DETAILED ACTION
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 05/27/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
On page 7 of the Remarks, Applicant contends that Zhao is deficient because it fails to teach or suggest features of claim 1 drawn to excluding luma. Applicant argues that Zhao merely discloses a secondary transform for energy compaction rather than take account of the relationship between Cb and Cr as recited in claim 1. Examiner disagrees. First, Applicant focuses only on Zhao’s paragraph [0032] where the rejection relies on the broader teachings of Zhao, and those teachings in combination with other references. The rejection, infra, explains that, according to the inventors in paragraphs [0007] and [0119] of the published Specification, there is “a significant degree of correlation between the Cb and Cr components” and that the prior art joint chroma technique, JCCR (Joint Coding for Chroma Residual), significantly simplifies the correlation between Cb and Cr and does not take full advantage, i.e. fully exploit, the correlation that may exist sometimes between Cb and Cr. The solution, according to the inventors, is to go above and beyond the “simplified proportional relationships” of JCCR in favor of “applying an adaptive chrominance space conversion.” Identically, Zhao teaches in paragraph [0018] that the prior art fixed, as opposed to adaptive, joint chroma component transform may be sub-optimal for all situations and that an adaptive color transform can better reduce redundancy between the highly correlated chroma channels Cb and Cr. Thus, Zhao teaches or suggests the same problem is that prior art joint chroma component transform is sub-optimal and the same adaptive solution to improve coding efficiency between the chrominance channels. Thus, because Applicant’s argument addresses Zhao’s paragraph [0032] individually rather than what Zhao’s full teachings, combined with the other prior art, would teach or suggest one of ordinary skill in the art, it is not persuasive of error. Second, Zhao’s Figs. 2A and 3A explicitly show the two inputs into the transform pipeline are the two color channels and not the luma channel such that Zhao would have taught or suggested to the skilled artisan excluding luma from the solution. Finally, used as a dictionary-type reference, Rudat et al., cited under the Conclusion Section of this Office Action, explains that prior art JCCR is a coding tool that utilizes a rotational transform to decorrelate the chroma channels from one another exclusive of the luma channel. For all the foregoing reasons, Applicant’s argument that the prior art does not teach or suggest as obvious excluding the luma channel from a solution that decorrelates residuals between the Cb and Cr components is unreasonable and thus unpersuasive of patentability.
On pages 8–10, Applicant attacks the references individually rather than what the combination would teach or suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art. Applicant argues against references for failing to teach features the references were not cited for teaching. MPEP 2145(IV). Accordingly, Examiner is unpersuaded of error.
Applicant’s argument that one skilled in the art would not be motivated to combine He’s explicit signaling of filter information with the other prior art is unreasonable on its face. In this art, all information is explicitly coded unless otherwise handled. Even when indexed-based signaling is used, such a fact does not necessarily mean the indexes identify hard-coded information. Rather, indexes can be used to reference previously transmitted look-up tables (LUTs) sent as header/side information.
On pages 9–10 of the Remarks, Applicant contends the inventive feature is “directly signaling, in a bitstream, coefficient values {a, b, c, d} of the correlation matrix representing only a Cb-Cr relationship, and performing inverse conversion using those directly signaled matrix coefficients, as required by claim 1.” Examiner notes Rudat et al., cited under the Conclusion Section of this Office Action, teaches or suggests such an approach in listing the matrix coefficients for a Cb-Cr transform and explaining such weights are signaled in the bitstream, albeit using a more sophisticated approach that saves bits by using the CBF flags and a single enablement flag, rather than explicit signaling of the matrix coefficients themselves. As explained, supra, explicit coding is the default. So, the skilled artisan could have easily ignored the ancillary part explained in Rudat et al. regarding how to signal the matrix coefficients utilizing existing VVC syntax and structure in favor of basic explicit signaling.
Examiner notes the claims are alternatively rejected in view of the teachings of Rudat et al. See alternative rejection, infra.
Other claims are not argued separately. Remarks, 10.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 of this title, 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 and 16–19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao (US 2021/0377567 A1), Zhang (US 2022/0159301 A1), Stauder (US 2015/0139544 A1) and He (US 2018/0124400 A1).
