Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. The Office Action is in response to amendment filed on 07/27/2026.
Response to Amendment
3. The amendment filed on 07/27/2026, Claims 1-35 have been cancelled. Claims 36, 39-42, 45, 47-50, 53, and 55 have been amended; therefore, Claims 36-55 are pending.
4. Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 07/27/2026, pages 7-9 have been fully considered.
Claim Rejections – Double Patenting
Since applicant has not filed terminal disclaimer yet, the double patenting rejection is maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §112
The 112(b) rejection in the non-final 03/26/2026 is withdrawn, due to the amendment filed on 07/27/2026.
However, new ground of rejection is found and presented in this office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §103
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim under 35 U.S.C. § 103 has been fully considered.
Basically, applicant argued that the prior arts (Suzuki et al. (US 20090244331) and in view of Boyce et al. (US 20070058866)) does not discloses the amended limitation of : “generating, via an in-loop noise generator, a first noise pattern for a first portion of a decompressed version of the compressed image and a second noise pattern for a second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image, at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion of the image” in amended independent claims, since:
“The "dark current noise" described in Suzuki corresponds to the first noise
pattern generated for the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image, and
that the "smear noise" described in Suzuki corresponds to the second noise pattern generated for
the second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image. However, the "dark
current noise" and the "smear noise" described in Suzuki is generated for an entire image, not
respective first and second portions of the image, as recited in claim 36. As such, the cited
portions of Suzuki, taken alone or in combination with Boyce, do not describe or suggest
"generating, via an in-loop noise generator, a first noise pattern for a first portion of a
decompressed version of the compressed image and a second noise pattern for a second portion
of the decompressed version of the compressed image, at least part of the second portion being
different from the first portion of the image," as recited in claim 36”;
“The cited portions of Boyce do not cure at least these deficiencies of Suzuki.”.
Examiner’s Response:
After reviewing the claim limitations and the prior arts, and after updating search, examiner believe that the current prior arts (Suzuki et al. (US 20090244331) and in view of Boyce et al. (US 20070058866) and further in view of De Waele et al. (US 20080252781)) teach the aforementioned limitation. Follows are reason:
For example, De Waele teaches that generating, via noise generator, a first noise pattern for a first portion of a decompressed version of the compressed image and a second noise pattern for a second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image, at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion of the image, as shown in paragraph 0037, “the pseudo-random generator is arranged to generate a pseudo-random noise sequence corresponding to each of the several seeds, and the video processing means is arranged to add the noise picture elements based upon the different seeds to respective different regions of the picture. This way the unit can add different optimized noise patches to the picture”; the image is decompressed of compressed image, as suggested in paragraph 0079, “This video processing means may optionally decode/decompress the picture data P1”.
Therefore, the combination of Suzuki, Boyce and De Waele discloses the limitations of: “generating, via an in-loop noise generator, a first noise pattern for a first portion of a decompressed version of the compressed image and a second noise pattern for a second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image, at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion of the image” in independent claims.
The applicant also argued that dependent claims should be allowed due to their dependency on independent claims.
Examiner’s Response:
As discussed above, the combination of LELEANNEC and LEE discloses the limitations in independent claims.
Double Patenting
5. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
6. Claim 36-39 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 19 of US Patent US 11395008 indicated below.
For Claim 36-39, although the conflicting claims are not identical, they both are dealing with method/system for decoding compressed video image data. As clearly indicated in the table below, each claimed limitations of claim 36-39 of the current application are anticipated by the corresponding limitations of claim 19 of the reference patent.
.
Current Application
US 11395008
Claim 36:
A method for decoding compressed video image data, the method comprising:
receiving an encoded bit stream for a compressed image of a video;
generating, via an in-loop noise generator, a first noise pattern for a first portion of a decompressed version of the compressed image and a second noise pattern for a second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image, at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion;
adding noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image;
and adding noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image.
claim 37’s limitation:
wherein the encoded bit stream comprises data indicating a noise model or noise parameters to be used to generate noise for the first and second portions of the decompressed version of the compressed image.
Claim 38’s limitation:
generating, via the in-loop noise generator, based on the data indicating the noise model or noise parameters, the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern
claim 39’s limitation:
wherein the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values at an image block level, wherein different noise pattern values are added to different blocks of the decompressed version of the compressed image.
Claim 19
A system configured to decode compressed video image data, the system comprising:
one or more processors; and one or more memories storing program instructions, that when executed on or across the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to:
receive an encoded bit stream for a compressed image of a video, wherein the encoded bit stream comprises data indicating a noise model or noise parameters to be used to generate noise for two or more portions of a decompressed version of the compressed image;
select a first one of the portions and a second one of the portions, the second one of the portions being different from the first one of the portions;
generate, via an in-loop noise generator, based on the data indicating the noise model or noise parameters, a first noise pattern for the first one of the portions and a second noise pattern for the second one of the portions;
add the first noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image;
and add the second noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image
claim 19’s limitation:
wherein the encoded bit stream comprises data indicating a noise model or noise parameters to be used to generate noise for two or more portions of a decompressed version of the compressed image
claim 19’s limitation:
generate, via an in-loop noise generator, based on the data indicating the noise model or noise parameters, a first noise pattern for the first one of the portions and a second noise pattern for the second one of the portions.
claim 19’s limitation:
add the first noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image; and add the second noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image
7. Claim 45-47 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 19 of US Patent US 11395008 indicated below.
For Claim 45-47, although the conflicting claims are not identical, they both are dealing with method/system for decoding compressed video image data. As clearly indicated in the table below, each claimed limitations of claim 45-47 of the current application are anticipated by the corresponding limitations of claim 19 of the reference patent.
