DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This office action is a response to an application filed on 12/17/2025, in which claims 1-38 are pending and ready for examination.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 4-5, 7, 10, 13-14, 16, 19, 22, 25, and 28 are currently amended. Claims 31-38 are newly added.
Response to Argument
Applicant's arguments filed 12/17/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to claims rejected under 35 USC 102, the Applicant argues, see Pg. 10-11 of Remarks filed on 12/17/2025, that Chen does not teach the amended features “generating the merge candidate list comprises: determining a first prediction candidate according to a first CCP mode, … including the fusion prediction candidate in the merge candidate list …”.
Examiner cannot concur. As taught in Para. [0118], Chen clearly teaches the combination candidate is generated using at least two CCP candidates including at least a first CCP and a second CCP. Thus, the Applicant’s argument is moot.
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 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)(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.
Claims 1, 4-10, 13-19, 22-28, and 31-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen (US Pub. 20250016343 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses a method of decoding encoded video data, the method comprising (Chen; Fig. 2, Para. [0115]. A video decoding system/method is used.):
determining that a chroma block of the encoded video data is coded in a cross-component prediction (CCP) mode (Chen; Para. [0115]. A chroma block of coded video data is determined to be coded in a cross-component prediction mode.);
generating a merge candidate list for the chroma block, wherein the merge candidate list includes at least two prediction candidates generated by different CCP modes and a third prediction candidate, wherein the third prediction candidate comprises a fusion prediction candidate (Chen; Para. [0115, 118]. A merge list for a chroma block is determined, wherein a merge list includes at least two prediction candidates of different CCP modes, and a third prediction candidate of a combined/fusion mode, also see Para. [0178].),
wherein generating the merge candidate list comprises: determining a first prediction candidate according to a first CCP mode determining a second prediction candidate according to a second CCP mode; determining the fusion prediction candidate based on the first prediction candidate and the second prediction candidate: and including the fusion prediction candidate in the merge candidate list.
However, Chen teaches wherein generating the merge candidate list comprises: determining a first prediction candidate according to a first CCP mode (Chen; Para. [0118].
At least a first prediction based on a first CCP mode is determined.);
determining a second prediction candidate according to a second CCP mode (Chen; Para. [0118]. At least a second prediction based on a second CCP mode is determined.);
determining the fusion prediction candidate based on the first prediction candidate and the second prediction candidate (Chen; Para. [0118]. A combination/fusion prediction is determined based on a first prediction and a second prediction.): and
including the fusion prediction candidate in the merge candidate list (Chen; Para. [0118]. A combination/fusion prediction is added to a merge list.);
receiving, in the encoded video data, a syntax element set to a value (Chen; Para. [0128]. A syntax element of a value is received in a coded video data.);
selecting a prediction candidate from the merge candidate list based on the value of the syntax element (Chen; Para. [0128]. A prediction candidate is selected from a merge list in accordance with a syntax element.);
determining a prediction block for the chroma block based on the selected prediction candidate (Chen; Para. [0130-131]. A prediction block of a chroma block is determined in accordance with a selected candidate.);
determining a decoded block of video data based on the prediction block for the chroma block (Chen; Para. [0130-131]. A decoded block of video data is determined in accordance with prediction block of a chroma block.); and
outputting a decoded picture of video data that includes the decoded block of video data (Chen; Para. [130-131]. A decoded picture of video data is generated, including decoded block of video data.).
Regarding claim 4, Chen discloses determining the first prediction candidate according to the first CCP mode comprises selecting the first prediction candidate from a first plurality of candidates based on template matching for each of the first plurality of candidates (Chen; Para. [115, 125]. A first prediction candidate from different candidates is selected in accordance with template matching for different candidates.); and
determining the second prediction candidate according to the second CCP mode comprises selecting the second prediction candidate from a second plurality of candidates based on template matching for each of the second plurality of candidates (Chen; Para. [0115, 125]. A second prediction candidate is selected in accordance with template matching for different candidates.).
Regarding claim 5, Chen discloses determining the fusion prediction candidate based on the first prediction candidate and the second prediction candidate comprises determining a weighted combination of the first prediction candidate and the second prediction candidate (Chen; Para [0132]. A fusion prediction candidate is determined in accordance with a first prediction candidate and a second prediction candidate by determining weight combination.).