Examiner notes the problem, according to the inventors in paragraphs [0007] and [0119] of the published Specification, is that there is “a significant degree of correlation between the Cb and Cr components” and that the prior art joint chroma technique, JCCR (Joint Coding for Chroma Residual), significantly simplifies the correlation between Cb and Cr and does not take full advantage, i.e. fully exploit, the correlation that may exist sometimes between Cb and Cr. The solution, according to the inventors, is to go above and beyond the “simplified proportional relationships” of JCCR in favor of “applying an adaptive chrominance space conversion.” Identically, Zhao teaches in paragraph [0018] that the prior art fixed, as opposed to adaptive, joint chroma component transform may be sub-optimal for all situations and that an adaptive color transform can better reduce redundancy between the highly correlated chroma channels Cb and Cr. Thus, Zhao teaches or suggests the same problem is that prior art joint chroma component transform is sub-optimal and the same adaptive solution to improve coding efficiency between the chrominance channels. Accordingly, Zhao teaches Applicant’s invention is obvious under 35 U.S.C. 103. Specific claim mapping is included, infra.
Regarding claim 1, the combination of Zhao, Zhang, Stauder, and He teaches or suggests a method performed by a video decoding device for inversely converting a current chroma block, the method comprising: obtaining two converted chroma signals of the current chroma block (Examiner interprets the two converted signals are the two chroma channels; Zhao, ¶¶ 0018 and 0032: teaches chroma channels Cb and Cr having redundancy being subjected to a chrominance space forward transform at the encoder and an inverse chrominance space transform (i.e. conversion) at the decoder; see also Zhao, Figs. 2A and 2B); obtaining, from a bitstream, inverse conversion information representing a chroma-to-chroma relationship between the two converted chroma signals and two chroma signals excluding a luma signal (Zhao, ¶ 0033: teaches received prediction mode information can inform the transform kernel; Zhang, ¶ 0043: teaches that adaptive color transforms (ACT) can be utilized to convert from one color space to another and that although the HEVC standard uses only one additional color space for simplicity, obviously more transforms were contemplated such that if more possibilities were implemented within the standard, additional signaling in the form of color transform indexes, would have been necessary; As evidence of the foregoing, Stauder, ¶ 0006: explains that it would have been obvious to use an index to signal to the decoder which of the chosen color transforms was used during encoding; Zhao, Figs. 2A and 3A: teaches the first and second color components, Cb and Cr, are input into the transform engine; see also Zhao, ¶ 0018: teaching the joint mode-dependent transform is applied to the color channels; While Zhao’s teachings are viewed sufficient, Examiner notes Chiu (US 2005/0275736 A1), cited under the Conclusion Section of this Office Action, teaches flexible (as opposed to fixed) chroma-only enhancement matrices wherein the chroma channels are converted from a first chroma to a second chroma utilizing only the lower 2x2 matrix coefficients (e.g. ¶ 0067 et seq.)); performing inverse conversion on the two converted chroma signals using the inverse conversion information to obtain the two chroma signals (Zhang, ¶ 0043: teaches that adaptive color transforms (ACT) can be utilized to convert from one color space to another; Zhao, ¶¶ 0018 and 0032: teaches chroma channels Cb and Cr having redundancy being subjected to a chrominance space forward transform at the encoder and an inverse chrominance space transform (i.e. conversion) at the decoder; see also Zhao, Figs. 2A and 2B); wherein the inverse conversion information comprises coefficients of a correlation matrix between the two converted chroma signals and the two chroma signals; and wherein the coefficients of the correlation matrix are directly obtained from the bitstream (Zhang, ¶ 0045: teaches forward and inverse color transform matrices wherein the matrices have coefficients; While it is noted that Stauder teaches defining a set of alternative transform kernels (conversion matrices) and signaling the chosen matrix (coefficients) utilizing an index value in the bitstream, the skilled artisan had in their possession the ability to explicitly signal the filter properties, such as the filter (matrix) coefficients, in the bitstream; He, ¶ 0050: teaches that the skilled artisan had in their possession the ability to signal in the encoded bitstream chroma enhancement filter information such as filter coefficients).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to combine the elements taught by Zhao, with those of Zhang, because both references are drawn to the same field of endeavor such that one wishing to practice the art of decorrelating color channels by use of adaptive color transforms would be led to their relevant teachings and because combining Zhao’s teachings regarding improving decorrelation among chroma channels with Zhang’s teaching of adaptive color space conversion to reduce correlation using one of a number of available color spaces represents a mere combination of prior art elements, according to known methods, to yield a predictable result. This rationale applies to all combinations of Zhao and Zhang used in this Office Action unless otherwise noted.
