DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-14 were previously pending. Applicant’s amendment filed July 9, 2026, has been entered in full. The title of the specification is amended. Claims 1-14 are amended. No claims are added or cancelled. Accordingly, claims 1-14 are now pending.
Response to Argument
Applicant argues that the amendment to the title of the specification overcomes the previous objection (Remarks filed July 9, 2026, hereinafter Remarks: Page 8). Examiner agrees. The previous objection to the specification is withdrawn.
Applicant argues that the amended claims do not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (Remarks: Page 9). Examiner agrees. The previous interpretation of the claims as invoking 35 U.S.C. 112(f) is withdrawn.
Applicant argues that the amendments to the claims have overcome the previous rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) (Remarks: Page 9). Examiner agrees. The previous rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is withdrawn.
Applicant traverses the previous rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1), arguing that the previously-cited Teo reference does not disclose all elements of the amended claims (Remarks: Pages 9-11). In particular, Applicant argues that Teo does not disclose that “the chroma format of the image is converted according to a congestion degree of a transmission medium for transmitting the image” as recited in the amended claims (Remarks: Page 10). Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The encoding and decoding described in Teo is used to compress video image data for transmission (e.g., [0282]-[0288], Fig. 1). The fundamental purpose of such compression is to decrease a congestion degree of a transmission medium for transmitting the video image. I.e., the greater the degree of compression, the lower the congestion degree of a transmission medium, and vice versa. One of the ways in which Teo compresses video image data is by downsampling pictures by a certain sampling rate prior to encoding, and then upsampling them by a corresponding rate after decoding (e.g., [0865] et seq.). A higher down-sampling rate provides a higher degree of compression (and thus a lower congestion degree of a transmission medium) and vice versa. Teo uses its chroma format conversion to provide specific sampling rates (e.g., Figs. 99-105). For at least these reasons, the chroma format conversion in Teo is within the scope of being “according to a congestion degree of a transmission medium for transmitting the image” as required by the amended claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 7-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 7 has been amended to recite that “the chroma format of the image is converted according to a congestion degree of a transmission medium for transmitting the image.” Within the context of claim 7, “the image” apparently refers to the image generated by decoding a bitstream – i.e., a decoded image. However, the specification does not describe transmitting the decoded image. Instead, the specification describes transmitting only an encoded image as a bitstream – e.g., Fig. 13. Claim 7 lacks adequate written description because it recites a congestion degree of a transmission medium for transmitting a decoded image, but the specification does not describe transmitting decoded images. Claims 8-13 depend from claim 7 and thus include the same limitation that lacks adequate written description. Claim 14 recites substantially the same limitation and thus also lacks adequate written description for substantially the same reasons as claim 7.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by ‘Teo’ (US 2024/0223766 A1)1.
Regarding claim 1, Teo discloses an image processing apparatus (e.g., Fig. 1) comprising:
circuitry (e.g., Fig. 1, encoder 100 – whose functions are implemented by computer circuitry – see, e.g., Fig. 8 and [0314] et seq.) configured to:
perform reduction processing of reducing resolution of at least a luminance component of an image including the luminance component and two chrominance components to convert a chroma format of the image (e.g., [0881], encoder 100 may apply a downsampling process like the one shown in Fig. 99, where resolution of a luminance component is reduced to convert a chroma format from 4:2:0 to 4:2:2; Note that while Fig. 99 illustrates one exemplary downsampling process, Figs. 100 and 101 illustrate other alternative downsampling processes), and
encode the image in which the chroma format has been converted to generate a bitstream (e.g., [0880]-[0882]; Fig. 1),
wherein the chroma format of the image is converted according to a congestion degree of a transmission medium for transmitting the image (e.g., [0282]-[0288], Fig. 1, encoder provides compressed video image data that transmitted as a stream over a network transmission medium; The fundamental purpose of the compression is to reduce a congestion degree of the network transmission medium; e.g., [0865] et seq., compression may be provided by downsampling prior to encoding and performing corresponding upsampling after decoding; e.g., Figs. 99-105, chroma conversion is applied to provide different sampling rates, and thus different degrees of compression, and thus different degrees of transmission medium congestion; For at least these reasons, the chroma format conversion in Teo falls within the scope of the claim).
