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 .
Applicant(s) Response to Official Action
The response filed on July 10, 2026 has been entered and made of record. Claims 1 – 21 are currently pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant states on page 7 that “The Examiner did not consider two of the references cited by Applicant in an IDS dated June 24, 2024. Applicant respectfully requests that the Examiner consider those references and indicate as such”. As noted on page 2 of the Non-Final office action filed on August 6, 2025, the references have been placed on the record. However, the Examiner noted that NPL entries 3 and 4 of the IDS submitted on June 24, 2024 contains citations of references that do not comply with 37 C.F.R. 1.98(b)(5) which requires "Each publication listed in an information disclosure statement must be identified by publisher, author (if any), title, relevant pages of the publication, date, and place of publication." The Examiner is unable to timely consider the various coding standards and working drafts of said coding standard in their entirety as they comprise hundreds of pages. The Examiner encourages resubmission with the pertinent portions of these references pointed out. Accordingly, the references have been placed on the record, but have not been considered by the Examiner.”
Applicant’s arguments see pages 7 - 9 with respect to the rejection of Claims 1 - 3, 5, 9 - 13, 15 and 19 - 21 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xu et al., (US 2020/0120353 A1) have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Examiner' s response to the presented arguments follows below:
Applicant argues on page 8 that “Techniques for determining a block vector for a chroma block, per Xu, are not a disclosure of determining reference chroma blocks, as set forth in claim 1”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. As noted in the office action, Xu clearly discloses in Fig. 11A and Par. [0123] each chroma unit is collocated with four luma units (i.e. two or more reference chroma blocks) instead of one luma unit shown in FIG. 10. For example, the chroma unit (1111) is collocated with the four luma units (1121)-(1124) (i.e. two or more reference chroma blocks are determined based on BVs), which refers to the blocks or units, not block vectors. Therefore, Xu discloses the limitations as claimed.
Applicant further argues on page 8 that “Techniques for averaging block vectors of luma blocks, per Xu, are not a disclosure of fusing reference chroma blocks, as set forth in claim 1.”. Xu clearly discloses in Par. [0130], the chroma BV for the chroma unit (1111) is determined (i.e. generate prediction sample) based on an average (i.e. fusing) of multiple luma BVs for some or all of the luma units (1121)-(1124) (i.e. reference chroma blocks). The luma BVs of the luma units (1121)-(1124) can be averaged with or without weights to obtain an averaged luma BV. The averaged luma BV can be scaled to determine the chroma BV, where the block is encoded or decoded based on the reference block referred to by the block vector. As similarly found in the disclosure in Par. [0081] “With respect to fusion of reference blocks derived by direct BV, video encoder 200 or video decoder 300 may fuse multiple reference chroma blocks derived by chroma BVs.” and in Par. [0083] “Based on the BVs for the luma blocks, video encoder 200 and video decoder 300 may determine reference chroma blocks 902A and 902B for chroma block 900”. Therefore, Xu discloses the limitations as claimed.
Accordingly, the rejections are maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 - 3, 5, 9 - 13, 15 and 19 - 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xu et al., (US 2020/0120353 A1) referred to as Xu hereinafter.
Regarding Claim 1, Xu discloses a method of encoding or decoding video data (Fig. 12), the method comprising:
for a chroma block of a picture, determining luma blocks that are co-located with the chroma block (Fig. 11A, Par. [0123], The chroma CB (1110) includes a plurality of chroma units (1111)-(1114) (i.e. chroma block), and is co-located with the collocated luma region (1120). The collocated luma region (1120) includes a plurality of luma units (1121)-(1136) (i.e. co-located luma blocks));
determining two or more reference chroma blocks based on block vectors for the luma blocks (Par. [0123] In the example shown in FIG. 11A, a 4:2:0 format is used, each chroma unit has a size of 4×4 chroma samples, each luma unit has a size of 4×4 luma samples, and each chroma unit is collocated with four luma units (i.e. two or more reference chroma blocks) instead of one luma unit shown in FIG. 10. For example, the chroma unit (1111) is collocated with the four luma units (1121)-(1124) (i.e. two or more reference chroma blocks)), the block vectors pointing to locations within the picture (Par. [0110] A position offset between the reference block (940) and the current block (930) is referred to as a BV (i.e. block vector)(950). Par. [0125] a luma BV for a luma unit where the luma sample is located can be used to determine the chroma BV);
fusing the reference chroma blocks to generate prediction samples for the chroma block (Par. [0130], the chroma BV for the chroma unit (1111) is determined (i.e. generate prediction sample) based on an average (i.e. fusing) of multiple luma BVs for some or all of the luma units (1121)-(1124) (i.e. reference chroma blocks). The luma BVs of the luma units (1121)-(1124) can be averaged with or without weights to obtain an averaged luma BV. The averaged luma BV can be scaled to determine the chroma BV); and
block vector encoding or decoding the chroma block based on the prediction samples (Par. [0022], The processing circuitry can reconstruct (i.e. decode) at least one sample in the one of the one or more chroma units based on the chroma BV).