.
Current Application
US 11395008
Claim 45:
A system configured to decode compressed video image data, the system comprising:
one or more processors; and one or more memories storing program instructions, that when executed on or across the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to:
receive an encoded bit stream for a compressed image of a video; generate, via an in-loop noise generator, a first noise pattern for a first portion of a decompressed version of the compressed image and a second noise pattern for a second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image, at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion;
add noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image;
and add noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image
claim 46’s limitation:
wherein the encoded bit stream comprises data indicating a noise model or noise parameters to be used to generate noise for the first and second portions of the decompressed version of the compressed image, and wherein the program instructions, when executed on or across the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to generate, via the in-loop noise generator, based on the data indicating the noise model or noise parameters, the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern
Claim 47’s limitation:
wherein the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values at an image block level, wherein different noise pattern values are added to different blocks of the decompressed version of the compressed image
Claim 19
A system configured to decode compressed video image data, the system comprising:
one or more processors; and one or more memories storing program instructions, that when executed on or across the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to:
receive an encoded bit stream for a compressed image of a video, wherein the encoded bit stream comprises data indicating a noise model or noise parameters to be used to generate noise for two or more portions of a decompressed version of the compressed image;
select a first one of the portions and a second one of the portions, the second one of the portions being different from the first one of the portions;
generate, via an in-loop noise generator, based on the data indicating the noise model or noise parameters, a first noise pattern for the first one of the portions and a second noise pattern for the second one of the portions;
add the first noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image;
and add the second noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image
claim 19’s limitation:
wherein the encoded bit stream comprises data indicating a noise model or noise parameters to be used to generate noise for two or more portions of a decompressed version of the compressed image
claim 19’s limitation:
generate, via an in-loop noise generator, based on the data indicating the noise model or noise parameters, a first noise pattern for the first one of the portions and a second noise pattern for the second one of the portions.
claim 19’s limitation:
add the first noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image; and add the second noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image
8. Claim 53-55 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1, 5 of US Patent US 11395008 indicated below.
For Claim 53-55, although the conflicting claims are not identical, they both are dealing with method/system for encoding compressed video image data. As clearly indicated in the table below, each claimed limitations of claim 53-55 of the current application are anticipated by the corresponding limitations of claim 1, 5 of the reference patent.
.
Current Application
US 11395008
Claim 53:
A method for encoding video image data, the method comprising: s
electing a first portion of an image of a video;
determining a first noise pattern to be generated for the first portion of the image;
selecting a second portion of the image, at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion of the image;
determining a second noise pattern to be generated for the second portion of the image;
generating, via a noise generator included in a compression loop for compressing pixel value data for the image, the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern, wherein the first and second noise patterns are different;
and compressing the pixel value data for the image based at least in part on noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern and noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern
claim 54’s limitation:
encoding the compressed pixel value data for the image, wherein an encoded bit stream for the compressed pixel value data includes data indicating a noise model or one or more noise parameters
Claim 55’s limitation:
wherein noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern and noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern are added to prediction residuals used in the compression loop as part of an in-loop inter-prediction or intra-prediction process
Claim 1
A system configured to encode video image data, the system comprising:
one or more processors;
and one or more memories storing program instructions, that when executed on or across the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to:
compress pixel value data for a plurality of images included in a plurality of frames of a video, wherein to compress the pixel value data, the program instructions cause the one or more processors to:
select a first portion of a given one of the images;
determine a first noise pattern to be generated for the first portion of the given one of the images;
select a second portion of the given one of the images, the second portion being different from the first portion of the given one of the images;
determine a second noise pattern to be generated for the second portion of the same given one of the images;
generate, via an in-loop noise generator included in a compression loop for compressing the pixel value data, the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern, wherein the first and second noise patterns are different;
and encode the compressed pixel value data for the plurality of images, wherein an encoded bit stream for the compressed pixel value data includes data indicating a noise model or one or more noise parameters used to generate the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern
claim 1’s limitation:
encode the compressed pixel value data for the plurality of images, wherein an encoded bit stream for the compressed pixel value data includes data indicating a noise model or one or more noise parameters used to generate the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern
claim 5’s limitation:
wherein the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to prediction residuals used in the compression loop as part of an in-loop inter-prediction or intra-prediction process
9. Claim 36-44 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-8 of US Patent US 12238342 indicated below.
For Claim 36-44, although the conflicting claims are not identical, they both are dealing with method/system for decoding compressed video image data. As clearly indicated in the table below, each claimed limitations of claim 36-44 of the current application are anticipated by the corresponding limitations of claim 1-8 of the reference patent.
.