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to combine the elements taught by Zhao and Zhang, with those of Stauder, because all three references are drawn to the same field of endeavor such that one wishing to practice the art of decorrelating color channels by use of adaptive color transforms would be led to their relevant teachings and because combining Zhao’s and Zhang’s teachings regarding improving decorrelation among chroma channels with Stauder’s teaching of signaling relevant adaptive color space conversion information from encoder to decoder represents a mere combination of prior art elements, according to known methods, to yield a predictable result. This rationale applies to all combinations of Zhao, Zhang, and Stauder used in this Office Action unless otherwise noted.
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to combine the elements taught by Zhao, Zhang, and Stauder, with those of He, because all four references are drawn to the same field of endeavor such that one wishing to practice the art of modifying chroma channel values using filters (matrix coefficients) would be led to their relevant teachings and because combining Stauder’s teaching of signaling relevant adaptive chroma filtering information from encoder to decoder using index information with He’s teaching of signaling relevant adaptive chroma filtering information using explicit filter coefficients represents a mere combination of prior art elements, according to known methods, to yield a predictable result. This rationale applies to all combinations of Zhao, Zhang, Stauder, and He used in this Office Action unless otherwise noted.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Zhao, Zhang, Stauder, and He teaches or suggests the method of claim 1, wherein the two chroma signals include: original signals of the current chroma block, predictors of the current chroma block, or residual signals of the current chroma block (Zhang, ¶ 0043: teaches ACT is performed typically on prediction residuals; Examiner notes Stauder’s citation to Marpe’s publication, the Marpe publication teaching it does not matter when during the coding loop the color transform takes place; Examiner further notes that lossless color transforms like the reversible YCoCg ensures it does not matter when, in the coding loop, the transform takes place).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Zhao, Zhang, Stauder, and He teaches or suggests the method of claim 1, wherein the correlation matrix is an inverse matrix of a combination matrix utilized for the inverse conversion (Zhang, ¶ 0045: teaches forward and inverse color transform matrices; Zhang, ¶ 0043: teaches that adaptive color transforms (ACT) can be utilized to convert from one color space to another and that although the HEVC standard uses only one additional color space for simplicity, obviously more transforms were contemplated such that if more possibilities were implemented within the standard, additional signaling in the form of color transform indexes, would have been necessary; As evidence of the foregoing, Stauder, ¶ 0006: explains that it would have been obvious to use an index to signal to the decoder which of the chosen color transforms was used during encoding; Examiner notes Stauder cites to a publication of Marpe, which explains the transform matrices are generalized for a plurality of transform matrices).
Claim 16 lists the same elements as claim 1, but is drawn to the corresponding encoding method rather than the decoding method. Therefore, the rationale for the rejection of claim 1 applies to the instant claim.
Claim 17 lists the same elements as claim 2, but is drawn to the corresponding encoding method rather than the decoding method. Therefore, the rationale for the rejection of claim 2 applies to the instant claim.
Claim 19 lists the same elements as claim 1, but is drawn to a method of transmitting the encoded information corresponding encoding and decoding methods. Therefore, the rationale for the rejection of claim 1 applies to the instant claim.
