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 .
Claim Status
This Office Action responds to reply filed on 12/26/25 regarding application 18/855939 that was initially filed on 10/10/24. Claims 1-14, 16, 32, and 35 are pending.
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 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.
1. Claims 1 - 6, 32, and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhang et al., US 2024/0364879 A1 (hereinafter Zhang).
As for claim 1, Zhang discloses a method for encoding or decoding a video, the video comprising a sequence of pictures which includes a first picture ([0068], e.g., reference frame) and a second picture ([0063], e.g., frame, note a current frame), the method comprising: obtaining a first group ([0068], e.g., reference block) of values of samples included in a first block, wherein the first block is included in the first picture ([0068], e.g., reference frame); selecting, from a set of filters ([0115], e.g., coefficients, note all the filters), a filter ([0115], e.g., {0, 1, -2, 3, -7, 255, 8, -3, 2, -1, 0, 0,}) to use for generating a second group ([0068], e.g., current prediction unit) of values included in a second block, wherein the second block is included in the first picture or the second picture ([0063], e.g., frame, note a current frame); and using the selected filter ([0115], e.g., {0, 1, -2, 3, -7, 255, 8, -3, 2, -1, 0, 0,}) and the first group of values ([0068], e.g., reference block), generating the second group of values ([0068], e.g., current prediction unit), wherein the filter comprises a set of 6, 8, 10, or 12 coefficient ([0115], e.g., {0, 1, -2, 3, -7, 255, 8, -3, 2, -1, 0, 0,}, note the 12 coefficients) values, the set of coefficient values is selected from the following groups of coefficient values: … {0, 1, -2, 3, -7, 255, 8, -3, 2, -1, 0, 0} ([0115], e.g., {0, 1, -2, 3, -7, 255, 8, -3, 2, -1, 0, 0,}) ….
As for claim 2, most of limitations of this claim have been noted in the rejection of Claim 1. In addition, Zhang further discloses the samples having the first group of values are located at non-fractional sample positions ([0068], e.g., spatially discreat and/or integer pixels), and the samples having the second group of values are located at fractional sample positions ([0068], e.g., fractional position).
As for claim 3, most of limitations of this claim have been noted in the rejection of Claim 1. In addition, Zhang further discloses the samples having the first group of values include a first sample located at a non-fractional sample position ([0068], e.g., spatially discreat and/or integer pixels), the samples having the second group of values include a second sample located at a fractional sample position ([0068], e.g., fractional position), the fractional sample position is determined based at least on the non-fractional sample position ([0068], e.g., spatially discreat and/or integer pixels) and a fraction value ([0068], e.g., fractional position), and the fraction value is associated with one set of 6, 8, 10, or 12 ([0115], e.g., {0, 1, -2, 3, -7, 255, 8, -3, 2, -1, 0, 0,}, note the 12 coefficients) coefficient values selected from the groups of coefficient values.
As for claim 4, most of limitations of this claim have been noted in the rejection of Claim 3. In addition, Zhang further discloses the fractional sample position = the non-fractional sample position + (the fraction value x a distance between samples) ([0068], e.g., (n-1) fractional position).
As for claim 5, most of limitations of this claim have been noted in the rejection of Claim 3. In addition, Zhang further discloses the fraction value is any of 0/16, 1/16, 2/16, 3/16, ..., 15/16, 0/32, 1/32, 2/32 ([0115], e.g., 2/32), 3/32, ..., and 31/32.
As for claim 6, most of limitations of this claim have been noted in the rejection of Claim 1. In addition, Zhang further discloses performing one or more of a motion compensated prediction, an inter prediction ([0068], e.g., inter prediction), and an intra prediction using the first group of values of samples included in the first block, wherein performing one or more of the motion compensated prediction, the inter prediction, and the intra prediction comprises interpolating the first group of values using the filter ([0115], e.g., {0, 1, -2, 3, -7, 255, 8, -3, 2, -1, 0, 0,}).
As for claim 32, the claim recites a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing a computer program comprising instructions of the method of claim 1, and is similarly analyzed.
As for claim 35, the claim recites an apparatus of the method of claim 1, and is similarly analyzed.
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.
2. Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang in view of Li et al., US 2014/0185680 A1 (hereinafter Li).
As for claim 7, most of limitations of this claim have been noted in the rejection of Claim 1.
Zhang does not explicitly disclose, but Li teaches down-sampling or up-sampling ([0215], e.g., up-sampling) the first picture using the first group of values of samples included in the first block, wherein the down-sampling or the up-sampling comprises interpolating ([0215], e.g., interpolation filter) the first group of values using the filter.
Therefore, given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the references of Zhang and Li before him/her to modify the method, apparatus, and medium for video processing of Zhang with the teaching of device and method for scalable and Multiview/3D coding of video information of Li with a motivation to provide a scalable video coding (SVC) or Multiview video coding (MVC, 3DV) as taught by Li ([0002]) by using the layers and/or up-sampling.
As for claim 8, most of limitations of this claim have been noted in the rejection of Claim 7. In addition, Zhang further discloses the motion compensated prediction is a motion compensated down-sampling (In the claim 6 rejection, a motion compensated prediction, an inter prediction, and an intra prediction is in optional form, and inter prediction is selected in the claim rejection, and this claim pertains to an option that is not selected; thus, no further citation is provided.).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments, filed 12/26/25, have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the citations being used in the current rejection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-14 and 16 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.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
1. US 2003/0108099 discloses picture encoding method and apparatus, picture decoding method and apparatus and furnishing medium.
2. US 2005/0053294 discloses techniques and tools for progressive and interlaced video coding and decoding.
3. US 2006/0126962 discloses methods and systems for reducing blocking artifacts with reduced complexity for spatially-scalable video coding.
Conclusion
Applicant 's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 JOSEPH SUH whose telephone number is 571-270-7484. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 7:30 AM - 6:00 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, Jay Patel can be reached on 571-272-2988. 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.
/JOSEPH SUH/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2485