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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) was/were submitted on 26 February 2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 17-19 and 24-27 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s arguments, see Response to Office Action mailed 25 November 2025, filed 25 February 2026, with respect to Claim Objections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The Claim Objections of Claims 17-32 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 17-18, 25-26, and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Norkin (JVET-Q0533-v2; 7-17Jan2020).
Regarding Claims 17 and 25, Norkin discloses device, comprising: a processor [Norkin: Abstract: use mandatory film grain post-processing in VVC] configured to: determine a first set of film grain scaling factors [Norkin: §2: f(Y) is the piece-wise linear function that scales with the noise intensity depending on the value of the luma component; and § 5 The 32x32 block of the film grain is scaled with intensities of reconstructed samples,], wherein the first set of film grain scaling factors is represented by a plurality of constant functions [Norkin: §2: Synthesized noise is added separately to Y, Cb, and Cr color components. The noise is estimated in smooth areas of the picture. Then, the noise standard deviation is modeled using piece-wise linear function for each of Y, Cb, and Cr components. In luma, grain strength is modulated with a function of luminance], the first set of film grain scaling factors comprises a first film grain scaling factor associated with a first intensity interval [Norkin: §2: In luma, grain strength is modulated with a function of luminance] and a second film grain scaling factor associated with a second intensity interval [Norkin: § 2: the noise standard deviation is modeled using piece-wise linear function for each of Y, Cb, and Cr components]; and map the first film grain scaling factor to a third film grain scaling factor, and the second film grain scaling factor to a fourth film grain scaling factor [Norkin: FIG. 1: Analysis of structure, intensity [Wingdings font/0xE0] Maps [Wingdings font/0xE0] Film grain estimation], wherein the third film grain scaling factor and the fourth film grain scaling factor are elements of a second set of film grain scaling factors [Norkin: §5: The scaling for a color component can use a look-up table (LUT) with the 256 8-bit values for 8-bit video and 1024 8-bit values for the 10-bit video. The table is filled based on the points of the piece-wise linear scaling function in the beginning of noise signaling for each frame], and the second set of film grain scaling factors is represented by a continuous piecewise linear function [Norkin: § 2: the noise standard deviation is modeled using piece-wise linear function for each of Y, Cb, and Cr components].
Regarding Claims 18 and 26, Norkin discloses all the limitations of Claims 17 and 25, respectively, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Furthermore, Norkin discloses wherein the processor being configured to map the first film grain scaling factor to the third film grain scaling factor, and the second film grain scaling factor to the fourth film grain scaling factor comprises the processor being configured to: determine a first pivot point for the first intensity interval, wherein the third film grain scaling factor is a scaling factor associated with the first pivot point; and determine a second pivot point for the second intensity interval [Norkin: §7: num_y_points specifies the number of points for the piece-wise linear scaling function of the luma component. It is a requirement of bitstream conformance that num_y_points is less than or equal to 14.
point_y_value| i] represents specifies the luma value for the i-th point of the piecewise linear scaling function for the luma component], wherein the fourth film grain scaling factor is a scaling factor associated with the second pivot point [Norkin: §7: [i]], wherein the processor is further configured to connect the first pivot point and the second pivot point to generate the continuous piecewise linear function [Norkin: §7].
Regarding Claims 24 and 32, Norkin discloses all the limitations of Claims 17 and 25, respectively, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Furthermore, Norkin discloses wherein the processor is further configured to receive a film grain characteristics (FGC) supplemental enhancement information (SEI) message that indicates the first film grain scaling factor and the second film grain scaling factor [Norkin: §2: The film grain SEI messages exist in H.264].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19-23 and 27-31 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's submission of an information disclosure statement under 37 CFR 1.97(c) with the timing fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(p) on 26 February 2026 prompted the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 609.04(b). 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 JONATHAN R MESSMORE whose telephone number is (571)272-2773. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5 EST/EDT.
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, Chris Kelley can be reached at 571-272-7331. 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.
/JONATHAN R MESSMORE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482
Prosecution Insights