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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/21/25 is in accordance with provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Preliminary Amendment
The preliminary amendment filed 12/28/24 has been entered and made of record.
Claim Objections
Claim 27 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 2 recites, “said one or more directions”. However, there is a lack of antecedent basis for this limitation.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 (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 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.
Claims 16 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Koo et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0132134; cited in the IDS filed 5/21/25).
In regard to claim 16, Koo teaches an apparatus comprising at least one processor (i.e., the processor may include an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC), other chipset, logic circuit, and/or a data processing device) (para[0422]); and
at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to (i.e., software, the above-described methods may be embodied as modules (processes, functions or the like) to perform the above-described functions; the modules may be stored in a memory and may be executed by a processor) (para[0422]):
receive an image block unit of a frame (i.e., image partitioner 210 may partition an input image (or a picture or a frame) input to the encoding apparatus 200 into one or more processing units; the unit and a term such as a block, an area, or the like may be used in place of each other) (para[0062]-[0066], wherein the image block unit is predicted using a cross-component prediction mode (i.e., the encoding apparatus 200 according to an embodiment may derive an intra prediction mode for the chroma block as the CCLM mode (S1810)) (para[0376]-[0382]) and comprises samples in color channels comprising at least one chrominance channel and one luminance channel (i.e., the CCLM are dependent intra prediction modes for predicting a chroma block using information on a luma block) (para[0112]-[0113])
determine an intra prediction direction based at least on: the samples of said luminance channels of the image block unit, samples in a neighborhood of the luminance channel of the image block unit, and/or samples in the neighborhood of the image block unit (i.e., the encoding apparatus may change the CCLM mode of the chroma block to the intra prediction mode of the luma block corresponding to the chroma block for the LFNST of the chroma block (S1840)) (para[0386]-[0388]);
select a non-separable transform index for a non-separable transform using the determined intra prediction direction (i.e., the encoding apparatus determines the LFNST set including the LFNST matrices based on the intra prediction mode of the luma block (S1850), and based on the residual samples; output image information including information on quantized transform coefficients, intra prediction mode information, and an LFNST index indicating an LFNST matrix (S1870)) (para[0389]-[0394]); and
perform the non-separable transform using the selected non-separable transform index (i.e., according to S1860, transform efficiency and coding efficiency of the encoding apparatus 200 may be increased through the LFNST; an LFNST index indicating an LFNST matrix (S1870)) (para[0393]-[0396]).
In regard to claims 28, the claim recites analogous limitations to claim 16 above, and is therefore rejected on the same premise.
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.
6. 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 17-27 and 29-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koo et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0132134; cited in the IDS filed 5/21/25) in view of Li et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2023/0217030).
In regard to claim 17, Koo teaches all of the limitations of claim 16 as discussed above. However, Koo does not explicitly teach wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to:
derive an angular intra prediction mode corresponding to the determined intra prediction direction, wherein the angular intra prediction mode represents a texture inside the image block by performing a texture analysis on at least one of the following:
a plurality of neighboring reconstructed samples of the image block unit;
a plurality of neighboring samples of a co-located block in a reference channel;
a plurality of samples inside the co-located block in the reference channel;
a plurality of predicted samples inside the image block unit,
a plurality of residual information inside the co-located block in the reference channel; or
a plurality of residual information of the neighboring blocks in a current channel.
In the same field of endeavor, Li teaches wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to:
derive an angular intra prediction mode corresponding to the determined intra prediction direction (i.e., angular intra prediction is a directional intra prediction method) (Fig. 2; para[0067]-[0069]), wherein the angular intra prediction mode represents a texture inside the image block by performing a texture analysis (i.e., computing texture gradients) (i.e., para[0100]) on at least one of the following:
a plurality of neighboring reconstructed samples of the image block unit;
a plurality of neighboring samples of a co-located block in a reference channel;
a plurality of samples inside the co-located block in the reference channel;
a plurality of predicted samples inside the image block unit,
a plurality of residual information inside the co-located block in the reference channel; or
a plurality of residual information of the neighboring blocks in a current channel (i.e., derive a chroma intra prediction mode to be applied in reconstructing a current chroma block based on computing texture gradients of any, some, or all of: collocated reconstructed luma samples, collocated luma block-adjacent reconstructed luma samples, and adjacent reconstructed chroma samples) (para[0100]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant's invention, to combine the teachings of Koo and Li because Li teaches using angular intra prediction in conjunction with HEVC and VVC standards (See, for example, para[0003] of Li).
