6–8 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant contends the combination of Lee and Blasi fails to teach or suggest the amended features of the claims. Examiner disagrees and further finds the arguments moot in view of the new grounds of rejection necessitated by amendment. While features of multiple dependent claims were partially rolled up into claim 1, the combination and changes in the language represented a shift in scope triggering a new ground of rejection. The rejection now relies on the additional teachings of Chiang, which teaches more directly features regarding the multi-hypothesis prediction mode. See rejections, infra. Examiner notes aspects of the claimed invention are so broadly claimed in some instances that multiple embodiments of the prior art can read on the claimed features. Examiner suggests Applicant more particularly define in the claims the subject matter sought for patent. See 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections, infra.
Other claims are not argued separately. Remarks, 8.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1–21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blasi (US 2022/0103833 A1), Lee (US 2022/0312003 A1), and Chiang (US 2021/0392364 A1).
Regarding claim 1, the combination of Blasi, Lee, and Chiang teaches or suggests a method of video processing, comprising: determining, during a conversion between a target block of a video and a bitstream of the video, a target weight table from a plurality of weight tables for multi-hypothesis prediction (Lee, ¶ 0559: teaches weighted combination prediction, which is synonymous in this art with multi-hypothesis prediction; Lee, ¶¶ 0560–0569: explains the weights used can differ based on the type of intra prediction being utilized in the multi-hypothesis prediction, along with many other factors including size of blocks; Lee, ¶ 0569: teaches weight table configurations can differ based on scenarios; While Lee teaches different weight tables based on factors present during multi-hypothesis prediction, Blasi, ¶¶ 0040–0042: teaches look-up tables for signaling different weights based on certain characteristics present during combined (multi-hypothesis) prediction, wherein the tables themselves can be transmitted and indexes into the tables are transmitted), the target weight table being used for a first hypothesis of the target block (both Lee and Blasi teach the weight tables are used for multi-hypothesis prediction; see supra), the target block being a multiple hypothesis prediction block, and the target block is coded with a geometric partitioning mode (GPM) (both Lee and Blasi teach the weight tables are used for multi-hypothesis prediction; see supra; Lee, ¶¶ 0069, 0218, and 0230: teaches geometric partitioning mode and the weighting of each prediction sample; Blasi likewise teaches geometric partitioning in teaching triangular partitions (see e.g. Blasi, Abstract); Blasi, ¶ 0018: teaches the triangular partitions can be predicted using combined inter-intra prediction using weighting); wherein, in response to the multi-hypothesis prediction being applied to the target block, at least one message corresponding to multiple hypothesis information is indicated associated with the target block (Interpreted in light of Applicant’s Specification, published paragraph [0290], wherein the “message” is “coding information of additional hypotheses other than the base hypothesis”; Published paragraph [0224] explains the base hypothesis is the first hypothesis or first prediction unit generated from the first prediction mode; Lee, ¶ 0584: teaches coding prediction information for multi-hypothesis prediction but perhaps not as clearly as Chiang; To expedite prosecution, Chiang, ¶¶ 0046–0052: teaches Multi-Hypothesis (MH) mode and teaches a first and second hypothesis wherein both the first and second hypotheses can include information supported mode information indicating which inter or intra mode to use in the combined (i.e. MH) mode), the multiple hypothesis information comprising coding information indicating whether a second hypothesis of the target block is coded with an inter prediction method or an intra prediction method (Examiner interprets the claim to be drawn to a first prediction and the additional prediction method makes a second prediction method combined with the first prediction method to yield a combined inter-intra prediction mode; Both Lee and Blasi teach combined inter-intra prediction (CIIP); Lee, ¶ 0218: teaches CIIP; Blasi, Abstract: teaches CIIP; Blasi, ¶ 0018: teaches combined inter-intra prediction for geometric (triangular) partitions using weighting; To expedite prosecution, the further teachings of Chiang, ¶ 0047, explain that when the second hypothesis is an intra prediction mode, the MH mode is called MH mode for Intra and when the second hypothesis is an inter prediction mode, the MH mode is called MH mode for Merge), and wherein, in response to the second hypothesis being coded with the intra prediction method, whether the second hypothesis is coded with a first prediction method is indicated (Examiner notes that according to original claim 11, this mode is MRL; But