DETAILED ACTION
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Following prior arts are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20120263235 A1 (hereinafter Sugio)
US 20130077871 A1 (hereinafter Lu)
US 20120170648 A1 (hereinafter Chen)
US 20120320969 A1 (hereinafter Zheng)
US20040223657A1 (hereinafter Sugimoto)
US 20130003857 A1 (hereinafter Yu)
US 20130128982 A1 (Kim)
US-20140177707-A1 (George)
US 20110293010 A1 (hereinafter Jeong)
CE9:Unified Merge and AMVP candidates selection (UNI03), Document:JCTVC-F297, Joint Collaborative Team on Video Coding (JCT-VC) of ITU-T SG16 WP3 and ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11 6th Meeting:Torino, IT, 14-22 July, 2011
Response to Remarks/Arguments
Rejection made under 35 USC § 112 (d) have been withdrawn in view of cancellation of the claim.
Double patenting rejection has been withdrawn in view of approved terminal disclaimer.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim rejections have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for following reason.
Re: Prior art rejection of independent claims
Applicant argued in substance that the Lu does not teaches the argued claimed limitation because Lu’s neighboring QPs does not teach previous QP
Examiner respectfully disagrees and argues that neighboring blocks are previously decoded/encoded that’s why they can be reused, otherwise they won’t be available to reuse in current block prediction, this is well understood in the art. Also, Lu recites “The quantization parameter predictor is determined using multiple quantization parameters from previously coded neighboring portions” {Lu’s Abstract}; “The QP predictor is formed by multiple QPs from neighboring blocks of previously encoded/decoded coding units” {Lu’s para 70}
Furthermore, Lu’s claims 1-3 recites these as reproduced below.
1. An apparatus, comprising: an encoder for encoding image data for at least a portion of a picture using a quantization parameter predictor for a current quantization parameter to be applied to the image data, the quantization parameter predictor being determined using multiple quantization parameters from previously coded neighboring portions, wherein a difference between the current quantization parameter and the quantization parameter predictor is encoded for signaling to a corresponding decoder.
2. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the quantization parameter predictor is implicitly derived based on a rule that is known to both the encoder and the decoder.
3. The apparatus of claim 2, wherein the rule is for at least one of determining and selecting the quantization parameter predictor responsive to at least one of a quantization parameter having a minimum value from among the multiple quantization parameters, a quantization parameter having a maximum value from among the multiple quantization parameters, a quantization parameter calculated from a median value of at least some of the multiple quantization parameters, and a quantization parameter calculated from a mean value of at least some of the multiple quantization parameters.
Therefore applicant’s arguments are not persuasive
Re: Prior art rejection of dependent claims
Applicant has presented no additional argument, other than arguments already presented with respect to independent claims. Therefore, the arguments are similarly not persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating
Claims 1 & 3 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sugio in view of Lu in view of Chen in view of Zheng further in view of Sugimoto.
Regarding Claim 1: Sugio teaches 1. A method of decoding [(Fig. 11 & Fig. 10)] video data in merge mode, comprising: constructing a merge candidate list using available spatial and temporal merge candidates, [(para 111 & s54 of Fig. 11. In Fig. 6 see Merge block candidate includes Neighbor block {teaches claimed spatial} and co-located merge block {teaches temporal: “a merge block from which at least one motion vector and at least one reference picture index value are copied” para 111, motion vector indicates motion information: which is indicated by the candidate list}))] :
deriving motion information using a merge index and the merge candidate list[(para 111 & s55, s53 in Fig. 11)] : generating a prediction block using the motion information[(para 111)] : generating a residual block by inverse-quantizing a quantized block and by inverse-transforming the inverse quantized block[(unit 202, 203 of Fig.10 and para 106, prediction error is residual block: )] : and generating a reconstructed block using the residual block and the prediction block[(para 109, unit 211 of Fig.10, reconstructing/decoding )] ,
Sugio does not explicitly teach
a quantization parameter and a quantization matrix is used in the inverse-quantization
wherein the quantization parameter is generated per quantization unit and a minimum size of the quantization unit is adjusted per picture, the quantization parameter is generated using a quantization parameter predictor and a differential quantization parameter,
wherein the differential quantization parameter is generated by restoring a bin string indicating an absolute value of the differential quantization parameter and a bin indicating a sign of the differential quantization parameter,
wherein the quantization parameter predictor is generated using a left quantization parameter and an above quantization parameter when both of the left and above quantization parameters are available, the quantization parameter predictor is generated using the above quantization parameter and a previous quantization parameter when the left quantization parameter is not available, and the quantization parameter predictor is generated using the left quantization parameter and the previous quantization parameter when the above quantization parameter is not available,
wherein available blocks of a left block, an above block, an above-right block and an left-below block are set as available spatial merge candidate blocks, and available above-left block is added as available merger candidate block when at least one of the left block, the above block, the above-right block, and the left-below block is unavailable.
However, Lu, in the same field of endeavor, teaches
a quantization parameter and a quantization matrix is being used in inverse-quantization [(para 5, teaches quantization on encoder, on the decoder side it is inverse-quantization)]
the quantization parameter is generated using a quantization parameter predictor and a differential quantization parameter [(para 85)]
wherein the quantization parameter predictor is generated using a left quantization parameter and an above quantization parameter when both of the left and above quantization parameters are available,
[(para 79-80, 74, Fig.7.