In regard to claim 18, Koo and Li teach all of the limitations of claims 16 and 17 as discussed above. However, Koo does not explicitly teach wherein the texture analysis comprises a gradient calculation for at least one of the following:
a plurality of neighboring reconstructed samples of the image block unit;
a plurality of neighboring samples of a co-located block in a reference channel;
a plurality of samples inside the co-located block in the reference channel;
a plurality of predicted samples inside the image block unit,
a plurality of residual information inside the co-located block in the reference channel; or
a plurality of residual information of the neighboring blocks in a current channel.
In the same field of endeavor, Li teaches wherein the texture analysis comprises a gradient calculation (i.e., computing texture gradients) (i.e., para[0100]) for at least one of the following:
a plurality of neighboring reconstructed samples of the image block unit;
a plurality of neighboring samples of a co-located block in a reference channel;
a plurality of samples inside the co-located block in the reference channel;
a plurality of predicted samples inside the image block unit,
a plurality of residual information inside the co-located block in the reference channel; or
a plurality of residual information of the neighboring blocks in a current channel (i.e., derive a chroma intra prediction mode to be applied in reconstructing a current chroma block based on computing texture gradients of any, some, or all of: collocated reconstructed luma samples, collocated luma block-adjacent reconstructed luma samples, and adjacent reconstructed chroma samples) (para[0100]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant's invention, to combine the teachings of Koo and Li for the same reasons as those discussed above for claim 17.
In regard to claim 19, Koo and Li teach all of the limitations of claims 16 and 17 as discussed above. However, Koo does not explicitly teach wherein to derive the apparatus is further caused to:
apply a texture analysis intra prediction method for the reconstructed neighboring and/or co-located samples of luma block in order to determine the intra prediction mode.
In the same field of endeavor, Li teaches wherein to derive the apparatus is further caused to:
apply a texture analysis intra prediction method for the reconstructed neighboring and/or co-located samples of luma block in order to determine the intra prediction mode (i.e., to build a DIMD histogram for a block, an encoder and a decoder perform gradient analysis on samples of a L-shaped template encompassing a second nearest neighboring line of samples adjacent to an upper edge and a left edge of the block) (Fig. 4; para[0088]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant's invention, to combine the teachings of Koo and Li for the same reasons as those discussed above for claim 17.
In regard to claim 20, Koo and Li teach all of the limitations of claims 16 and 17 as discussed above. In addition, Koo teaches wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus to: derive an intra prediction mode based on at least one of the following:
a prediction mode of neighboring blocks of a current block (i.e., the intra predictor 222 may determine the prediction mode applied to the current block by using the prediction mode applied to the neighboring block) (para[0066]);
an intra prediction mode of a co-located reference block in a reference channel; or
one or more neighboring blocks of the co-located reference block in the reference channel.
In regard to claim 21, Koo and Li teach all of the limitations of claim 16 as discussed above. In addition, Koo teaches wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus to: decide performing the non-separable transform and/or signaling of the non-separable transform index for the cross-component predicted block (i.e., 0, 1, and 2 are possible as the transmitted index value, 0 may indicate that the LFNST is not applied, and 1 and 2 may indicate any one of two transform matrices constituting a transform set selected based on the intra prediction mode value; the encoding apparatus determines the LFNST set including the LFNST matrices based on the intra prediction mode of the luma block (S1850), and based on the residual samples; output image information including information on quantized transform coefficients, intra prediction mode information, and an LFNST index indicating an LFNST matrix (S1870)) (para[0205], [0389]-[0394]) based on one or more of the following:
prediction modes of the co-located block and/or its neighboring blocks in the reference channel and/or neighboring blocks of the current block; or
residual information of the co-located block and/or its neighboring blocks in the reference channel and/or neighboring blocks of the current block (i.e., the encoding apparatus determines the LFNST set including the LFNST matrices based on the intra prediction mode of the luma block (S1850), and based on the residual samples) (para[0389]-[0394]).