note also that original claims 13 and 15 explain the mode can be a regular mode or LM mode; Lee, ¶¶ 0008–0010: teaches the MPM candidate list for intra prediction modes does not include the “special” intra prediction modes like MRL, LM, CPR, etc.; Lee, ¶ 0024: teaches a “special” intra-prediction mode can be MIP, MRL, ISP, LM, or CPR; Lee, ¶ 0429: explains the intra-prediction mode can be special modes or regular modes; Lee, ¶¶ 0296–0298: teaches that “unavailable” modes are the special intra-prediction modes and that when a neighboring block is coded using a special intra mode, a predetermined base mode, such as planar, DC, or angular mode may be substituted; In other words, Lee teaches the skilled artisan that the MPM list, from which the MH mode (CIIP mode) will get its intra mode can exclude the special intra modes; Examiner notes that non-angular modes, such as planar mode and DC mode, have been taught in the prior art to be disabled for MRL and Examiner finds that perhaps these claims are a veiled attempt to reach this subject matter; see additional prior art under the Conclusion Section of this Office Action; see also Blasi, ¶ 0018; To expedite prosecution, Chiang, e.g. ¶ 0014, further exemplifies an embodiment of the claimed subject matter wherein it is explained that intra-prediction signaling includes signaling whether an intra prediction mode can be found in the MPM list or not; see similar teachings in Bossen, ¶¶ 0066 and 0070, cited under the Conclusion Section of this Office Action); and performing the conversion based on the target weight table (both Lee and Blasi teach the weight tables are used for multi-hypothesis prediction; see supra).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to combine the elements taught by Blasi, with those of Lee, because both references are drawn to the same field of endeavor such that one wishing to practice combined (multi-hypothesis) prediction would be led to their relevant teachings and because Lee suggests using tables for weights and Blasi merely explains the benefits of predefined weights to simply weighted combinations of the multi-hypothesis coding technique. Therefore, the combination is a mere combination of prior art elements, according to known methods, to yield a predictable result. This rationale applies to all combinations of Blasi and Lee used in this Office Action unless otherwise noted.
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to combine the elements taught by Blasi and Lee, with those of Chiang, because all three references are drawn to the same field of endeavor such that one wishing to practice combined (multi-hypothesis) prediction would be led to their relevant teachings and because Chiang teaches how the intra prediction modes from the MPM list can be used as the intra prediction portion of the combined, multi-hypothesis prediction, and further because Chiang’s teachings are simply being relied upon for teaching the signaling of the coding mode information for the first and second hypotheses. Therefore, the combination is a mere combination of prior art elements, according to known methods, to yield a predictable result. This rationale applies to all combinations of Blasi, Lee, and Chiang used in this Office Action unless otherwise noted.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Blasi, Lee, and Chiang teaches or suggests the method of claim 1, wherein the target weight table used for the first hypothesis of the target block is indicated in the bitstream (Blasi, ¶¶ 0040–0042: teaches look-up tables for signaling different weights based on certain characteristics present during combined (multi-hypothesis) prediction, wherein the tables themselves can be transmitted and indexes into the tables are transmitted; see also Blasi, ¶ 0018).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Blasi, Lee, and Chiang teaches or suggests the method of claim 1, wherein determining the target weight table comprises: determining the target weight table based on one or more rules (Applicant’s published paragraph [0228] explains the weight rule can be what the base prediction mode is; Lee, ¶ 0568: teaches weight can be based on the intra-prediction mode used in the multi-hypothesis prediction).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Blasi, Lee, and Chiang teaches or suggests the method of claim 3, wherein the target weight table is determined based on one or more of: a width of a coded block associated with the target block, or a height of a coded block associated with the target block (Lee, ¶ 0561: teaches weights can be based off the number of reference blocks and the size/shape of the current block; Lee, ¶¶ 0586 and 0587: teaches the size of a previously coded block can inform prediction information).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Blasi, Lee, and Chiang teaches or suggests the method of claim 3, wherein the target weight table is determined based on one or more of: a width of the target block, or a height of the target block (Lee, ¶ 0561: teaches weights can be based off the number of reference blocks and the size/shape of the current block).