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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/09/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's argument, filed on March 23, 2026 has been entered and carefully considered. Claims 1 and 18-20 are amended. Claims 1-20 are pending.
The rejection of claims 1 and 18-20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
3. On pages 7-8 applicant argues "combination of TAQUET and Zhang fail to disclose the number of lines for determining at least one jilter coefficient for a convolutional cross-component model (CCCM) for the current chroma block," as claimed in amended claim 1. While the applicant's argument points are understood, the examiner respectfully disagrees it is because TAQUET discloses a number of lines for
determining at least one filter coefficient ([para 0041-0043]- determining if cross-component adaptive loop filter (CCALF) is indicated for a given component; and decoding/or encoding said filter coefficients from a bitstream; number of lines is indicated in the bitstream).
Therefore, the rejection has been maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Zhang et al. (US 2018/0205946 A1 ) in view of TAQUET et al.( US 2022/0312006 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Zhang discloses a method for video processing([see in Fig. 4-6]-a video processing method), comprising: obtaining, during a conversion between a current chroma block of a video and a bitstream of the video([see in Fig. 8]- FIG. 8 is a conceptual diagram illustrating example sets of reference samples used for linear model prediction mode for video coding. JEM describes a linear model (LM) prediction mode for video coding. Although the cross-complement redundancy is significantly reduced in YCbCr color space, correlation between three color components still exists, in 4:2:0 chroma video coding, a method named Linear Model (LM) prediction mode has been well studied during development of HEVC standard. With LM prediction mode, the chroma samples are predicted based on downsampled reconstructed luma samples of the same block by using a linear model ),
However, the number of lines for determining at least one filter coefficient for a convolutional cross-component model (CCCM) for the current chroma block; and performing the conversion based on the number of lines.
In an analogous art, TAQUET discloses the number of lines for determining at least one filter coefficient for a convolutional cross-component model (CCCM) for the current chroma block; and performing the conversion based on the number of lines([see in Fig. 4]- provides a filter shape and coefficient arrangement for a CCALF filter and show an example of filter shape 401 that can be used when performing CCALF with a linear convolution filter. This filter shape is well suited for filtering Luma channel to correct error in Chroma channel of a video using YUV 4:2:0 colour representation, but it can also be used with other kinds of colour representations. Each box corresponds to samples positioned around a reference sample position (the box with grey dotted background). Each number in each box corresponds to the index of a filter coefficient to apply to the sample at the position of the box; [see also para 0106 ]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the technique of TAQUET to the modified system of Zhang an adaptive loop filter (ALF), which is also applied as an in-loop filter to reduce undesirable compression artefacts in decoded frames/images and also to improve the coding performance of a portion of CCALF process by simplifying the cross-component filter [ TAQUET; para 0004].
Regarding claim 2, Zhang discloses wherein the number of lines is indicated in the bitstream, or the number of lines is dependent on coding information of the current chroma block([para 0034, 0041, 0046 and 0062-0063]- video decoder 300 performs a reciprocal process to that performed by video encoder 200 to decode the encoded video data of the bitstream. For example, video decoder 300 may decode values for syntax elements of the bitstream using CABAC in a manner substantially similar to, albeit reciprocal to, the CABAC encoding process of video encoder 200).
Regarding claim 3, Zhang discloses wherein the coding information comprises at least one of: a gradient of reference samples of the current chroma block, a size of the current chroma block, dimensions of the current chroma block, at least one neighboring block of the current chroma block, or a color format of the video([see in Fig. 8]- the cross-complement redundancy is significantly reduced in YCbCr color space, correlation between three color components still exists).
