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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 March 6, 2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on November 12, 2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
Applicant(s) Response to Official Action
The response filed on January 9, 2026 has been entered and made of record. Claims 1, 5 and 12 - 14 have been amended. Claims 4 and 6 were previously cancelled. Accordingly, claims 1 - 3, 5 and 7 - 14 are currently pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s submitted Amendments to the Specification has overcome the title objection previously set forth in the Final Office Action mailed October 9, 2025. Accordingly, the objection is withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments see pages 8 – 10 with respect to the rejection of Claims 1 - 3, 5 and 7 - 14 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by BORDES et al., (US 2020/0280727 A1) in view of LI et al. (US 2023/0300352 A1) have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Examiner’s response to the presented arguments follows below:
Applicant has amended claim 1 to includes limitations of the previous presented claim 5 “wherein the plurality of modes includes a first mode in which a region including at least one sample in the top-left neighboring region is used as the reference region” which was previously rejected under 35 USC 103 over Bordes (US 2020/0280727 A1) in view of Li (US 2023/0300352 A1). Claims 12 - 14 have been similarly amended.
Applicant argues on page 9 that “Li does not disclose or suggest a mode that references samples located in the top-left region”. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant further states that “each of these modes of Li relies on reference samples that are only adjacent to the top side "and/or" the left side of the current block. More specifically: LIC_LT references samples adjacent to the top side and the left side only, LIC_T references samples adjacent to the top side only, and LIC_L references samples adjacent to the left side only”. Applicant clearly states "and/or", in reference to top “and” left side. Therefore, Applicant acknowledges that the LIC_LT reference samples are adjacent to the top side “and” the left side. Furthermore, as described, Li clearly discloses in [0106] “To simplify parameter estimation, four points estimation can be used, in which only four pairs of samples are used. LIC also has three modes: LIC_LT, LIC_T and LIC_L, where FIG. 10C illustrates exemplary LIC model parameters estimations using four pairs for LIC_LT. As shown in FIG. 10C, when "both" the top row "and" the left column are available, the reconstructed samples (e.g., A, B, C, and D) of the neighboring block of the current block are selected”. BORDES does not specifically teach signaling of an index information. Li is relied upon for teaching this limitation. LI teaches wherein the first reference region is determined based on one of a plurality of modes for specifying a reference region of the current block (Par. [0106], LIC also has three modes (i.e. plurality of modes): LIC_LT (i.e. left and top region), LIC_T (i.e. top region) and LIC_L (i.e. left region)), wherein the one of the plurality of modes is determined based on index information signaled from a bitstream to indicate the one of the plurality of modes (Table 3, Par. [0136] At step 1204, an index associated with a coding unit based on the bitstream is decoded is signaled. The index indicating a selection mode among at least four selection modes (i.e. plurality of modes). For example, the selection modes can include LT, ELT, T, ET, L and EL). Li further teaches wherein the plurality of modes (i.e. LIC_LT, LIC T and LIC_L), includes a first mode (i.e. LIC_LT) in which a region including at least one sample in the top-left neighboring region is used as the reference region(i.e. LIC_LT, top and left, Par. [0106]). References BORDES and LI are considered to be analogous art because they relate to illumination compensation video coding. Therefore, it would have been obvious that one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would specify a selection from a plurality of modes indicated by an index information as suggested by LI in the invention of BORDES. This modification would allow a flag to determine whether a LIC mode is used or not, and when the mode is used, an index will be further signaled to indicate which pair of selection modes (i.e. left and top, top or left regions) are used (See LI, Par. [0119]). Accordingly, BORDES in view of Li teaches the limitations as amended in claim 1.
Applicant further argues on page 10 that the “while Bordes' merge/AMVP mode concerns the inference of motion information for inter-prediction purposes, the claimed first mode is directed to defining a reference region from which the parameter is derived for pre-predicted samples”. In response to applicant’s argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., pre-predicted samples) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). And further, In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Bordes clearly describes in Par. [0058] “The present embodiments are directed to methods and apparatus for adaptively choosing the neighboring samples to be used to derive the IC (illumination compensation) parameters. In particular, techniques are proposed to improve block-based IC by varying the selection of reconstructed neighboring samples used to estimate IC parameters so that they may be better correlated with the current block samples”. BORDES does not specifically teach signaling of an index information. Li is relied upon for teaching this limitation. Therefore, BORDES in view of Li teaches the limitations as amended in claim 1.
Accordingly, the rejections are maintained.
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, 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, 5, 7 - 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BORDES et al., (US 2020/0280727 A1) referred to as BORDES hereinafter, and in view of LI et al. (US 2023/0300352 A1) referred to as LI hereinafter.
Regarding Claim 1, BORDES teaches an image decoding method (Par. [0059] FIG. 8 illustrates an exemplary process 800 for selecting reconstructed neighboring samples for calculating IC parameters), comprising:
obtaining a prediction sample of a current block (Par. [0059] At step 810, for a current block, the motion information (e.g., MV, reference picture index) is obtained and used to build prediction information (i.e. obtain prediction sample) with the motion compensation (MC) process);
deriving, based on a first reference region for the current block (Par. [0054], The IC parameters are estimated by comparing the reconstructed neighboring samples (i.e., samples in L-shape-cur region 602′ of a current block 603′) with the neighboring samples (samples in L-shape-ref-i region, 602″ (i.e. first reference region)) of the reference-i block (i=0 or 1) 603″), a first parameter for modifying the prediction sample of the current block (Par. [0060] At step 840, IC parameters are estimated (i.e. derive first parameter) with the selected set S of neighboring samples and corresponding samples in the reference picture. Here, the corresponding samples in the reference picture may be chosen as the neighboring samples of the prediction block for the current block (i.e. first reference region)); and
obtaining a first modified prediction sample by modifying the prediction sample of the current block based on the first parameter (Par. [0060], At step 850, the estimated IC parameters are used for the illumination compensation for the prediction of the current block, i.e., adjusted based on the IC function, for example, the samples in the prediction block are adjusted (i.e. modified prediction sample) using Eq. (1)),
wherein the first reference region includes a neighboring region of the current block (Par. [0054], The IC parameters are estimated by comparing the reconstructed neighboring samples (i.e., samples in L-shape-cur region 602′ of a current block 603′) with the neighboring samples (samples in L-shape-ref-i region, 602″ (i.e. neighboring region)) of the reference-i block (i=0 or 1) 603″,
wherein the neighboring region of the current block includes at least one of a top neighboring region, a left neighboring region, a top-left neighboring region, a top-right neighboring region, or a bottom-left neighboring region (Fig. 9(a) and Fig. 9(b), Par. [0026], examples of selection of a plurality of samples for IC parameter calculation, Par. [0066], L-shape is shown in dashed line which corresponds to an L-shape extended to further include top-left, bottom-left, or top-right neighboring blocks), and
wherein the plurality of modes includes a first mode in which a region including at least one sample in the top-left neighboring region is used as the reference region (Par. [0052] FIG. 4 illustrates using FRUC to derive motion information for a current block 410. The current block may be in the “merge” or “AMVP” mode. Top and left neighboring blocks of the current block are used as a template),
BORDES does not specifically teach signaling of an index information. BORDES fails to explicitly teach wherein the first reference region is determined based on one of a plurality of modes for specifying a reference region of the current block, wherein the one of the plurality of modes is determined based on index information signaled from a bitstream to indicate the one of the plurality of modes.
However, LI teaches wherein the first reference region is determined based on one of a plurality of modes for specifying a reference region of the current block (Par. [0106], LIC also has three modes (i.e. plurality of modes): LIC_LT (i.e. left and top region), LIC_T (i.e. top region) and LIC_L (i.e. left region)), wherein the one of the plurality of modes is determined based on index information signaled from a bitstream to indicate the one of the plurality of modes (Table 3, Par. [0136] At step 1204, an index associated with a coding unit based on the bitstream is decoded is signaled. The index indicating a selection mode among at least four selection modes (i.e. plurality of modes). For example, the selection modes can include LT, ELT, T, ET, L and EL).
References BORDES and LI are considered to be analogous art because they relate to illumination compensation video coding. Therefore, it would have been obvious that one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would specify a selection from a plurality of modes indicated by an index information as suggested by LI in the invention of BORDES. This modification would allow a flag to determine whether a LIC mode is used or not, and when the mode is used, an index will be further signaled to indicate which pair of selection modes (i.e. left and top, top or left regions) are used (See LI, Par. [0119]).
Regarding Claim 2, BORDES in view of LI teaches Claim 1. BORDES further teaches wherein the first parameter is derived based on one or more samples selected among samples belonging to the first reference region (Par. [0065], neighboring samples belonging to a block (such as one or more of T0, T1, T2, L0, L1 and L2) (i.e. first reference regions), which shares the same reference picture as the current block and/or has a MV value close to the MV value of the current block, will be selected for the derivation of the IC parameters (i.e. first parameter) for the current block), and wherein the one or more samples are selected based on at least one of coding information of the current block (Par. [0059], the selection of the set S of neighboring samples will be based on information (i.e. coding information) used to reconstruct one or more neighboring reconstructed blocks), sub-sampling for the first reference region, a predetermined threshold value, or a representative sample of the first reference region.
Regarding Claim 3, BORDES in view of LI teaches Claim 2. BORDES further teaches wherein the first reference region includes at least one of a first sample line adjacent to the current block (Par. [0065], top part 901-1 of the L-shape template 901 belong to neighboring blocks T0, T1 and T2, (i.e. adjacent sample line) and neighboring samples on the left part 901-2 of the L-shape template 901 belong to the blocks L0, L1 and L2 (i.e. adjacent sample line)) or a second sample line not adjacent to the current block (Par. [0066], a different L-shape is shown in dashed line which corresponds to an L-shape extended (i.e. not adjacent sample lines) to further include top-left, bottom-left, or top-right neighboring blocks. In this example, neighboring samples on the top part 911-1 of the L-shape template 911 belong to neighboring blocks T0, T1, T2 and T3, where T3 is not adjacent, and neighboring samples on the left part 911-2 of the L-shape template 911 belong to blocks L0, L1, L2, L3 and L4, where L3 and L4 are not adjacent).
Regarding Claim 4, it has been cancelled.
Regarding Claim 5, BORDES in view of LI teaches Claim 1. BORDES further teaches wherein the plurality of modes further includes at least one of a second mode or a third mode, wherein the second mode refers to a mode in which a region including at least one sample belonging to the top neighboring region and not including at least one sample belonging to the top-left neighboring region is used as the reference region (Par. [0075], if the MV predictor index indicates a neighboring block above (i.e. top region, not top-left region) the current block, then the set of samples S is equal to the upper part of the L-shape template), and
wherein the third mode refers to a mode in which a region including at least one sample belonging to the left neighboring region and not including at least one sample belonging to the top-left neighboring region is used as the reference region (Par. [0075], if the MV predictor index indicates a neighboring block to the left of the current block (i.e. left region, but not top-left region), then the set S of samples is equal to the left part of the L-shape template).
Regarding Claim 6, it has been cancelled.
Regarding Claim 7, BORDES in view of LI teaches Claim 1. BORDES further teaches wherein the index information is obtained from the bitstream based on a first flag indicating whether modification for the prediction sample is enabled for a coded video sequence (Par. [0056], In the bitstream, when IC is enabled for the current slice, picture or sequence, an indication such as, e.g., an IC flag may be encoded per block to indicate whether IC is enabled for this block or not), a second flag indicating whether modification is performed on the prediction sample of the current block, or a third flag indicating whether modification for the prediction sample is not enabled for a current slice including the current block.
Regarding Claim 8, BORDES in view of LI teaches Claim 1. BORDES further teaches wherein the current block is divided into a plurality of sub- regions including a first sub-region and a second sub-region (Fig. 17, Par. [0086] In case of sub-CU coding where the current CU is divided into multiple sub-CUs, OBMC is applied to each sub-CU), wherein the first sub-region (As illustrated in Fig. 17, first sub region is sub-CU top) represents a sub-region adjacent to the first reference region (i.e. adjacent to CU top reference region), and the second sub-region (As illustrated in Fig. 17 second sub region is sub-CU left) represents a region that is not adjacent to the first reference region (i.e. which is not adjacent to CU top reference region), and wherein when the prediction sample belongs to the first sub-region, the prediction sample is modified using the first parameter (Par. [0075], if the MV predictor index indicates a neighboring block above (i.e. first sub-region) the current block, then the set of samples S is equal to the upper part of the L-shape template), while when the prediction sample belongs to the second sub-region, the prediction sample is not modified using the first parameter (Par. [0075], if the MV predictor index indicates a neighboring block to the left of the current block (i.e. left region, not with first parameter), then the set S of samples is equal to the left part of the L-shape template).
Regarding Claim 9, BORDES in view of LI teaches Claim 8. BORDES further teaches wherein when the prediction sample belongs to the second sub-region (Fig. 17, sub-CU left is the second sub-region, Par. [0086] In case of sub-CU coding where the current CU is divided into multiple sub-CUs, OBMC is applied to each sub-CU), the prediction sample is modified based on a second parameter (Par. [0060] At step 840, IC parameters (i.e. second parameter) are estimated with the selected set S of neighboring samples and corresponding samples in the reference picture), and wherein the second parameter is derived based on a second reference region adjacent to the second sub-region Par. [0075], if the MV predictor index indicates a neighboring block to the left of the current block (i.e. second sub-region), then the set S of samples is equal to the left part of the L-shape template).
Regarding Claim 10, BORDES in view of LI teaches Claim 1. BORDES further teaches wherein the first parameter is variably determined based on a position of the prediction sample or a sample line to which the prediction sample belongs (Par. [0058] methods and apparatus for adaptively (i.e. variably) choosing the neighboring samples to be used to derive the IC parameters, such that the IC process can more effectively improve the current block prediction. In particular, techniques are proposed to improve block-based IC by varying the selection of reconstructed neighboring samples (i.e. position of prediction sample) used to estimate IC parameters so that they may be better correlated with the current block samples).
Regarding Claim 11, BORDES in view of LI teaches Claim 5. BORDES further teaches further comprising:
deriving, based on a second reference region for the current block (Par. [0068], Method 1000 can be used in step 830 (i.e. select adaptive set of neighboring samples) of method 800. At step 1010, the list of neighboring blocks of the current block is obtained. As shown in FIG. 9(a), the list may contain top neighboring blocks (e.g., T0, T1 and T2), and left neighboring blocks (e.g., L0, L1 and L2) (i.e. second reference region). The neighboring samples in the L-shape template belonging to the particular block ‘b’ are added to the selected sample set S. The process 1000 then loops back to step 1020 until all of the neighboring blocks (e.g., T0, T1, T2, L0, L1 and L2) have been tested), a second parameter for modifying the prediction sample of the current block (Par. [0060], At step 840, IC parameters (i.e. second parameter) are estimated with the selected set S of neighboring samples and corresponding samples in the reference picture), the second reference region being determined based on another one of the plurality of modes (Par. [0075], if the MV predictor index indicates a neighboring block to the left of the current block (i.e. another one of plurality of modes), then the set S of samples is equal to the left part of the L-shape template);
obtaining a second modified prediction sample by modifying the prediction sample of the current block based on the second parameter (Par. [0060], At step 850, the estimated IC parameters (i.e. second parameter) are used for the illumination compensation for the prediction of the current block, i.e., adjusted based on the IC function, for example, the samples (i.e. second region) in the prediction block are adjusted (i.e. second modified prediction sample) using Eq. (1)); and
obtaining a final prediction sample of the current block based on a weighted sum of the first modified prediction sample and the second modified prediction sample (Par. [0083]-[0085] For each sample of the boundary areas, a weighted sum of the prediction P.sub.C(s) and prediction P.sub.N(s) can be used to generate the final prediction (P.sub.OBMC(s)), as shown in FIG. 16. If s belongs to one boundary area: P.sub.OBMC(s) = w(d).Math.P.sub.C(s) + (1−w(d)) x P.sub.N(s). If s belongs to two boundary areas: P.sub.OBMC(s) = (w(d.sub.1) + w(d.sub.2)) x P.sub.C(s) + (1−w(d.sub.1)) x P.sub.N1(s) + (1−w(d.sub.2)) x P.sub.N2(s)).
Regarding Claim 12, the limitations are similar to those treated in the above rejection of Claim 1, and is met by the reference as discussed above. Claim 12 however recite an encoding method, rather than an decoding method, which is similar in structure expect in reverse operation. Therefore, claim 12 is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Regarding Claim 13, the computer-readable storage medium is drawn to the method claimed in Claim 12. Therefore Claim 13 corresponds to method Claim 12 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Regarding Claim 14, it is drawn to the method claimed in Claim 12. Therefore Claim 14 corresponds to method Claim 12 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above. Claim 14 further recites a method of transmitting a bitstream, comprising: generating the bitstream, and transmitting the bitstream (See BORDES Par. [0017] The present embodiments also provide a computer readable storage medium having stored thereon a bitstream generated according to the methods described above. The present embodiments also provide a method and apparatus for transmitting the bitstream generated according to the methods described above).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to SUSAN E HODGES whose telephone number is (571)270-0498. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday from 8:00 am (EST) to 4:00 pm (EST).
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://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Susan E. Hodges/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425