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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged (US Provisional Application 63/668,683 filed July 8th, 2024).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on December 19th, 2025 was filed before the mailing date of the First Action on the Merits (this Office Action). The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In Paragraph 53 line 5, the acronym “DPU” is not defined on first use for clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1 – 15 and 19 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the claim is a method claim, but recites structures performing the method. Thus, the statutory category of the claim is Indefinite as the claim being a method claim or an apparatus claim with the memory and processor functions recited. Additionally the “performed at a …” recitation of the claim is in the preamble and thus the patentable weight to afford the preamble is Indefinite.
For purposes of Examination, the preamble will not be afforded patentable weight and the claim treated as a method claim.
Regarding claim 10, see claim 1 for similar reasoning for the same / similar claim construct for an encoder generating the data to be processed in the decoder in claim 1 thus is similarly Rejected.
Regarding claims 2 – 9 and 11 – 15, the dependent claims do not cure the deficiencies of their respective independent claims and thus are similarly Rejected.
Regarding claim 5, the claimed “transformation information” has Indefinite metes and bounds as no exemplary embodiments or definition of the term is provided for in the Specification.
Regarding claims 13 and 19, see claim 5 which recites the same / similar limitation and thus are similarly Rejected.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 4 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Regarding claim 4, the claim recites “scalar quantizer” which does not further limit or is related to the claimed “dependent quantizer” in independent claim 1.
Regarding claim 12, the claim recites “scalar quantizer” which does not further limit or is related to the claimed “dependent quantizer” in independent claim 10.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
(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) 16 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen, et al. (WO2023/177752 A1 referred to as “Chen” throughout).
Regarding claim 16, Chen teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a video bitstream that is generated by a video encoding method [Chen Figures 1 – 2 and Paragraph 202 (see at least reference characters 410, 420, 20, and 30) as well as “non-transitory computer readable medium may have stored therein a bitstream …” embodiments) where there is no structural differences in the bitstream MPEP2113 I], the video encoding method comprising [The method steps do not carry patentable weight as the claim is a product-by-process claim in which only the bitstream (product) generated/ created is given weight (see MPEP2113 I and II)].
Regarding claims 17 – 20, the claims depend from the product by process in claim 16 and thus does not add additional meaningful limitations for the same reasons given in claim 16 and thus is similarly Rejected as claim 16 above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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.
Claim(s) 1 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen, et al. (WO2023/177752 A1 referred to as “Chen” throughout), and further in view of Hasse, et al. (US PG PUB 2023/0238982 A1 referred to as “Hasse” throughout) and Balcilar, et al. (WO2025/149595 A1 referred to as “Balcilar” throughout in which citations will come from the WIPO Document in lieu of all enabling US Provisional Applications).
Examiner Note for all claims: Applicant in Specification Paragraph 19 renders obvious “a context (e.g. a CDF)” thus context models / tables are obvious variant of the claimed “CDF” (cumulative distribution function) which are probability values. Thus, the Examiner in citing context models / tables notes one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the Specification understands the obvious variants between the context tables / models cited and the claimed “CDF” or use of probabilities including states, values, or a table of probabilities.
Regarding claim 11, see claim 2 which recites the same / similar limitation and thus similar reasoning applies in view of at least Chen Paragraphs 54, 72, and 75 – 78 (encoding and decoding are faithful inverse processes with some common steps).
Regarding claim 12, see claim 4 which recites the same / similar limitation and thus similar reasoning applies in view of at least Chen Paragraphs 54, 72, and 75 – 78 (encoding and decoding are faithful inverse processes with some common steps).
Regarding claim 13, see claim 5 which recites the same / similar limitation and thus similar reasoning applies in view of at least Chen Paragraphs 54, 72, and 75 – 78 (encoding and decoding are faithful inverse processes with some common steps).
Regarding claim 14, see claim 8 which recites the same / similar limitation and thus similar reasoning applies in view of at least Chen Paragraphs 54, 72, and 75 – 78 (encoding and decoding are faithful inverse processes with some common steps).
