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 .
Response to Arguments
Presented arguments have been fully considered but are held unpersuasive. Examiner’s response to the presented arguments follows below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Summary of Arguments:
Applicant argues that Wang fails to disclose:
Claim 1: a padding process in which first values of first pixels in the first region are replaced with second values of second pixels, the second pixels being provided in the second region of the first picture. See Remarks Page 3, Para. 3-5, pg. 4, para. 5. More specifically, the applicant argues the process of padding unknown pixel values using already decoded macroblocks (as taught by Wang) is different from the process of replacing first values of first pixels in a first region with second values from pixels belonging to second region of an image. See Remarks pg. 4, para. 5.
Examiner’s Response:
Examiner contends that Wang does disclose:
a padding process in which first values of first pixels in the first region are replaced with second values of second pixels, the second pixels being provided in the second region of the first picture ([0063], same picture macroblock inter prediction (i.e. prediction between macroblocks belong to same picture is performed) by performing padding using a padding method in which pixel values for a current region (i.e. a first region as claimed) are a replaced with pixel values of blocks within a same picture (i.e. a second region as claimed)). Further, FIGs. 1A and 1B and [0038] teach the value for padding pixels in macroblocks along row 102 (i.e. a second region) are copied from the value of pixels in previously decoded block 104 which is within the same image 100. The examiner further contends the process of padding unknown pixel values using already decoded macroblocks (which the applicant acknowledges as being taught by Wang; See Remarks pg. 4, para. 5) is the same as the claimed process of replacing first values of first pixels in a first region with second values from pixels belonging to second region of an image as claimed and as outlined above.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Song et al. (Song) (US 2013/0034154) in view of Wang (US 2009/0010338).
Regarding claim 1, Song discloses an encoder (FIG. 1), comprising:
processing circuitry ([0081], a microprocessor); and
memory connected to the processing circuitry ([0081], a stored program is executed),
wherein, using the memory, the processing circuitry:
generates a first picture, the first picture including a plurality of regions, the plurality of regions including a first region and a second region different from the first region (FIG. 2, [0274], a first image is partitioned into macroblocks);
obtains one or more parameters indicating the first region within the first picture ([0102], a macroblock type is determined, [0200], [0274], [0287], partition type data for each partitioned macroblock is determined and signaled);
performs an inter prediction process on the first picture ([0090], inter prediction is performed); and
writes the one or more parameters into a bitstream ([0102], macroblock type information is encoded into the bitstream, [0200], [0274], [0287], partition type data for each partitioned macroblock is signaled), wherein
the inter prediction process is performed for each block in the image ([0133], motion estimation is performed for sub blocks in an image, [0212], inter prediction Is performed on all sub blocks), and
the inter prediction process includes a padding process ([0307], padding is performed during inter prediction).
Song is silent about a padding process in which first values of first pixels in the first region are replaced with second values of second pixels, the second pixels being provided in the second region of the first picture.
Wang from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses a padding process in which first values of first pixels in the first region are replaced with second values of second pixels, the second pixels being provided in the second region of the first picture (FIG. 1E, the image is divided into macroblocks, [0063], during inter prediction padding is performed by copying pixels from decoded macroblocks).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Wang into the teachings of Song for more efficient motion estimation and encoding.
Conclusion
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 JEFFERY A WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)270-7579. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Sath Perungavoor can be reached at 571-272-7455. 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.
/JEFFERY A WILLIAMS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488