Regarding Claim 2, Xu discloses claim 1. Xu further discloses wherein fusing the two or more reference chroma blocks comprises at least one of: averaging the two or more reference chroma blocks (Par. [0153], the chroma BV for the chroma unit (1111) is determined based on an average (i.e. fusing) of multiple luma BVs for some or all of the luma units (1121)-(1124) (i.e. two or more reference chroma blocks). The luma BVs of the luma units (1121)-(1124) can be averaged with or without weights to obtain an averaged luma BV. The averaged luma BV can be scaled to determine the chroma BV); or scaling and summing the two or more reference chroma blocks.
Regarding Claim 3, Xu discloses claim 1. Xu further discloses further comprising: determining respective weights for the two or more reference chroma blocks, wherein fusing comprises fusing the two or more reference chroma blocks based on the respective weights (Par. [0153], the chroma BV for the chroma unit (1111) is determined based on an average of multiple luma BVs for some or all of the luma units (1121)-(1124) (i.e. two or more reference chroma blocks). The luma BVs of the luma units (1121)-(1124) can be averaged with or without weights (i.e. respective weights) to obtain an averaged luma BV. The averaged luma BV can be scaled to determine the chroma BV).
Regarding Claim 5, Xu discloses claim 3. Xu further discloses determining a weighting factor derivation operation, wherein determining respective weights comprises determining respective weights based on the weighting factor derivation operation (Par. [0130], the luma BVs of the luma units (1121)-(1124) can be averaged with or without weights to obtain an averaged (i.e. weight factor derivation) luma BV).
Regarding Claim 9, XU discloses claim 1. Xu further discloses wherein block vector encoding or decoding the chroma block comprises decoding the chroma block, and wherein decoding the chroma block (Par. [0022] decode prediction information of a chroma coding block (CB) from a coded video bitstream) comprises: determining residual values indicative of a difference between the prediction samples and the chroma block (Fig. 5, Par. [0059] After motion compensating the fetched samples in accordance with the symbols (521) pertaining to the block, these samples can be added (i.e. adding) by the aggregator (555) to the output of the scaler/inverse transform unit (551) (in this case called the residual samples or residual signal) (i.e. residual values) so as to generate output sample information); and adding the residual values to the prediction samples to reconstruct the chroma block (Par. [0022] reconstruct at least one sample in the one of the one or more chroma units based on the chroma BV. Par. [0103] The reconstruction module (874) is configured to combine, in the spatial domain, the residual as output by the residue decoder (873) and the prediction results (as output by the inter or intra prediction modules as the case may be) to form a reconstructed block, that may be part of the reconstructed picture, which in turn may be part of the reconstructed video).
Regarding Claim 10, XU discloses claim 1. Xu further discloses wherein block vector encoding or decoding the chroma block comprises encoding the chroma block (Par. [0022] Aspects of the disclosure provide methods and apparatuses for video encoding/decoding), and wherein encoding the chroma block (Fig. 7, a video encoder (703), Par. [0022] decode prediction information of a chroma coding block (CB) from a coded video bitstream) comprises: determining residual values indicative of a difference between the prediction samples and the chroma block (Par. [0095] The residue calculator (723) is configured to calculate a difference (residue data) between the received block and prediction results selected from the intra encoder (722) or the inter encoder (730)); and signaling information indicative of the residual values (Par. [0095] The residue encoder (724) is configured to operate based on the residue data to encode the residue data to generate the transform coefficients. Par. [0096] the entropy encoder (725) is configured to include the general control data, the selected prediction information (e.g., intra prediction information or inter prediction information), the residue information (i.e. signaling information), and other suitable information in the bitstream).
