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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Response to Office Action mailed 25 February 2026, filed 26 May 2026, with respect to Claim Rejections under 35 USC §112 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The Claim Rejections under 35 USC §112 of claim 2 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Response to Office Action mailed 25 February 2026, filed 26 May 2026, with respect to Claim Rejections under 35 USC §102 and §103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Chen et al. (US 2022/0385897 A1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 9, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen et al. (US 2022/0385897 A1).
Regarding Claims 1, 9, and 16, Chen discloses a method performed by an apparatus comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory including instructions; wherein the at least one memory and the instructions are configured to, with the at least one processor [Chen: ¶ [0112]: The methods can be implemented in, for example, a processor], cause the apparatus at least to: receive, by an encoder implemented by the apparatus as part of an encoding process of input video, a picture [Chen: ¶ [0158]: The smoothness information (for example, which CU(s) and/or block(s) are smooth) may be stored for processing subsequent video (for example, pictures, frames, slices etc.)]; identify, by the encoder, whether the picture has blocks containing smooth content [Chen: ¶ [0155]: A video processing apparatus may send (for example, if the video processing apparatus is an encoder) or receive (for example, if the video processing apparatus is a decoder) signaling that indicates whether reference samples in a reference CU or a reference block have smooth sample values or sample values associated with sharp transitions such as edges. The indication may be sent (for example, from an encoder side) during motion estimation and/or may be set or flagged (for example, at a decoder side) during motion compensation, for example, when reconstructing reference blocks in the same picture or a different picture], wherein to identify whether the picture has blocks containing smooth content, the apparatus is further caused to: perform a smoothness test comprising: dividing the picture into blocks; checking individual blocks for a presence of smooth value distribution [Chen: ¶ [0156]: A video processing apparatus (for example, an encoder) may analyze the characteristics of video contents, for example, when different encoding modes are evaluated. The analysis may be conducted using a smoothness detection technique described herein. If smooth contents (for example, smooth sample values) are identified in a CU based on the analysis, the video processing apparatus may send an indication that the CU includes smooth contents]; and deciding, for the individual blocks, whether this block contains either fully smooth content as the smooth content, or mixed smooth and transitional content as mixed content [Chen: ¶ [0155]: signaling that indicates whether reference samples in a reference CU or a reference block have smooth sample values or sample values associated with sharp transitions such as edges]; encode, by the encoder, a bitstream comprising at least one coded picture, and perform, by the encoder, one or more adaptations to encoding decisions made in the encoding based on the identified blocks containing the smooth content [Chen: ¶ [0156]: Responsive to receiving such an indication, a video processing apparatus (for example, a decoder) may apply a shorter interpolation filter to one or more samples of the CU. The indication (for example, of smoothness) may be provided for an intra-predicted CU (for example, only for intra CUs)].
Regarding Claim 4, Chen disclose(s) all the limitations of Claim 1, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Chen discloses wherein the decision is made at least by using a smoothness test analyzing a gradient between all adjacent pixel values in a block, and in response to the gradient between one or more pixel values of the block being larger than a threshold, then the block is classified as containing mixed content [Chen: ¶ [0157] A video encoding apparatus may be configured to determine (for example, detect) the smoothness of video contents based on gradients in the horizontal, vertical, and/or one or two diagonal directions. The video encoding apparatus may obtain (for example, calculate) these gradients using an array such as a 1-D Laplacian. The video encoding apparatus may determine a gradient threshold value, for example, based on a calculated gradient map of a CU, by statistically measuring whether a CU is smooth or not, and/or by calculating a standard deviation of the luma samples within a CU (for example, a calculated standard deviation of luma samples within a CU may statistically indicate whether the CU is smooth or not)].
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Starck et al. (Image Decomposition: Separation of Texture from Piecewise Smooth Content); 2006.
Regarding Claim 2, Chen disclose(s) all the limitations of Claim 1, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Chen may not explicitly disclose wherein to identify whether the picture has blocks containing smooth content, the apparatus is further caused to: identify whether the picture has a piece-wise smooth value distribution; and identify, responsive to the picture having a piece-wise smooth value distribution, smooth blocks in the picture.
