Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/021,873

CHROMA RESIDUAL SCALING FORESEEING A CORRECTIVE VALUE TO BE ADDED TO LUMA MAPPING SLOPE VALUES

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Jan 15, 2025
Examiner
TORRENTE, RICHARD T
Art Unit
2485
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Interdigital Madison Patent Holdings SAS
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 3m
To Grant
83%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allow Rate
717 granted / 1039 resolved
+11.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
40 currently pending
Career history
1079
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.5%
-33.5% vs TC avg
§103
51.9%
+11.9% vs TC avg
§102
25.9%
-14.1% vs TC avg
§112
8.3%
-31.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1039 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/15/25 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Specification The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Drawings The drawings were received on 1/15/25. These drawings are acceptable. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhao et al. (US 2022/0256174). Regarding claim 19, Zhao discloses a non-transitory program storage device having encoded data representative of an image of a video (see fig. 1; e.g. see ¶ [0327]), the encoded data comprising: an indication specifying an absolute codeword value of a corrective value (e.g. see ¶ [0174], [0228]) for one or more chroma residual scaling parameters (e.g. see ¶ [0174]); and an indication specifying a sign of a corrective value (e.g. see ¶ [0174], [0028]) for one or more chroma residual scaling parameters (e.g. see ¶ [0174]). Note: The claim discloses “a non-transitory program storage device having encoded data representative of an image of a video”. The claim then recites the content of the data. These data do not add any further structure or functional limitation to the “storage device having encoded data representative of an image of a video”. Hence, these data do not add patentable weight to the claim. It is recommended to either cancel the claim, change to a method claim or add a “non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a bitstream with stored instructions to decode the bitstream according to the method of ...” to consider the body of the claim along with incorporating all the limitations of claim 1 to have claim 19 in condition for allowance. Regarding claim 20, Zhao further discloses wherein the indication specifying the absolute codeword value of the corrective value for one or more chroma residual scaling parameters and the indication specifying the sign of the corrective value for one or more chroma residual scaling parameters are part of an Adaptation Parameter Set (APS) in the encoded data (e.g. see ¶ [0187]). Allowable Subject Matter Claim(s) 1-18 is/are allowable. The following is an Examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Claims 1, 6, 10 and 15 discloses a method comprising: decoding an indication specifying an absolute codeword value of a corrective value for one or more chroma residual scaling parameters; decoding an indication specifying a sign of a corrective value for one or more chroma residual scaling parameters; determining the corrective value for one or more chroma residual scaling parameters based on the indication specifying the absolute codeword value and the indication specifying the sign of the corrective value; obtaining one or more luma mapping parameters representative of a slope of a luma forward mapping function applied to a prediction of luma samples; determining one or more corrected luma mapping parameters by adding the corrective value of the one or more chroma residual scaling parameters to the one or more luma mapping parameters; obtaining one or more corrected residual scaling parameters by inverting the one or more corrected luma mapping parameters; scaling chroma residuals using one or more corrected residual scaling parameters; and decoding a video based on the scaled chroma residuals. The closest prior art Zhao (US 2022/0256174) discloses chroma residual scaling parameters (e.g. see equation in ¶ [0174], and luma mapping parameters representative of a slope of a luma forward mapping function applied to a prediction of luma samples (see fig. 8) but fails to anticipate or render the above underlined limitation obvious. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Citation of Pertinent Art The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. 1. Shingala et al. (US 2020/0389648), discloses luma reshaping for chroma scaling. 2. Song et al. (US 2019/0320191), discloses chroma reshaping with dynamic range. 3. Su (US 2018/0124399), discloses dynamic range video reshaping. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD T TORRENTE whose telephone number is (571)270-3702. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 6:45-3:15 pm. 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, Jay Patel can be reached at (571) 272-2988. 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. /RICHARD T TORRENTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2485
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 15, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604032
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR PERFORMING PADDING IN CODING OF A MULTI-DIMENSIONAL DATA SET
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604041
METHODS AND DEVICES FOR GEOMETRIC PARTITIONING MODE SPLIT MODES REORDERING WITH PRE-DEFINED MODES ORDER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604014
METHOD AND SYSTEM OF VIDEO PROCESSING WITH LOW LATENCY BITSTREAM DISTRIBUTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593062
IMAGE ENCODING AND DECODING METHOD WITH MERGE FLAG AND MOTION VECTORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12581067
INTRA PREDICTION METHOD AND DEVICE USING MPM LIST
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
69%
Grant Probability
83%
With Interview (+14.0%)
3y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1039 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month