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 .
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.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye (US 2008/0310507) in view of He (US 2013/0336409).
2. As per claim 1, Ye teaches a video decoder comprising one or more processors, the one or more processors configured to: decode syntax elements specifying coefficients of a transform unit that is partitioned into a plurality of coefficient groups, each coefficient group having a size equal to the size of each other coefficient group (Ye, ¶0066-0069 “… transform coefficient matrix … all of which have a size equal to the size of the block … “); and for a set of coefficients comprising one or more coefficient groups of the plurality of coefficient groups (Ye, ¶0066-0069 “… coefficient… ”): identify, in the set of coefficients, a first non-zero coefficient in a scan order and a last non-zero coefficient in the scan order, based at least in part on the syntax elements (Ye, ¶0076 “ non-zero coefficient … first coefficient … last coefficient”); determine, in the set of coefficients, a number of coefficients based on the first non-zero coefficient and the last non-zero coefficient (Ye, ¶0078 “ … number of times … non-zero coefficient”), and in response to the determined number of coefficients exceeding a threshold (Ye, ¶0080 “ … exceeds a threshold value”):
While Ye doesn’t explicitly mention, He teaches determine a parity of sum of non-zero coefficients in the set of coefficients (He, ¶0022-0023); and based at least in part on the parity, assign a sign to a coefficient in the set of coefficients (He, ¶0022-0023). Therefore, taking the combined teaching of Ye and He as a whole, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the instant limitation for the benefit of improving encoding and decoding of compressed video data.
3. Claims 5 and 9 are similarly analyzed as claim 1 for obviousness reason discussed above.
4. As per claim 2, Ye in view of He teaches the video decoder of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors is further configured to: assign a negative sign to the coefficient in the set of coefficients when the parity is odd (He, ¶0087).
5. Claim 6 is similarly analyzed as claim 2 for obviousness reason discussed above.
6. As per claim 3, Ye in view of He teaches the video decoder of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors is further configured to: assign the sign to the last non-zero coefficient in the scan order in the set of coefficients (He, ¶0093-0094).
7. Claim 7 is similarly analyzed as claim 3 for obviousness reason discussed above.
8. As per claim 4, Ye in view of He teaches the video decoder of claim 1, wherein the set of coefficients includes exactly one coefficient group, and wherein the scan order is applied within the one coefficient group (Ye, ¶0111).
9. Claim 8 is similarly analyzed as claim 4 for obviousness reason discussed above.
10. As per claim 10, Ye teaches a video encoder comprising one or more processors, the one or more processors configured to: encode syntax elements specifying coefficients of a transform unit that is partitioned into a plurality of coefficient groups, each coefficient group having a size equal to the size of each other coefficient group (Ye, ¶0066-0069 “… transform coefficient matrix … all of which have a size equal to the size of the block … “); and for a set of coefficients comprising one or more coefficient groups of the plurality of coefficient groups (Ye, ¶0066-0069 “… coefficient… ”): identify, in the set of coefficients, a first non-zero coefficient in a scan order and a last non-zero coefficient in the scan order (Ye, ¶0076 “ non-zero coefficient … first coefficient … last coefficient”); determine, in the set of coefficients, a number of coefficients based on the first non-zero coefficient and the last non-zero coefficient (Ye, ¶0078 “ … number of times … non-zero coefficient”), and in response to the determined number of coefficients exceeding a threshold (Ye, ¶0080 “ … exceeds a threshold value”):
While Ye doesn’t explicitly mention, He teaches determine a parity sum of non-zero coefficients in the set of coefficients (He, ¶0022-0023); and based at least in part on the parity, hide a sign of a coefficient in the set of coefficients (He, ¶0022-0023). Therefore, taking the combined teaching of Ye and He as a whole, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to implement the instant limitation for the benefit of improving encoding and decoding of compressed video data.
11. Claims 14 and 18 are similarly analyzed as claim 10 for obviousness reason discussed above.
12. As per claim 11, Ye in view of He teaches the video encoder of claim 10, wherein the one or more processors is further configured to: hide a negative sign of the coefficient in the set of coefficients when the parity is odd (He, ¶0087).
13. Claim 15 is similarly analyzed as claim 11 for obviousness reason discussed above.
14. As per claim 12, Ye in view of He teaches the video encoder of claim 10, wherein the one or more processors is further configured to: hide the sign of the last non-zero coefficient in the scan order in the set of coefficients (He, ¶0093-0094).
15. Claim 16 is similarly analyzed as claim 12 for obviousness reason discussed above.
16. As per claim 13, Ye in view of He teaches the video encoder of claim 10, wherein the set of coefficients includes exactly one coefficient group, and wherein the scan order is applied within the one coefficient group (Ye, ¶0111).
17. Claim 17 is similarly analyzed as claim 13 for obviousness reason discussed above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZEWDU A KASSA whose telephone number is (571)270-5253. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5:30.
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 Payne can be reached at 5712723024. 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.
ZEWDU A. KASSA
Examiner
Art Unit 2637
/ZEWDU A KASSA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2635