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
The objections to claims 1, 16, 17, and 18 have been withdrawn in view of current amendments.
The 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) rejection to claims 17 and 18 has been withdrawn in view of current amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 11, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant argues US Pub. No. 2020/0404257 (hereinafter “Filippov”) fails to teach or suggest the limitations of claims 1, 16, 17, and 18. Specifically, the Applicant argues the combination of Filippov and Schwarz fails to teach or suggest the limitation “wherein the sign-hiding state used to represent the one or more signs is variable” in claims 1, 16, 17, and 18 and the limitation “encoding said one or more sign-hiding quantization coefficients without signaling said one or more signs associated with said one or more sign-hiding quantization coefficients” in claim 16.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Filippov teaches that it is also possible to hide the signs of plural transform coefficients in the value of a predetermined function, the signs of N coefficients can be hidden by means of a predetermined function that can assume 2N different values (par. 70). Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, Filippov teaches “wherein the sign-hiding state used to represent the one or more signs is variable”.
In regards to the limitation “encoding said one or more sign-hiding quantization coefficients without signaling said one or more signs associated with said one or more sign-hiding quantization coefficients” Filippov teaches about the embedding (hiding) of signs of plural transform coefficients (par. 72). Also teaches that the SBH technique should guarantee that for a given set of coefficients (CC or CG) the value of a sign being hidden corresponds to the value of a check function (predetermined function) applied to this set (par. 90) and discloses selecting the sign (+) of the coefficient for hiding (par.198).
In the case of Schwarz, sign data hiding mode is disclosed. In said mode (under certain conditions) the transmission of the sign for that last non-zero level inside a subblock is omitted (par. 100).
Under the broadest reasonable interpretation, both Filippov and Schwarz disclose the limitation “encoding said one or more sign-hiding quantization coefficients without signaling said one or more signs associated with said one or more sign-hiding quantization coefficients”.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “encoding of the one or more sign-hiding quantization coefficients without signalling said one or more sigs associated with said one or more sign-hiding quantization coefficients” in Figure 10 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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
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.
Claim(s) 1-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Filippov et al. (US 2020/0404257) in view of Schwarz et al. (US 2021/0084304).
Regarding claim 1 Filippov discloses a method of dequantizing quantized transform coefficients for processing video data, the method comprising:
receiving quantization coefficients associated with transform coefficients of a residual block (quantized coefficients 209 in Figure 9), wherein the quantization coefficients are divided into one or more segments with a predefined number or range of transform coefficients for each of said one or more segments (Figure 1 shows TU 410 with a size of 16×16 coefficients, which is divided into 16 coefficient groups with the size 4×4, of which the first CG is denoted by reference numeral – [0008]), and wherein one or more signs associated with one or more sign-hiding quantization coefficients corresponding to one or more target coefficients in a current segment are not signalled or parsed (determine whether or not sign data hiding was applied based on conditions and/or information extracted from a bitstream (such as a flag indicating whether or not SBH is allowed) – [0015-0019]);
for the current segment, determining a sign-hiding state of a selected coefficient and parity information of the quantized coefficients of the current segment (determine whether or not sign data hiding was applied based on conditions and/or information extracted from a bitstream (such as a flag indicating whether or not SBH is allowed) – [0015-0019]);
determining said one or more signs associated with said one or more sign-hiding quantization coefficients corresponding to said one or more target coefficients in the current segment based on the sign-hiding state and the parity information of the current segment (determine the first non-zero coefficient in the CG, calculate parity of the sum of all absolute coefficient values in the CG, if the parity has a first value, set the sign of the first non-zero coefficient to the respective first polarity corresponding to the first value (positive or negative) – [0015-0019]; determining the sign of the coefficient to which SBH is applied – [0195]), wherein the sign-hiding state used to represent the one or more signs is variable (it is also possible to hide the signs of plural transform coefficients in the value of a predetermined function, the signs of N coefficients can be hidden by means of a predetermined function that can assume 2N different values – [0070]); and
dequantizing the quantization coefficients with said one or more signs recovered using respective quantizers from the plurality of quantizers (retrieve hidden signs and apply them to corresponding quantized transform coefficients – S24 in Figure 10; dequantized coefficients 211 in Figure 9).
However, fails to explicitly disclose identifying a plurality of states and a plurality of quantizers corresponding to dependent quantization used for the residual block.