However, Starck discloses wherein to identify whether the picture has blocks containing smooth content, the apparatus is further caused to: identify whether the picture has a piece-wise smooth value distribution; and identify, responsive to the picture having a piece-wise smooth value distribution, smooth blocks in the picture [Starck: §2.1-§2.2: if indeed the proper choice of a dictionary is made, we get very sparse representations for textures and non-sparse representations for different image types… assume that for images containing piecewise smooth content… we have a different dictionary].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine determination of which data type is to be processed of Starck with the processing of Chen in order to provide the proper process based on specific situation, improving computational output.
Claim(s) 5, 11-12, 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen as applied to claim 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Leontaris et al. (US 2009/0086814 A1).
Regarding Claim 5, Chen disclose(s) all the limitations of Claim 1, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Chen may not explicitly disclose wherein the decision is made at least by using a smoothness test applying a two-dimensional Sobel operator to the block horizontally, vertically or both horizontally and vertically, and in response to a resulting output image having any pixel value above a threshold, then the block is classified as containing mixed content.
However, Leontaris discloses wherein the decision is made at least by using a smoothness test applying a two-dimensional Sobel operator to the block horizontally, vertically or both horizontally and vertically, and in response to a resulting output image having any pixel value above a threshold, then the block is classified as containing mixed content [Leontaris: ¶ [0094]-[0095]: Edge intensity information can be generated by an edge analyzer that applies one or more gradient-based edge filters to a frame. Example edge filters include the Sobel filter and the Prewitt filter operators].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the processing of Leontaris with the processing of Chen in order to provide well-known filtering, improving output.
Regarding Claims 11 and 18, Chen disclose(s) all the limitations of Claims 9 and 16, respectively, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Chen may not explicitly disclose wherein to decode according at least to available coding adaptation information and the smooth content information, the apparatus is further caused to: perform an adaption comprising: raising quantization parameter offsets for corresponding blocks identified as smooth content.
However, Leontaris discloses wherein to decode according at least to available coding adaptation information and the smooth content information, the apparatus is further caused to: perform an adaption comprising: raising quantization parameter offsets for corresponding blocks identified as smooth content [Leontaris: ¶ [0314]: it may be desirable to keep details of a smooth block as accurately as possible, and therefore decrease or disable the thresholding parameters and/or increase the quantization offset in an effort to improve the subjective/perceived quality of this block].
Regarding Claims 12 and 19, Chen disclose(s) all the limitations of Claims 9 and 16, respectively, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Chen may not explicitly disclose wherein to decode according at least to available coding adaptation information and the smooth content information, the apparatus is further caused to: perform an adaption comprising: identifying a picture has blocks containing smooth content and further identifying blocks containing mixed content, and lowering quantization parameter offsets for corresponding blocks identified as containing mixed content.
However, Leontaris discloses wherein to decode according at least to available coding adaptation information and the smooth content information, the apparatus is further caused to: perform an adaption comprising: identifying a picture has blocks containing smooth content and further identifying blocks containing mixed content, and lowering quantization parameter offsets for corresponding blocks identified as containing mixed content [Leontaris: ¶ [0314]].
Claim(s) 6-8, and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen as applied to claim 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Kuo et al. (US 2023/0336785 A1).
Regarding Claims 6 and 14, Chen disclose(s) all the limitations of Claims 1 and 9, respectively, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Chen may not explicitly disclose wherein to perform the one or more adaptations, the apparatus is further caused to: deactivate one or more of the following for blocks identified as smooth content: luma mapping with chroma scaling (LMCS); a deblocking filter (DBF) that follows an encoding process; a sample adaptive offset filter (SAO); an adaptive loop filter (ALF); a cross-component adaptive loop filter (CCALF), a cross-component sample adaptive offset filter (CCSAO), a neural network-based filter; a bilateral filter; a loop restoration filter; or a constrained directional enhancement filter (CDEF)..
