DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04/13/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Recognizing the claim amendments would trigger new grounds of rejection, Applicant did not provide substantive arguments in favor of waiting to consider the new grounds of rejection necessitated by amendment. Remarks, 5.
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 29, 49, 50, and 53–55 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Venugopal et al., “Intra Region-based Template Matching,” JVET-J0039, 10th Meeting: San Diego, April 2018, Marpe et al., “CE8 related: Intra Region-based Template Matching for luma and chroma,” JVET-K0050-v1, 11th Meeting: Ljubljana, July 2018 and Chen (US 2017/0302929 A1).
Regarding claim 29, the combination of Venugopal, Marpe, and Chen teaches or suggests a method for encoding a current block of picture information, the current block comprising a luma block and at least one chroma block, the method comprising: determining a luma displacement vector based on a template matching process applied to the luma block (Examiner notes this feature is interpreted in view of Applicant’s published paragraph [0007] in which it is explained the displacement vector is the result of template matching; Venugopal, Abstract and Section 1: teaches a template matching approach for determining a displacement vector between the current block and a prediction block from already decoded blocks in the same picture; Venugopal, Section 2.1: teaches the template matching is for luma); determining Cb and Cr chroma refinement areas respectively in partially decoded Cb and Cr chroma picture information based on the luma displacement vector (Marpe, Section 1: teaches determining the prediction of the chroma blocks based on the corresponding luma prediction); selecting a Cb chroma block by applying a template matching process in the Cb chroma refinement area, thereby determining a Cb displacement vector (Marpe, Section 1: teaches the final prediction for the chroma block “is generated in the same way as that of luma,” which determines a best template matching score within a search region; Examiner notes the region was already picked by the encoder for the luma block such that only a sub-portion of the available regions is necessary to be subjected to template matching; Examiner further notes that full template matching is suggested by Marpe but that Marpe decides, as a design choice, that decoder resources can be advantageously saved by not subjecting chroma to full template matching when the decisions about the luma block can be borrowed to speed up chroma processing; While Marpe’s teachings may not explicitly teach that which is obvious, Chen more clearly teaches what the skilled artisan would understand about predicting the chroma from the luma; Chen, ¶ 0118: teaches either using scaled motion vectors indicating a luma reference patch directly for locating the chroma reference patch without performing a chroma search or using a refined search around the area indicated by the scaled luma vector); selecting a Cr chroma block by applying a template matching prediction in the Cr chroma refinement area, thereby determining a Cr displacement vector (see previous with respect to Cb; The skilled artisan would be led to use the same process for both chroma channels); determining a prediction block for the current block based on samples of the selected luma, Cb chroma and Cr chroma blocks (Marpe, Section 1: teaches prediction units are determined for luma and chroma channels); adding the determined luma displacement vector to a list of Intra-Block Copy (IBC) block vector predictors for the current luma block (Examiner notes current picture referencing (CPR) is synonymous in the art with intra-block copy; Venugopal, Section 1: explains the already-coded block is copied for use as a prediction block for the current block); adding the determined Cb displacement vector to a list of IBC block vector predictors for a current Cb block (Examiner notes current picture referencing (CPR) is synonymous in the art with intra-block copy; Venugopal, Section 1: explains the already-coded block is copied for use as a prediction block for the current block); adding the determined Cr displacement vector to a list of IBC block vector predictors for a current Cr block (Examiner notes current picture referencing (CPR) is synonymous in the art with intra-block copy; Venugopal, Section 1: explains the already-coded block is copied for use as a prediction block for the current block); and encoding the current block based on the prediction block into a data content (Chen, ¶ 0037: teaches this very basic concept in teaching the purpose of intra- or inter-prediction is encoding a current block; The skilled artisan understands the benefit of encoding is that the current block can later be decoded at the decoder; Venugopal, Section 1: teaches the encoder transmits information to the decoder for indicating the use of template matching and where to search; see also Venugopal, Section 3: teaching the bitstream having indications of the use of the RTM tool).
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 Venugopal, with those of Marpe, because both references are drawn to the same field of endeavor such that one wishing to practice current picture referencing using template matching would have been led to their relevant teachings, because both references have common authorship, and because Marpe literally references Venugopal’s work as extending the teachings to chroma channels. Thus, 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 Venugopal and Marpe 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 Venugopal and Marpe, with those of Chen, because all three references are drawn to the same field of endeavor such that one wishing to practice current picture referencing using template matching would have been led to their relevant teachings, and because the skilled artisan understands current picture referencing using displacement vectors is really the same as motion prediction using motion vectors such that the skilled artisan would be led to use the refinement search for chroma used in motion compensation for the purposes of intra-prediction using templates. Thus, 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 Venugopal, Marpe, and Chen used in this Office Action unless otherwise noted.