In his disclosure Schwarz teaches identifying a plurality of states and a plurality of quantizers corresponding to dependent quantization used for the residual block (states and quantizers shown in Figures 10b and 10c).
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Schwarz into the teachings of Filippov because such incorporation results in having reconstructed transform coefficients being calculated by algorithms with a very low computational complexity (paragraph 122).
Regarding claim 2 Filippov discloses the method of Claim 1. However, fails to explicitly disclose wherein when the plurality of states corresponds to 4 states and said one or more target coefficients correspond to one target coefficient, two of the 4 states represent positive sign and remaining two of the 4 states represent negative sign.
In his disclosure Schwarz teaches the plurality of states corresponds to 4 states and said one or more target coefficients correspond to one target coefficient, two of the 4 states represent positive sign and remaining two of the 4 states represent negative sign (Figures 10b and 10c show 4 states with positive signs and negative signs (values of 0s and 1s).
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Schwarz into the teachings of Filippov because such incorporation results in having reconstructed transform coefficients being calculated by algorithms with a very low computational complexity (paragraph 122).
Regarding claim 3 Filippov discloses the method of Claim 1. However, fails to explicitly disclose wherein when the plurality of states corresponds to 8 states and said one or more target coefficients correspond to one target coefficient, four of the 8 states represent positive sign and remaining four of the 8 states represent negative sign.
In his disclosure Schwarz teaches the plurality of states corresponds to 4 states and said one or more target coefficients correspond to one target coefficient, two of the 4 states represent positive sign and remaining two of the 4 states represent negative sign (refer to rejection of claim 2).
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Schwarz into the teachings of Filippov because such incorporation results in having reconstructed transform coefficients being calculated by algorithms with a very low computational complexity (paragraph 122).
While Schwarz teaches 4 states and two of the 4 states represent positive sign and remaining two of the 4 states represent negative sign fails to teach the plurality of states corresponds to 8 states and four of the 8 states represent positive sign and remaining four of the 8 states represent negative sign. However, it appears the method will perform equally well with 4 states and two of the 4 states represent positive sign and remaining two of the 4 states represent negative sign, as per Applicant’s disclosure.
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have 8 states and four of the 8 states represent positive sign and remaining four of the 8 states represent negative sign because it appears to be an arbitrary design consideration which fails to patentably distinguish over the prior art.
Regarding claim 4 Filippov discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein the sign-hiding state of the selected coefficient corresponds to a state of first or last coefficient of the current segment, or corresponds to a state of first or last non-zero coefficient of the current segment (If SBH is to be applied, embedding the sign of the first non-zero coefficient into a function of a plurality or all coefficients in the CC – [0027]).
Regarding claim 5 Filippov discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein the predefined number or range of transform coefficients for each of said one or more segments corresponds to N coefficients, one coefficient group, two coefficient groups, four coefficient groups, one transform unit, or one transform block, and wherein N corresponds to 16, 32, 48, or 64 (Figure 1 shows a larger TU 410 with a size of 16×16 coefficients, which is divided into 16 coefficient groups with the size 4×4, of which the first CG is denoted by reference numeral 420).
Regarding claim 6 Filippov discloses the method of Claim1, wherein said one or more target coefficients in the current segment correspond to a first non-zero coefficient, an Mth non-zero coefficient or a last non-zero coefficient in the current segment (Figure 1 shows a first and last non-zero coefficient of a Coefficient Group).
Regarding claim 7 Filippov discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein when said one or more segments correspond to at least two segments (refer to Figure 1). However, fails to explicitly disclose, after the quantization coefficients are determined for a first segment, a dependent quantization state is reset to an initial state, or keeping not changed through remaining said target coefficients in the residual block.
In his disclosure Schwarz teaches when said one or more segments correspond to at least two segments, after the quantization coefficients are determined for a first segment, a dependent quantization state is reset to an initial state, or keeping not changed through remaining said target coefficients in the residual block (refer to Figure 16).
It would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Schwarz into the teachings of Filippov because such incorporation results in having reconstructed transform coefficients being calculated by algorithms with a very low computational complexity (paragraph 122).
Regarding claim 8 Filippov discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein the parity information of the current segment corresponds to a sum of quantization coefficient levels or a sum of absolute quantization coefficient levels (if the sign is “+”, the parity of absolute values of quantized transform coefficients should be kept even – [0007, 0009, 0019]).
