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 04/21/2028 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to applicant’s argument in the Remarks, He in Fig.17, [07], [94], discloses a video encoded bitstream that may include reference picture set (RPS) extensions. The RPS extension signaling lower layer reference picture available in the lower layer or aggregate decoder picture buffer (DPB), is the claimed parameter for a decoded picture buffer (DPB), and enhancement layer can be predicted from the picture of the lower layer while it is available or received in a decoder. RPS extension is determined at step of parsing RPS extension in sequence parameter set (SPS) header as depicted in Fig.17 ). Further, in Fig.8, [44]-[46], [101], [169], [223], [225], Chen teaches A decoder may use SEI to determine whether a bitstream includes multiple layers, and to properly separate the base layer into constituent pictures of the two views and enhancement views. As depicted in Fig.8, a video decoder receives an indication of potential operation points of a certain representation (e.g. layer, views of layer). That is, video decoder may receive an indication of which layers are provided in the bitstream, as well as the dependencies of the layers. After selecting an operation point, video decoder may decode a base layer of the scalable multi-view bitstream. Wherein the operation point that is described by SEI message is part of sequence parameter set extension (SPS), and base layer is the reference layer of enhancement layer. That means whether or not a base layer is in bitstream indicates whether or not the related operation point is present in the bitstream, and the SEI as parameter describing the operation point that would be interpreted or inferred by the decoder may or may not be included in the bitstream.
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) 1-5, 8-15, 18-20, 22-24, 27-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2013116415 A1 HE YONG et al. (hereafter He), and further in view of US 20120075436 A1 CHEN; YING et al. (hereafter Chen).
Regarding claim 1, He discloses A method of coding video information, the method comprising: determining whether or not a reference layer for an enhancement layer is included in a bitstream ([248], [262]-[263], parsing bitstream (e.g. NAL) would determine there are any indication of the availability of a reference layer for other layers in the bitstream); determining whether one or more parameters for a decoded picture buffer are signaled in the bitstream based upon determining whether the reference layer for the enhancement layer is included in the bitstream (Fig.17, [07], [94], a video encoded bitstream that may include reference picture set (RPS) extensions. The RPS extension signaling lower layer reference picture available in the lower layer or aggregate decoder picture buffer (DPB), is the claimed parameter for a decoded picture buffer (DPB), and enhancement layer can be predicted from the picture of the lower layer while it is available or received in a decoder. RPS extension is determined at step of parsing RPS extension in sequence parameter set (SPS) header as depicted in Fig.17); and coding the video information based at least in part on the values of the one or more parameters for the decoded picture buffer ([142], after decoding slice header that includes parameter sets decoding pictures in bitstream occurs).
He fails to disclose inferring values of the one or more parameters based upon a determination that the reference layer for the enhancement layer is not included in the bitstream and that the one or more parameters are not signaled in the bitstream.
However, Chen teaches inferring values of the one or more parameters based upon a determination that the reference layer for the enhancement layer is not included in the bitstream, and that the one or more parameters are not signaled in the bitstream (Fig.8, [44]-[46], [101], [169], [223], [225], a decoder may use SEI to determine whether a bitstream includes multiple layers, and to properly separate the base layer into constituent pictures of the two views and enhancement views. As depicted in Fig.8, a video decoder receives an indication of potential operation points of a certain representation (e.g. layer, views of layer). That is, video decoder may receive an indication of which layers are provided in the bitstream, as well as the dependencies of the layers. After selecting an operation point, video decoder may decode a base layer of the scalable multi-view bitstream. Wherein the operation point that is described by SEI message is part of sequence parameter set extension (SPS), and base layer is the reference layer of enhancement layer. That means whether or not a base layer is in bitstream indicates whether or not the related operation point is present in the bitstream, and the SEI as parameter describing the operation point that would be by interpreted or inferred by the decoder may or may not be included in the bitstream).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of coding video information disclosed by He include the teaching in the same field of endeavors of Chen, in order to provide techniques for supporting stereo video data used to produce a three-dimensional (3D) effect, as identified by Chen.
Regarding claims 2, 12, 22, 27, He discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the reference layer is coded according to a non-HEVC (High Efficiency Video Coding) codec, and wherein the enhancement layer is coded according to a HEVC codec ([87], [119]).
Regarding claims 3, 13, 23, 28, Chen teaches The method of claim 1, wherein the reference layer is coded according to an Advanced Video Coding (AVC) codec ([30]).
Regarding claims 4, 14, 24, 29, He discloses The method of claim 1, wherein determining whether or not the reference layer for the enhancement layer is included in the bitstream comprises determining whether or not the reference layer is included in the bitstream based upon a value included in one of a video parameter set, a sequence parameter set, a picture parameter set, or an adaptation parameter set ([101]).
Regarding claims 5, 15, He discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the one or more parameters comprise a parameter which signals a maximum size of the decoded picture buffer for a highest temporal sub-layer to be decoded ([234]-[236]).
Regarding claims 8, 18, He discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the one or more parameters comprise a parameter which signals a maximum reordering of output pictures ([155]).
Regarding claims 9, 19, Chen teaches The method of claim 1, further comprising generating one or more syntax elements in the bitstream, the one or more syntax elements comprising the values of the one or more parameters, wherein coding the video information comprises encoding the video information ([47], [83]).
Regarding claims 10, 20, Chen teaches The method of claim 1, wherein determining whether the one or more parameters are signaled in the bitstream comprises decoding one or more syntax elements from the bitstream and wherein coding video information comprises decoding the video information (Fig.1, [60]).
Regarding claims 11, 21, 26, see the rejection for claim 1.
Claim(s) 6, 7, 16, 17, 25, 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He, in view of Chen, and further in view of US 20140092964 A1 Ugur; Kemal et al. (hereafter Ugur).
Regarding claims 6, 16, Ugur teaches The method of claim 5, further comprising: determining, when the reference layer for the enhancement layer is not included in the bitstream, the parameter which signals the maximum size of the decoded picture buffer for the highest temporal sub-layer to be decoded to have a value of 0 ([221], [242]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention having all the references He, Chen and Ugur before him/her, to modify the method of coding video information disclosed by He include the teaching in the same field of endeavors of Chen and Ugur, in order to provide techniques for supporting stereo video data used to produce a three-dimensional (3D) effect, as identified by Chen, and a decoder where enhancement layer is coded with Scalable HEVC coding, while base layer is coded with H.264/AVC coding, as identified by Ugur.
Regarding claims 7, 17, Ugur teaches The method of claim 1, wherein the one or more parameters comprise a parameter which signals a maximum latency (219]).
Regarding claims 25, 30, see the rejections for claims 5, 7, 8.
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 TRACY Y. LI whose telephone number is (571)270-3671. The examiner can normally be reached Monday Friday (8:30 AM- 4:30 PM) 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, 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.
/TRACY Y. LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
Prosecution Insights