Regarding claim 6, Chen discloses a weighting for the weighted combination is an equal weighting (Chen; Para. [0097, 211]. Weighted combination is an equal weighting, also see, Para. [0211].).
Regarding claim 7, Chen discloses the first CCP mode comprises a convolutional cross-component intra prediction model mode and the second CCP mode comprises a cross-component linear model mode (Chen; Para. [0120]. A first CCP mode includes a CCCM mode, and a second CCP mode includes a CCLM mode.).
Regarding claim 8, Chen discloses generating a fusion candidate list for the chroma block, wherein the fusion candidate list includes at least two fusion candidates (Chen; Para. [0115]. A fusion list is determined for a chroma block, including at least two candidates.); and
selecting the third prediction candidate for the merge candidate list from the fusion candidate list (Chen; Para. [0115]. A third prediction candidate is selected for a merge list from a fusion list.).
Regarding claim 9, Chen discloses selecting the third prediction candidate for the merge candidate list based on a comparison of template matching costs for the at least two fusion candidates (Chen; Para. [0211, 213]. A third prediction candidate is selected for a merge list in accordance with template matching cost for fusion candidates, also see Para. [0115, 125].).
Claims 10, 13-18 are directed to a device for decoding encoded video data, the device comprising a sequence of processing steps corresponding to the same as claimed in claims 1-9, and are rejected for the same reason of anticipation as outlined above.
Claims 19, 22-27 are directed to a method of encoding video data, the method comprising a sequence of processing steps that are in symmetric/reciprocal manner with the steps corresponding to the same as claimed in claims 1-9, and are rejected for the same reason of anticipation as outlined above.
Clam 28 is directed to a device for encoding video data, the device comprising: a memory configured to store video data; one or more processors implemented in circuitry and configured to perform a sequence of processing steps that are in symmetric/reciprocal manner with the steps corresponding to the same as claimed in claims 1-3, and are rejected for the same reason of anticipation as outlined above.
Regarding claim 31, Chen discloses receiving a flag for the chroma block, wherein the flag is set to a value indicating that a CCP merge fusion mode is enabled for the chroma block (Chen; Para. [0178]. A flag for a chroma block is received, set to a value indicating a CCP merge fusion mode is used for a chroma block.).
Regarding claim 32, Chen discloses determining the fusion prediction candidate based on the first prediction candidate and the second prediction candidate comprises: determining one or more additional prediction candidates (Chen; Para. [0117-118]. A fusion/combination prediction is determined in accordance with a first prediction and a second prediction by determining at least one or more additional prediction.); and
determining the fusion prediction candidate based on the first prediction candidate, the second prediction candidate, and the one or more additional prediction candidates (Chen; Para. [0117-118]. A fusion/combination prediction is determined based on a first prediction, a second prediction, and one or more predictions.).
Regarding claim 33, Chen discloses wherein determining the fusion prediction candidate based on the first prediction candidate, the second prediction candidate, and the one or more additional prediction candidates comprises: performing a linear combination of the first prediction candidate, the second prediction candidate, and the one or more additional prediction candidates (Chen; Para. [0121]. An average/linear combination of a first prediction, a second prediction, and one or more predictions is performed.).
Regarding claim 34, Chen discloses wherein determining the fusion prediction candidate based on the first prediction candidate, the second prediction candidate, and the one or more additional prediction candidates comprises: selecting prediction candidates to be included in the one or more additional prediction candidates based on template matching (Chen; Para. [0125]. Prediction candidates are selected to be used as one or more prediction candidates in accordance with template matching.).
Claims 35-38 are directed to a device for decoding encoded video data, the device comprising: a memory configured to store video data; one or more processors implemented in circuitry and configured to perform a sequence of processing steps corresponding to the same as claimed in claims 31-34, and are rejected for the same reason of anticipation as outlined above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Huang (US Pub. 20260046419 A1) teaches a video coding system that perform weighted fusion mode for CCP prediction.
Lin (US Pub. 20250119528 A1) teaches a video coding system that performs cross-component prediction merge candidate derivation and fusion in chroma coding.
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 ALBERT KIR whose telephone number is (571)272-6245. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30am - 5:00pm.
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, Jay Patel can be reached at (571) 272-2988. 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.
/ALBERT KIR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2485