Claims 8–15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao, Zhang, Stauder, He, and Su (US 2023/0368344 A1).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Zhao, Zhang, Stauder, He, and Su teaches or suggests the method of claim 1, wherein the inverse conversion information further comprises an offset matrix utilized for the inverse conversion (Zhang, ¶ 0043: teaches that adaptive color transforms (ACT) can be utilized to convert from one color space to another and that although the HEVC standard uses only one additional color space for simplicity, obviously more transforms were contemplated such that if more possibilities were implemented within the standard, additional signaling in the form of color transform indexes, would have been necessary; As evidence of the foregoing, Stauder, ¶ 0006: explains that it would have been obvious to use an index to signal to the decoder which of the chosen color transforms was used during encoding; Examiner notes Stauder cites to a publication of Marpe, which explains the transform matrices are generalized for a plurality of transform matrices; Su, ¶ 0037: teaches that for any number of color transforms, including proprietary color transforms, matrices and offset vectors can be used to convert from RGB to a generic YCC color space; Su, ¶ 0053: teaching coefficients in the color transform matrix are used for color transformation; Examiner further notes that the recited features are nothing more than generic, obvious software tools possessed by the skilled artisan for carrying out the functions described in the prior art; see also Zhang, ¶ 0046: teaches that the inverse color transform utilizes an offset for the second chroma channel).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to combine the elements taught by Zhao, Zhang, Stauder, and He, with those of Su, because all five references are drawn to the same field of endeavor such that one wishing to practice the art of decorrelating color channels by use of adaptive color transforms would be led to their relevant teachings and because combining Zhang’s and Stauder’s teachings regarding multiple possible color transforms for improving decorrelation among chroma channels with Su’s teaching of utilizing matrix and offset vectors for adaptive color space conversion represents a mere combination of prior art elements, according to known methods, to yield a predictable result. This rationale applies to all combinations of Zhao, Zhang, Stauder, He, and Su used in this Office Action unless otherwise noted.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Zhao, Zhang, Stauder, He, and Su teaches or suggests the method of claim 8, wherein obtaining the inverse conversion information includes: decoding, from a bitstream, an index indicative of the offset matrix; and obtaining, by using the index, values of the offset matrix from a preset list (Zhang, ¶ 0043: teaches that adaptive color transforms (ACT) can be utilized to convert from one color space to another and that although the HEVC standard uses only one additional color space for simplicity, obviously more transforms were contemplated such that if more possibilities were implemented within the standard, additional signaling in the form of color transform indexes, would have been necessary; As evidence of the foregoing, Stauder, ¶ 0006: explains that it would have been obvious to use an index to signal to the decoder which of the chosen color transforms was used during encoding; Examiner notes Stauder cites to a publication of Marpe, which explains the transform matrices are generalized for a plurality of transform matrices; Su, ¶ 0037: teaches that for any number of color transforms, including proprietary color transforms, matrices and offset vectors can be used to convert from RGB to a generic YCC color space; Examiner further notes that the recited features are nothing more than generic, obvious software tools possessed by the skilled artisan for carrying out the functions described in the prior art).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Zhao, Zhang, Stauder, He, and Su teaches or suggests the method of claim 8, wherein obtaining the inverse conversion information includes: decoding, from a bitstream, values of the offset matrix (Zhang, ¶ 0043: teaches that adaptive color transforms (ACT) can be utilized to convert from one color space to another and that although the HEVC standard uses only one additional color space for simplicity, obviously more transforms were contemplated such that if more possibilities were implemented within the standard, additional signaling in the form of color transform indexes, would have been necessary; As evidence of the foregoing, Stauder, ¶ 0006: explains that it would have been obvious to use an index to signal to the decoder which of the chosen color transforms was used during encoding; Examiner notes Stauder cites to a publication of Marpe, which explains the transform matrices are generalized for a plurality of transform matrices; Su, ¶ 0037: teaches that for any number of color transforms, including proprietary color transforms, matrices and offset vectors can be used to convert from RGB to a generic YCC color space; Examiner further notes that the recited features are nothing more than generic, obvious software tools possessed by the skilled artisan for carrying out the functions described in the prior art).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Zhao, Zhang, Stauder, He, and Su teaches or suggests the method of claim 8, wherein performing inverse conversion includes: multiplying the two converted chroma signals by the correlation matrix and adding the offset matrix to generate the chroma signals (Su, ¶ 0113: teaches that, of course, you add the offset vector; Examiner further notes that the recited features are nothing more than generic, obvious software tools possessed by the skilled artisan for carrying out the functions described in the prior art).