Apparatus claims 11 – 13, 15, and 19 are drawn to the corresponding method claimed in Claims 1 – 3, 5, 9 and 10. Therefore Claims 11 – 13, 15, and 19 correspond to method Claims 1 – 3, 5, 9 and 10 and are rejected for the same reasons of anticipation as used above. Claim 11 further recites one or more memories configured to store the video data and processing circuitry coupled to the one or more memories (See Xu, Par. [0160] Fast storage and retrieve to any of the memory devices can be enabled through the use of cache memory (i.e. memory), that can be closely associated with one or more CPU (1341) (i.e. processing circuitry)).
Computer-readable storage medium claim 20 is drawn to the corresponding method claimed in Claim 1. Therefore Claim 20 corresponds to method claim 1 and are rejected for the same reasons of anticipation as used above.
Regarding Claim 21, Xu discloses claim 1. Xu further discloses wherein determining the two or more reference chroma blocks based on block vectors for the luma blocks (Fig. 11A, Par. [0122]-[0123] A chroma BV for the chroma unit can be determined based on one or more luma BVs for the plurality of luma units (i.e. block vectors for luma blocks). The chroma CB (1110) includes a plurality of chroma units (1111)-(1114), and is co-located with the collocated luma region (1120). The collocated luma region (1120) includes a plurality of luma units (1121)-(1136) (i.e. two or more reference chroma blocks)) comprises:
determining a first chroma block vector for the chroma block based on one or more of the block vectors for the luma blocks (Par. [0123] the chroma unit (1111) (i.e. first chroma block) is collocated with the four luma units (1121)-(1124), where a chroma BV of each chroma unit can be determined);
determining a second chroma block vector for the chroma block based on one or more of the block vectors for the luma blocks (Par. [0123] the chroma unit (1112) (i.e. second chroma block) is collocated with the four luma units (1125)-(1128), where a chroma BV of each chroma unit can be determined);
determining a first reference chroma block of the two or more reference chroma blocks based on the first chroma block vector (Par. [0125] Referring to FIG. 11B, the luma units (1121)-(1124) form a luma sub-region (1160) where the luma units (1121)-(1124) (i.e. two or more reference chroma blocks) are located at a top left, a top right, a bottom left, and a bottom right location of the luma sub-region (1160)); and
determining a second reference chroma block of the two or more reference chroma blocks based on the second chroma block vector (Par. [0131] Chroma BVs for the other chroma units (1112)-(1114) can be determined similarly as described with reference to FIG. 11B).
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 4, 6, 7, 14, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (US 2020/0120353 A1) in view of Kang et al., (US 2025/0301121 A1) referred to as Kang hereinafter.
Regarding Claim 4, Xu discloses claim 3. Xu further discloses determining the two or more reference chroma blocks, wherein determining respective weights comprises determining respective weights (Par. [0153], the chroma BV for the chroma unit (1111) is determined based on an average of multiple luma BVs for some or all of the luma units (1121)-(1124) (i.e. two or more reference chroma blocks). The luma BVs of the luma units (1121)-(1124) can be averaged with or without weights (i.e. respective weights) to obtain an averaged luma BV. The averaged luma BV can be scaled to determine the chroma BV).
Xu does not specifically disclose determining costs of reference chroma blocks. Therefore, Xu fails to explicitly teach determining respective costs of the two or more reference chroma blocks.
However, Kang teaches determining respective costs of the two or more reference chroma blocks (Par. [0141], the neighboring samples (i.e. reference chroma blocks) of the chroma block are used to calculate the template matching cost, where the first-order linear function may be used to convert luma sample values to chroma sample values, as in the CCLM), wherein determining respective weights comprises determining respective weights based on the respective costs (Par. [0158], the video encoding device may calculate a first template matching cost TC.sub.pred0 and a second template matching cost TC.sub.pred0 by using the neighboring blocks of the prediction block in each predicted direction. After normalizing the calculated template matching costs, the video encoding device may calculate a first chroma weight w0 and a second chroma weight w1 according to Equation 17 to set a larger weight for a block with smaller matching cost).
References Xu and Kang are considered to be analogous art because they relate to video coding reference blocks. Therefore, it would be obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify determining a cost of reference blocks as taught by Kang in the invention of Xu. This modification would apply the weights to the chroma bi-prediction block to generate the final chroma prediction block of the current chroma block from the smaller matching cost (See Kang, Par. [0159]).
Regarding Claim 6, Xu discloses claim 1. Xu further discloses determining respective candidate reference chroma blocks based on respective block vectors for the luma blocks Par. [0153], the chroma BV for the chroma unit (1111) is determined based on an average of multiple luma BVs for some or all of the luma units (1121)-(1124) (i.e. two or more candidate reference chroma blocks).