Regarding claim 4, Zhang discloses wherein the number of lines used for the current chroma block is different from the number of lines used for a further block, the further block having a different size from the current chroma block([para 0077]- QTBT partitioning structure, the CTU size is set as 128×128 (luma samples and two corresponding 64×64 chroma samples), the MinQTSize is set as 16×16, the MaxBTSize is set as 64×64, the MinBTSize (for both width and height) is set as 4, and the MaxBTDepth is set as 4), or wherein the number of lines on a left side of the current chroma block is larger than the number of lines above the current chroma block, if a height of the current chroma block is larger than a width of the current chroma block, or wherein the number of lines above the current chroma block is larger than the number of lines on a left side of the current chroma block, if a width of the current chroma block is larger than a height of the current chroma block.
Regarding claim 5, Zhang discloses determining information on applying a convolutional cross-component model (CCCM) to the current chroma block based on a color format of the video, wherein the information comprises at least one of: whether to apply CCCM to the current chroma block, or how to apply CCCM to the current chroma block([para 0105 and 0109, 0113]- The video coder then modifies the intra chroma prediction mode list by adding the DDM mode into the intra chroma prediction mode list, which includes one cross-component linear model (CCLM) mode, one proposed DDM mode, one DM mode derived from the co-located luma block).
Regarding claim 6, Zhang discloses wherein the color format is a format in YCbCr color space or a format in RGB color space, and/or wherein a first process of CCCM for a first color format is the same as a second process of CCCM for a second color format different from the first color format, or a first process of CCCM for a first color format is different from a second process of CCCM for a second color format different from the first color format([see in Fig. 8]- the cross-complement redundancy is significantly reduced in YCbCr color space, correlation between three color components still exists).
Regarding claim 7, TAQUET discloses determining at least one filter coefficient for CCCM without using a division operation ([see in Fig. 2 and abstract]- Chroma channel is subsampled compared to the Luma channel, for instance for videos using YUV 4:2:0 color representation. On such variants, the CCALF filtering process 308, 309 is not applied on each Luma sample positions, but only on integer Luma sample position obtained when up-sampling the Chroma sample position. Thus on YUV 4:2:0 representation, the filtering is only applied to one fourth of the Luma sample position).
Regarding claim 8, TAQUET discloses wherein a division operation for determining the at least one filter coefficient is replaced with a set of look-up tables([see in Table-2]-look-up table), or wherein a division operation for determining the at least one filter coefficient is replaced based on a process and the process is used by at least one coding tool other than CCCM to replace a division operation, or the division operation is replaced with a module and the module is used by at least one coding tool other than CCCM to replace a division operation([see in Table-2]-look-up table), or the division operation is replaced with a logic and the logic is used by at least one coding tool other than CCCM to replace a division operation([see in Table-2]-look-up table), or wherein a numerator of a division operation for determining the at least one filter coefficient is adjusted by a positive scale factor([see in Table-2]-look-up table), or wherein a denominator of a division operation for determining the at least one filter coefficient is quantized
to a predetermined value, and the division operation is replaced with a set of shift operations([see in Table-2]-look-up table).
Regarding claim 9, Zhang discloses wherein a target syntax element indicating whether to apply CCCM to the current chroma block is independent from at least one syntax element for CCLM or MMLM([para 0108]- multiple linear models (MMLM)).
Regarding claim 10, Zhang discloses wherein the target syntax element is indicated in the bitstream before or after at least one of the following: an indication of CCLM([para 0068 and 0108]- video encoder 200 and video decoder 300 may code a one bit flag that indicates whether the DDM is either CCLM or derived direction mode; multiple linear models (MMLM)), or an indication of MMLM, and/or wherein the target syntax element is indicated in the bitstream before or after an indication of chroma direct copy of intra prediction mode for luma component, and/or wherein the target syntax element is indicated in the bitstream before or after an indication of decoder-side derivation of intra prediction mode (DDIPM) for chroma, and/or wherein the target syntax element is indicated at the beginning of indications of chroma intra prediction modes in the bitstream([para 0108]- multiple linear models (MMLM)), or the target syntax element is indicated at the end of indications of chroma intra prediction modes in the bitstream, and/or wherein at least one further syntax element indicating the CCCM being used is indicated in the bitstream([para 0108]- multiple linear models (MMLM)).