Regarding claim 9 Filippov discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein the parity information of the current segment corresponds to a sum of states associated with the quantization coefficients (if the sign is “+”, the parity of absolute values of quantized transform coefficients should be kept even – [0007, 0009, 0019]).
Regarding claim 10 Filippov discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein said one or more target coefficients in the current segment correspond to two target coefficients (Figure 1 shows a first coefficient group having two target coefficients).
Regarding claim 11 Filippov discloses the method of Claim 10, wherein two signs for the two target coefficients are determined according to the sign-hiding state, the parity information of the current segment, or both (determine whether or not sign data hiding was applied based on conditions and/or information extracted from a bitstream (such as a flag indicating whether or not SBH is allowed) – [0015-0019]).
Regarding claim 12 Filippov discloses the method of Claim 11, wherein one of the two signs is determined according to the sign-hiding state and another of the two signs is determined according to the parity information of the current segment (check, whether conditions for applying sign bit hiding are fulfilled for the CG; determine the first non-zero coefficient in the CG and its sign, calculate parity of the sum of all absolute coefficient values in the CG, embed the determined sign: If the calculated parity corresponds to the determined sign, no modification of coefficient values is necessary. Otherwise, a value of one of the coefficients the CG is modified by increasing or decreasing it by one, so that the parity corresponds to the determined sign – [0015-0019]).
Regarding claim 13 Filippov discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein said one or more sign-hiding quantization coefficients are allowed when one or more conditions are satisfied (determine whether or not sign data hiding was applied based on conditions and/or information extracted from a bitstream (such as a flag indicating whether or not SBH is allowed) – [0015-0019]).
Regarding claim 14 Filippov discloses the method of Claim 13, wherein said one or more conditions comprise a number of non-zero coefficients in the current segment or in the residual block being larger than one or more threshold (for each TU (Transform Unit) satisfying the condition that the number of coefficients between the first PFSC and last PLSC nonzero coefficients is greater than a threshold Dthr: the sign bit for the first nonzero coefficient is embedded into the parity of the sum of all nonzero coefficients – [0006]).
Regarding claim 15 Filippov discloses the method of Claim 13, wherein said one or more conditions comprise a distance between the first non-zero coefficient and the last non-zero coefficient in the current segment or in the residual block being larger than one or more threshold (for each TU (Transform Unit) satisfying the condition that the number of coefficients between the first PFSC and last PLSC nonzero coefficients is greater than a threshold Dthr: the sign bit for the first nonzero coefficient is embedded into the parity of the sum of all nonzero coefficients – [0006]).
In regard to claim 16, any decoder technology except the parsing/entropy decoding that is present in a decoder also necessarily needs to be present, in substantially identical form in a corresponding encoder. The description of encoder technologies can be abbreviated as they are the inverse of the comprehensively described decoder technologies. Therefore, claim 16 is being rejected on the same basis as claim 1.
It is noted Filippov teaches the limitation “encoding said one or more sign-hiding quantization coefficients without signaling said one or more signs associated with said one or more sign-hiding quantization coefficients (embedding (hiding) of signs of plural transform coefficients – [0072]; at the encoder side, the SBH technique should guarantee that for a given set of coefficients (CC or CG) the value of a sign being hidden corresponds to the value of a check function (predetermined function) applied to this set – [0190]; selecting the sign (+) of the coefficient for hiding – [0198]).
It is also noted that Schwarz discloses sign data hiding mode, in which (under certain conditions) the transmission of the sign for that last non-zero level inside a subblock is omitted (par. 100).
In regard to claim 17, any encoder technology that is present in an encoder also necessarily needs to be present, in substantially identical form in a corresponding decoder. The description of decoder technologies can be abbreviated as they are the inverse of the comprehensively described encoder technologies. Therefore, claim 17 is being rejected on the same basis as claim 16.
Claim 18 corresponds to the apparatus that performs the method of claim 16. Therefore, claim 18 is being rejected on the same basis as claim 16.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 MARIA E VAZQUEZ COLON whose telephone number is (571)270-1103. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 AM-3:30 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 S 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.
/MARIA E VAZQUEZ COLON/Examiner, Art Unit 2482
Prosecution Insights