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 .
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to communications filed 04/29/2026. Claims 32-51 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are moot due to new grounds of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 32-33, 38-40, 44-45, 48-49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lim et al (US 2022/0321890 and hereafter referred to as “Lim”).
Regarding 32, Lim discloses a device for video decoding, comprising:
a processor (Page 35, paragraph 0761-0762, Figure 17, 1710) configured to:
obtain a video block comprising an intra-prediction portion and an inter-prediction portion (Figure 2, 200, Page 11, paragraph 0254 – Figure 21);
obtain a reference block in a reference picture of the video block (Page 7, paragraph 0190, Page 38, paragraph 0833, Page 8, paragraph 0204);
determine an intra-prediction mode for the intra-prediction portion of the video block based on one or more intra-prediction modes associated with the reference block (Figure 21, intra prediction in second partition);
predict the intra-prediction portion of the video block using the intra-prediction mode (Figure 21, Page 38, paragraph 0833-0835, Page 7, paragraph 0188, 0190);
predict the inter-prediction portion using an inter-prediction mode (Figure 21, Page 38, paragraph 0833-0835, Page 7, paragraph 0190); and
decode the video block based on the intra-prediction portion and the inter-prediction portion of the video block (Figure 21, Page 38, paragraph 0833-0835, Page 7, paragraph 0190, Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 39, Lim discloses a device for video encoding, comprising:
a processor (Page 34, paragraph 0744-0746, Figure 16, 1610) configured to:
obtain a video block comprising an intra-prediction portion and an inter-prediction portion (Figure 1, 110, 125, Page 8, paragraph 0202-0204 );
obtain a reference block in a reference picture of the video block (Page 7, paragraph 0190, Page 38, paragraph 0833, Page 8, paragraph 0204);
determine an intra-prediction mode for the intra-prediction portion of the video block based on one or more intra-prediction modes associated with the reference block (Page 7, paragraph 0188-0190, Page 38, paragraph 0833, Page 8, paragraph 0204);
predict the intra-prediction portion of the video block using the intra-prediction mode (Page 7, paragraph 0190, Page 38, paragraph 0833, Page 8, paragraph 0204);
predict the inter-prediction portion using an inter-prediction mode (Page 7, paragraph 0190, Page 38, paragraph 0833, Page 8, paragraph 0204); and
encode the video block based on the intra-prediction portion and the inter-prediction portion of the video block (Figure 1, Figure 21, Page 7, paragraph 0190, Page 38, paragraph 0833, Page 8, paragraph 0204).
Regarding 44, Lim discloses a method for video decoding, comprising:
obtaining a video block comprising an intra-prediction portion and an inter-prediction portion (Figure 2, 200, Page 11, paragraph 0254 – Figure 21);
obtaining a reference block in a reference picture of the video block (Page 7, paragraph 0190, Page 38, paragraph 0833, Page 8, paragraph 0204);
determining an intra-prediction mode for the intra-prediction portion of the video block based on one or more intra-prediction modes associated with the reference block (Figure 21, intra prediction in second partition);
predicting the intra-prediction portion of the video block using the intra-prediction mode (Figure 21, Page 38, paragraph 0833-0835, Page 7, paragraph 0188, 0190);
predicting the inter-prediction portion using an inter-prediction mode (Figure 21, Page 38, paragraph 0833-0835, Page 7, paragraph 0190); and
decoding the video block based on the intra-prediction portion and the inter-prediction portion of the video block (Figure 21, Page 38, paragraph 0833-0835, Page 7, paragraph 0190, Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 48, Lim discloses a method for video encoding, comprising:
obtaining a video block comprising an intra-prediction portion and an inter-prediction portion (Figure 1, 110, 125, Page 8, paragraph 0202-0204 );
obtaining a reference block in a reference picture of the video block (Page 7, paragraph 0190, Page 38, paragraph 0833, Page 8, paragraph 0204);
determining an intra-prediction mode for the intra-prediction portion of the video block based on one or more intra-prediction modes associated with the reference block (Page 7, paragraph 0188-0190, Page 38, paragraph 0833, Page 8, paragraph 0204);
predicting the intra-prediction portion of the video block using the intra-prediction mode (Page 7, paragraph 0190, Page 38, paragraph 0833, Page 8, paragraph 0204);
predict the inter-prediction portion using an inter-prediction mode (Page 7, paragraph 0190, Page 38, paragraph 0833, Page 8, paragraph 0204); and
encoding the video block based on the intra-prediction portion and the inter-prediction portion of the video block (Figure 1, Figure 21, Page 7, paragraph 0190, Page 38, paragraph 0833, Page 8, paragraph 0204).
Regarding Claim 33, 40, 45 and 49, Lim discloses all the limitations of Claims 32, 39, 44 and 48 respectively. Lim discloses wherein the processor is further configured to determine that geometric partitioning mode (GPM) is enabled for the video block, and wherein the intra-prediction portion and the inter-prediction portion are associated with GPM (Page 41, paragraph 0900, Page 35, paragraph 0778, Figure 18, Figure 21).
Regarding Claim 38, Lim discloses all the limitations of Claims 32. Lim discloses wherein the processor is further configured to receive an indication associated with an intra prediction of the video block, wherein the indication indicates that the intra- prediction mode for the intra-prediction portion of the video block is to be determined based on the one or more intra-prediction modes associated with the reference block, and wherein the intra-prediction mode for the intra-prediction portion of the video block is determined based on the indication (Page 7, paragraph 0190).
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, 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.
Claims 36 and 43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim in view of Lim et al (US 2022/0166998 and hereafter referred to as “Lim2”).
Regarding Claim 36 and 43, Lim discloses all the limitations of Claims 32 and 39 respectively. Lim discloses wherein the one or more intra-prediction modes associated with the reference block comprises an intra- prediction mode associated with a reference block (paragraph 0190). Lim discloses reference samples but does not explicitly disclose the reference block comprises a reference sample, and wherein the one or more intra-prediction modes associated with the reference block comprises an intra- prediction mode associated with the reference sample. Lim2 discloses the reference block comprises a reference sample, and wherein the one or more intra-prediction modes associated with the reference block comprises an intra- prediction mode associated with the reference sample (paragraph 0782, 00227, 0260). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Lim to include the missing limitation as taught by Lim2 in order to improved coding efficiency (paragraph 0005) as disclosed by Lim2.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 34-35, 37, 41-42, 46-47, 50-51 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARZANA HOSSAIN whose telephone number is (571)272-5943. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am to 5:00 pm.
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, Christopher 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.
/FARZANA HOSSAIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482
June 26, 2026
Prosecution Insights