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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species II (claims 1-2, 4-5, 11-12, 14-15, and 20) in the reply filed on 8/4/25 is acknowledged.
Claims 3, 6-10, 13, 16-19 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 8/4/25.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 11-12, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2024/0205391 A1 (“Kidani”).
Regarding claim 1, Kidani discloses a video decoding method, comprising: partitioning a current block into a first region and a second region based on a geometric partitioning mode (e.g. see partitioning a current block into two areas of partitioned area A and partitioned area B as shown in at least Fig. 5 based on geometric partitioning mode, paragraphs [0105]-[0114]); determining intra prediction mode candidates for the first region, based on at least one of a most probable mode (MPM) list, intra- prediction modes of one or more pre-reconstructed blocks adjacent to the current block, one or more reference pixels adjacent to the current block, or a third region adjacent to the current block (e.g. see constructing intra prediction mode candidate list, e.g. as shown in Fig. 7, paragraphs [0112]-[0114], [0119], [0130], [0196]-[0197], based on adjacent reference samples or adjacent reference blocks as disclosed in the text and shown in Figs. 8-11); generating an intra prediction block corresponding to the first region based on the intra prediction mode candidates (e.g. see after derivation of intra prediction mode (construction of the intra prediction mode candidate list) is completed, the intra prediction unit may select any one intra prediction mode in the intra prediction mode candidate list for each of the partitioned areas A/B, e.g. see Fig. 5, to be used for intra prediction sample generation, paragraph [0120]); generating an inter prediction block corresponding to the second region (e.g. see inter prediction of partitioned area B as shown in Fig. 5, paragraphs [0105]-[0114]); and generating a prediction block of the current block (e.g. see generating prediction signal for each prediction block as shown in Fig. 3, paragraphs [0089]-[0094]), based on the intra prediction block and the inter prediction block (e.g. see intra/inter-GPM in Fig. 5, paragraphs [0105]-[0114]), wherein determining the intra prediction mode candidates comprises: determining the one or more pre-reconstructed blocks adjacent to the current block based on an angle of a partition boundary between the first region and the second region (e.g. see defining adjacent reference blocks as shown in Fig. 11 based on angle of GPM partition line as shown in Fig. 9, paragraph [0196]; also see paragraphs [0159]-[0161]); and determining the intra prediction mode candidates using intra prediction modes of the one or more pre-reconstructed blocks (e.g. see constructing intra prediction mode candidate list, e.g. as shown in Fig. 7, paragraphs [0112]-[0114], [0119], [0130], [0196]-[0197], based on adjacent reference samples or adjacent reference blocks as disclosed in the text and shown in Figs. 8-11).
Regarding claim 2, Kidani further discloses wherein the first region is an upper left region of the current block, and the second region is a lower right region of the current block (e.g. see partitioning a current block into two areas of partitioned area A and partitioned area B as shown in Fig. 5, paragraphs [0105]-[0114]).
Regarding claims 11-12, 20, the claims recite analogous limitations to the claims above and are therefore rejected on the same premise.
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, 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.
Claim(s) 4-5, 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kidani in view of US 2022/0394269 A1 (“Cao”).
Regarding claim 4, Kidani discloses wherein generating the intra prediction block corresponding to the first region comprises: generating one or more prediction pixels by applying one or more candidate modes in the list to one or more reference pixels of the third region adjacent to the current block (e.g. see template-based intra mode derivation, e.g. for partitioned area A in Fig. 5, to generate intra prediction for template by using a predetermined intra prediction mode from candidate list for normal intra prediction on adjacent reference sample for template as shown in Fig. 10, paragraphs [0163]-[0165])); calculating variable values based on differences between the one or more prediction pixels and one or more reconstructed pixels of the third region (e.g. see sum of absolute transformed difference SATD, paragraphs [0163]-[0165]); and deriving, based on the variable values, the intra prediction block corresponding to the first region (e.g. see an intra prediction mode in which the SATD is minimum is derived as the intra prediction mode of the TIMD to generate an intra prediction sample, paragraphs [0163]-[0165]).
Although Kidani discloses the one or more candidate modes in the list, it is noted Kidani differs from the present invention in that it fails to particularly disclose MPM list. Cao however, teaches MPM list (e.g. see most-probable mode (MPM) list, paragraphs [0022]-[0023], [0077]).
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the references of Kidani and Cao before him/her, to modify the Image decoding device, image decoding method, and program of Kidani with the teachings of Cao in order to improve coding efficiency and performance of intra prediction by further enhancing the efficiency of TIMD.
Regarding claim 5, Kidani further discloses wherein the third region is determined based on the current block or the first region (e.g. see adjacent reference sample (hereinafter, a template) of a predetermined line adjacent to the block to be decoded, adjacent reference samples for the template as illustrated in Fig. 10, paragraphs [0163]-[0165]; also see paragraph [0180]).
Regarding claims 14-15, the claims recite analogous limitations to the claims above and are therefore rejected on the same premise.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/20/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts on pages 8-9 of the Remarks that Kidani fails to disclose “determining the one or more pre-reconstructed blocks adjacent to the current block based on an angle of a partition boundary between the first region and the second region” because paragraphs [0105]-[0108], [0112]-[0113] of Kidani merely discloses that “the intra prediction mode may be determined based on already-decoded neighboring blocks or samples and from the partitioned shape of the GPM or from reference information.” Further, applicant asserts on page 9 that Kidani fails to disclose “determining the intra prediction mode candidates using intra prediction modes of the one or more pre-reconstructed blocks” because paragraphs [0112]-[0113] of Kidani merely discloses that “for the intra prediction additionally applied to the GPM, the intra prediction mode may also be derived based on adjacent reference samples or adjacent reference blocks that are adjacent to the block to be decoded and have been previously decoded.”
However, the examiner respectfully disagrees. At least paragraph [0196] of Kidani discloses to define adjacent reference blocks as shown in Fig. 11 based on angle of GPM partition line as shown in Fig. 9. For example, when the partitioned shape (angleIdx) of the geometric partitioning mode is “0”, the partitioned area A refers to the intra prediction of only the adjacent reference block (B0, B1 and B2 in Fig. 11) adjacent only to the upper portion of the block to be decoded. Further, construction of intra prediction mode candidate list, e.g. in Fig. 7, is based on at least adjacent reference blocks, see paragraphs [0112]-[0114], [0119], [0130], [0196]-[0197]. For at least these reasons, the arguments are not persuasive.
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 FRANCIS G GEROLEO whose telephone number is (571)270-7206. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 am - 3:30 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, Anna M Momper can be reached on (571) 270-5788. 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.
/Francis Geroleo/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights