DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This office action is a response to an application filed on 10/29/2025, in which claims 16-37 are pending and ready for examination.
Response to Amendment
Claims 16-19 and 21-30 are currently amended. Claims 36-37 are newly added.
Response to Argument
Applicant's arguments filed 10/29/205 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to claims rejected under 35 USC 103, the Applicant, see 10-11 of the filed Remarks, argues that Liu does not teach “determining parameters for a determined at least one prediction mode … based on models of different orders and based on one or more of …” by asserting that there is no disclosure or implication in Liu that (1) the orders of the polynomial are different between multiple models and one of the models is determined based on models having different orders, (2) an indication of the order of the model is signaled, and (3) one of the models, each of which having different orders, is selected.
Examiner cannot concur. As taught in previously cited paragraphs and claim 6 of Liu, different models having different respective orders are clearly determined, i.e. n = 3 and n = 2, and at least one of the models having a particular order is determined to be used as the prediction model. An indication/flag is then signaled, which indicates the order of the determined model that is selected as the prediction model. Thus, the Applicant’s argument is moot.
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 16-17, 19-23, 25-26, and 29-32, 36-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (US Pub. 20210297670 A1) in view of Chubach (US Pub. 20250024072 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Liu discloses an apparatus comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to perform at least the following: (Liu; Para. [0217]. A video coding system includes at least one processor, memory with program codes for performing video coding.):
obtaining an image block unit comprising samples in color channels of one or two chrominance channels and one luminance channel (Liu; Para. [0185-188]. An image block includes samples in color channels of one or two chroma channels and luma channel.);
reconstructing samples of said one luminance channel of the image block unit (Liu; Para. [0199]. Samples of a luma channel of an image block is reconstructed.);
determining parameters for a determined at least one prediction model for predicting samples of at least one channel of the image block unit using the determined at least one prediction model based on models of different orders and based on one or more of: reference samples in a neighboring block in current channel or frame, and one or more reference samples inside the co-located block in the reference channel or frame (Liu; Para. [0172-176, 209]. Parameters of a prediction model for predicting samples of color channels are determined in accordance with neighboring reference samples, reference samples of a co-located block in a reference channel, wherein, see claim 6 of Liu, different models having different respective orders are clearly determined, i.e. n = 3 and n = 2, and at least one of the models having a particular order is determined to be used as the prediction model. An indication/flag is then signaled, which indicates the order of the determined model that is selected as the prediction model.)
wherein the determined at least one prediction model comprises a polynomial and/or an exponential prediction mode (Liu; Para. [0172-176, 209]. A determined one model includes a polynomial and/or an exponential mode.); and
predicting at least one sample value of the samples of the at least one channel based on the determined at least one prediction model (Liu; Para. [0195-197]. A prediction model is determined as a polynomial and/or exponential prediction model for the prediction of at least one sample of the at least one channel in accordance with the determined model.).
But it does not specifically disclose determine parameters for said prediction model used for predicting samples of at least one color channel of the image block unit using a prediction model based on one or more reference samples in a neighboring block of a co-located block in a reference channel or frame.
However, Chubach teaches disclose determine parameters for said prediction model used for predicting samples of at least one color channel of the image block unit using a prediction model based on one or more reference samples in a neighboring block of a co-located block in a reference channel or frame (Chubach; Para. [0079]. Parameters of said prediction model are determined based on one or more reference samples in a neighboring block of a co-located block in a reference channel or frame.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the pertinent before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the video coding system of Liu to adapt an image processing approach, by incorporating Chunach’s teaching wherein parameters for different prediction models are determined using collocated neighboring blocks, for the motivation to cross component prediction using higher order model (Chubach; Abstract.).
Regarding claim 17, modified Liu teaches the determining the parameter comprises: determining the parameters for a plurality of prediction models comprising nth order prediction models with corresponding different orders (Liu; Para. [0172-176, 209]. Parameters are determined for different prediction models including nth order models of different orders, see claim 6 of Liu.); and
selecting a best performing order model to be indicated to a decoder (Liu; Para. [0178-179]. A determined/best order model is signaled to a decoder.).
Regarding claim 19, modified Liu teaches to perform at least: concluding a final prediction of a block as a weighted combination of at least two predictions that are achieved by different prediction models (Liu; Para. [0053]. A final prediction of a block is concluded as a weighted sum of at least two predictions of different models.).
Regarding claim 20, modified Liu teaches wherein a prediction model order and/or corresponding parameters are inherited from neighboring blocks (Liu; Para. [0085-90]. Prediction model order or parameters are determined/inherited from neighboring blocks.).
Regarding claim 21, Liu discloses an apparatus comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to perform at least the following: (Liu; Para. [0217]. A video coding system includes at least one processor, memory with program codes for performing video coding.):
receiving an image block unit comprising samples in color channels of one or two chrominance channels and one luminance channel (Liu; Para. [0185-188]. An image block includes samples in color channels of one or two chroma channels and luma channel.);
reconstructing samples of said one luminance channel of the image block unit (Liu; Para. [0199]. Samples of a luma channel of an image block is reconstructed.);
determining an order of a determined a least one prediction model used by an encoder for predicting samples of at least one channel of the image block unit (Liu; Para. [0195-197]. An order of a prediction model is determined and used by an encoder for predicting samples of an image block.);
wherein the determined at least one prediction model is one model, having the order, of a plurality of models of different orders (Liu; Para. [-172-176]. A determined model is one model or an order from different models with respective orders, see claim 6 of Liu.);
determining parameters for said determined at least one prediction model used for predicting samples of at least one color channel of the image block unit using the determined at least one prediction model based on one or more of: one or more reference samples in a neighboring block in current channel or frame; and one or more reference samples inside the co-located block in the reference channel or frame (Liu; Para. [0176, 209]. Parameters of a prediction model for predicting samples of color channels are determined in accordance with neighboring reference samples, reference samples of a co-located block in a reference channel.),
wherein the determined at least one prediction model comprises a polynomial and/or an exponential prediction mode (Liu; Para. [0172-176, 209]. A determined one model includes a polynomial and/or an exponential mode.); and
predicting at least one sample value of the samples of the at least one channel based on the determined at least one prediction model (Liu; Para. [0195-197]. A prediction model is determined as a polynomial and/or exponential prediction model for the prediction of at least one sample of the at least one channel in accordance with the determined model.).
But it does not specifically disclose determine parameters for said prediction model used for predicting samples of at least one color channel of the image block unit using a prediction model based on one or more reference samples in a neighboring block of a co-located block in a reference channel or frame.
However, Chubach teaches disclose determine parameters for said prediction model used for predicting samples of at least one color channel of the image block unit using a prediction model based on one or more reference samples in a neighboring block of a co-located block in a reference channel or frame (Chubach; Para. [0079]. Parameters of said prediction model are determined based on one or more reference samples in a neighboring block of a co-located block in a reference channel or frame.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the pertinent before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the video coding system of Liu to adapt an image processing approach, by incorporating Chunach’s teaching wherein parameters for different prediction models are determined using collocated neighboring blocks, for the motivation to cross component prediction using higher order model (Chubach; Abstract.).
Regarding claim 22, modified Liu teaches to perform at least: deriving the order of the prediction model based on a texture analysis applied on one or more of reference samples (Liu; Para. [0195-197]. The order of a prediction model is based on analysis of reference samples.).
Regarding claim 23, modified Liu teaches to perform at least: deriving the order of the prediction model based on minimum and maximum sample values in reference samples of neighboring blocks of a current block and/or the minimum and maximum sample values in the reference samples of the reference channel or frame (Liu; Para. [0190-191]. The order of a prediction model is determined based on maximum sample and minimum sample values in reference samples of neighboring or reference samples. Chubach; Para. [0026]. The order of a prediction model is determined based on maximum sample and minimum sample values in reference samples of neighboring or reference samples.).
Regarding claim 25, modified Liu teaches to perform at least: deriving the order of the prediction model based on reconstruction samples of another block that has been predicted using at least partially the same reference samples as a current block (Liu; Para. [0170-172]. The order of a prediction model is determined in accordance with reconstructed another block of neighboring blocks predicted with same reference samples of a current block, also see Para. [0069-75].).
Regarding claim 26, modified Liu teaches to perform at least: deriving the order of the prediction model based on block dimensions (Liu; Para. [0170-172, 186]. The order of a prediction model is determined based on a block size.).
Claim 29 is directed to a method comprising performing a sequence of processing steps corresponding to the same as claimed in claim 21, and is non-patentable over the prior art for the same reason as previously indicated.
Claims 30-32 are directed to a method comprising performing a sequence of processing steps corresponding to the same as claimed in claims 21-23, 25-26, and are non-patentable over the prior art for the same reason as previously indicated.
Regarding claim 36, modified Liu teaches signaling an order of the determined at least one prediction model in or along bitstream (Liu; Para. [0172-176], Claim 6 of Liu. Different models having different respective orders are clearly determined, i.e. n = 3 and n = 2, and at least one of the models having a particular order is determined to be used as the prediction model. An indication/flag is then signaled, which indicates the order of the determined model that is selected as the prediction model.).
Regarding claim 36, modified Liu teaches determining the order of the determined at least one prediction model used by the encoder is performed using signaling of the order that is received in or along a bitstream (Liu; Para. [0172-176], Claim 6 of Liu. Different models having different respective orders are clearly determined, i.e. n = 3 and n = 2, and at least one of the models having a particular order is determined to be used as the prediction model. An indication/flag is then signaled, which indicates the order of the determined model that is selected as the prediction model.).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (US Pub. 20210297670 A1) in view of Chubach (US Pub. 20250024072 A1), as applied in claim 17, and further in view of Ma (WO 2019174389 A1, English equivalent document cited).
Regarding claim 18, modified Liu does not specifically teach wherein the best performing prediction model is configured to be selected based on a rate-distortion optimization (RDO) approach over a set of predetermined prediction models; and wherein the at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to perform at least: signaling an index of an order model in or along a bitstream comprising image block data.
However, Ma teaches wherein the best performing prediction model is configured to be selected based on a rate-distortion optimization (RDO) approach over a set of predetermined prediction models (Ma; Para. [0197, 206]. The order of model is determined over a set of order models in accordance with an RDO.); and
wherein the at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to perform at least: signaling an index of an order model in or along a bitstream comprising image block data (Ma; Para. [0205-206]. An index of an order model is signaled in a bitstream.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the pertinent before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the video coding system of modified Liu to adapt an order model selection approach, by incorporating Ma’s teaching wherein an order model is selected in accordance with an RDO, for the motivation to perform cross component prediction using different models (Ma; Para. [0004].).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 24, 27-28, and 33 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Esenlik (WO 2025049857 A2) teaches a video coding system that performs prediction using NN-based model.
Zhang (WO 2024182720 A1) teaches a video coding system that performs cross component prediction.
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 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 ALBERT KIR whose telephone number is (571)272-6245. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30am - 5:00pm.
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.
/ALBERT KIR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2485
Prosecution Insights