Current Application
US 12238342
Claim 36:
A method for decoding compressed video image data, the method comprising:
receiving an encoded bit stream for a compressed image of a video;
generating, via an in-loop noise generator, a first noise pattern for a first portion of a decompressed version of the compressed image and a second noise pattern for a second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image; at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion;
adding noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image;
and adding noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image.
claim 37’s limitation:
wherein the encoded bit stream comprises data indicating a noise model or noise parameters to be used to generate noise for the first and second portions of the decompressed version of the compressed image.
Claim 38’s limitation:
generating, via the in-loop noise generator, based on the data indicating the noise model or noise parameters, the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern
claim 39’s limitation:
wherein the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values at an image block level, wherein different noise pattern values are added to different blocks of the decompressed version of the compressed image.
claim 40’s limitation:
wherein noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values at a noise portion level, wherein each noise portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image overlaps two or more blocks of the decompressed version of compressed image, and wherein different noise pattern values are added to different ones of the noise portions of the decompressed version of the compressed image
claim 41’s limitation:
wherein noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern and noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values prior to the predicted pixel being filtered by one or more in-loop filters of a decompression process
claim 42’s limitation:
wherein noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to adjusted predicted pixel values that have been adjusted based on decoded residual pixel values included in the bit stream, wherein the adjusted predicted pixel values have been filtered by one or more in-loop filters of a decompression process prior to the first and second noise pattern being added
claim 43’s limitation:
predicting pixel values for the compressed image; filtering noise from predicted pixel values; and applying residual values to the predicted values to determine decompressed pixel values, wherein noise filtered predicted values are used along with residual pixel values and the first and second noise patterns to generate the decompressed version of the compressed image
claim 44’s limitation:
filtering noise from a decompressed version of another compressed image included in an adjacent frame of the video, prior to using the decompressed version of the other compressed image in a motion estimation process to determine estimated motion between the images, wherein noise is filtered from the decompressed version of the other compressed image using one or more filters selected based on noise models selected to generate a first noise pattern and a second noise pattern for the decompressed version of the other compressed image.
Claim 1
A method for decoding compressed video image data, the method comprising:
receiving an encoded bit stream for a compressed image of a video;
generating, via an in-loop noise generator, a first noise pattern to be added to a first portion of a decompressed version of the compressed image and a second noise pattern to be added to a second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image, at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image;
adding the first noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image;
and adding the second noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image;
wherein the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to predicted pixel values that have been adjusted based on decoded residual pixel values included in the bit stream, wherein the adjusted predicted pixel values have been filtered by one or more in-loop filters of a decompression process prior to the first and second noise pattern being added
claim 2’s limitation:
wherein the encoded bit stream comprises data indicating a noise model or noise parameters to be used to generate noise for two or more portions of a decompressed version of the compressed image
claim 3’s limitation:
generate, via an in-loop noise generator, based on the data indicating the noise model or noise parameters, a first noise pattern for the first one of the portions and a second noise pattern for the second one of the portions.
claim 4’s limitation:
wherein the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values at an image block level, wherein different noise pattern values are added to different blocks of the decompressed version of the compressed image
claim 5’s limitation:
wherein the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values at a noise portion level, wherein each noise portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image overlaps two or more blocks of the decompressed version of compressed image, and wherein different noise pattern values are added to different ones of the noise portions of the decompressed version of the compressed image
claim 6’s limitation:
wherein the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values prior to the predicted pixel being filtered by one or more in-loop filters of a decompression process
claim 1’s limitation:
wherein the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to predicted pixel values that have been adjusted based on decoded residual pixel values included in the bit stream, wherein the adjusted predicted pixel values have been filtered by one or more in-loop filters of a decompression process prior to the first and second noise pattern being added
claim 7’s limitation:
predicting pixel values for the compressed image; filtering noise from predicted pixel values; and applying residual values to the predicted values to determine decompressed pixel values, wherein noise filtered predicted values are used along with residual pixel values and the first and second noise patterns to generate the decompressed version of the compressed image
claim 8’s limitation:
filtering noise from a decompressed version of another compressed image included in an adjacent frame of the video, prior to using the decompressed version of the other compressed image in a motion estimation process to determine estimated motion between the images, wherein noise is filtered from the decompressed version of the other compressed image using one or more filters selected based on noise models selected to generate a first noise pattern and a second noise pattern for the decompressed version of the other compressed image
10. Claim 45-52 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9-15 of US Patent US 12238342 indicated below.
For Claim 45-52, although the conflicting claims are not identical, they both are dealing with method/system for decoding compressed video image data. As clearly indicated in the table below, each claimed limitations of claim 45-52 of the current application are anticipated by the corresponding limitations of claim 9-15 of the reference patent.
.
Current Application
US 12238342
Claim 45:
A system configured to decode compressed video image data, the system comprising:
one or more processors;
and one or more memories storing program instructions, that when executed on or across the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to:
receive an encoded bit stream for a compressed image of a video;
generate, via an in-loop noise generator, a first noise pattern for a first portion of a decompressed version of the compressed image and a second noise pattern for a second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image; at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion;
add noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image;
and add noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image.
claim 46’s limitation:
wherein the encoded bit stream comprises data indicating a noise model or noise parameters to be used to generate noise for the first and second portions of the decompressed version of the compressed image, and wherein the program instructions, when executed on or across the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to generate, via the in-loop noise generator, based on the data indicating the noise model or noise parameters, the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern.
