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 .
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.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang; Ye-Kui (US 20140086333 A1).
Regarding claim 3, claim 3 claims a product by process claim limitation where the product is the bitstream and the process is the method steps to generate the bitstream. MPEP §2113 recites “Product-by-Process claims are not limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps”. Thus, the scope of the claim is the storage medium storing the bitstream (with the structure implied by the method steps). The structure includes the information and samples manipulated by the steps.
“To be given patentable weight, the printed matter and associated product must be in a functional relationship. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated”. MPEP §2111.05(I)(A). When a claimed “computer-readable medium merely serves as a support for information or data, no functional relationship exists. MPEP §2111.05(III).
The memory storing the claimed bitstream in claim 3 merely services as a support for the storage of the bitstream and provides no functional relationship between the stored bitstream and storage medium. Therefore the bitstream, which scope is implied by the method steps, is non-functional descriptive material and given no patentable weight. MPEP §2111.05(III). Thus, the claim scope is just a storage medium storing data and is anticipated by Wang which recites a storage medium storing a bitstream.
Wang discloses, A bitstream of compressed video data, including a computer readable storage medium storing the compressed non-transitory video data (¶60 and 44-45, “Video encoder 20” implemented as a variety of suitable circuitry such as one or more microprocessors).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-2 allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Salehfiar et al. teaches an encoder which in operation determines a transform process and selectively including an orthogonal transform and a secondary transform (Paragraph 89; Paragraphs 109-112).
Salehfiar et al. further teaches performing a quantization process on the transformed coefficients (Paragraph 11).
Sugio et al. teaches selecting between a first quantization process and a second quantization process based on whether a orthogonal transform was performed or skipped, including deciding whether or not to use a quantization matrix in the quantization process (Paragraphs 60-69).
Tanaka et al. teaches performing up-conversion and down-conversion on a quantization matrix (Paragraph 293-300).
However, no prior art of record has been explicitly deemed to teach “the second quantization process is performed on the current block in a case where the orthogonal transform is performed and the secondary transform is not performed on the current block, the second quantization process using a first quantization matrix, the first quantization matrix being generated by performing an up-conversion and a down-conversion on a second quantization matrix” and the equivalent decoder limitation of “the second inverse quantization process is performed on the current block in a case where the inverse orthogonal transform is to be performed and the inverse secondary transform is not to be performed on the current block, the second inverse quantization process using a first inverse quantization matrix, the first inverse quantization matrix being generated by performing an up-conversion and a down-conversion on a second inverse quantization matrix.”
The current claims further recite the limitation of “encodes information indicating whether the orthogonal transform and the secondary transform are to be performed on the current block” and equivalent language in the other claims to differentiate from the parent claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARHAN MAHMUD whose telephone number is (571)272-7712. The examiner can normally be reached 10-7.
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.
/FARHAN MAHMUD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483