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, 3-11, 13-21, 23-26, 28-30 and 35-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsukuba (US 2021/0144376) in view of Le Leannec et al. (US 2023/0396805, hereinafter Leannec).
Regarding claim 1, Tsukuba discloses a method of decoding video data (see figs. 27 and 33), the method comprising: receiving a block of video data encoded using a prediction mode (e.g. see ¶ [0114]); receiving a multiple transform selection (MTS) index (see S164 in fig. 12) for the block; determining, from a set of more than two transform candidate pairs (see fig. 3) determined for inter-coded blocks (see S163 in fig. 12) and based on the MTS index, a pair of transforms for decoding the block using a MTS process (e.g. see “Table A” “trSetIdx” = 0 and “EmtIdx” = 1 for pair of “{DST4, DCT2}” in fig. 3); and decoding the block using the pair of transforms (see 412 in fig. 27).
Although Tsukuba discloses encoding using a prediction mode, it is noted that Tsukuba does not disclose the particular wherein the prediction mode is an intra block copy mode.
However, Leannec discloses a method of decoding video data wherein the prediction mode is an intra block copy (IBC) mode or an intra template matching prediction (TMP) mode (see IBC and TMP in fig. 11).
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 Leannec teachings of IBC coding into Tsukuba intra coding as an upgrade for the benefit of providing a robust set of coding/decoding tools to effectively use multiple transform selection.
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Tsukuba further discloses wherein determining the pair of transforms, further comprises: determining the pair of transforms based on the MTS index and a size of the block (see S162 in fig. 12).
Regarding claims 4 and 14, Tsukuba further discloses wherein the set of more than two include a vertical type-2 discrete cosine transform (DCT-2) a horizontal DCT-2, and four other pairs of transforms (see fig. 3).
Regarding claims 5 and 15 transform candidate pairs, Tsukuba further discloses comprising: determining a number of transform candidate pairs in the set (see fig. 3).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, Tsukuba further discloses wherein determining the number of transform candidate pairs in the set comprises: decoding a syntax element (see fig. 3) indicating the number of transform candidate pairs in the set using arithmetic coding (e.g. see ¶ [0083]) and a dedicated context (e.g. see ¶ [0084]).
Although it is not explicitly recited, it is conventional in the art for arithmetic coding to be context adaptive binary arithmetic coding. The Examiner takes official notice that context adaptive binary arithmetic coding 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 incorporate context adaptive binary arithmetic coding for the benefit of efficiently code data.
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Tsukuba further discloses wherein determining the number of transform candidate pairs in the set comprises: determining an intra mode for the block based on a decoder side intramode derivation (DIMD) process (e.g. see ¶ [0075]-[0076]); and determining the number of transform candidate pairs in the set based on the intra mode (e.g. see ¶ [0075]-[0076]).
Regarding claims 8, 18, 23 and 28, Leannec further discloses wherein the block of video data is encoded using the IBC mode and the IBC mode is an advance motion vector prediction (AMVP) IBC mode (see fig. 11; e.g. see ¶ [0095]).
Regarding claims 9, 19, 24 and 29, Leannec further discloses wherein the block of video data is encoded using the IBC mode and the IBC mode is an advance motion vector prediction (AMVP) IBC mode or a merge IBC mode (see fig. 11; e.g. see ¶ [0095]).
Regarding claims 10, 20, 25 and 30, Tsukuba further discloses wherein the video data is natural content video data (e.g. see ¶ [0554]).
Regarding claim 11, the claim(s) recite an apparatus with analogous limitations to claim 1, and is/are therefore rejected on the same premise.
Regarding claim 21, the claim(s) recite a method of encoding (see Tsukuba fig. 21) with analogous limitations to claim 1, and is/are therefore rejected on the same premise.
Regarding claim 26, the claim(s) recite an apparatus (see Tsukuba 200 in fig. 15) with analogous limitations to claim 1, and is/are therefore rejected on the same premise.
Regarding claims 35 and 37, Tsukuba further discloses wherein the set of more than two transform candidate pairs is defined for the inter-coded blocks (see S163 in fig. 12).
Regarding claims 36 and 38, Tsukuba further discloses wherein the set of more than two transform candidate pairs is determined based on syntax data in a sequence parameter set, a picture parameter set, a picture header, or a slice header of the video data (e.g. see ¶ [0385]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1, 11, 21 and 26 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of another embodiment of the rejection.
Citation of Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chen et al. (US 2021/0120269 ), discloses multiple transform for video coding.
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