CTNF 18/849,365 CTNF 87350 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Specification The abstract and specification were received on 05/09/2025. These abstract and specification are acceptable. Drawings 06-37 AIA The drawings were received on 05/09/2025 . These drawings are acceptable . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-3, 6, 7, 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20220116592 A1 ZHANG; Li et al. (hereafter Zhang), further in view of US 12143598 B2 Lim; Sung Chang et al. (hereafter Lim) Regarding claim 1, Zhang discloses An image decoding method performed by an image decoding apparatus (Fig.1), the image decoding method comprising (Fig.24): determining whether to apply geometric partitioning to a current block ([1080]); partitioning the current block into a firs sub-block and a second sub-block based on geometric partitioning being applied to the current block ([121]); and performing intra prediction on the first sub-block and performing inter prediction on the second sub-block ([19]). Zhang fails to disclose an intra prediction mode of the first sub-block is derived based on an intra prediction mode of a collocated block within a reference block and whether to resample the reference picture. However, Lim teaches wherein an intra prediction mode of the first sub-block is derived based on an intra prediction mode of a collocated block within a reference block (col.85 lines 22-25, col.81 lines 29-48, intra mode of subblock is derived by corresponding neighbor blocks that are collocated blocks in reference picture ) and whether to resample the reference picture (col.69 line 34-col.70 line 17, col.24 lines 28-30, upsampling on reconstructed as a reference in decoder site corresponding downsampling on reference sample in encoder site is the resampling to derive intra prediction). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the image decoding method performed by an image decoding apparatus disclosed by Zhang to include the teaching in the same field of endeavor of Lim, in order to enhance compression efficiency, as identified by Lim. Regarding claim 2, Lim teaches The image decoding method of claim 1, wherein based on the reference picture being resampled, the collocated block is derived based on a value clipped to a position within a certain range for the current block (col.81 lines 41-48). Regarding 3, Lim teaches The image decoding method of claim 2, wherein the position within the certain range for the current block is determined based on a coding tree unit size for the current block (col.18 lines 31-46). Regarding claim 6, Lim teaches The image decoding method of claim 1, wherein based on the reference picture being resampled, the intra prediction mode of the first sub-block is derived based on a specific intra prediction mode (col.24 lines 41-44). Regarding claim 7, Lim teaches The image decoding method of claim 6, wherein the specific intra prediction mode is one of planar or DC mode (col.24 lines 41-44). Regarding claims 10, 11, see the rejection claim 1. Zhang further discloses An image encoding method performed by an image encoding apparatus (Fig.24). Regarding claim 12, Zhang teaches A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a bitstream generated by the image encoding method of claim 10 (col.11 line 63-col.12 line 2) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 4, 5, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang , in view of Lim, and further in view of US 20140168362 A1 Hannuksela; Miska Matias et al. (hereafter Hannuksela) . Regarding 4, Hannuksela teaches The image decoding method of claim 1, wherein based on the reference picture being resampled, the collocated block is derived based on scaling according to a sampling ratio of the reference picture ([364]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention having all the references Zhang, Lim and Hannuksela before him/her, to modify the image decoding method performed by an image decoding apparatus disclosed by Zhang to include the teaching in the same field of endeavor of Lim and Hannuksela, in order to enhance compression efficiency, as identified by Lim, and provide more efficient coding, as identified by Hannuksela. Regarding 5, Hannuksela teaches The image decoding method of claim 4, wherein the collocated block is derived by being transformed into an integer pixel position after scaling ([377]). Regarding 8, Hannuksela teaches The image decoding method of claim 1, wherein, based on the second sub- block being bi-predicted and at least one of the reference pictures being resampled, the intra prediction mode of the first sub-block is derived based on a specific intra prediction mode ([445], [603]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang, in view of Lim, and further in view of US 20230047030 A1 Wang; Ye-kui et al. (hereafter Wang) Regarding claim 9, Wang teaches The image decoding method of claim 1, wherein based on the second sub- block being bi-predicted and only one of the reference pictures being not resampled, the intra prediction mode of the first sub-block is derived based on an intra prediction mode of a collocated block within the reference picture which is not resampled and a specific intra prediction mode ([08], [220]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention having all the references Zhang, Lim and Wang before him/her, to modify the image decoding method performed by an image decoding apparatus disclosed by Zhang to include the teaching in the same field of endeavor of Lim and Wang, in order to enhance compression efficiency, as identified by Lim, and improve compression efficiency, as identified by Wang . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure : US 20240283944 A1, US 20230179762 A1, CN 113906740 B . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRACY Y. LI whose telephone number is (571)270-3671. The examiner can normally be reached Monday Friday (8:30 AM- 4:30 PM) EST. 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, David Czekaj can be reached at (571) 272-7327. 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. /TRACY Y. LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487 Application/Control Number: 18/849,365 Page 2 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 18/849,365 Page 3 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 18/849,365 Page 4 Art Unit: 2487
Prosecution Insights