Claim 47’s limitation:
wherein noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values at an image block level, wherein different noise pattern values are added to different blocks of the decompressed version of the compressed image
claim 48’s limitation:
wherein noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values at a noise portion level, wherein each noise portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image overlaps two or more blocks of the decompressed version of compressed image, and wherein different noise pattern values are added to different ones of the noise portions of the decompressed version of the compressed image.
claim 49’s limitation:
wherein noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values prior to the predicted pixel being filtered by one or more in-loop filters of a decompression process
claim 50’s limitation:
wherein noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to adjusted predicted pixel values that have been adjusted based on decoded residual pixel values included in the bit stream, wherein the adjusted predicted pixel values have been filtered by one or more in-loop filters of a decompression process prior to the first and second noise pattern being added
claim 51’s limitation:
predict pixel values for the compressed image; filter noise from predicted pixel values; and apply residual values to the predicted values to determine decompressed pixel values, wherein noise filtered predicted values are used along with residual pixel values and the first and second noise pattern to generate the decompressed version of the compressed image
claim 52’s limitation:
filter noise from a decompressed version of another compressed image included in an adjacent frame of the video, prior to using the decompressed version of the other compressed image in a motion estimation process to determine estimated motion between the images, wherein noise is filtered from the decompressed version of the other compressed image using one or more filters selected based on noise models selected to generate a first noise pattern and a second noise pattern for the decompressed version of the other compressed image.
Claim 9
A system configured to decode compressed video image data, the system comprising:
one or more processors;
and one or more memories storing program instructions, that when executed on or across the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to:
receive an encoded bit stream for a compressed image of a video;
generate, via an in-loop noise generator, a first noise pattern to be added to a first portion of a decompressed version of the compressed image and a second noise pattern to be added to a second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image,
at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image;
add the first noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image;
and add the second noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image;
wherein the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values at a noise portion level, wherein each noise portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image overlaps two or more blocks of the decompressed version of compressed image, and wherein different noise pattern values are added to different ones of the noise portions of the decompressed version of the compressed image
claim 10’s limitation:
wherein the encoded bit stream comprises data indicating a noise model or noise parameters to be used to generate noise for the first and second portions of the decompressed version of the compressed image, and wherein the program instructions, when executed on or across the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to generate, via the in-loop noise generator, based on the data indicating the noise model or noise parameters, the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern
claim 11’s limitation:
wherein the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values at an image block level, wherein different noise pattern values are added to different blocks of the decompressed version of the compressed image.
claim 9’s limitation:
wherein the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values at a noise portion level, wherein each noise portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image overlaps two or more blocks of the decompressed version of compressed image, and wherein different noise pattern values are added to different ones of the noise portions of the decompressed version of the compressed image
claim 12’s limitation:
wherein the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values prior to the predicted pixel being filtered by one or more in-loop filters of a decompression process
claim 13’s limitation:
wherein the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to adjusted predicted pixel values that have been adjusted based on decoded residual pixel values included in the bit stream, wherein the adjusted predicted pixel values have been filtered by one or more in-loop filters of a decompression process prior to the first and second noise pattern being added
claim 14’s limitation:
predict pixel values for the compressed image; filter noise from predicted pixel values; and apply residual values to the predicted values to determine decompressed pixel values, wherein noise filtered predicted values are used along with residual pixel values and the first and second noise pattern to generate the decompressed version of the compressed image
claim 15’s limitation:
filter noise from a decompressed version of another compressed image included in an adjacent frame of the video, prior to using the decompressed version of the other compressed image in a motion estimation process to determine estimated motion between the images, wherein noise is filtered from the decompressed version of the other compressed image using one or more filters selected based on noise models selected to generate a first noise pattern and a second noise pattern for the decompressed version of the other compressed image
11. Claim 53-55 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 16-18 of US Patent US 12238342 indicated below.
For Claim 53-55, although the conflicting claims are not identical, they both are dealing with method/system for decoding compressed video image data. As clearly indicated in the table below, each claimed limitations of claim 53-55 of the current application are anticipated by the corresponding limitations of claim 16-18 of the reference patent.
.
Current Application
US 12238342
Claim 53:
A method for encoding video image data, the method comprising:
selecting a first portion of an image of a video;
determining a first noise pattern to be generated for the first portion of the image;
selecting a second portion of the image,
at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion of the image;
determining a second noise pattern to be generated for the second portion of the image;
generating, via a noise generator included in a compression loop for compressing pixel value data for the image, the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern, wherein the first and second noise patterns are different;
and compressing the pixel value data for the image based at least in part on noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern and noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern.
claim 54’s limitation:
encoding the compressed pixel value data for the image, wherein an encoded bit stream for the compressed pixel value data includes data indicating a noise model or one or more noise parameters.
