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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/21/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Regarding claims 43-44, and 50 these claims improperly depend on cancelled claims. In this case, new claim 43 depends on cancelled claim 5, and new claim 50 depends on cancelled claim 12. Appropriate correction is required. A series of singular dependent claims is permissible in which a dependent claim refers to a preceding claim which, in turn, refers to another preceding claim. A claim which depends from a dependent claim should not be separated by any claim which does not also depend from said dependent claim. It should be kept in mind that a dependent claim may refer to any preceding independent claim. In general, applicant's sequence will not be changed. See MPEP § 608.01(n). In this case the dependence on cancelled claims means that the dependent claims are not dependent on claims previously set forth in the current claim set.
For the purposes of examination, Claim 43 is interpreted to depend on claim 42, and Claim 50 is interpreted to depend on claim 49. Appropriate correction is required.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 38-57 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nalci et al. (US 20200404276 A1).
Regarding Claim 38, Nalci et al. teaches a video encoding device, comprising: a processor (Paragraphs 10-11) configured to:
obtain depth information associated with a video block (Paragraph 7);
determine, based at least on the depth information, whether to apply multiple transform signaling (MTS) to the video block (Paragraph 7; Paragraph 66; Paragraph 95; Paragraph 118; Paragraphs 146-150; Paragraphs 167-168; context may rely on both MTS and depth info); and
encode the video block based at least on the determination of whether to apply MTS to the video block (Paragraph 7; Paragraph 66; Paragraph 95; Paragraph 118; Paragraphs 146-150; Paragraphs 167-168).
Regarding Claim 39, Nalci et al. teaches the video encoding device of claim 38, wherein the determination whether to apply MTS to the video block is further based on obtained motion information associated with the video block, and wherein the processor is further configured to: determine, based at least on the depth information, a homogeneity value associated with the video block, wherein the determination of whether to apply MTS to the video block is further based on the homogeneity value (Paragraph 7; Paragraphs 57-58; Paragraph 66; Paragraph 90; Paragraph 118; Paragraphs 167-168).
Regarding Claim 40, Nalci et al. teaches the video encoding device of claim 39, wherein the processor is further configured to: determine whether the homogeneity value is greater than a threshold, wherein the determination whether to apply MTS to the video block is further based on the determination whether the homogeneity value is greater than the threshold (Paragraph 7; Paragraphs 57-58; Paragraph 66; Paragraph 90; Paragraph 118; Paragraphs 149-156; Paragraphs 167-168).
Regarding Claim 41, Nalci et al. teaches the video encoding device of claim 38, wherein the depth information includes a depth map that indicates respective depth values associated with one or more samples of the video block, wherein the determination whether to apply MTS to the video block is further based on the depth map (Paragraph 7; Paragraph 66; Paragraph 95; Paragraph 118; Paragraphs 129; Paragraph 137; Paragraphs 167-168).
Regarding Claim 42, Nalci et al. teaches the video encoding device of claim 38, wherein the processor is further configured to:obtain motion information associated with the video block, wherein the motion information includes a motion map that indicates one or more motions associated with the video block; and determine, based on at least one of the depth information or the motion information, whether to apply transform skip (TrSkip) to the video block, wherein the video block is encoded further based on the determine of whether to apply TrSkip to the video block (Paragraph 7; Paragraph 66; Paragraph 95; Paragraph 118; Paragraphs 152; Paragraphs 167-168).
Regarding Claim 43, Nalci et al. teaches the video encoding device of claim 5 (interpreted to be correctly as depending on claim 42 since claim 5 is cancelled), wherein the processor is further configured to: determine, based on at least one of the depth information or the motion information, whether to apply subblock transform (SBT) to the video block, wherein the video block is encoded further based on the determination of whether to apply SBT to the video block (Paragraph 7; Paragraph 49; Paragraph 68; Paragraph 95; Paragraph 118; Paragraphs 150-153; Paragraphs 167-168).
Regarding Claim 44, Nalci et al. teaches the video encoding device of claim 43, wherein the processor is further configured to: determine an SBT split line associated with the video block based on the motion information, wherein the SBT split line divides the video block into a first part having a first size and a second part having a second size (Paragraph 7; Paragraph 86-87; Paragraph 95; Paragraph 118; Paragraphs 131-132; Paragraphs 150-153; Paragraphs 167-168).
The video decoding device of claims 45-50 is drawn to the decoding device associated with the encoding device of claims 38-44 and has similar limitations to those rejected above merely performed in the inverse. These claims are rejected for the same reasons as above. Nalci et al. further teaches a video decoding device corresponding to a video encoding device (Paragraph 6; Paragraph 32).
Method claims 51-57 are drawn to the method of using the corresponding apparatus claimed in claims 38-44 and are rejected for the same reasons as used above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARHAN MAHMUD whose telephone number is (571)272-7712. The examiner can normally be reached 10-7.
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, Joseph Ustaris can be reached at 5712727383. 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.
/FARHAN MAHMUD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483