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Blasi, Lee, and Chiang teaches or suggests the method of claim 1, wherein the multiple hypothesis information further comprises additional coding information of the target block (There are too many instances of this teaching from which to choose; For example, Lee, ¶ 0584: teaches coding prediction information for multi-hypothesis prediction; see also teachings of Chiang cited for the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Blasi, Lee, and Chiang teaches or suggests the method of claim 1, wherein the multiple hypothesis information further indicates a prediction method with which the second hypothesis is coded (Both Lee and Blasi teach combined inter-intra prediction (CIIP), which is also known as MHP; Lee, ¶ 0218: teaches CIIP; Blasi, Abstract: teaches CIIP; Blasi, ¶ 0018: teaches combined inter-intra prediction for geometric (triangular) partitions using weighting; Chiang, ¶¶ 0014 and 0047: teaches in MH prediction where the second prediction is an intra predictor, the intra prediction mode can be indicated using an index into the MPM list or explicitly signaled).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Blasi, Lee, and Chiang teaches or suggests the method of claim 1, wherein in response to the second hypothesis being coded with the first prediction method, a syntax element associated with the first prediction method is further indicated (Examiner notes that according to original claim 11, this mode is MRL; But note also that original claims 13 and 15 explain the mode can be a regular mode or LM mode; Lee, ¶ 0024: teaches a “special” intra-prediction mode can be MIP, MRL, ISP, LM, or CPR; Lee, ¶ 0429: explains the intra-prediction mode can be special modes or regular modes; Lee, ¶ 0024: teaches a “special” intra-prediction mode can be MIP, MRL, ISP, LM, or CPR; Lee, ¶¶ 0296–0298: teaching that “unavailable” modes are the special intra-prediction modes and that when a neighboring block is coded using a special intra mode, a predetermined base mode, such as planar, DC, or angular mode may be substituted; Examiner notes that non-angular modes, such as planar mode and DC mode have been taught in the prior art to be disabled for MRL and Examiner finds that perhaps these claims are a veiled attempt to reach this subject matter; see additional prior art under the Conclusion Section of this Office Action; see also Blasi, ¶ 0018; Chiang, e.g. ¶ 0014, further exemplifies an embodiment of the claimed subject matter wherein it is explained that intra-prediction signaling includes signaling whether an intra prediction mode can be found in the MPM list or not, such an MPM flag being a syntax element associated with the intra prediction mode signaling representing the second hypothesis; see similar teachings in Bossen, ¶¶ 0066 and 0070, cited under the Conclusion Section of this Office Action; It is noted that Bossen also teaches mh_intra_luma_mpm_flag should this be an embodiment of the syntax element Applicant seeks to claim).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Blasi, Lee, and Chiang teaches or suggests the method of claim 1, wherein in response to a first prediction method is mandatorily used for an intra coded second hypothesis, whether the second hypothesis is coded with the first prediction method is not indicated (Lee, ¶ 0024: teaches a “special” intra-prediction mode can be MIP, MRL, ISP, LM, or CPR; Lee, e.g. ¶ 0300: teaches that when a neighboring mode is a special mode, such as MIP, the mandatory mode can be set as planar mode; Examiner notes Lee is not limited to MIP mode being converted to a regular mode; Other teachings in Lee support converting the special modes into regular intra-modes; For example, Lee, claim 8, teaches converting special mode IBC (CPR) mode into regular DC mode; see Lee, ¶¶ 0296–0298: teaching that “unavailable” modes are the special intra-prediction modes and that when a neighboring block is coded using a special intra mode, a predetermined base mode, such as planar, DC, or angular mode may be substituted; see also Blasi, ¶ 0018).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Blasi, Lee, and Chiang teaches or suggests the method of claim 9, wherein a pre-defined intra prediction method is mandatorily used (Lee, ¶ 0024: teaches a “special” intra-prediction mode can be MIP, MRL, ISP, LM, or CPR; Lee, ¶¶ 0296–0298: teaching that “unavailable” modes are the special intra-prediction modes and that when a neighboring block is coded using a special intra mode, a predetermined base mode, such as planar, DC, or angular mode may be substituted).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Blasi, Lee, and Chiang teaches or suggests the method of claim 8, wherein the first prediction method is a MRL method (Lee, ¶ 0024: teaches a “special” intra-prediction mode can be MIP, MRL, ISP, LM, or CPR; Lee, ¶¶ 0296–0298: teaching that “unavailable” modes are the special intra-prediction modes and that when a neighboring block is coded using a special intra mode, a predetermined base mode, such as planar, DC, or angular mode may be substituted).