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 filed 20 May 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 8 – 9, applicant argues that neither Meardi nor Leleannec teach “a value of a quantization shift offset of the one or more quantization shifting offsets being dependent on a value of at least the scaling factor” as claimed in the amended claims because Meardi only teaches that a quantization offset may be subtracted from a residual or coefficient value before quantization and Leleannec only discusses that the residual block is in the spatial domain and the transform domain. While applicant’s arguments are understood, examiner respectfully disagrees. Examiner relies on Meardi in maintaining the rejection.
Meardi first teaches that a value of a quantization offset is derived as a function of stepwidth and a modifier. See, e.g. pars. 164 – 165: describing that the quantization offset that is applied is derived as a function of deadzone width, the deadzone width determined as a function of stepwidth and a modifier. Meardi next teaches that the modifier is either a signaled value or derived based on a scaling factor. See, e.g. pars. 166 – 169: describing that the modifier is either a constant value based on a level of enhancement or derived based on a particular coefficient within a coefficient block, the modifier being based on a quantization matrix modified by the scaling factor. The system of Meardi then uses the derived quantization offset to scale the transform coefficients. See, e.g. pars. 58 and 175 – 177: describing that the system scales the transform coefficients using a linear quantizer, the linear quantizer utilizing the derived quantization offset. Meardi, therefore, teaches “a value of a quantization shift offset of the one or more quantization shifting offsets being dependent on a value of at least the scaling factor” as claimed. The rejection, therefore, is maintained.
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) 1 – 7 and 17 - 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meardi et al. (US 2022/0272342) (hereinafter Meardi) in view of Leleannec et al. (US 2020/0045313) (hereinafter Leleannec).
Regarding claims 1, 17, and 21, Meardi teaches a method of video decoding (e.g. Figs. 3 and 4, and pars. 119 – 128: depicting and describing a method of video decoding), a method of video encoding (e.g. Figs. 3 and 4, and pars. 119 – 128: depicting and describing a method of video encoding), and a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing instructions which, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform the method of video encoding (e.g. par. 255: describing that a computer readable storage medium stores instructions, which when executed by a hardware processor, performs encoding):
Receiving a bitstream that comprises coded information of a current block, the coded information of the current block comprising coded bits of quantized transform coefficients of the current block, the coded information being indicative of at least a scaling factor to be used during a dequantization of the quantized transform coefficients (e.g. Figs. 11 – 13 and pars. 205 – 216: depicting and describing that the system receives a bitstream, the bitstream comprising encoded data including a current block of quantized transform coefficients, the encoded data further including at least a scaling factor to be used during dequantization of the quantized transform coefficients);
Determining one or more quantization shifting offsets for a reconstruction of transform coefficients in the transform domain based on at least the scaling factor, a value of a quantization shift offset of the one or more quantization shifting offsets being dependent on a value of at least the scaling factor (e.g. Figs. 8 and 11 – 13, and pars. 153 – 169: depicting and describing that the system determines quantization offsets for reconstruction of transform coefficients, the quantization offsets derived based on the deadzone width, the deadzone width derived based on stepwidth and a modifier, the modifier determined based on the scaling factor, wherein deriving quantization offsets based on the deadzone width, the deadzone width derived based on stepwidth and a modifier, the modifier determined based on the scaling factor is the equivalent of the quantization offsets being dependent on a value of at least the scaling factor) ;
Dequantizing the quantized transform coefficients to obtain dequantized transform coefficients based on a product of the quantized transform coefficients and at least the scaling factor (e.g. pars. 210- 216: describing that the system dequantizes the quantized transform coefficients to obtain dequantized transform coefficients [di([Symbol font/0xB0])] based on a product of the quantized transform coefficients [qi([Symbol font/0xB0])] and at least the scaling factor [SF(s)computed] [see, e.g. par. 211: describing that SW(s)actual is computed as a product of SWsignaled and [SF(s)computed] ]) ;
Reconstructing the transform coefficients from the dequantized transform coefficients that are adjusted based on the one or more quantization shifting offsets (e.g. ;
Calculating residuals in a pixel domain of the current block based on the transform coefficients in the transform domain (e.g. Figs. 3-4, 8, and 13, and pars. 7, 125 and 198: depicting and describing that the system determines residuals by comparing an original image signal with a reconstructed image signal in a pixel domain [described as pixel data elements in par. 198] of the current block based on transform coefficients in the transform domain); and
Reconstructing the current block according to the residuals in the spatial domain (e.g. Figs. 2, 4, and 13, and pars. 111, 126 – 128, 243 – 248: depicting and describing that the system reconstructs the block by combining residuals to generate a reconstructed signal in the spatial domain).