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Zhao, Zhang, Stauder, He, and Su teaches or suggests the method of claim 16, wherein the conversion information further comprises: an offset matrix utilized for performing the conversion (Zhang, ¶ 0043: teaches that adaptive color transforms (ACT) can be utilized to convert from one color space to another and that although the HEVC standard uses only one additional color space for simplicity, obviously more transforms were contemplated such that if more possibilities were implemented within the standard, additional signaling in the form of color transform indexes, would have been necessary; As evidence of the foregoing, Stauder, ¶ 0006: explains that it would have been obvious to use an index to signal to the decoder which of the chosen color transforms was used during encoding; Examiner notes Stauder cites to a publication of Marpe, which explains the transform matrices are generalized for a plurality of transform matrices; Su, ¶ 0037: teaches that for any number of color transforms, including proprietary color transforms, matrices and offset vectors can be used to convert from RGB to a generic YCC color space; Su, ¶ 0113: teaches that, of course, you add the offset vector; Examiner notes, of course, matrix multiplication information for a color transform means the coefficients represented in the matrix; see e.g. Su, ¶ 0053: teaching coefficients in the color transform matrix are used for color transformation; Examiner further notes that the recited features are nothing more than generic, obvious software tools possessed by the skilled artisan for carrying out the functions described in the prior art).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 (alternative)
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 of this title, 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 and 16–19 are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rudat, C., Helmrich, C. R., Lainema, J., Nguyen, T., Schwarz, H., Marpe, D., and Wiegand, T., “Inter-component transform for color video coding,” in 2019 Picture Coding Symposium (PCS), 1 –5 (2019) (herein “Rudat”) and He (US 2018/0124400 A1).
Regarding claim 1, the combination of Rudat and He teaches or suggests a method performed by a video decoding device for inversely converting a current chroma block, the method comprising: obtaining two converted chroma signals of the current chroma block (Rudat, e.g. Abstract, Section III, and Section IV(B): teaches receiving converted signals at the decoding device to undo the inter-component transform (ICT) that took advantage of the correlation between Cb and Cr; Rudat, Figs. 3 and 4: teaches the input of the inverse ICT stage are Cb’ and Cr’ coefficients that were ICT converted); obtaining, from a bitstream, inverse conversion information representing a chroma-to-chroma relationship between the two converted chroma signals and two chroma signals excluding a luma signal (Rudat, e.g. Section IV(C): teaches a decoder receiving ICT conversion parameters from the bitstream); performing inverse conversion on the two converted chroma signals using the inverse conversion information to obtain the two chroma signals (Rudat, Figs. 3 and 4: teaches the output of the inverse ICT stage are Cb and Cr residual signals); wherein the inverse conversion information comprises coefficients of a correlation matrix between the two converted chroma signals and the two chroma signals (Rudat, Table 1: teaches the rotation transform angles can be characterized as a 2x2 correlation matrix); and wherein the coefficients of the correlation matrix are directly obtained from the bitstream (While Rudat’s Table 1 and Section IV(C) teaches a more sophisticate approach to signaling the matrix coefficients utilizing pre-existing syntax in the VVC standard, including CBF flags for the chroma components and a novel enable flag for ICT, He, ¶ 0050: teaches that the skilled artisan had in their possession the ability to signal in the encoded bitstream chroma enhancement filter information such as filter coefficients directly).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to combine the elements taught by Rudat, with those of He, because both references are drawn to the same field of endeavor such that one wishing to practice the art of modifying chroma channel values using filters (matrix coefficients) would be led to their relevant teachings and because combining Rudat’s teaching of a more sophisticated signaling approach to signaling matrix coefficients for chroma channel manipulation with He’s teaching of direct signaling relevant adaptive chroma filtering information using explicit filter coefficients represents a mere combination of prior art elements, according to known methods, to yield a predictable result. This rationale applies to all combinations of Rudat and He used in this Office Action unless otherwise noted.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Rudat and He teaches or suggests the method of claim 1, wherein the two chroma signals include: original signals of the current chroma block, predictors of the current chroma block, or residual signals of the current chroma block (Rudat, Figs. 3 and 4: teaches the chroma signals subjected to ICT can be chroma residuals; Rudat, Section IV(A): more broadly teaches exploiting correlations between the chroma components can be thought of as a third dimension of decorrelation along a third axis, thus suggesting the signals need not be residual signals).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Rudat and He teaches or suggests the method of claim 1, wherein the correlation matrix is an inverse matrix of a combination matrix utilized for the inverse conversion (Applicant defines a combination matrix as “any 2x2 matrix.”; Rudat, Table 1: teaches the ICT transform can be characterized as a 2x2 matrix).