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Blasi, Lee, and Chiang teaches or suggests the method of claim 11, wherein a default MRL index is used, and additional MIP information is not indicated (Lee, ¶ 0024: teaches a “special” intra-prediction mode can be MIP, MRL, ISP, LM, or CPR; Lee, ¶¶ 0296–0298: teaching that “unavailable” modes are the special intra-prediction modes and that when a neighboring block is coded using a special intra mode, a predetermined base mode, such as planar, DC, or angular mode may be substituted).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Blasi, Lee, and Chiang teaches or suggests the method of claim 8, wherein the first prediction method is a regular intra prediction method (Lee, ¶ 0024: teaches a “special” intra-prediction mode can be MIP, MRL, ISP, LM, or CPR; Lee, ¶¶ 0296–0298: teaching that “unavailable” modes are the special intra-prediction modes and that when a neighboring block is coded using a special intra mode, a predetermined base mode, such as planar, DC, or angular mode may be substituted).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Blasi, Lee, and Chiang teaches or suggests the method of claim 13, wherein an intra prediction mode index is indicated (Lee, ¶ 0024: teaches a “special” intra-prediction mode can be MIP, MRL, ISP, LM, or CPR; Lee, ¶¶ 0296–0298: teaching that “unavailable” modes are the special intra-prediction modes and that when a neighboring block is coded using a special intra mode, a predetermined base mode, such as planar, DC, or angular mode may be substituted).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Blasi, Lee, and Chiang teaches or suggests the method of claim 8, wherein the first prediction method is an intra LM prediction method (Lee, ¶ 0024: teaches a “special” intra-prediction mode can be MIP, MRL, ISP, LM, or CPR; Lee, ¶¶ 0296–0298: teaching that “unavailable” modes are the special intra-prediction modes and that when a neighboring block is coded using a special intra mode, a predetermined base mode, such as planar, DC, or angular mode may be substituted).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Blasi, Lee, and Chiang teaches or suggests the method of claim 15, wherein a default LM method is used, and additional LM information is indicated (Lee, ¶ 0024: teaches a “special” intra-prediction mode can be MIP, MRL, ISP, LM, or CPR; Lee, ¶¶ 0296–0298: teaching that “unavailable” modes are the special intra-prediction modes and that when a neighboring block is coded using a special intra mode, a predetermined base mode, such as planar, DC, or angular mode may be substituted).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Blasi, Lee, and Chiang teaches or suggests the method of claim 1, wherein the conversion includes encoding the target block into the bitstream (Lee, Title: teaches encoding/decoding).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Blasi, Lee, and Chiang teaches or suggests the method of claim 1, wherein the conversion includes decoding the target block from the bitstream (Lee, Title: teaches encoding/decoding).
Claim 19 lists the same elements as claim 1, but in apparatus form rather than method form. Therefore, the rationale for the rejection of claim 1 applies to the instant claim.
Claim 20 lists the same elements as claim 1, but is drawn to a method of storing a bitstream rather than a method of video processing. Therefore, the rationale for the rejection of claim 1 applies to the instant claim.
Regarding claim 21, the combination of Blasi, Lee, and Chiang teaches or suggests the method of claim 1, further comprising: storing the bitstream in a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium (Lee, ¶ 0001: teaches this art encompasses storing bitstreams).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chang et al., “Multiple Reference Line Coding for Most Probable Modes in Intra Prediction,” 2019 Data Compression Conference (DCC), 2019.
Galpin (US 2022/0385922 A1) teaches multi-hypothesis coding in terms of CIIP and using weight sets (e.g. ¶ 0052).
Li (US 2022/0174270 A1) teaches, “The CIIP mode may be called a multi-hypothesis mode….” (¶ 0129).
Bossen (US 2022/0086460 A1) teaches when MHP is applied, an intra MPM list only includes PLANAR, DC, vertical, and horizontal modes and only one of those may be used as the intra-prediction mode (¶ 0070).
Zhao (US 2021/0084309 A1) teaches CIIP is synonymous with multi-hypothesis and teaches weight sets for CIIP (e.g. ¶¶ 0131–0132).
Kulupana (US 2021/0409696 A1) teaches the multiple hypotheses can both be intra prediction modes (e.g. ¶¶ 0005 and 0012).
Bossen (US 2022/0086460 A1) teaches distinct MPM list constructions in JVET-L1001 that differed based on whether basic intra prediction or multi-hypothesis prediction was used (¶¶ 0221 and 0232).
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 extension fee 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 Michael J Hess whose telephone number is (571)270-7933. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00am-5:30pm.
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 571-273-8933.
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://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MICHAEL J HESS/Examiner, Art Unit 2481
Prosecution Insights