Claim 55’s limitation:
wherein noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern and noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern are added to prediction residuals used in the compression loop as part of an in-loop inter-prediction or intra-prediction process
Claim 16
A method for encoding video image data, the method comprising:
selecting a first portion of an image of a video;
determining a first noise pattern to be added to the first portion of the image;
selecting a second portion of the image,
at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion of the image;
determining a second noise pattern to be added to the second portion of the image;
generating, via a noise generator included in a compression loop for compressing pixel value data for the image, the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern, wherein the first and second noise patterns are different;
and compressing the pixel value data for the image based at least in part on the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern;
wherein the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are to be added to adjusted predicted pixel values that have been adjusted based on residual pixel values, wherein the adjusted predicted pixel values have been filtered by one or more in-loop filters of a compression process prior to the first and second noise pattern being added
claim 17’s limitation:
encoding the compressed pixel value data for the image, wherein an encoded bit stream for the compressed pixel value data includes data indicating a noise model or one or more noise parameters.
claim 18’s limitation:
wherein the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to prediction residuals used in the compression loop as part of an in-loop inter-prediction or intra-prediction process
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
12. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
13. Claim 36 and its dependent claims 37-44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
For claim 36, it recites limitations of “adding noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image; and adding noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image”. However, it is not clear how it works. Since there are multiple noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern and there are a plurality of predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image, it is not clear how the noise values are added to the predicted pixel values? Can any noise value corresponding to the first noise pattern to be added to any predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image? Or there are some restrictions or rules to do so?
Similarly, it is not clear how noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern are added to predicted pixel values corresponding to the second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image .
Thus the scope of the claim and its dependent claim 37-44 are unclear.
14. Claim 45 and its dependent claims 46-52 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention as for the similar reason as form claim 36 and its dependent claim 37-44.
15. Claim 53 and its dependent claims 54-55 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
For claim 53, it recites limitations of “compressing the pixel value data for the image based at least in part on noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern and noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern”; However, it is not clear how to compress pixel value based on noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern and noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern, since it is not clear how the values of noise patterns interact with the pixel value data for the image. Are the noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern and noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern added to the pixel value data of the image? Or the noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern and noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern replace the pixel value data of the image? The claim does not explain it clearly.
Thus the scope of the claim and its dependent claims 54-55 are unclear.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
16. 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 of this title, 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.
17. Claims 36-39, 41, 45-47, 49, 53-55 are rejected are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suzuki et al. (US 20090244331) and in view of Boyce et al. (US 20070058866) and further in view of De Waele et al. (US 20080252781).
Regarding claim 36, Suzuki discloses a method for decoding compressed video image data (fig. 6, component 32, decompression section), comprising:
receive an encoded bit stream for a compressed image of a video (fig. 6, component 28 compress image and component 32 received an encoded bit stream for a compressed image ), there are a plurality of images, as suggested in paragraph 0028, … capturing images );
determine a first noise pattern to be generated for a first portion of a given one of the images (fig. 10, component 2010; paragraph 0086, …each block has a different quantization parameter, noise will occur on a boundary between blocks; paragraph 0156, … The fixed-pattern noise elimination section 2010 may be configured as the dark current noise eliminator… the fixed pattern noise corresponds to the dark current noise; in which, the dark noise is the first noise pattern to be generated for a first portion of a given one of the images; The dark noise is one kind of noise pattern and it is generated for the image, which including a first portion of the give one of the images. Please notice: first portion of image belongs to the image. When the pattern applied for the image, it applied to the first portion of the image);
determine a second noise pattern to be generated for a second portion of the same given one of the images (fig. 10, component 2011; paragraph 0086, …each block has a different quantization parameter, noise will occur on a boundary between blocks; paragraph 0159, … the amount of smear charges coming from each light-receiving bit is cumulatively added up in sequence. Then, since a smear noise component arising during the transfer of information charges is expressed by the cumulative sum value, it is possible to eliminate smear noise by subtracting this value from the image signal; in which, the smear noise is a second noise pattern to be generated for a second portion of the same given one of the images; The smear noise is one kind of noise pattern and it is generated for the image, which including a second portion of the give one of the images. Please notice: second portion of image belongs to the image. When the pattern applied for the image, it applied to the second portion of the image).
It is noticed that Suzuki does not disclose explicitly that generate, via an in-loop noise generator the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern and add noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image; and add noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image.
Boyce teaches that generate, via an in-loop noise generator the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern (as shown in fig. 2, component 402, uniform noise generator and 408 random noise line generator are an in-loop noise generator included in a compression loop for compressing the pixel value data, the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern; also suggested in paragraph 0021, … FIG. 2 illustrates an apparatus 400 that adds comfort noise on a pixel-by-pixel basis in accordance with the noise values w.sub.0, w.sub.1 and w.sub.f obtained from the apparatus 300 of FIG. 1.);
add noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image (as shown in fig. 2; it is predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image as shown in fig. 1);
and add noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image (as shown in fig. 2; ; it is predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image as shown in fig. 1; paragraph 0021, …FIG. 2 illustrates an apparatus 400 that adds comfort noise on a pixel-by-pixel basis in accordance with the noise values w.sub.0, w.sub.1 and w.sub.f obtained from the apparatus 300 of FIG. 1)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the technology that generate, via an in-loop noise generator the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern and add noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image; and add noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image as taught by Boyce as a modification to the method of Suzuki for the benefit of that adds comfort noise on a pixel-by-pixel basis (see Boyce, paragraph 0021. Although Suzuki teaches to eliminate some kind of noise pattern, however, it is beneficial to add some other noise pattern (comfort noise) on a pixel-by-pixel basis to hide compression artifact (see Boyce Abstract)).