Regarding claim 15, see claim 9 which recites the same / similar limitation and thus similar reasoning applies in view of at least Chen Paragraphs 54, 72, and 75 – 78 (encoding and decoding are faithful inverse processes with some common steps).
Regarding claim 16, while the method steps are not afforded patentable weight (product by process claim), in the sole interest to expedite prosecution the claim when afforded patentable weight is similarly rejected to claim 10 as the encoding method claimed and Chen Paragraph 202 (structures / computer with processor and memory storing the bitstream).
Regarding claim 17, while the method steps are not afforded patentable weight (product by process claim), in the sole interest to expedite prosecution the claim when afforded patentable weight is similarly rejected to claim 11 as the encoding method claimed and Chen Paragraph 202 (structures / computer with processor and memory storing the bitstream).
Regarding claim 18, while the method steps are not afforded patentable weight (product by process claim), in the sole interest to expedite prosecution the claim when afforded patentable weight is similarly rejected to claim 12 as the encoding method claimed and Chen Paragraph 202 (structures / computer with processor and memory storing the bitstream).
Regarding claim 19, while the method steps are not afforded patentable weight (product by process claim), in the sole interest to expedite prosecution the claim when afforded patentable weight is similarly rejected to claim 13 as the encoding method claimed and Chen Paragraph 202 (structures / computer with processor and memory storing the bitstream).
Regarding claim 20, while the method steps are not afforded patentable weight (product by process claim), in the sole interest to expedite prosecution the claim when afforded patentable weight is similarly rejected to claim 14 as the encoding method claimed and Chen Paragraph 202 (structures / computer with processor and memory storing the bitstream).
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches updating / initialization of context tables based on dependent quantization values with syntax elements to signal such updates. Hasse teaches various features to update the context tables / models (or probabilities adaptation rates or windows / how much data to accumulate). Balcilar teaches syntax elements to use instead of those taught by Chen for dependent quantizers to update / initialize context models.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen to include additional context model parameters and update information as taught by Hasse and to use syntax elements and initialization / adjustment techniques as taught by Balcilar. The combination teaches
receiving a video bitstream comprising a plurality of blocks and a syntax element [Chen Figures 1 and 2 (subfigures included see at least reference character 30 (decoder – detailed in Figure 2A receiving the bitstream input in reference character 201) and a plurality of blocks in Figures 1D – 1F (see at least reference characters 400, 410, 420, 430, and 440) as well as Paragraphs 77 – 82 (bitstream formed in encoder with information on blocks and syntax to decode))];
adjusting a cumulative distribution function (CDF) for the syntax element based on a state of a dependent quantizer [Chen Figures 5 – 6 as well as Paragraphs 106 – 109 (QP dependent parameter to initialize / adjust the context model to use – combinable with the teachings of Hasse) and 116 – 120 (signaling in a slice (or picture) header initialization information for the context table and if a dependent quantizer / quantization state is used); Hasse Figure 3 as well as Paragraphs 80 – 83 (arithmetic / entropy decoding based on a dependent quantization) and 133 – 140 (initialization of the context model based on the state of a dependent quantizer including Table 1) and Paragraphs 179 – 199 (adjusting / adapting the CDF / probability state of the context model)];
decoding the syntax element using the adjusted CDF [Chen Figures 2 (subfigures included and in particularly reference character 201 and 202) and 5 – 6 as well as Paragraphs 78 – 82 (decoding syntax elements), 105 – 107 (context model / probability used to decode the syntax elements), and 116 – 120 and 135 – 138 (signaling initialization of the context model / table to use and if the information is in a bock of CTU thus the block is decoded based on signaling syntax elements)]; and
decoding at least one block of the plurality of blocks based on the syntax element [Chen Figures 2 (subfigures included and in particularly reference character 201 and 202) and 5 – 6 as well as Paragraphs 78 – 82 (decoding syntax elements), 105 – 107 (context model / probability used to decode the syntax elements), and 116 – 120 (initialization syntax – combinable with Balcilar) and 135 – 138 (signaling initialization of the context model / table to use and if the information is in a bock of CTU thus the block is decoded based on signaling syntax elements); Balcilar Figures 7 – 8 as well as Paragraphs 136 – 143 (transmitting the context model and decoding syntax elements / information from the syntax elements with the context model / probability information) 146 – 150 (enabling dependent quantizers on a picture level to modify / combine with Chen)].