PNG
media_image1.png
174
399
media_image1.png
Greyscale
QPA, QPB are left and above quantization parameters respectively, please see Fig.7 and para 74)] ,
the quantization parameter predictor is generated using the above quantization parameter and a previous quantization parameter when the left quantization parameter is not available, [(is taught by Rule 4 in para 79 and the fact in para 80 that when any of QPs are not available use the available QPs. For rule 4, if QPA is not available QP of other block can be used to replace it {para 80}, QP of other block teaches previous quantization parameter because they are previously coded {para 74})] ,
and the quantization parameter predictor is generated using the left quantization parameter and the previous quantization parameter when the above quantization parameter is not available, [(is taught by Rule 4 in para 79 and the fact in para 80 that when any of QPs are not available use the available QPs from other blocks. {para 80}, QP of other block teaches previous quantization parameter because they are previously coded {para 74})] ,
Therefore in light of above discussion it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system disclosed by Sugio with the teaching of Lu, because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Sugio in view of Lu does not explicitly teach wherein the quantization parameter is generated per quantization unit and a minimum size of the quantization unit is adjusted per picture, the quantization parameter is generated using a quantization parameter predictor and a differential quantization parameter
and wherein the differential quantization parameter is generated by restoring a bin string indicating an absolute value of the differential quantization parameter and a bin indicating a sign of the differential quantization parameter, and
wherein available blocks of a left block, an above block, an above-right block and an left-below block are set as available spatial merge candidate blocks, and available above-left block is added as available merger candidate block when at least one of the left block, the above block, the above-right block, and the left-below block is unavailable.
However Chen, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the quantization parameter is generated per quantization unit and a minimum size of the quantization unit is adjusted per picture, [(para 110, 109, please note minimum QP depth {used to find minimum coding unit size } is signaled, in a PPS {para 110} PPS is picture parameter set {para 109})] , the quantization parameter is generated using a quantization parameter predictor and a differential quantization parameter[(equation 1 in para 108 and para 109: QPy,PREV teaches the predictor and the delta QP teaches the differential)] ,
Therefore in light of above discussion it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system disclosed by Sugio in view of Lu by incorporating the teaching of Chen, because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention.
Sugio in view of Lu in view of Chen does not explicitly teach wherein available blocks of a left block, an above block, an above-right block and an left-below block are set as available spatial merge candidate blocks, and available above-left block is added as available merger candidate block when at least one of the left block, the above block, the above-right block, and the left-below block is unavailable. And
and wherein the differential quantization parameter is generated by restoring a bin string indicating an absolute value of the differential quantization parameter and a bin indicating a sign of the differential quantization parameter,
However Zheng, in the same field of endeavor, teaches available blocks of a left block, an above block, an above-right block and an left-below block are set as available spatial merge candidate blocks, and available above-left block is added as available merger candidate block when at least one of the left block, the above block, the above-right block, and the left-below block is unavailable [(Fig.5A and Provisional application no:61/499114 see Fig.4 and para 13)] ,
Therefore, in light of above discussion it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teaching of the prior art because by reusing motion information, even more, processing of motion estimation is reduced by avoiding full motion estimation.
Sugio in view of Lu in view of Chen in view of Zheng does not explicitly shows the differential quantization parameter is generated by restoring a bin string indicating an absolute value of the differential quantization parameter and a bin indicating a sign of the differential quantization parameter.
However, Chen teaches that differential quantization parameters are coded using arithmetic coding [(Chen para 45)] and Sugimoto, teaches that during arithmetic coding differential parameter is generated by restoring a bin string indicating an absolute value [(Fig.10 shows the bin string representing differential value)] of the differential parameter and a bin indicating a sign of the differential parameter [(Fig.9 shows bin for sign)]
Therefore, in light of above discussion it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system disclosed by Sugio in view of Lu in view of Chen in view of Zhou to include the teaching of Sugimoto, because Sugimoto simply providing the details of arithmetic coding (the arithmetic coding being used by Chen), the details of arithmetic coding that Chen is silent.
Lu additionally teaches, with respect to claim 3. The method of claim 1, wherein when the left and above quantization are unavailable, the previous quantization parameter is set as the quantization parameter predictor. [(Lu teaches this; It is taught by Rule 4 in para 79 and the fact in para 80 that when the QPA/left and QPB/above are not available Rule 4 only have QPc, QP of other block {in this case QPC} teaches previous quantization parameter because they are previously coded {para 74})] ,
Claim 4 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sugio in view of Lu in view of Chen in view of Zheng in view of Sugimoto.
further in view of Yu.
Regarding Claim 4:Please refer to previously presented analysis of the base/independent claim and any intervening claim(s) on which the current claim depends upon and section of prior art(s) relied upon therein.
Sugio in view of Lu in view of Chen in view of Zheng in view of Sugimoto does not explicitly shows that when a size of the quantized block is larger than a predetermined size, a plurality of subsets are generated by inversely scanning quantized coefficient information and the quantized block is generated by inversely scanning the plurality of subsets using a diagonal scan.
However, Yu teaches that when a size of quantized block is larger than a predetermined size, a plurality of subsets are generated by inversely scanning quantized coefficient information and the quantized block is generated by inversely scanning the plurality of subsets using a diagonal scan. ((para 100: Also see para 80, & 81 & 97, 98))
Therefore, in light of above discussion it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system disclosed by Sugio in view of Lu in view of Chen in view of Zhou to include the teaching of Yu, because such incorporation would have aligned the system with known techniques of high efficiency video coding therefore improve the coding efficiency ((see para 100 & 9)).
Conclusion
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 Shahan Rahaman whose telephone number is (571)270-1438. The examiner can normally be reached on 7am - 3:30pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nasser Goodarzi can be reached at telephone number (571) 272-4195. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/SHAHAN UR RAHAMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426