It is noticed that Suzuki does not disclose explicitly that generating, via noise generator to two portion of images, at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image.
De Waele teaches that generating, via noise generator to two portion of images, at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image (as shown in paragraph 0037, “the pseudo-random generator is arranged to generate a pseudo-random noise sequence corresponding to each of the several seeds, and the video processing means is arranged to add the noise picture elements based upon the different seeds to respective different regions of the picture. This way the unit can add different optimized noise patches to the picture”; the image is decompressed of compressed image, as suggested in paragraph 0079, This video processing means may optionally decode/decompress the picture data P1).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the technology that generating, via noise generator to two portion of images, at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image as a modification to the method of Suzuki for the benefit of that to add different optimized noise patches to the picture, as intended by the content provider (see paragraph 0037).
Regarding claim 45, Suzuki discloses a system configured to decode compressed video image data (fig. 6, component 32, decompression section), the system comprising:
one or more processors (fig. 6, component 28, 32);
and one or more memories storing program instructions, that when executed on or across the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors (paragraph 0042, … any combination of the aforementioned components, and representations of the present invention that are interchanged between methods, devices, systems, computer programs, data structures, or storage media are also valid as an embodiment of the present invention) to:
receive an encoded bit stream for a compressed image of a video (fig. 6, component 28 compress image and component 32 received an encoded bit stream for a compressed image ), there are a plurality of images, as suggested in paragraph 0028, … capturing images );
determine a first noise pattern to be generated for a first portion of a given one of the images (fig. 10, component 2010; paragraph 0086, …each block has a different quantization parameter, noise will occur on a boundary between blocks; paragraph 0156, … The fixed-pattern noise elimination section 2010 may be configured as the dark current noise eliminator… the fixed pattern noise corresponds to the dark current noise; in which, the dark noise is the first noise pattern to be generated for a first portion of a given one of the images; The dark noise is one kind of noise pattern and it is generated for the image, which including a first portion of the give one of the images. Please notice: first portion of image belongs to the image. When the pattern applied for the image, it applied to the first portion of the image);
determine a second noise pattern to be generated for a second portion of the same given one of the images (fig. 10, component 2011; paragraph 0086, …each block has a different quantization parameter, noise will occur on a boundary between blocks; paragraph 0159, … the amount of smear charges coming from each light-receiving bit is cumulatively added up in sequence. Then, since a smear noise component arising during the transfer of information charges is expressed by the cumulative sum value, it is possible to eliminate smear noise by subtracting this value from the image signal; in which, the smear noise is a second noise pattern to be generated for a second portion of the same given one of the images; The smear noise is one kind of noise pattern and it is generated for the image, which including a second portion of the give one of the images. Please notice: second portion of image belongs to the image. When the pattern applied for the image, it applied to the second portion of the image).
It is noticed that Suzuki does not disclose explicitly that generate, via an in-loop noise generator the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern and add noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image; and add noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image.
Boyce teaches that generate, via an in-loop noise generator the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern (as shown in fig. 2, component 402, uniform noise generator and 408 random noise line generator are an in-loop noise generator included in a compression loop for compressing the pixel value data, the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern; also suggested in paragraph 0021, … FIG. 2 illustrates an apparatus 400 that adds comfort noise on a pixel-by-pixel basis in accordance with the noise values w.sub.0, w.sub.1 and w.sub.f obtained from the apparatus 300 of FIG. 1.);
add noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image (as shown in fig. 2; it is predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image as shown in fig. 1);
and add noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image (as shown in fig. 2; ; it is predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image as shown in fig. 1; paragraph 0021, …FIG. 2 illustrates an apparatus 400 that adds comfort noise on a pixel-by-pixel basis in accordance with the noise values w.sub.0, w.sub.1 and w.sub.f obtained from the apparatus 300 of FIG. 1)
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the technology that generate, via an in-loop noise generator the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern and add noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image; and add noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern to predicted pixel values corresponding to the second portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image as taught by Boyce as a modification to the system of Suzuki for the benefit of that adds comfort noise on a pixel-by-pixel basis (see Boyce, paragraph 0021. Although Suzuki teaches to eliminate some kind of noise pattern, however, it is beneficial to add some other noise pattern (comfort noise) on a pixel-by-pixel basis to hide compression artifact (see Boyce Abstract)).
It is noticed that Suzuki does not disclose explicitly that generating, via noise generator to two portion of images, at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image.
De Waele teaches that generating, via noise generator to two portion of images, at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image (as shown in paragraph 0037, “the pseudo-random generator is arranged to generate a pseudo-random noise sequence corresponding to each of the several seeds, and the video processing means is arranged to add the noise picture elements based upon the different seeds to respective different regions of the picture. This way the unit can add different optimized noise patches to the picture”; the image is decompressed of compressed image, as suggested in paragraph 0079, This video processing means may optionally decode/decompress the picture data P1).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the technology that generating, via noise generator to two portion of images, at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion of the decompressed version of the compressed image as a modification to the system of Suzuki for the benefit of that to add different optimized noise patches to the picture, as intended by the content provider (see paragraph 0037).
