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 .
Priority
Acknowledgement is made of applicant's claim for foreign applications filed on 12/16/24.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/1/25 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 27 and 28 is/are objected to because of the following informalities: All texts should be spelled out with American English form. Appropriate correction is required for “quantised” and “optimiser”.
Drawings
Figure(s) 17 is/are objected to as depicting a block diagram without "readily identifiable" descriptors of each block, as required by 37 CFR 1.84(n). Rule 84(n) requires "labeled representations" of graphical symbols, such as blocks; and any that are "not universally recognized may be used, subject to approval by the Office, if they are not likely to be confused with existing conventional symbols, and if they are readily identifiable." In the case of Figure(s) 17, the blocks are not readily identifiable per se and therefore require the insertion of text that identifies the function of those blocks. That is, each vacant block should be provided with a corresponding label identifying its function or purpose.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as "amended." If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an
application must be labeled in the top margin as either "Replacement Sheet" or "New Sheet" pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 16, 24-27 and 29-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye et al. (US 2004/0086050) in view of Schwarz et al. (US 2021/0084304).
Regarding claim 16, Ye discloses a method for encoding data defining an image (see 110 in fig. 3), the method comprising the steps of:(a) segmenting the image into image blocks, each image block having a uniform block size (e.g. see macroblocks ¶ [0005], wherein MPEG-4 standards includes block of uniform size);(b) applying a frequency-based transform to each of the image blocks (e.g. see “DCT” in ¶ [0006], wherein DCT is frequency-based transform), thereby providing transformed image data in which the image data is represented as coefficients defining a linear combination of predetermined basis functions having different spatial frequencies (e.g. see ¶ [0006]); such that each block of transformed image data comprises one coefficient for a zero frequency basis function (e.g. see “DC” in ¶ [0006], wherein DC standard is a zero frequency basis function in a DCT), and a plurality of coefficients for higher frequency basis functions (e.g. see “AC” in ¶ [0006], wherein AC standard is a higher frequency basis function in a DCT);(c) grouping the plurality of coefficients for higher frequency basis functions in each block of transformed image data into one
Although Ye discloses converting the concatenated coefficients into code using coding (see 110 in fig. 3), it is noted that Ye does not provide the particular wherein the converting is with binary code using binary arithmetic coding.
However, Schwarz discloses an encoding method converting coefficients wherein the converting is with binary code using binary arithmetic coding (e.g. see ¶ [0085]).
Given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate Schwarz teachings of binary arithmetic coding into Ye coding for the benefit of compatibility with industries standards efficient video compression.
Regarding claim 24, the references further discloses wherein the step of converting the coefficients into binary code comprises applying binary arithmetic coding using a probability model (e.g. see Schwarz ¶ [0097]).
Regarding claim 25, the references further discloses wherein the probability model is tailored based on a sample set of representative images (see Schwarz fig. 19a-19b).
Regarding claim 26, the references further discloses the probability model is selected from a number of tailored probability models, each of the number of tailored probability models being learnt based on a sample set of representative images for a particular image modality (e.g. see Schwarz ¶ [0097]).
Regarding claim 27, the references further discloses wherein the coefficients for each of the one or more sub-bands are arranged in a predetermined order so as to form a vector (e.g. see Schwarz ¶ [0058]), which vector has a gain and a unit length direction (e.g. see Schwarz ¶ [0058]), and wherein the unit length direction is quantised by constraining its component terms to be integers (e.g. see Schwarz ¶ [0033]), and constraining a sum of those component terms to be equal to a predetermined value K (e.g. see Schwarz ¶ [0033]).
Regarding claim 29, the references further discloses which image has been encoded according to the method of claim 16, the method of decoding comprising inverting the steps performed in encoding the image (see Ye 130 in fig. 3).
Regarding claim 30, the references further discloses method of encoding a series of image frames including at least a current frame and a preceding frame, each of the frames being encoded according to the method of claim 16 (see Ye 130 in fig. 3).
Regarding claim 31, the references further discloses one or more non-transitory computer-readable medium having stored thereon data defining an image, which data has been encoded according to the method of claim 16 (e.g. see Schwarz ¶ [0009]).
Regarding claim 32, Ye further discloses comprising instructions which, when the instructions are executed by a computer, cause the computer to carry out the method of claim 16 (e.g. see ¶ [0017]).
Regarding claim 33, Ye further discloses processor configured to perform the method of claim 16 (e.g. see ¶ [0017]).
Regarding claim 34, the references further discloses one or more non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions which, when the instructions are executed by a computer, cause the computer to carry out the method of claim 29 (e.g. see Schwarz ¶ [0009]).
Regarding claim 35, Ye further discloses a processor configured to perform the method of claim 29 (e.g. see ¶ [0017]).
Claims 20-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye and Schwarz in view of Kondo et al. (US 6,389,562).
Regarding claim 20, Ye does not disclose comprising the step of grouping the blocks into two or more sets of blocks, prior to grouping the blocks into slices.
However, Kondo discloses the step of grouping the blocks into two or more sets of blocks, prior to grouping the blocks into slices (see 510-540 in fig. 5).
Given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate Kondo teachings of image to block mapping process into Ye encoding for the benefit of providing a step to enhance subsequent recovery of lost or damage compression parameters of encoded data.
Regarding claim 21, the references further discloses wherein the step of grouping is performed such that the blocks in any one of the sets do not share any boundaries (see Kondo fig. 5A).
Regarding claim 22, the references further discloses wherein there are two sets of blocks, and the two sets interlock (see Kondo 550 in fig. 5).
Regarding claim 23, the references further discloses wherein each slice comprises a number of consecutive blocks in one of the sets of blocks (e.g. see Schwarz ¶ [0059]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 17-19 and 28 is/are allowed.
The following is an Examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Claim(s) 17 discloses the step of applying, subsequent to converting the concatenated coefficients to binary code using binary arithmetic coding, an allocation method to allocate bits associated with coefficients in each sub-band in a slice to a position in a bitstream; the allocation method comprising:(i) defining a number of bins in the bitstream, the bins each having a uniform size, and each of the bins having an associated one of the plurality of blocks;(ii) allocating bits representing a selected one of the one or more sub-bands of each of the plurality of blocks to the bin associated with said each of the plurality of blocks; (iii) if the number of bits in a first of the bins is greater than the uniform size, transferring excess bits to a second of the bins, the second of the bins being selected according to a predetermined order; the allocation method being such that each bin starts with bits representing its associated block; and repeating the allocation method for all of the one or more sub-bands. Claim 28 discloses wherein the step of converting the coefficients into binary code comprises applying binary arithmetic coding using a probability model, wherein the probability model is a truncated normal distribution in a range between K and -K with variance o, which variance is dependent on the number of components in the sub-band L, the predetermined value K, and the position i of the coefficient in the sub-band through a relationship: in which relationship the parameters a, pi, and 6o for each sample set of representative imagery are calculated using a least-squares optimiser on the basis of the sample set of representative imagery.
The closest prior arts Ye, Schwarz and Kondo fail to anticipate or render the above underlined limitation obvious.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Citation of Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Alshina et al. (US 2023/0247201), discloses decoding with allocating bits in bins.
Pan et al. (US 2021/0099699), discloses decoding with allocating bits in bins.
Deng et al. (US 12,407,829), discloses decoding with allocating bits in bins.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD T TORRENTE whose telephone number is (571)270-3702. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 6:45-3:15 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 at (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.
/RICHARD T TORRENTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2485