Regarding claim 49, the combination of Venugopal, Marpe, and Chen teaches or suggests a method of claim 29, further comprising signaling, in the data content, a flag indicating whether different displacement vectors are used for the luma block and the at least one chroma block, wherein when the flag indicates that different displacement vectors are not used, only the luma displacement vector is used for the at least one chroma block (Marpe, Section 1: teaches the final prediction for the chroma block “is generated in the same way as that of luma,” which determines a best template matching score within a search region; Examiner notes the region was already picked by the encoder for the luma block such that only a sub-portion of the available regions is necessary to be subjected to template matching; Examiner further notes that full template matching is suggested by Marpe but that Marpe decides, as a design choice, that decoder resources can be advantageously saved by not subjecting chroma to full template matching when the decisions about the luma block can be borrowed to speed up chroma processing; While Marpe’s teachings may not explicitly teach that which is obvious, Chen more clearly teaches what the skilled artisan would understand about predicting the chroma from the luma; Chen, ¶ 0118: teaches either using scaled motion vectors indicating a luma reference patch directly for locating the chroma reference patch without performing a chroma search or using a refined search around the area indicated by the scaled luma vector; In other words, the prior art, as a whole, teaches an independent search for chroma, no search for chroma, and a refinement search for chroma; Given such a teaching, the skilled artisan would understand the need to signal the chosen approach to the decoder).
Regarding claim 50, the combination of Venugopal, Marpe, and Chen teaches or suggests a method of claim 49, wherein the flag is signaled at the coding unit (CU) level, a slice level, a picture level, or a sequence parameter set (SPS) level (Chen, ¶ 0017: teaches search strategy information can be signaled at the SPS, PPS, slice, or block level).
Claim 53 lists the same elements as claim 29, but is drawn to the corresponding decoder rather than the encoder. Because the processes are reciprocal, the rationale for the rejection of claim 29 applies to the instant claim.
Claim 54 lists the same elements as claim 49, but is drawn to the corresponding decoder rather than the encoder. Because the processes are reciprocal, the rationale for the rejection of claim 49 applies to the instant claim.
Claim 55 lists the same elements as claim 50, but is drawn to the corresponding decoder rather than the encoder. Because the processes are reciprocal, the rationale for the rejection of claim 50 applies to the instant claim.
Claims 51, 52, 56, and 57 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Venugopal, Marpe, Chen, and Chen (US 2021/0250580 A1) (herein “Chen-2”).
Regarding claim 51, the combination of Venugopal, Marpe, Chen, and Chen-2 teaches or suggests the method of claim 29, wherein adding the determined luma, Cb, and Cr displacement vectors comprises storing the respective vectors in a history-based block vector predictor list for subsequent use by other blocks (Chen-2, ¶ 0068: teaches the IBC predictions can be stored in a history-based block predictor list).
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 Venugopal, Marpe, and Chen, with those of Chen-2, because all four references are drawn to the same field of endeavor such that one wishing to practice current picture referencing using template matching would have been led to their relevant teachings, and because the skilled artisan understands current picture referencing using displacement vectors is really the same as motion prediction using motion vectors such that the skilled artisan would be led to apply history-based motion vector prediction to IBC block vector candidates as explicitly described in Chen-2. Thus, 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 Venugopal, Marpe, Chen, and Chen-2 used in this Office Action unless otherwise noted.
Regarding claim 52, the combination of Venugopal, Marpe, Chen, and Chen-2 teaches or suggests the method of claim 29, further comprising indicating that the added luma, Cb, and Cr displacement vectors are refined vectors; and skipping a subsequent refinement process for the added displacement vectors during an IBC merge mode process (Chen-2, ¶ 0177: teaches the optional BV refinement process; Chen-2, ¶ 0018: teaches the skip and merge processes skip the residual vector difference from the prediction; see also rationale for the rejection of claim 49, wherein it is explained the art contemplates refinement or no refinement).
Claim 56 lists the same elements as claim 51, but is drawn to the corresponding decoder rather than the encoder. Because the processes are reciprocal, the rationale for the rejection of claim 51 applies to the instant claim.
Claim 57 lists the same elements as claim 52, but is drawn to the corresponding decoder rather than the encoder. Because the processes are reciprocal, the rationale for the rejection of claim 52 applies to the instant claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sethuraman (US 2021/0329257 A1) teaches that while only luma samples are predicted for DMVR, chroma is also subjected to prediction and refinement by suitably scaling the chroma predictions due to chroma downsampling (¶ 0018).
Lai (US 2018/0359486 A1) teaches refining motion vectors for chroma instead of directly reusing luma motion vectors within a refinement range (¶ 0110).
Chen (US 2020/0128258 A1) teaches a template refinement process that directly uses the vector of the luma component with chroma scaling to account for chroma color sampling (¶ 0015).
Sim (US 2017/0134726 A1) teaches a current CU can be encoded in a template-matching prediction mode (IBC) and whether a block vector is identical to a neighboring block vector or has a residual component (¶ 0151).
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 on 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 571-273-8300.
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.
/MICHAEL J HESS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2481
Prosecution Insights