The motivation to combine Hasse with Chen is to combine features in the same / related field of invention of encoding / decoding with context models [Hasse Paragraphs 11 – 15] in order to improve processing speed and support parallelized architectures for video encoding / decoding [Hasse Paragraphs 12 – 15 where the Examiner observes at least KSR Rationales (D) or (F) are also applicable].
The motivation to combine Balcilar with Hasse and Chen is to combine features in the same / related field of invention of initializing / updating state transitions [Balcilar Paragraphs 2 – 6] in order to improve coding efficiency [Balcilar Paragraphs 139 and 186 – 187 where the Examiner observes at least KSR Rationales (D) or (F) are also applicable].
This is the motivation to combine Chen, Hasse, and Balcilar which will be used throughout the Rejection.
Regarding claim 2, Chen teaches updating / initialization of context tables based on dependent quantization values with syntax elements to signal such updates. Hasse teaches various features to update the context tables / models (or probabilities adaptation rates or windows / how much data to accumulate). Balcilar teaches syntax elements to use instead of those taught by Chen for dependent quantizers to update / initialize context models.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen to include additional context model parameters and update information as taught by Hasse and to use syntax elements and initialization / adjustment techniques as taught by Balcilar. The combination teaches
wherein adjusting the CDP comprises initializing or updating the CDF [Chen Figures 5 – 6 as well as Paragraphs 106 – 109 (QP dependent parameter to initialize / adjust the context model to use – combinable with the teachings of Hasse) and 116 – 120 (signaling in a slice (or picture) header initialization information for the context table and if a dependent quantizer / quantization state is used); Hasse Figure 3 as well as Paragraphs 80 – 83 (arithmetic / entropy decoding based on a dependent quantization) and 133 – 140 (initialization of the context model based on the state of a dependent quantizer including Table 1) and Paragraphs 179 – 199 (adjusting / adapting the CDF / probability state of the context model)].
See claim 1 for the motivation to combine Chen, Hasse, and Balcilar.
Regarding claim 3, Chen teaches updating / initialization of context tables based on dependent quantization values with syntax elements to signal such updates. Hasse teaches various features to update the context tables / models (or probabilities adaptation rates or windows / how much data to accumulate). Balcilar teaches syntax elements to use instead of those taught by Chen for dependent quantizers to update / initialize context models.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen to include additional context model parameters and update information as taught by Hasse and to use syntax elements and initialization / adjustment techniques as taught by Balcilar. The combination teaches
wherein adjusting the CDF comprises [See claim 1 for citations]:
identifying one or more initialization values for the CDF [Chen Paragraphs 104 – 109 and 112 – 115 (initialization parameters for the context / CDF), 119 – 121, and 129 – 137 (syntax for initialization) in combination with Hasse’s initialization techniques in at least Paragraphs 138 – 142 (including the tables where a dependent quantizer selects the initial table), 147 – 154 (other syntax elements to use to initialize the context table / CDF), 228 – 237 and 244 – 252 (other methods to initialize states variables for a context model Table included)]; and
initializing the CDF using the one or more initialization values [Chen Paragraphs 104 – 109 and 112 – 115 (initialization parameters for the context / CDF), 119 – 121, and 129 – 137 (syntax for initialization) in combination with Hasse’s initialization techniques and suggested syntax elements to initialize context models in at least Paragraphs 138 – 142 (including the tables where a dependent quantizer selects the initial table), 147 – 154 (other syntax elements to use to initialize the context table / CDF), 228 – 237 and 244 – 252 (other methods to initialize states variables for a context model Table included)].