Regarding claim 2, Teo discloses the image processing apparatus according to claim 1,
wherein the circuitry does not perform reduction processing on the chrominance components (e.g., Fig. 99, middle, first resampling process does not perform any reduction on the chrominance components Cb or Cr; Figs. 100-101 are also pertinent, but the mapping focuses on Fig. 99 to provide a concise explanation) or the circuitry performs reduction processing on the chrominance components at a reduction ratio equal to or less than a reduction ratio of the reduction processing performed on the luminance component (e.g., Fig. 99, bottom, second resampling process applies an equal 50% reduction ratio [i.e. downsampling by half] to both the resampled luminance and the original chrominance components; Overall, application of both stages of the resampling process results in both the luminance and chrominance components having reduced resolution, but the reduction ratio of the chrominance is lower than that of the luminance – see, e.g., [0826]), and wherein the circuitry is further configured to convert the chroma format of the image (e.g., Fig. 99, chroma format is converted from 4:2:0 to 4:2:2).
Regarding claim 3, Teo discloses the image processing apparatus according to claim 1,
wherein in a case where the chroma format of the image is originally YUV 4:2:0 or YUV 4:2:2, the circuitry converts the chroma format of the image into YUV 4:4:4 (Figs. 100 and 101 illustrate conversion from YCbCr 4:2:0 and YCbCr 4:2:2 to YCbCr 4:4:4, respectively; [0807]-[0808], YUV color space may be used instead of YCbCr).
Regarding claim 4, Teo discloses the image processing apparatus according to claim 1,
wherein the circuitry is further configured to control a set of flags indicating whether or not it is effective to convert the chroma format of the image in a middle of the bitstream (e.g., [0882], Encoder encodes a parameter indicating a resolution change method – i.e., a flat indicating whether or not it is effective to convert the chroma format of the image – for each picture in a middle of the bitstream).
Regarding claim 5, Teo discloses the image processing apparatus according to claim 4,
wherein in a case where it is effective to convert the chroma format of the image in the middle of the bitstream, the circuitry is further configured to control a parameter for specifying the chroma format for each picture of the image (e.g., [0881]-[0882], chroma format is specified for each picture; In the example given in the cited section, the encoder applies downsampling that changes the chroma format from 4:2:0 to 4:2:2 and controls a parameter for specifying a corresponding upsampling method at the decoder that reverts the chroma format from 4:2:2 to 4:2:0).
Regarding claim 6, Examiner notes that the claim recites a method that is substantially the same as the method performed by the image processing apparatus of claim 1. Teo discloses the image processing apparatus of claim 1 (see above). Accordingly, claim 6 is also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Teo for substantially the same reasons as claim 1.
Regarding claim 7, Teo discloses an image processing apparatus comprising:
circuitry (e.g., Fig. 1, decoder 200 – whose functions are implemented by computer circuitry – see, e.g., Fig. 68 and [0655] et seq.) configured to:
decode a bitstream to generate an image (e.g., Fig. 1, bitstream is decoded by decoder to generate a decoded image) including one luminance component and two chrominance components (e.g., Figs. 98 B-D, one luminance component Y and two chrominance components Cb and Cr; Note from [0807]-[0808] that different color spaces including YUV may be used), and
convert a chroma format of the image by performing enlargement processing of enlarging resolution of at least the luminance component of the generated image (e.g., [0881], decoder 200 may apply an upsampling/enlargement process like the one shown in Fig. 104, where resolution of a luminance component is enlarged; Note that while Fig. 104 illustrates one exemplary upsampling process, Figs. 102 and 103 illustrate other alternative upsampling processes),
wherein the chroma format of the image is converted according to a congestion degree of a transmission medium for transmitting the image (e.g., [0282]-[0288], Fig. 1, encoder provides compressed video image data that transmitted as a stream over a network transmission medium, then decoded/uncompressed at the decoder; The fundamental purpose of the compression is to reduce a congestion degree of the network transmission medium; e.g., [0865] et seq., compression may be provided by downsampling prior to encoding and performing corresponding upsampling after decoding; e.g., Figs. 99-105, chroma conversion is applied to provide different sampling rates, and thus different degrees of compression, and thus different degrees of transmission medium congestion; For at least these reasons, the chroma format conversion in Teo falls within the scope of the claim).
Regarding claim 8, Teo discloses the image processing apparatus according to claim 7,
wherein the circuitry does not perform enlargement processing on the chrominance components (e.g., Fig. 104, middle, first resampling process only performs enlargement on luminance component and does not perform enlargement on chrominance components Cb and Cr; Figs. 102-103 are also pertinent, but the mapping focuses on Fig. 104 to provide a concise explanation) or the circuitry performs the enlargement processing on the chrominance components at an enlargement ratio equal to or less than an enlargement ratio of the luminance component (e.g., Fig. 104, bottom, second resampling process enlarges luminance and chrominance components at equal ratios; Overall, application of both stages of the resampling process results in both the luminance and chrominance components having enlarged resolution, but the enlargement ratio of the chrominance is lower than that of the luminance – see, e.g., [0841], [0846]) to convert the chroma format of the image (e.g., Fig. 104, chroma format is converted from 4:2:2 to 4:2:0).
