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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the JP2013-058679 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) submitted on 9/25/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/29/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103,
Applicant contends that the cited prior art fails to disclose newly amended limitations of independent claims 1 and 8, including: “receive, from an encoder, encoded data of a tile of an enhancement layer”, and “receive, associated with the encoded data, control information designating for the tile of the enhancement layer, a permitted reference area in the base layer thereby allowing reference to encoding-related information for the permitted reference area for decoding of the encoded data of the tile of the enhancement layer to be permitted”.
Particularly, Applicant contends:
“Ugur discloses that “if the enhancement layer sub-picture is coded predictively with respect to base layer, the prediction process may be restricted so that only the pixels within the co-located area of base layer picture could be used.” See paragraph [0230] of Ugur. However, Ugur fails to disclose that such restriction of the prediction process is based on control information associated with encoded data thereby designating the co-located area of the base layer. In fact, Ugur is completely silent regarding how such co-located area of the base layer picture is designated and thus, appears to be possibly only designated based on relative location of the base layer to the enhancement layer, not on any control information associated with encoded data and designating the co-located area.” (Remarks of 12/29/2025; pages 7-8)
While Applicant’s points are fully understood, the Examiner respectfully disagrees.
See Ugur, ¶ 0171, 0239 discloses the enhancement layer sub-picture concept being implemented in the form of Supplemental Enhancement Information (SEI) messages. A tile set SEI message may be signaled to indicate a set of tile indexes or addresses so as to form an isolated-region picture group, or “area” (such as element 702 in Fig. 7). Hence, such a signaled SEI message functioning as the “control information”.
Ugur thus clearly sets forth signaling control information in the form of an SEI message associated with encoded data designating available co-located area (tile) of a base layer.
See the rejection below for how the cited art in light of new/existing references reads on the newly amended language as well as the examiner’s interpretation of the cited art in view of the presented claim set.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ugur et al. (US 20140003504 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ugur discloses:
An image decoding device comprising: [See Ugur, ¶ 0094 discloses coding/decoding of audio and/or video.]
circuitry configured to: [See Ugur, ¶ 0094 discloses codec circuitry]
receive, from an encoder, encoded data of a tile of an enhancement layer of image data, the image data including a base layer and at least one enhancement layer, [See Ugur, Fig. 5 illustrates a currently layer (enhancement layer) of a plurality of layers (consisting of base and enhancement layers) and a certain area (502); See Ugur, ¶ 0202, 0207 discloses encoding one or more enhancement layer sub-pictures for a given base-layer picture.] wherein each of the base layer and the at least one enhancement layer comprises one or more tiles, [See Ugur, ¶ 0123, 0128 0171 discloses that a picture can be partitioned into tiles.] and wherein for each of the base layer and the at least one enhancement layer a picture of the image data is divided into the tiles which are independently decodable; [See Ugur, ¶ 0128 discloses video coding standards allowing encoders to divide a coded picture to independently decodable pieces – particularly, coded slices or alike. Thus, the routine and conventional partitioning of a picture into independently decodable slices or tiles is within the level of ordinary skill.]
receive, associated with the encoded data, control information designating, for the tile of the enhancement layer, a permitted reference area in the base layer, thereby allowing reference to encoding-related information for the permitted reference area for decoding of the encoded data of the tile of the enhancement layer to be permitted, and [see Ugur, ¶ 0230 discloses that if the enhancement layer sub-picture is coded predictively with respect to base layer, the prediction process may be restricted so that only the pixels within the co-located area of base layer picture could be used. This is illustrated in FIG. 7, where only reference samples from the co-located area 702 of the base-layer picture 700 are allowed to be used, when defining the enhancement layer sub-picture 704; See Ugur, ¶ 0236 discloses that the position and size of the enhancement layer sub-pictures may be the same as tiles or slices used in the base layer picture]
wherein the permitted reference area identifies a set of tiles; and [See Ugur, ¶ 0171, 0239 discloses the enhancement layer sub-picture concept being implemented in the form of Supplemental Enhancement Information (SEI) messages. A tile set SEI message may be signaled to indicate a set of tile indexes or addresses so as to form an isolated-region picture group, or “area” (such as element 702 in Fig. 7). Hence, such a signaled SEI message functioning as the “control information”.]
decode the encoded data with reference to the permitted reference area according to control of the control information. [See Ugur, ¶ 0124-0128, 0230 discloses decoding according to a defined restricted co-located area.]
