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
This application discloses and claims only subject matter disclosed in prior application, and names the inventor or at least one joint inventor named in the prior application. Accordingly, this application may constitute a continuation or divisional. Should applicant desire to claim the benefit of the filing date of the prior application, attention is directed to 35 U.S.C. 120, 37 CFR 1.78, and MPEP § 211 et seq. The presentation of a benefit claim may result in an additional fee under 37 CFR 1.17(w)(1) or (2) being required, if the earliest filing date for which benefit is claimed under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) and 1.78(d) in the application is more than six years before the actual filing date of the application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS)s submitted on 05/12/2026 and 12/19/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 (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 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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (US20190313107) (hereinafter Park) in view of Tan (US20260214274) (hereinafter Tan).
Regarding claim 1, Park discloses a method of signaling neural network post-loop filter information for video data, the method comprising: signaling a neural network post-filter characteristics message [Figs. 29-39, 0099, 0255, 0275-0299, 0335-0342; global motion calculation module performing coding process].
signaling a syntax element specifying a padding type corresponding to the neural network post-filter characteristics message, wherein the syntax element includes a value specifying a wrap-around padding type and a value specifying a fixed padding type [Figs. 29-39, 0099, 0255, 0275-0299, 0335-0342; variety of algorithms implementing global motion calculation module for virtual region pixel values including different padding methods, including a variety of boundary types/regions].
Park discloses the limitations of the claims. However, Park does not explicitly disclose signaling a syntax element indicating a sample value to be used for padding in a case where the fixed padding type is specified.
Tan more explicitly discloses signaling a syntax element indicating a sample value to be used for padding in a case where the fixed padding type is specified [TBLS 2-5, 0172-0199; nnpf padding types implemented including fixed and wrapround padding].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Park with the teachings of Tan as stated above. By incorporating the teachings as such a high efficiency image compression technology to effectively transmit, store, and reproduce the information of high resolution and high quality images is achieved (see Tan 0003-0005).
Regarding claim 2, Park discloses a method of applying a neural network in-loop filter to reconstructed video, the method comprising: receiving a neural network post-filter characteristics message ;parsing a syntax element identifying a padding type corresponding to the neural network post-filter characteristics message, wherein the syntax element includes a value specifying a wrap-around padding type and a value specifying a fixed padding type [Figs. 29-39, 0099, 0255, 0275-0299, 0335-0342; variety of algorithms implementing global motion calculation module for virtual region pixel values including different padding methods, including a variety of boundary types/regions].
Park discloses the limitations of the claims. However, Park does not explicitly disclose parsing a syntax element indicating a sample value to be used for padding in a case where the fixed padding type is specified.
Tan more explicitly discloses parsing a syntax element indicating a sample value to be used for padding in a case where the fixed padding type is specified [TBLS 2-5, 0172-0199; nnpf padding types implemented including fixed and wrapround padding].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Park with the teachings of Tan as stated above. By incorporating the teachings as such a high efficiency image compression technology to effectively transmit, store, and reproduce the information of high resolution and high quality images is achieved (see Tan 0003-0005).
Regarding claim 3, Park discloses a device comprising one or more processors configured to: receive a neural network post-filter characteristics message [Figs. 29-39, 0099, 0255, 0275-0299, 0335-0342; global motion calculation module performing coding process].
parse a syntax element identifying a padding type corresponding to the neural network post-filter characteristics message, wherein the syntax element includes a value specifying a wrap-around padding type and a value specifying a fixed padding type [Figs. 29-39, 0099, 0255, 0275-0299, 0335-0342; variety of algorithms implementing global motion calculation module for virtual region pixel values including different padding methods, including a variety of boundary types/regions].
Park discloses the limitations of the claims. However, Park does not explicitly disclose
parse a syntax element indicating a sample value to be used for padding in a case where the fixed padding type is specified
Tan more explicitly discloses parse a syntax element indicating a sample value to be used for padding in a case where the fixed padding type is specified.
[TBLS 2-5, 0172-0199; nnpf padding types implemented including fixed and wrapround padding].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Park with the teachings of Tan as stated above. By incorporating the teachings as such a high efficiency image compression technology to effectively transmit, store, and reproduce the information of high resolution and high quality images is achieved (see Tan 0003-0005).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TALHA M NAWAZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5439. The examiner can normally be reached Flex, M-R 6:30am-3:30pm; F 8:30am-12:30pm.
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, Joe G Ustaris can be reached at 571-272-7383. 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.
/TALHA M NAWAZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483
Prosecution Insights