See claim 1 for the motivation to combine Chen, Hasse, and Balcilar.
Regarding claim 4, Chen teaches updating / initialization of context tables based on dependent quantization values with syntax elements to signal such updates. Hasse teaches various features to update the context tables / models (or probabilities adaptation rates or windows / how much data to accumulate). Balcilar teaches syntax elements to use instead of those taught by Chen for dependent quantizers to update / initialize context models.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen to include additional context model parameters and update information as taught by Hasse and to use syntax elements and initialization / adjustment techniques as taught by Balcilar. The combination teaches
wherein the CDF is adjusted based on which scalar quantizer is currently selected [Chen Figures 8 – 9 as well as Paragraphs 106 – 109 (initialization based on parameters and quantizers) and 180 – 188 in combination with Balcilar Paragraphs 130 (scalar quantizers) and 136 – 142 (quantization states Q0 and Q1 are used to adjust the CDF with dependent / scalar quantizers in Paragraphs 148 – 153)].
See claim 1 for the motivation to combine Chen, Hasse, and Balcilar.
Regarding claim 5, Chen teaches updating / initialization of context tables based on dependent quantization values with syntax elements to signal such updates. Hasse teaches various features to update the context tables / models (or probabilities adaptation rates or windows / how much data to accumulate). Balcilar teaches syntax elements to use instead of those taught by Chen for dependent quantizers to update / initialize context models.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen to include additional context model parameters and update information as taught by Hasse and to use syntax elements and initialization / adjustment techniques as taught by Balcilar. The combination teaches
wherein the syntax element indicates transform information for the at least one block [Chen Paragraphs 94 – 97 (syntax elements indicating quantized transform coefficients encoded and decoded) wither further details in Balcilar Figure 8 as well as Paragraphs 152 – 160 (Table 5 included)].
See claim 1 for the motivation to combine Chen, Hasse, and Balcilar.
Regarding claim 6, Chen teaches updating / initialization of context tables based on dependent quantization values with syntax elements to signal such updates. Hasse teaches various features to update the context tables / models (or probabilities adaptation rates or windows / how much data to accumulate). Balcilar teaches syntax elements to use instead of those taught by Chen for dependent quantizers to update / initialize context models.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen to include additional context model parameters and update information as taught by Hasse and to use syntax elements and initialization / adjustment techniques as taught by Balcilar. The combination teaches
identifying an update rate for the CDF [Chen Paragraphs 105 – 109 (such as the “SlopeIdx” in equation 2), 113 – 114 and 119 (adaptation rate is an obvious variant of the claimed “update rate” to one of ordinary skill in the art such as in Hasse Paragraphs 136 – 141 and 178 – 185 (adaptation rate affecting the updating of the context model and the agility / speed of the update)]; and
updating the CDF in accordance with the identified update rate [Chen Paragraphs 105 – 109, 113 –119 (including equations 5 – 8 as adaptation rate is used in updating the context model is an obvious variant of the claimed “update rate” to one of ordinary skill in the art such as in Hasse Paragraphs 136 – 141 and 178 – 185 (adaptation rate affecting the updating of the context model and the agility / speed of the update)].
See claim 1 for the motivation to combine Chen, Hasse, and Balcilar.
Regarding claim 7, Chen teaches updating / initialization of context tables based on dependent quantization values with syntax elements to signal such updates. Hasse teaches various features to update the context tables / models (or probabilities adaptation rates or windows / how much data to accumulate). Balcilar teaches syntax elements to use instead of those taught by Chen for dependent quantizers to update / initialize context models.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen to include additional context model parameters and update information as taught by Hasse and to use syntax elements and initialization / adjustment techniques as taught by Balcilar. The combination teaches
wherein identifying the update rate comprises identifying a set of offsets corresponding to the update rate [Chen Paragraphs 103 – 109 (see at least the “OffsetIdx” as an obvious variant of the claimed “offset” to one of ordinary skill in the art) or alternatively in Hasse Paragraphs 142 – 154 and 161 (see the offsets including those in Table 2 regarding accessing models / updates to models)].