Claim 16 lists the same elements as claim 1, but is drawn to the corresponding encoding method rather than the decoding method. Therefore, the rationale for the rejection of claim 1 applies to the instant claim.
Claim 17 lists the same elements as claim 2, but is drawn to the corresponding encoding method rather than the decoding method. Therefore, the rationale for the rejection of claim 2 applies to the instant claim.
Claim 19 lists the same elements as claim 1, but is drawn to a method of transmitting the encoded information corresponding encoding and decoding methods. Therefore, the rationale for the rejection of claim 1 applies to the instant claim.
Claims 8–15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rudat, He, and Su (US 2023/0368344 A1).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Rudat, He, and Su teaches or suggests the method of claim 1, wherein the inverse conversion information further comprises an offset matrix utilized for the inverse conversion (Su, ¶ 0037: teaches that for any number of color transforms, including proprietary color transforms, matrices and offset vectors can be used to convert from RGB to a generic YCC color space; Su, ¶ 0053: teaching coefficients in the color transform matrix are used for color transformation; Examiner further notes that the recited features are nothing more than generic, obvious software tools possessed by the skilled artisan for carrying out the functions described in the prior art; Examiner notes that while not necessary to sustain this rejection, Schwarz, ¶ 0195, cited under the Conclusion Section of this Office Action, explains teaches an offset matrix, a rotation matrix, or a scale matrix are part of the skilled artisan’s toolkit and may be used interchangeably as desired for correlation operations).
One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to combine the elements taught by Rudat and He, with those of Su, because all three references are drawn to the same field of endeavor such that one wishing to practice the art of decorrelating color channels by use of adaptive color transforms would be led to their relevant teachings and because combining Rudat’s teachings regarding color space conversion for purposes of decorrelation (Section II(A)) with Su’s teaching of utilizing matrix and offset vectors for adaptive color space conversion represents a mere combination of prior art elements, according to known methods, to yield a predictable result. This rationale applies to all combinations of Rudat, He, and Su used in this Office Action unless otherwise noted.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Rudat, He, and Su teaches or suggests the method of claim 8, wherein obtaining the inverse conversion information includes: decoding, from a bitstream, an index indicative of the offset matrix; and obtaining, by using the index, values of the offset matrix from a preset list (Su, ¶ 0037: teaches that for any number of color transforms, including proprietary color transforms, matrices and offset vectors can be used to convert from RGB to a generic YCC color space; Examiner further notes that the recited features are nothing more than generic, obvious software tools possessed by the skilled artisan for carrying out the functions described in the prior art; Examiner notes that while not necessary to sustain this rejection, Schwarz, ¶ 0195, cited under the Conclusion Section of this Office Action, explains teaches an offset matrix, a rotation matrix, or a scale matrix are part of the skilled artisan’s toolkit and may be used interchangeably as desired for correlation operations).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Rudat, He, and Su teaches or suggests the method of claim 8, wherein obtaining the inverse conversion information includes: decoding, from a bitstream, values of the offset matrix (Su, ¶ 0037: teaches that for any number of color transforms, including proprietary color transforms, matrices and offset vectors can be used to convert from RGB to a generic YCC color space; Examiner further notes that the recited features are nothing more than generic, obvious software tools possessed by the skilled artisan for carrying out the functions described in the prior art; Examiner notes that while not necessary to sustain this rejection, Schwarz, ¶ 0195, cited under the Conclusion Section of this Office Action, explains teaches an offset matrix, a rotation matrix, or a scale matrix are part of the skilled artisan’s toolkit and may be used interchangeably as desired for correlation operations).