Regarding claim 9, Teo discloses the image processing apparatus according to claim 7, wherein in a case where the chroma format of the image is YUV 4:4:4 (Note from [0807]-[0808] that while the Figures in Teo illustrate a YCbCr color space, a YUV color space may be used instead), the circuitry converts the chroma format of the image into YUV 4:2:0 (Fig. 103) or YUV 4:2:2 (Fig. 102).
Regarding claim 10, Teo discloses the image processing apparatus according to claim 7,
wherein the circuitry is further configured to control conversion of the chroma format of the image according to a flag indicating whether or not it is effective to perform conversion of the chroma format of the image in a middle of the bitstream (e.g., [0881]-[0882], Encoder encodes a parameter indicating a resolution change method – i.e., a flat indicating whether or not it is effective to convert the chroma format of the image – for each picture in a middle of the bitstream and decoder uses this parameter to control conversion of the chroma format, such as conversion from 4:2:2 to 4:2:0).
Regarding claim 11, Teo discloses the image processing apparatus according to claim 10,
wherein in a case where it is effective to convert the chroma format of the image in the middle of the bitstream, the circuitry controls conversion of the chroma format of the image based on a parameter for specifying the chroma format for each picture of the image (e.g., [0881]-[0882], chroma format is specified for each picture; In the example given in the cited section, the encoder applies downsampling that changes the chroma format from 4:2:0 to 4:2:2 and encodes a parameter for that is used to control a corresponding upsampling method at the decoder that reverts the chroma format from 4:2:2 to 4:2:0).
Regarding claim 12, Teo discloses the image processing apparatus according to claim 11,
wherein circuitry is further configured to
derive the resolution of the image of the chrominance components in a current frame according to the resolution and the chroma format of the image of the luminance component in the current frame (e.g., [0866], Fig. 109, chroma format change results in resolution being changed to FHD for current frame; Also see, e.g., Figs. 98B-D),
determine whether or not resolution of a reference frame is larger than the resolution of the current frame (e.g., [0863]-[0864], Fig. 9, reference picture has a higher resolution than the current picture),
reduce the reference frame, in a case where it is determined that the resolution of the reference frame is higher than the resolution of the current frame, in accordance with the resolution of the current frame (e.g., [0864], Fig. 9, “In this case, the downsampling process is performed” – i.e., the reference picture is downsampled to match the lower resolution of the current frame), and
perform inter prediction to decode the bitstream (e.g., [0812]).
Regarding claim 13, Teo discloses the image processing apparatus according to claim 12,
wherein in a case where it is determined that the resolution of the reference frame is smaller than the resolution of the current frame, the circuitry is further configured to enlarge the reference frame in accordance with the resolution of the current frame (e.g., [0863]-[0864], the resolution of the reference may be different from – i.e., larger or smaller than – the resolution of the current frame; [0864], as discussed above with respect to claim 12, Fig. 9 illustrates an example where the resolution of the reference frame is larger than the resolution of the current frame, thereby resulting in downsampling that reduces the resolution of the reference frame; However, this is but one example and [0812]-[0813] discloses that the reference image may be upsampled instead of downsampled during inter prediction; As reference image upsampling is only needed when the reference image has a smaller resolution than the current frame [because upsampling allows the reference image resolution to match the current image’s resolution], one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the reference image upsampling disclosed in Teo is applied in a case where it is determined that the resolution of the reference frame is smaller than the resolution of the current frame).
Regarding claim 14, Examiner notes that the claim recites a method that is substantially the same as the method performed by the image processing apparatus of claim 7. Teo discloses the image processing apparatus of claim 7 (see above). Accordingly, claim 14 is also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Teo for substantially the same reasons as claim 7.
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
‘Doken’ (WO 2012/058394 A1)
Performs downsampling prior to encoding and corresponding upsampling after decoding – e.g., Fig. 5
The down/up-sampling ratio is selected based on, for example, available data transmission capacity – e.g., page 15, line 24 et seq.
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 GEOFFREY E SUMMERS whose telephone number is (571)272-9915. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:00 AM to 3:30 PM ET.
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, Chan Park can be reached at (571) 272-7409. 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.
/GEOFFREY E SUMMERS/Examiner, Art Unit 2669
1 The ‘Teo’ reference claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 63/250,369 and incorporates its disclosure by reference ([0001]). Support for the portions of Teo cited herein can be found at least at pages 12, 20, 85 and 109-119 of the disclosure in the ‘369 application (both original and translated versions).
Prosecution Insights