Regarding claim 2, Ugur discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Ugur discloses:
wherein the control information designates the set of tiles using an identification number allocated in a raster scan order, [See Ugur, ¶ 0239 discloses tile indexes or addresses defining an enhancement layer sub-picture area in which only samples within the co-located area are allowed to be used; See Ugur, ¶ 0171 discloses that sub-pictures may be scanned in sub-picture raster scan order.] information indicating positions of the tile in vertical and horizontal directions in a picture, or information indicating a data position of the tile in the encoded data.
Regarding claim 3, Ugur discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Ugur discloses:
wherein the circuitry is further configured to receive information indicating whether or not to control a tile in which the encoding-related information is referred to. [See Ugur, ¶ 0239 discloses that some picture properties may be changed (controlled) as pre-processing for encoding – areas outside the enhancement layer sub-picture may be low-pass filtered prior to encoding, etc.]
Regarding claim 4, Ugur discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Ugur discloses:
wherein the encoding-related information includes information used for generation of a prediction image used in decoding of the encoded data. [See Ugur, ¶ 0239 discloses that a tile set SEI message may indicate to avoid inter-layer prediction from areas outside a sub-picture area on a base layer or other layer used for inter-layer prediction.]
Regarding claim 6, Ugur discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Ugur discloses:
wherein the circuitry is further configured to:
receive the encoded data encoded for each of the tiles obtained by dividing the picture of the enhancement layer of the image data and the control information of each of the tiles; [See Ugur, ¶ 0128 discloses division of a picture into coded slices or tiles; See Ugur, ¶ 0200 discloses that a sub-picture region may correspond with a particular selected region; See Ugur, ¶ 0171, 0230, 0239 discloses tile indexes or addresses defining an enhancement layer sub-picture area in which only samples within the co-located area are allowed to be used.]
and decode the encoded data with reference to the encoding-related information of some tiles of the base layer for each of the tiles according to control of the control information of each tile. [See Ugur, ¶ 0239 discloses areas inside or outside a sub-picture area may be pre- processed prior to encoding according to picture properties (encoding-related information).]
Regarding claim 7, Ugur discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Ugur discloses:
wherein the circuitry is further configured to receive information indicating whether it is possible to detect a tile division of the enhancement layer with reference to a tile division of the base layer. [See Ugur, ¶ 0128 discloses division of a picture into coded slices or tiles; See Ugur, ¶ 0200 discloses that a sub-picture region may correspond with a particular selected region; See Ugur, ¶ 0171, 0230, 0239 discloses tile indexes or addresses defining an enhancement layer sub-picture area in which only samples within the co-located area are allowed to be used.]
Regarding claim 8, this claim recites analogous limitations to claim 1 in the form of “a method” rather than “a device”, 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.
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.
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ugur et al. (US 20140003504 A1) in view of Rapaka et al. (US 20140254669 A1) (hereinafter Rapaka).
Regarding claim 5, Ugur discloses all the limitations of claim 4.
Ugur does not appear to explicitly disclose:
wherein the information used for the generation of the prediction image includes information used for texture prediction of the image data and information used for syntax prediction of the image data, and
wherein the control information includes information used to independently control a tile in which the information used for the texture prediction is referred to and a tile in which the information used for the syntax prediction is referred to.
However, Rapaka discloses:
wherein the information used for the generation of the prediction image includes information used for texture prediction of the image data and information used for syntax prediction of the image data, and [See Rapaka, ¶ 0189-0191 discloses performing inter-layer texture prediction and inter-layer syntax prediction.]
wherein the control information includes information used to independently control a tile in which the information used for the texture prediction is referred to and a tile in which the information used for the syntax prediction is referred to. [See Rapaka, ¶ 0189-0191 discloses indicating whether inter-layer texture prediction and/or inter-layer syntax prediction are not allowed along or across tile boundaries.]
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Ugur to add the teachings of Rapaka in order to signal restrictions of tile boundaries related to geometrical parameters.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 PATRICK E DEMOSKY whose telephone number is (571)272-8799. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7-4 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, Jamie Atala can be reached at 5712727384. 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.
/PATRICK E DEMOSKY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2486