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Rudat, He, and Su teaches or suggests the method of claim 8, wherein performing inverse conversion includes: multiplying the two converted chroma signals by the correlation matrix and adding the offset matrix to generate the chroma signals (Su, ¶ 0113: teaches that, of course, you add the offset vector; Examiner further notes that the recited features are nothing more than generic, obvious software tools possessed by the skilled artisan for carrying out the functions described in the prior art; Examiner notes that while not necessary to sustain this rejection, Schwarz, ¶ 0195, cited under the Conclusion Section of this Office Action, explains teaches an offset matrix, a rotation matrix, or a scale matrix are part of the skilled artisan’s toolkit and may be used interchangeably as desired for correlation operations).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Rudat, He, and Su teaches or suggests the method of claim 16, wherein the conversion information further comprises: an offset matrix utilized for performing the conversion (Su, ¶ 0037: teaches that for any number of color transforms, including proprietary color transforms, matrices and offset vectors can be used to convert from RGB to a generic YCC color space; Su, ¶ 0113: teaches that, of course, you add the offset vector; Examiner notes, of course, matrix multiplication information for a color transform means the coefficients represented in the matrix; see e.g. Su, ¶ 0053: teaching coefficients in the color transform matrix are used for color transformation; Examiner further notes that the recited features are nothing more than generic, obvious software tools possessed by the skilled artisan for carrying out the functions described in the prior art; Examiner notes that while not necessary to sustain this rejection, Schwarz, ¶ 0195, cited under the Conclusion Section of this Office Action, explains teaches an offset matrix, a rotation matrix, or a scale matrix are part of the skilled artisan’s toolkit and may be used interchangeably as desired for correlation operations).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kang (US 2023/0130958 A1) teaches using both ACT and JCCR together (¶ 0106).
Zhou (US 2017/0054966 A1) teaches an example of chrominance space conversion is RGB converted to YUV (¶ 0067).
Xiu (US 2022/0201301 A1) teaches adaptive color-space transform (ACT) is a tool used to reduce correlations among color channels (¶ 0007).
Zhang (US 2016/0105657 A1) teaches the YCgCo color space may, in some instances, achieve a better decorrelation between chroma channels than YCbCr (¶ 0071).
Marpe et al., “AN ADAPTIVE COLOR TRANSFORM APPROACH AND ITS APPLICATION IN 4:4:4 VIDEO CODING,” Proc. 14th European Signal Processing Conference (EUSIPCO 2006), Florence, Italy, September 2006.
Wang (US 8,922,835 B1) teaches YCbCr color space conversion accomplished with coefficients of a converting matrix (col. 1, ll. 45–55).
He (US 2018/0124400 A1) teaches chroma enhancement filters having filter information/parameters, like filter coefficients, encoded in a bitstream (¶ 0050).
Chiu (US 2005/0275736 A1) teaches a chroma-only 2x2 chroma enhancement matrix (lower right 2x2 of the 3x3 matrix where Y is treated as essentially identity)) that excludes the luminance signal from the conversion from one chroma space to an enhanced chroma space (e.g. ¶ 0063 et seq. Eq. 3–5).
Rudat, C., Helmrich, C. R., Lainema, J., Nguyen, T., Schwarz, H., Marpe, D., and Wiegand, T., “Inter-component transform for color video coding,” in 2019 Picture Coding Symposium (PCS), 1 –5 (2019). This publication describes the JCCR coding tool used in VVC and explains that JCCR exploits the correlation between Cb and Cr residuals (e.g. Abstract, Section III, and Section IV(B)).
Schwarz (US 2021/0092430 A1) teaches an offset matrix, a rotation matrix, or a scale matrix are part of the skilled artisan’s toolkit and may be used interchangeably as desired (¶ 0195).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael J Hess whose telephone number is (571)270-7933. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Fri 9:00am-5:30pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, William Vaughn can be reached on (571)272-3922. 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://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
MICHAEL J. HESS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2481
/MICHAEL J HESS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2481
Prosecution Insights