Meardi does not explicitly teach:
Wherein the pixel domain of the current block is a spatial domain of the current block, and wherein the residuals are in the spatial domain.
Leleannec, however, teaches a method of decoding, a method of encoding, and a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing instructions that when executed by a processor cause the processor to perform the method of encoding:
Wherein the pixel domain of the current block is a spatial domain of the current block, and wherein the residuals are in the spatial domain (e.g. Figs. 3-4, 7-8: depicting that the residual block is in the spatial domain and the transform domain, the residuals being calculated by subtracting a block of prediction samples from the original block, and an image block is reconstructed by combining the decoded residuals and the block of prediction samples).
It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Meardi by adding the teachings of Leleannec in order for the pixel domain of the current block to be a spatial domain of the current block, and for the residuals are in the spatial domain. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a modification because the modification ensures that the scaling factor that the norm of a corresponding residual block is preserved between the spatial domain and the transform domain (See, Leleannec, e.g. pars. 99 and 147: describing a desire to ensure that the scaling factor that the norm of a corresponding residual block is preserved between the spatial domain and the transform domain).
Turning to claim 2, Meardi and Leleannec teach all of the limitations of claim 1, as discussed above. Meardi further teaches:
Determining a single quantization shifting offset for the transform coefficients (e.g. Figs. 3-4 and 8, and pars. 160 – 165: depicting and describing that the system determines a single quantization offset for the transform coefficients).
Regarding claims 3, 18, and 22, Meardi and Leleannec teach all of the limitations of claims 1 and 2, claim 17, and claim 21, respectively, as discussed above. Meardi further teaches:
wherein at least the scaling factor includes a single scaling factor value for the transform coefficients associated with positions in the transform domain of the current block (e.g. Figs. 8 and 11-13 and pars. 160 – 162 and 175 – 177: depicting and describing that the scaling factor is a single scaling factor for transform coefficients in the current block),
the determining the single quantization shifting offset value further comprises at least one of: determining the single quantization shifting offset value according to a linear function of the single scaling factor value, parameters of the linear function being predefined constants ; and/or determining the single quantization shifting offset value according to a predefined function of the single scaling factor value (e.g. Figs. 8 and 11- 13, and pars. 58, 160 – 169, and 175 – 177: depicting and describing that the quantization offset is determined as a single offset value as a function of the scaling factor, parameters of the function being defined constants).
Turning to claims 4, 19, and 23, Meardi and Leleannec teach all of the limitations of claims 1 and 2, claim 17, and claim 21, respectively, as discussed above. Meardi further teaches:
wherein at least the scaling factor includes scaling factor values respectively for the transform coefficients at respective positions in the transform domain of the current block (e.g. Figs. 8 and 11-13 and pars. 160 – 169, 175 – 177, and 210 - 216: depicting and describing that the scaling factor is a scaling factor for transform coefficients at respective positions in the current block),
the determining the single quantization shifting offset value further comprises at least one of: determining the single quantization shifting offset value according to a linear function of a combination of the scaling factor values, parameters of the linear function being predefined constants; and/or determining the single quantization shifting offset value according to a predefined function of a combination of the scaling factor values (e.g. Figs. 8 and 11- 13, and pars. 58, 160 – 169, 175 – 177, and 210 - 216: depicting and describing that the quantization offset is determined as a single offset value as a function of the scaling factor, parameters of the function being defined constants).