Regarding claim 11, Zhang discloses wherein a syntax element indicating whether to apply CCCM to the current chroma block is indicated in the bitstream by using a plurality of contexts([para 0108]- multiple linear models (MMLM)).
Regarding claim 12, Zhang discloses wherein the plurality of contexts are dependent on coding information of the current chroma block, or wherein the plurality of contexts are dependent on whether the current chroma block is coded with CCLM or MMLM([para 0108]- multiple linear models (MMLM)).
Regarding claim 13, TAQUET discloses wherein a determination of filter coefficients for CCCM or a solution of an equation used in CCCM is used for at least one coding tool other than CCCM([see in Fig. 4a-4d]- 4-d shows a typical bitwise memory representation of the output of a multiplication of a CCALF filter coefficient with a sample value while performing CCALF filtering).
Regarding claim 14, TAQUET discloses wherein the at least one coding tool comprises at least one of: adaptive loop filter (ALF), cross-component adaptive loop filter (CC-ALF), sample-adaptive offset (SAO), cross-component sample-adaptive offset (CC-SAO), bilateral filter (BIF), BIF chroma, deblocking, CCLM, MMLM,or matrix weighted intra prediction (MIP) ([see in Fig. 4a-4d]- 4-d shows a typical bitwise memory representation of the output of a multiplication of a CCALF filter coefficient with a sample value while performing CCALF filtering; [see also para 0004] ).
Regarding claim 15, TAQUET discloses wherein the CCCM is used in a coding tool determining a chroma block of the video based on reconstructed samples of a collocated luma block of the chroma block by using a convolutional filter([para 0106]- a linear convolution filter (see FIG. 4 for instance)).
Regarding claim 16, TAQUET discloses wherein the conversion includes encoding the current chroma block into the bitstream([see in Fig. 7-c-7d]- , two or more filter patterns are available, and one filter pattern is chosen according to Chroma subsampling in YUV 4:2:0. In one alternative, the filter pattern index is provided/signalled in the bitstream).
Regarding claim 17, TAQUET discloses wherein the conversion includes decoding the current chroma block from the bitstream ([see in Fig. 7-c-7d]- , two or more filter patterns are available, and one filter pattern is chosen according to Chroma subsampling in YUV 4:2:0. In one alternative, the filter pattern index is provided/signalled in the bitstream).
Regarding claim 18, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1. Hence; all limitations for claim 18 have been met in method claim 1.
Regarding claim 19, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1. Hence; all limitations for claim 19 have been met in method claim 1.
Regarding claim 20, the claim is interpreted and rejected for the same reason as set forth in claim 1. Hence; all limitations for claim 20 have been met in method claim 1.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art are made of record and not relied upon but considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
1. ZHAO et al., US 2020/0014919 A1, discloses a method and apparatus comprising computer code configured to cause a hardware processor or processors to perform intra prediction among a plurality of reference lines.
2. LIM; Sung Won, US 2022/0295056 A1A1, discloses an image decoding method according to the disclosure comprises the steps of: determining whether a cross-component linear model (CCLM) mode is applied to a chroma block.
3. ZHAO et al., US 2020/0195976 A1, discloses method and apparatus for encoding or decoding a video sequence includes applying a Cross-Component Linear Model (CCLM) to a video sequence.
4. CHOI et al., US 2022/0417517 A1, discloses an image decoding method using CCLM prediction in an image coding system.
5. CHOI et al., US 2020/0195930 A1, discloses a method for decoding a picture, performed by a decoding apparatus. The method includes deriving neighboring luma reference samples of a luma block; deriving neighboring chroma reference samples for a chroma block when an intra prediction mode of the chroma block is a cross-component linear model (CCLM) mode.
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 MD NAZMUL HAQUE whose telephone number is (571)272-5328. The examiner can normally be reached IFW.
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 5712727327. 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.
/MD N HAQUE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
Prosecution Insights