See claim 1 for the motivation to combine Chen, Hasse, and Balcilar.
Regarding claim 8, Chen teaches updating / initialization of context tables based on dependent quantization values with syntax elements to signal such updates. Hasse teaches various features to update the context tables / models (or probabilities adaptation rates or windows / how much data to accumulate). Balcilar teaches syntax elements to use instead of those taught by Chen for dependent quantizers to update / initialize context models.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen to include additional context model parameters and update information as taught by Hasse and to use syntax elements and initialization / adjustment techniques as taught by Balcilar. The combination teaches
wherein the syntax element is decoded using a multi-hypothesis arithmetic coding [Chen Paragraphs 95 – 97 (various syntax elements to encode / decode with a CDF / context table) and 112 – 120 (MHP (multi-hypothesis probability estimation) in combination with Hasse Paragraphs 95 – 98 (first and second hypotheses used rendering obvious the multiple hypotheses claimed and further tests in Paragraphs 101 – 108 and 280 – 282 (see embodiments 61 – 62 and 67 – 68))], and
wherein a respective CDF for each hypothesis of the multi-hypothesis arithmetic coding is adjusted based on the state of the dependent quantizer [Chen Paragraphs 95 – 97 (various syntax elements to encode / decode with a CDF / context table) and 112 – 120 (MHP (multi-hypothesis probability estimation – see in particular the quantization step used in Paragraph 114)) and 130 – 136 (see syntax and initialization for the MHP depending on quantization) in combination with Hasse Paragraphs 95 – 98 (first and second hypotheses used rendering obvious the multiple hypotheses claimed and further tests in Paragraphs 101 – 111, 116, 136 – 148 (dependent quantizer 229 – 234 (dependent quantization affect context models) and 280 – 282 (see embodiments 61 – 62 and 67 – 68))].
See claim 1 for the motivation to combine Chen, Hasse, and Balcilar.
Regarding claim 9, Chen teaches updating / initialization of context tables based on dependent quantization values with syntax elements to signal such updates. Hasse teaches various features to update the context tables / models (or probabilities adaptation rates or windows / how much data to accumulate). Balcilar teaches syntax elements to use instead of those taught by Chen for dependent quantizers to update / initialize context models.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen to include additional context model parameters and update information as taught by Hasse and to use syntax elements and initialization / adjustment techniques as taught by Balcilar. The combination teaches
selecting a context from a set of two or more contexts for the syntax element based on the state of the dependent quantizer [Chen Paragraphs 136 – 139 ( selection of context models based on syntax elements / dependent quantizers in combination with Balcilar Figures 7 – 9 as well as Paragraphs 136 – 151 (including code snippets for selection of the table (e.g. Table 4) based on dependent quantizer state information)].
See claim 1 for the motivation to combine Chen, Hasse, and Balcilar.