Regarding claim 53, Suzuki discloses a method for encoding video image data (fig. 10, component 2004, image compression device),
selecting a first portion of an image of a video (fig. 10, component 2004; paragraph 0152, …, in the digital camera 2100, the imaging device 2002 converts incident light into an electrical signal… the image signal with its noise eliminated by the image compression device 2004 is compressed and then written in the storage medium 2005; paragraph 0086, …each block has a different quantization parameter, noise will occur on a boundary between blocks; there are a plurality of images, as suggested in paragraph 0028, … capturing images )
determine a first noise pattern to be generated for a first portion of a given one of the images (fig. 10, component 2010; paragraph 0156, … The fixed-pattern noise elimination section 2010 may be configured as the dark current noise eliminator… the fixed pattern noise corresponds to the dark current noise; in which, the dark noise is the first noise pattern to be generated for a first portion of a given one of the images; The dark noise is one kind of noise pattern and it is generated for the image, which including a first portion of the give one of the images. Please notice: first portion of image belongs to the image. When the pattern applied for the image, it applied to the first portion of the image);
selecting a second portion of the image, at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion of the image (paragraph 0086, …each block has a different quantization parameter, noise will occur on a boundary between blocks; which means the second portion being different from the first portion of the image);
determine a second noise pattern to be generated for a second portion of the same given one of the images (fig. 10, component 2011; paragraph 0159, … the amount of smear charges coming from each light-receiving bit is cumulatively added up in sequence. Then, since a smear noise component arising during the transfer of information charges is expressed by the cumulative sum value, it is possible to eliminate smear noise by subtracting this value from the image signal; in which, the smear noise is a second noise pattern to be generated for a second portion of the same given one of the images; The smear noise is one kind of noise pattern and it is generated for the image, which including a second portion of the give one of the images. Please notice: second portion of image belongs to the image. When the pattern applied for the image, it applied to the second portion of the image);
generate, the first noise pattern (fig. 10, 2010, fixed-pattern noise elimination section) and the second noise pattern (fig. 10, 2011, smear noise elimination section), wherein the first and second noise patterns are different (paragraph 0156, … The fixed-pattern noise elimination section 2010 may be configured as the dark current noise eliminator… the fixed pattern noise corresponds to the dark current noise; paragraph 0159, … the amount of smear charges coming from each light-receiving bit is cumulatively added up in sequence. Then, since a smear noise component arising during the transfer of information charges is expressed by the cumulative sum value, it is possible to eliminate smear noise by subtracting this value from the image signal; in which, fixed-pattern noise and smear noise are different);
and compressing the pixel value data for the image (as shown in fig. 10, component 2004, image compression device), based at least in part on noise values corresponding to the first noise pattern and noise values corresponding to the second noise pattern (paragraph 0156, … The fixed-pattern noise elimination section 2010 may be configured as the dark current noise eliminator… the fixed pattern noise corresponds to the dark current noise; paragraph 0159, … the amount of smear charges coming from each light-receiving bit is cumulatively added up in sequence. Then, since a smear noise component arising during the transfer of information charges is expressed by the cumulative sum value, it is possible to eliminate smear noise by subtracting this value from the image signal; in which, the dark noise and the cumulative sum value are a noise model or one or more noise parameters used to generate the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern).
It is noticed that Suzuki does not disclose explicitly that generating, via a noise generator included in a compression loop for compressing pixel value data for the image, the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern.
Boyce teaches that generating, via a noise generator included in a compression loop for compressing pixel value data for the image, the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern (as shown in fig. 2, component 402, uniform noise generator and 408 random noise line generator are an in-loop noise generator included in a compression loop for compressing the pixel value data, the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern; also suggested in paragraph 0021, … FIG. 2 illustrates an apparatus 400 that adds comfort noise on a pixel-by-pixel basis in accordance with the noise values w.sub.0, w.sub.1 and w.sub.f obtained from the apparatus 300 of FIG. 1; The whole picture of fig. 2 is compression loop for compressing the pixel value data, as suggested in paragraph 0004, “The term "comfort noise" comes from the use of noise in audio compression” and paragraph 0012, “and operations performed at the pixel level of a video image”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the technology that generating, via a noise generator included in a compression loop for compressing pixel value data for the image, the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern as a modification to the method of Suzuki for the benefit of that adds comfort noise on a pixel-by-pixel basis (see Boyce, paragraph 0021. Although Suzuki teaches to eliminate some kind of noise pattern, however, it is beneficial to add some other noise pattern (comfort noise) on a pixel-by-pixel basis to hide compression artifact (see Boyce Abstract)).
It is noticed that Suzuki does not disclose explicitly that generating, noise patterns to two portion of images, at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion of the image.
De Waele teaches that generating, noise patterns to two portion of images, at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion of the image (as shown in paragraph 0037, “the pseudo-random generator is arranged to generate a pseudo-random noise sequence corresponding to each of the several seeds, and the video processing means is arranged to add the noise picture elements based upon the different seeds to respective different regions of the picture. This way the unit can add different optimized noise patches to the picture”; the image is decompressed of compressed image, as suggested in paragraph 0079, This video processing means may optionally decode/decompress the picture data P1).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the technology that generating, noise patterns to two portion of images, at least part of the second portion being different from the first portion of the image as a modification to the method of Suzuki for the benefit of that to add different optimized noise patches to the picture, as intended by the content provider (see paragraph 0037).