Regarding claims 5, 20, and 24, Meardi and Leleannec teach all of the limitations of claims 1, 17, and 21, respectively, as discussed above. Meardi further teaches:
wherein the determining the one or more quantization shifting offsets comprises: determining respective quantization shifting offset values for the transform coefficients at respective positions in the transform domain of the current block (e.g. Figs. 8 and 11- 13, and pars. 58, 160 – 169, 175 – 177, and 210 - 216: depicting and describing that a quantization offset value is determined for respective transform coefficients in the current block [describing that the quantization offset is determined using a quantization matrix, the quantization matrix specifying values used to calculate the offset based on respective transform coefficients in the transform coefficient block]).
Turning to claim 6, Meardi and Leleannec teach all of the limitations of claims 1 and 5, as discussed above. Meardi further teaches:
wherein at least the scaling factor includes a single scaling factor value for the transform coefficients associated with positions in the transform domain of the current block (e.g. Figs. 8 and 11-13 and pars. 160 – 162 and 175 – 177: depicting and describing that the scaling factor is a single scaling factor for transform coefficients in the current block), and
wherein the determining the respective quantization shifting offset values further comprises: determining a first quantization shifting offset value for a first transform coefficient at a first position in the transform domain of the current block according to a linear function of a combination of the single scaling factor value and the first position, parameters of the linear function being predefined constants; and/or determining the first quantization shifting offset value according to a first predefined function of the single scaling factor value, the first predefined function being associated with the first position (e.g. Figs. 8 and 11- 13, and pars. 58, 160 – 169, 175 – 177, and 210 - 216: depicting and describing that the quantization offset is determined as a single offset value as a function of the scaling factor, parameters of the function being defined constants [describing that the quantization offset is determined using a quantization matrix, the quantization matrix specifying values used to calculate the offset based on respective transform coefficients in the transform coefficient block, wherein the quantization matrix is the equivalent of the predefined constants]).
Regarding claim 7, Meardi and Leleannec teach all of the limitations of claims 1 and 5, as discussed above. Meardi further teaches:
wherein at least the scaling factor includes respective scaling factor values for the transform coefficients at respective positions in the transform domain of the current block (e.g. Figs. 8 and 11-13 and pars. 160 – 169, 175 – 177, and 210 - 216: depicting and describing that the scaling factor is a scaling factor for transform coefficients at respective positions in the current block),
wherein the determining the quantization shifting offset values further comprises at least one of: determining a first quantization shifting offset value for a first transform coefficient at a first position in the transform domain of the current block according to a linear function of a first scaling factor at the first position, parameters of the linear function being predefined constants; and/or determining the first quantization shifting offset value for the first transform coefficient at the first position in the transform domain of the current block according to a predefined function of the first scaling factor at the first position (e.g. Figs. 8 and 11- 13, and pars. 58, 160 – 169, 175 – 177, and 210 - 216: depicting and describing that the quantization offset is determined as a single offset value as a function of the scaling factor, parameters of the function being defined constants [describing that the quantization offset is determined using a quantization matrix, the quantization matrix specifying values used to calculate the offset based on respective transform coefficients in the transform coefficient block, wherein the quantization matrix is the equivalent of the predefined constants]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Kerofsky et al. (US 2013/0114688) – describing that an offset value for modifying dequantization of transform coefficients is derived based on a signaled scaling factor.
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 SHANIKA M BRUMFIELD whose telephone number is (571)270-3700. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 - 5 PM AWS.
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, David Czekaj can be reached at 571-272-7327. 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.
SHANIKA M. BRUMFIELD
Examiner
Art Unit 2487
/SHANIKA M BRUMFIELD/Examiner, Art Unit 2487
/Dave Czekaj/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2487
Prosecution Insights