Regarding claim 10, Chen teaches updating / initialization of context tables based on dependent quantization values with syntax elements to signal such updates. Hasse teaches various features to update the context tables / models (or probabilities adaptation rates or windows / how much data to accumulate). Balcilar teaches syntax elements to use instead of those taught by Chen for dependent quantizers to update / initialize context models.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Chen to include additional context model parameters and update information as taught by Hasse and to use syntax elements and initialization / adjustment techniques as taught by Balcilar. The combination teaches
receiving video data comprising a plurality of blocks [Chen Figures 1 (subfigures included in particular reference characters 20, 100 (encoder), 400, 410, 420, 430, and 440 (plurality of blocks for the video input)) as well as Paragraphs 46 – 47 (block based video processing)];
encoding at least one block of the plurality of blocks [Chen Figure 1 (subfigures included in particular reference characters 100, 106 (entropy coder) and 114 (output of encoder)) as well as Paragraphs 47 – 51 (entropy encoding the blocks processed in the encoder)];
identifying a cumulative distribution function (CDF) for encoding a syntax element [Chen Figures 1 (subfigures included) and 5 – 6 as well as Paragraphs 103 – 109 (initializing the CDF / context model (Paragraph 104) using QP dependent parameter to initialize / adjust the context model to use – combinable with the teachings of Hasse) and 116 – 120 (signaling in a slice (or picture) header initialization information for the context table / model and if a dependent quantizer / quantization state is used); Hasse Figure 3 as well as Paragraphs 80 – 83 (arithmetic / entropy decoding based on a dependent quantization) and 133 – 140 (initialization of the context model based on the state of a dependent quantizer including Table 1) and Paragraphs 179 – 199 (adjusting / adapting the CDF / probability state of the context model)],
wherein the syntax element indicates encoding information about the at least one block [Chen Figures 1 and 2 (subfigures included and in particularly reference character 201 and 202) and 5 – 6 as well as Paragraphs 78 – 82 (decoding syntax elements), 96 (transform coefficient syntaxes), 105 – 107 (context model / probability used to decode the syntax elements), and 116 – 120 (initialization syntax – combinable with Balcilar) and 135 – 138 (signaling initialization of the context model / table to use and if the information is in a bock of CTU thus the block is decoded based on signaling syntax elements); Balcilar Figures 7 – 8 as well as Paragraphs 136 – 143 (transmitting the context model and decoding syntax elements / information from the syntax elements with the context model / probability information) 146 – 150 (enabling dependent quantizers on a picture level to modify / combine with Chen)];
adjusting the CDF based on a state of a dependent quantizer [Chen Figures 1 (subfigures included) and 5 – 6 as well as Paragraphs 96, 106 – 109 (QP dependent parameter to initialize / adjust the context model to use – combinable with the teachings of Hasse), 112 – 115 (various adjustment schemes / methods with syntax / state estimator adjustments for the context tables / models) 116 – 120 (signaling in a slice (or picture) header initialization information for the context table and if a dependent quantizer / quantization state is used), and 162 – 172 (adjusting probabilities / contexts to use for encoding); Hasse Figure 3 as well as Paragraphs 80 – 83 (arithmetic / entropy decoding based on a dependent quantization) and 133 – 140 (initialization of the context model based on the state of a dependent quantizer including Table 1) and Paragraphs 179 – 199 (adjusting / adapting the CDF / probability state of the context model)];
encoding the syntax element using the adjusted CDF [Chen Figure 1 (subfigures included in particular reference characters 100, 106 (entropy coder) and 114 (output of encoder)) as well as Paragraphs 47 – 51 (entropy encoding the blocks processed in the encoder including syntax elements), 96, 120, and 136 – 140 (tables included with signaling encoded syntax elements related to the processing of blocks into a bitstream for a decoder)]; and
signaling the encoded syntax element in a video bitstream [Chen Figure 1 (subfigures included in particular reference characters 100, 106 (entropy coder) and 114 (output of encoder)) as well as Paragraphs 47 – 51 (entropy encoding the blocks processed in the encoder including syntax elements), 96, 116 – 120 (initialization syntax – combinable with Balcilar), and 136 – 140 (tables included with signaling encoded syntax elements related to the processing of blocks into a bitstream for a decoder); Balcilar Figures 7 – 8 as well as Paragraphs 136 – 143 (transmitting the context model and information from the syntax elements with the context model / probability information) and 146 – 150 (enabling dependent quantizers on a picture level to modify / combine with Chen)].
See claim 1 for the motivation to combine Chen, Hasse, and Balcilar as Chen Paragraphs 54, 72, and 75 – 78 render obvious encoding generating the bitstream for the decoder to process as the faithful inverse operation of the encoder thus similar motivation exists.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Coban, et al. (US PG PUB 2019/0387259 A1 referred to as “Coban” throughout) in Paragraph 90 and Figures 4 – 6 and 12 renders obvious selection of context models / CDFs and the changes / updates based on QPs / quantizers.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tyler W Sullivan whose telephone number is (571)270-5684. The examiner can normally be reached IFP.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, David Czekaj can be reached at (571)-272-7327. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TYLER W. SULLIVAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487