DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is a response to an amendment filed on 01/22/2026, in which claims 1-9 are pending and ready for examination.
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). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 18/358,844, filed on 07/25/2023.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1-9 have been considered but are not persuasive.
In regards to claim 1 applicant argues that Lee discloses performing the intra prediction using the adjacent reference samples, however, this disclosure does not disclose the limitation of determining a single reference sample line among plural reference sample lines based on the position of an upper boundary of the current block.
However, examiner respectfully disagrees. In paragraph 300 Lee clearly mentions that an intra-prediction of the current block may be performed by at least one of a plurality of reference lines. As shown in Fig. 16 and paragraph 294 of Lee, a reference sample line is used for inter-prediction of the current block. Furthermore, as shown in Fig. 26 and paragraph 299 of Lee, multiple reference lines are present and at least one of the reference lines is used for the intra-prediction of the current block. Furthermore, as shown in Fig. 23B and paragraph 256 of Lee, intra-prediction modes of the top neighboring blocks of the current block are used for the intra-prediction of the current block. Please note that all the reference lines are determined with respect to the top-left position of the current coding block, and as shown in Fig. 26, each of the reference lines index numbers are with respect to the top and left boundary of the current block. Thus, all the argued limitations of the current application has been fully disclosed by the currently on file reference.
Claims 1-9 remain rejected since the system disclosed by the applicant is taught by the prior arts.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee (US 2019/0116381 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses: An image decoding method, comprising:
deriving an intra prediction mode of a current block (see paragraph 67);
determining one reference sample line among a plurality of reference sample lines (see paragraph 300, intra-prediction of a current block may be performed by at least one of a plurality of reference lines);
configuring a reference sample of intra prediction for the current block from the one reference sample line (see paragraph 297); and
performing intra prediction for the current block based on the intra prediction mode (see paragraph 303) and the reference sample (see paragraph 298),
wherein the one reference sample line is determined based on a position of an upper boundary the current block (see paragraph 300, 256, and Fig. 23B).
Regarding claim 2, Lee discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein the one reference sample line is determined based on whether the upper boundary of the current block corresponds to a boundary of a coding tree block (see Lee, paragraph 296 and Fig. 14, i.e. index 0 and 2).
Regarding claim 3, Lee discloses: The method of claim 1, when the upper boundary of the current block corresponds to a boundary of a coding tree block, the one reference sample line is determined as a reference sample line closest to the current block (see Lee, paragraph 296).
Regarding claim 4, Lee discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein the configuring the reference sample further comprising:
filtering the one reference sample line based on whether the one reference sample line is a reference sample line adjacent to the current block (see Lee, paragraph 208).
Regarding claims 5-8, claims 5-8 are drawn to an encoding methods having limitations similar to the decoding method claimed in claims 1-4 treated in the above rejections. Therefore, method claims 5-8 correspond to method claims 1-4 and are rejected for the same reasons of anticipation as used above.
Regarding claim 9, claim 9 is drawn to a transmitting method having limitations similar to the decoding method claimed in claim 1 treated in the above rejections. Therefore, method claim 9 corresponds to method claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons of anticipation as used above.
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 MARYAM A NASRI whose telephone number is (571)270-7158. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00-8:00 M-T.
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, Joseph Ustaris can be reached at 5712727383. 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.
/MARYAM A NASRI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483