However, Kuo discloses wherein to perform the one or more adaptations, the apparatus is further caused to: deactivate one or more of the following for blocks identified as smooth content: luma mapping with chroma scaling (LMCS) [Kuo: Table 16]; a deblocking filter (DBF) that follows an encoding process [Kuo: ¶ [0117]; a sample adaptive offset filter (SAO) [Kuo: ¶ [0020]]; an adaptive loop filter (ALF) [Kuo: ¶ [0071]]; a cross-component adaptive loop filter (CCALF) [Kuo: ¶ [0027]-[0028]], a cross-component sample adaptive offset filter (CCSAO) [Kuo: Abstract], a neural network-based filter; a bilateral filter; a loop restoration filter; or a constrained directional enhancement filter (CDEF) [Kuo: ¶ [0114]].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the processing of Chen with the processes of Kuo in order to provide well-known processes to improve output.
Regarding Claims 7 and 15, Chen disclose(s) all the limitations of Claims 1 and 9, respectively, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Chen may not explicitly disclose wherein to perform the one or more adaptations, the apparatus is further caused to: adapt filter settings for one or more of the following for blocks identified as smooth content, comprising adapting filter settings: an adaptive loop filter (ALF); a cross-component adaptive loop filter (CCALF); a cross-component sample adaptive offset filter (CCSAO); a neural network-based filter; one or more loop restoration filters; or a constrained directional enhancement filter (CDEF)..
However, Kuo discloses wherein to perform the one or more adaptations, the apparatus is further caused to: adapt filter settings for one or more of the following for blocks identified as smooth content, comprising adapting filter settings: an adaptive loop filter (ALF) [Kuo¶ [0071]]; a cross-component adaptive loop filter (CCALF); a cross-component sample adaptive offset filter (CCSAO); a neural network-based filter; one or more loop restoration filters; or a constrained directional enhancement filter (CDEF) .
Regarding Claim 8, Chen disclose(s) all the limitations of Claim 1, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Chen may not explicitly disclose wherein the encoder receives external guidance information suitable to identify blocks of smooth content within the picture, and the external guidance information comprises: one of ROA masks or inverted ROI masks; occupancy maps; or one of object masks or inverted object masks.
However, Kuo discloses wherein the encoder receives external guidance information suitable to identify blocks of smooth content within the picture, and the external guidance information comprises: one of ROA masks or inverted ROI masks; occupancy maps; or one of object masks or inverted object masks [Kuo: ¶ [0234]].
Claim(s) 10, 13, 17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen as applied to claims 9 and 16 above, and further in view of Mukherjee et al. (US 2023/0011893 A1).
Regarding Claims 10 and 17, Chen disclose(s) all the limitations of Claims 9 and 16, respectively, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Chen may not explicitly disclose wherein to decode according at least to available coding adaptation information and the smooth content information, the apparatus is further caused to: perform an adaption comprising: skipping any further block sub-partitioning once a block has been identified as smooth content.
However, Mukherjee discloses wherein to decode according at least to available coding adaptation information and the smooth content information, the apparatus is further caused to: perform an adaption comprising: skipping any further block sub-partitioning once a block has been identified as smooth content [Mukherjee: ¶ [0076]: Skip mode can be particularly useful for text, graphic, and/or screen content videos because those videos typically contain large areas of flat and/or smooth regions, such that intra and inter predictions of such regions yield almost perfect predictions with no (or little) prediction residue].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the process of Chen with the well-known processes of Mukherjee in order to provide improved processing.
Regarding Claims 13 and 20, Chen disclose(s) all the limitations of Claims 9 and 16, respectively, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to those claims.
Chen may not explicitly disclose wherein to decode according at least to available coding adaptation information and the smooth content information, the apparatus is further caused to: perform an adaption: comprising skipping residual coding for blocks identified as containing smooth content.
However, Mukherjee discloses wherein to decode according at least to available coding adaptation information and the smooth content information, the apparatus is further caused to: perform an adaption: comprising skipping residual coding for blocks identified as containing smooth content [Mukherjee: ¶ [0076]].
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 JONATHAN R MESSMORE whose telephone number is (571)272-2773. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5 EST/EDT.
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, Chris 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.
/JONATHAN R MESSMORE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482
Prosecution Insights