Xu does not specifically disclose determining costs of candidate reference chroma blocks. Therefore, Xu fails to explicitly teach determining respective costs of the respective candidate reference chroma blocks.
However, Kang teaches determining respective costs of the respective candidate reference chroma blocks (Par. [0141], the neighboring samples (i.e. candidate reference chroma blocks) of the chroma block are used to calculate the template matching cost, where the first-order linear function may be used to convert luma sample values to chroma sample values, as in the CCLM), wherein determining the two or more reference chroma blocks comprises selecting two or more of the candidate reference chroma blocks based on the respective costs (Par. [0158], the video encoding device may calculate a first template matching cost TC.sub.pred0 and a second template matching cost TC.sub.pred0 by using the neighboring blocks of the prediction block in each predicted direction. After normalizing the calculated template matching costs, the video encoding device may calculate a first chroma weight w0 and a second chroma weight w1 according to Equation 17 to set a larger weight for a block with smaller matching cost. Par. [0111] the CU-level weights may be determined based on a merge candidate index).
References Xu and Kang are considered to be analogous art because they relate to video coding reference blocks. Therefore, it would be obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to specify determining a cost of reference blocks as taught by Kang in the invention of Xu. This modification would apply the weights to the chroma bi-prediction block to generate the final chroma prediction block of the current chroma block from the smaller matching cost (See Kang, Par. [0159]).
Regarding Claim 7, Xu in view of Kang teaches claim 6. Kang further teaches wherein determining the respective costs comprises determining an amount of matching between a first template adjacent the respective candidate reference chroma blocks and a second template adjacent the chroma block (Par. [0158], the video encoding device may calculate a first template matching cost TC.sub.pred0 and a second template matching cost TC.sub.pred0 by using the neighboring blocks of the prediction block in each predicted direction. After normalizing the calculated template matching costs, the video encoding device may calculate a first chroma weight w0 and a second chroma weight w1 according to Equation 17 to set a larger weight for a block (i.e. amount of matching) with smaller matching cost).
Apparatus claims 14, 16 and 17 are drawn to the corresponding method claimed in Claims 4, 6 and 7. Therefore Claims 14, 16 and 17 correspond to method Claims 4, 6 and 7 and are rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (US 2020/0120353 A1), in view of Kang et al., (US 2025/0301121 A1), and in further view of LI et al., (US 2024/0022739 A1) referred to as LI hereinafter.
Regarding Claim 8, Xu in view of Kang teaches claim 6. Xu in view of Kang does not specifically teach constructing a list based on costs. Therefore, Xu in view of Kang fails to explicitly teach constructing a chroma block vector list based on the respective costs, wherein selecting two or more of the candidate reference chroma blocks comprises selecting two or more of the candidate reference chroma blocks based on the chroma block vector list
However, LI teaches constructing a chroma block vector list based on the respective costs (Par. [0216], the candidate chroma BVs are reordered (i.e. chroma block vector list) based on the template matching costs into a reordered list having an ascending order for example), wherein selecting candidate reference chroma blocks comprises selecting the candidate reference chroma blocks based on the chroma block vector list (Par. [0207], chroma BV predictor candidates can be generated according to the above techniques, and put into a candidate list (i.e. chroma block vector list). A BVP index that indicates a selected chroma BV predictor from the chroma BV predictor candidates can be signaled from the encoder side to the decoder side).
References Xu, Kang and LI are considered to be analogous art because they relate to chroma block coding. Therefore, it would be obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to specify constructing a chroma block vector list as suggest by LI in inventions of XU and Kang. This modification would allow a final chroma BV that points to a reference chroma block for copying as the current chroma block (See LI, Par. [0207]).
Apparatus claim 18 is drawn to the corresponding method claimed in Claim 8. Therefore Claim 18 corresponds to method Claim 8 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Conclusion
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).
The prior art references made of record are not relied upon but are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Zhang et al. (US 2019/0246143 A1) teaches intra block copy for video coding, where the MV for the luma coding block may be scaled to determine the MV for the chroma blocks, and the reference picture may be the same.
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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to SUSAN E HODGES whose telephone number is (571)270-0498. The Examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00 am - 4:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Brian T. Pendleton, can be reached on (571) . 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://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.
/Susan E. Hodges/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425
Prosecution Insights