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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Summary
This office action for US Patent application 18/865850 is responsive to communications filed on November 14th, 2024. Currently, claims 1-17 are pending are presented for examination while claims 4, 7, 9-10, 16 were canceled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 11, 17 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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 1-3, 5-6, 8, 11-15, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C §102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by ZHAO et al. (US 20220321909 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Liu et al. (US 20220060699 A1) meets the claim limitations, as follows:
A method of reconstructing a current block, performed by a video decoding device, the method comprising:
deriving an intra prediction mode of the current block [i.e. identify an intra prediction mode of a coded block; paragraph. 0140]; and
generating a prediction block of the current block by performing intra prediction based on reference samples from the plurality of reference lines using a weighted combination [i.e. multiple reference lines are selected for intra-prediction for the coded block. The more than one reference lines may be combined with or without weight; paragraph. 0140],
wherein the plurality of reference lines includes a reference line immediately adjacent to the current block [i.e. the reference line 1610 or 1618 immediately adjacent to the coded block 1602; Fig. 16].
Regarding claim 2, ZHAO et al. (US 20220321909 A1) discloses the following claim limitations as set forth in claim 1.
Furthermore, ZHAO et al. (US 20220321909 A1) discloses the claim limitations as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein the weighted combination is performed by applying different weights to prediction values generated based on reference samples derived from the plurality of reference lines [i.e. generate a prediction of the coded block by applying weights; paragraph. 0140].
Regarding claim 3, ZHAO et al. (US 20220321909 A1) discloses the following claim limitations as set forth in claim 1.
Furthermore, ZHAO et al. (US 20220321909 A1) discloses the claim limitations as follows:
The method of claim 1, further comprising: decoding a flag from a bitstream, wherein the flag indicates whether intra prediction of the current block is performed based on the plurality of reference lines [i.e. a reference line index may be indicated by a parameter extracted from a coded bitstream; paragraph. 0140, 0148, 0166].
Regarding claim 5, ZHAO et al. (US 20220321909 A1) discloses the following claim limitations as set forth in claim 1.
Furthermore, ZHAO et al. (US 20220321909 A1) discloses the claim limitations as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein generating the prediction block includes:
performing a preset arithmetic operation between reference samples at corresponding positions derived from the plurality of reference lines [i.e. the prediction of the coded block is derived by averaging, interpolating or any other manner from reference lines; paragraph. 0140].
Regarding claim 6, ZHAO et al. (US 20220321909 A1) discloses the following claim limitations as set forth in claim 5.
Furthermore, ZHAO et al. (US 20220321909 A1) discloses the claim limitations as follows:
The method of claim 5,: when a reference sample derived from one reference line is available but a corresponding reference pixel of sample derived from the other reference line is not available, the prediction block is generated by using a value of the available reference sample [i.e. paragraph. 0010, 0140].
Regarding claim 8, ZHAO et al. (US 20220321909 A1) discloses the following claim limitations as set forth in claim 1.
Furthermore, ZHAO et al. (US 20220321909 A1) discloses the claim limitations as follows:
The method of claim 1, further comprising: when intra prediction is not performed based on the plurality of reference lines, the prediction block of the current block is generated using a single reference line adjacent to the current block based on the intra prediction mode [i.e. the intra prediction of the coded block may be based on a single reference line from multiple reference lines; paragraph. 0140].
Regarding claim 11, all the claim limitations which are set forth and rejected as per discussion for claim 1.
Regarding claim 12, all the claim limitations which are set forth and rejected as per discussion for claim 3.
Regarding claim 13, all the claim limitations which are set forth and rejected as per discussion for claim 5.
Regarding claim 14, all the claim limitations which are set forth and rejected as per discussion for claim 6.
Regarding claim 15, all the claim limitations which are set forth and rejected as per discussion for claim 8.
Regarding claim 17, all the claim limitations which are set forth and rejected as per discussion for claim 1.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (20200244956).
Claim 17 directed to a non-transitory computer readable recording medium (CRM) storing a bitstream generated by an encoding method. The claim does not recite that the CRM contains executable instruction, that when executed, implement the encoding method. The bitstream is a product produced by the encoding method. Therefore, the claims are not limited to the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. (See MPEP 2113 - Product-by-Process claims.) Hence, the encoding method steps recited are given patentable weight only to structures in the bitstream that are implied by the steps.
To be given patentable weight, the CRM and the bitstream (i.e. descriptive material) must be in a functional relationship. A functional relationship can be found where the descriptive material performs some function with respect to the CRM to which it is associated. See MPEP §2111.05(I)(A). When a claimed “computer-readable medium merely serves as a support for information or data, no functional relationship exists”. MPEP §2111.05(III).
The CRM storing the claimed bitstream in claim 17 merely services as a support for the CRM of the bitstream and provides no functional relationship between the stored bitstream and the CRM.
Therefore, the structure bitstream, which scope is implied by the method steps, is non-functional descriptive material and given no patentable weight. MPEP §2111.05(III).
Thus, the claim scope is just a storage medium storing data and is anticipated by Lee recites a storage medium storing a bitstream (Fig. 1-2, the bitstream from Fig. 1 is stored in Fig. 2, 210; paragraph. 0002, a method and apparatus for encoding/decoding an image and a recording medium storing a bitstream).
New 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications form the examiner should be directed to Nam Pham, whose can be contacted by phone at (571)270-7352. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon—Thurs.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, CZEKAJ DAVID, can be reached on (571)272-7327.
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 (too 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.
/NAM D PHAM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