Regarding claim 37, the combination of Suzuki, Boyce and De Waele discloses the limitations recited in claim 36 as discussed above. In addition, Boyce also discloses that the encoded bit stream comprises data indicating a noise model or noise parameters to be used to generate noise for the first and second portions of the decompressed version of the compressed image (Fig. 2, since uniform noise and random noise are generated there to added to the data; therefore these two noise patterns include noise parameters).
The motivation of combination is the same as in claim 36’s rejection.
Regarding claim 38, the combination of Suzuki, Boyce and De Waele discloses the limitations recited in claim 37 as discussed above. In addition, Boyce also discloses that generating, via the in-loop noise generator, based on the data indicating the noise model or noise parameters, the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern (as shown in fig. 2, 402 and 408 are added to 424 and 422, which is prediction residuals used as part of an in-loop intra-prediction compression process).
The motivation of combination is the same as in claim 36’s rejection.
Regarding claim 39, the combination of Suzuki, Boyce and De Waele discloses the limitations recited in claim 36 as discussed above. In addition, Boyce also discloses that the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values at an image block level, wherein different noise pattern values are added to different blocks of the decompressed version of the compressed image (as shown in fig. 2, in which, first noise pattern luma noise and second noise pattern chroma_noise are added to different blocks of the decompressed version of the compressed image; they are added to predicted pixel values at an image block level as suggested in paragraph 0004, …the amount of noise added depends on the quantization parameter and on the amount of noise added to spatially neighboring pixels).
The motivation of combination is the same as in claim 36’s rejection.
Regarding claim 41, the combination of Suzuki, Boyce and De Waele discloses the limitations recited in claim 36 as discussed above. In addition, Boyce also discloses that the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values prior to the predicted pixel being filtered by one or more in-loop filters of a decompression process (paragraph 0004, adding a random noise dither in the video encoding and decoding process in the in loop deblocking filter … ; which is the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values prior to the predicted pixel being filtered by one or more in-loop filters of a decompression process).
The motivation of combination is the same as in claim 36’s rejection.
Regarding claim 46, the combination of Suzuki, Boyce and De Waele discloses the limitations recited in claim 45 as discussed above. In addition, Boyce also discloses that the encoded bit stream comprises data indicating a noise model or noise parameters to be used to generate noise for the first and second portions of the decompressed version of the compressed image (Fig. 2, since uniform noise and random noise are generated there to added to the data therefore these two noise patterns include noise parameters).
generating, via the in-loop noise generator, based on the data indicating the noise model or noise parameters, the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern (as shown in fig. 2, 402 and 408 are added to 424 and 422, which is prediction residuals used as part of an in-loop intra-prediction compression process).
The motivation of combination is the same as in claim 45’s rejection.
Regarding claim 47, the combination of Suzuki, Boyce and De Waele discloses the limitations recited in claim 45 as discussed above. In addition, Boyce also discloses that the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values at an image block level, wherein different noise pattern values are added to different blocks of the decompressed version of the compressed image (as shown in fig. 2, in which, first noise pattern luma noise and second noise pattern chroma_noise are added to different blocks of the decompressed version of the compressed image; they are added to predicted pixel values at an image block level as suggested in paragraph 0004, …the amount of noise added depends on the quantization parameter and on the amount of noise added to spatially neighboring pixels).
The motivation of combination is the same as in claim 45’s rejection.
Regarding claim 49, the combination of Suzuki, Boyce and De Waele discloses the limitations recited in claim 45 as discussed above. In addition, Boyce also discloses that the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values prior to the predicted pixel being filtered by one or more in-loop filters of a decompression process (paragraph 0004, adding a random noise dither in the video encoding and decoding process in the in loop deblocking filter … ; which is the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to the predicted pixel values prior to the predicted pixel being filtered by one or more in-loop filters of a decompression process).
The motivation of combination is the same as in claim 45’s rejection.
Regarding claim 54, the combination of Suzuki, Boyce and De Waele discloses the limitations recited in claim 53 as discussed above. In addition, Boyce also discloses that the encoded bit stream comprises data indicating a noise model or noise parameters to be used to generate noise for the first and second portions of the decompressed version of the compressed image (Fig. 2, since uniform noise and random noise are generated there to added to the data therefore these two noise patterns include noise parameters).
The motivation of combination is the same as in claim 53’s rejection.
Regarding claim 55, the combination of Suzuki, Boyce and De Waele discloses the limitations recited in claim 53 as discussed above. In addition, Boyce also discloses that the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to prediction residuals used in the compression loop as part of an in-loop inter-prediction or intra-prediction process (paragraph 0004, adding a random noise dither in the video encoding and decoding process in the in loop deblocking filter … ; which is the first noise pattern and the second noise pattern are added to prediction residuals used in the compression loop as part of an in-loop inter-prediction or intra-prediction process).
The motivation of combination is the same as in claim 53’s rejection.
18. Conclusion
. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
19. Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZAIHAN JIANG whose telephone number is (571)272-1399. The examiner can normally be reached on flexible.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sath Perungavoor can be reached on (571)272-7455. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-270-0655.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ZAIHAN JIANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488
Prosecution Insights