In regard to claim 22, Koo and Li teach all of the limitations of claim 16 as discussed above. In addition, Koo teaches wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus to: perform cross-component prediction by using a two-dimensional filter kernel to derive a luma-to-chroma model (i.e., primary transform may be performed through a plurality of transform kernels, and in this case, a transform kernel may be selected based on the intra prediction mode; the encoding apparatus may change the CCLM mode of the chroma block to the intra prediction mode of the luma block corresponding to the chroma block for LFNST of the chroma block (S1840); that is, the encoding apparatus may perform the LFNST by changing the intra prediction mode of the chroma block to the intra prediction mode of the luma block to reflect correlation between the chroma block and the luma block) (para[0385]-[0389]).
In regard to claim 23, Koo and Li teach all of the limitations of claim 16 as discussed above. In addition, Koo teaches when executed with the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus to: downsampling luminance samples (i.e., since the size of a luminance image is twice that of a chroma image,…the chroma block size needs to be generated through downsampling) (para[0119], [0386]-[0388]).
In regard to claim 24, Koo and Li teach all of the limitations of claim 16 as discussed above. However, Koo does not explicitly teach wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus to perform texture analysis by using different samples compared to the samples used for the cross-component prediction.
In the same field of endeavor, Li teaches wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus to perform texture analysis by using different samples compared to the samples used for the cross-component prediction (i.e., derive a chroma intra prediction mode to be applied in reconstructing a current chroma block based on computing texture gradients of any, some, or all of: collocated reconstructed luma samples, collocated luma block-adjacent reconstructed luma samples, and adjacent reconstructed chroma samples) (para[0100]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant's invention, to combine the teachings of Koo and Li for the same reasons as those discussed above for claim 17.
In regard to claim 25, Koo and Li teach all of the limitations of claims 16 and 24 as discussed above. However, Koo does not explicitly teach wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus to:
signal which samples in the neighborhood of the image block unit are used in the texture analysis.
In the same field of endeavor, Li teaches wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus to:
signal which samples in the neighborhood of the image block unit are used in the texture analysis (i.e., Figs. 6A-6B; derive a chroma intra prediction mode to be applied in reconstructing a current chroma block based on computing texture gradients of any, some, or all of: collocated reconstructed luma samples, collocated luma block-adjacent reconstructed luma samples, and adjacent reconstructed chroma samples) (para[0100], [0107]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant's invention, to combine the teachings of Koo and Li for the same reasons as those discussed above for claim 17.
In regard to claim 26, Koo and Li teach all of the limitations of claims 16 and 24 as discussed above. However, Koo does not explicitly teach wherein the output of the texture analysis is one or more directions indicating a texture pattern or a texture direction instead of an angular intra prediction mode.
In the same field of endeavor, Li teaches wherein the output of the texture analysis is one or more directions indicating a texture pattern or a texture direction instead of an angular intra prediction mode (i.e., perform a gradient-based derivation method as follows: for each reconstructed sample participating in the derivation, a horizontal gradient and a vertical gradient, Gx and Gy are computed) (para[0104]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, at the time of applicant's invention, to combine the teachings of Koo and Li for the same reasons as those discussed above for claim 17.
In regard to claim 27, Koo and Li teach all of the limitations of claims 16 and 24 as discussed above. However, Koo does not explicitly teach wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus to: decide said one or more directions based on the gradient calculation for the samples.
In the same field of endeavor, Li teaches wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, further cause the apparatus to: decide said one or more directions based on the gradient calculation for the samples (i.e., planar mode, vertical mode, horizontal mode, DC mode; an encoder and decoder are configured to perform a texture gradient processing to derive two best modes) (para[0081], [0085]).
In regard to claims 29-35, the claims recite analogous limitations to claims 17-23 above, and are therefore rejected on the same premise.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kristin Dobbs whose telephone number is (571)270-7936. The examiner can normally be reached Monday and Thursday 9:30am-5:30pm EST.
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, Sathyanarayanan Perungavoor can be reached at (571)272-7455. 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.
KRISTIN DOBBS
Examiner
Art Unit 2488
/KRISTIN DOBBS/Examiner, Art Unit 2488
Prosecution Insights