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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Summary
This office action for US Patent application 19/045257 is responsive to communications filed on February 4th, 2025. Currently, claims 1-20 are pending are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-9, 11, 13-14, 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C §102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1).
Regarding claim 1, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) meets the claim limitations, as follows:
A method of video decoding performed at a computing system having memory and one or more processors, the method comprising:
receiving a video bitstream comprising a plurality of blocks that includes a current block [i.e. receiving input data associated with a current block; Fig. 19];
for each neighboring block in a set of neighboring blocks of the current block, when the neighboring block is coded using a template-based intra prediction mode derivation (TIMD), populating a candidate list for the current block with an entry for the neighboring block [i.e. N template matching candidates are determined for the current block by selecting the N template matching candidates from a candidate group. The candidate group comprises one or more neighboring intra modes from one or more neighboring blocks, one or more selected intra modes, or a combination; paragraph. 0029], wherein at least one entry in the candidate list comprises a three-mode entry [i.e. the one or more selected intra modes may comprise one or more intra modes from a mode group consist of DC, Planar, vertical mode, etc.; paragraph. 0029]; and
reconstructing the current block using an entry from the candidate list [i.e. the current block is encoded or decoded using intra prediction with a current intra mode selected from the candidate group; paragraph. 0029].
Regarding claim 2, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the following claim limitations as set forth in claim 1.
Furthermore, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the claim limitations as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein the three-mode entry includes a primary mode, a secondary mode, and a non-angular mode [i.e. the one or more selected intra modes may comprise one or more intra modes from a mode group consist of vertical mode, horizontal mode, DC-Planar mode (non-angular mode); paragraph. 0029].
Regarding claim 3, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the following claim limitations as set forth in claim 1.
Furthermore, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the claim limitations as follows:
The method of claim 1, further comprising parsing an indicator from the video bitstream, wherein the indicator indicates whether the candidate list comprises at least one three-mode entry [i.e. the intra prediction mode is selected from the candidate group and signaled in the bitstream; paragraph. 0006].
Regarding claim 4, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the following claim limitations as set forth in claim 1.
Furthermore, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the claim limitations as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein the candidate list further comprises at least one two- mode entry The method of claim 1, wherein the candidate list further comprises at least one two- mode entry [i.e. the one or more selected intra modes may comprise one or more intra modes from a mode group consist of vertical mode, horizontal mode, DC-Planar mode (non-angular mode); paragraph. 0029].
Regarding claim 5, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the following claim limitations as set forth in claim 4.
Furthermore, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the claim limitations as follows:
The method of claim 4, further comprising parsing an indicator from the video bitstream, wherein the indicator indicates whether the candidate list is a heterogenous candidate list [i.e. the intra prediction mode is selected from the candidate group and signaled in the bitstream. While the candidate group comprises of DC mode, Planar mode, directional modes, etc.; paragraph. 0006].
Regarding claim 6, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the following claim limitations as set forth in claim 1.
Furthermore, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the claim limitations as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein the set of neighboring blocks includes at least one adjacent neighboring block and at least one non-adjacent neighboring block [i.e. intra mode candidate set using template-based Intra prediction according to the template region (non-adjacent) and the neighboring reference reconstructed pixels; paragraph. 0097, Fig. 16].
Regarding claim 7, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the following claim limitations as set forth in claim 1.
Furthermore, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the claim limitations as follows:
The method of claim 1, further comprising, for a neighboring block in the set of neighboring blocks, inserting at two-mode entry and a three-mode entry into the candidate list [i.e. the candidate group comprises intra prediction modes selected from neighboring blocks, or derived most probable modes, etc. paragraph. 0029].
Regarding claim 8, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the following claim limitations as set forth in claim 1.
Furthermore, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the claim limitations as follows:
The method of claim 1, further comprising generating a sorted candidate list by sorting the candidate list according to a respective template cost associated with each entry, wherein the entry from the candidate list used to reconstruct the current block is the top entry in the sorted candidate list [i.e. Costs associated with template matching Intra prediction are evaluated for said N template matching candidates to select one Intra mode from said N template matching candidates with a lowest cost as a final Intra mode; paragraph. 0029, 0059].
Regarding claim 9, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the following claim limitations as set forth in claim 1.
Furthermore, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the claim limitations as follows:
The method of claim 8, wherein the respective template cost associated with each entry comprises a combined weight cost for the entry [i.e. Costs associated with template matching Intra prediction are evaluated for said N template matching candidates to select one Intra mode from said N template matching candidates with a lowest cost as a final Intra mode; paragraph. 0029, 0059, 0066].
Regarding claim 11, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the following claim limitations as set forth in claim 1.
Furthermore, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the claim limitations as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein the candidate list is arranged so that a first group of adjacent entries consist of two-mode entries and a second group of adjacent entries consist of three-mode entries [i.e. the candidate group comprises of different intra mode group from one or more neighboring blocks, one or more selected intra modes; paragraph. 0029].
Regarding claim 13, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the following claim limitations as set forth in claim 11.
Furthermore, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the claim limitations as follows:
The method of claim 11, further comprising parsing an indicator from the video bitstream, wherein the indicator indicates whether the entry is from the first group or the second group [i.e. the intra prediction mode information is encoded and signaled via the bitstream; paragraph. 0006].
Regarding claim 14, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the following claim limitations as set forth in claim 11.
Furthermore, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the claim limitations as follows:
The method of claim 11, further comprising determining whether to select the entry from the first group or the second group based on coded information [i.e. the intra prediction mode information is encoded and signaled via the bitstream; paragraph. 0006].
Regarding claim 16, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the following claim limitations as set forth in claim 11.
Furthermore, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the claim limitations as follows:
The method of claim 1, further comprising determining a size of the candidate list for the current block [i.e. different block sizes having different numbers of Intra modes; paragraph. 0075].
Regarding claim 17, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the following claim limitations as set forth in claim 16.
Furthermore, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the claim limitations as follows:
The method of claim 16, wherein the size of the candidate list is determined based on at least one of:
a block size of the current block; and whether a dual-tree or single-tree coding is used for the current block. [i.e. different block sizes having different numbers of Intra modes; paragraph. 0075].
Regarding claim 18, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the following claim limitations as set forth in claim 16.
Furthermore, LIU et al. (US 20170353719 A1) discloses the claim limitations as follows:
The method of claim 16, wherein the size of the candidate list is based on a number of entries corresponding to the set of neighboring blocks that have a cost that is less than a predetermined value [i.e. the size of the candidate list is based on neighboring intra modes from one or more neighboring blocks; paragraph. 0029].
Regarding claims 19, 20, all the claim limitations which are set forth and rejected as per discussion for claim 1.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Joshi et al. (US 20160150234 A1).
Claim 20 directed to a non-transitory computer readable storage medium (CRM) storing a bitstream generated by an encoding method. The claim does not recite that the CRM contains executable instruction, that when executed, implement the encoding method. The bitstream is a product produced by the encoding method. Therefore, the claims are not limited to the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. (See MPEP 2113 - Product-by-Process claims.) Hence, the encoding method steps recited are given patentable weight only to structures in the bitstream that are implied by the steps.
To be given patentable weight, the CRM and the bitstream (i.e. descriptive material) must be in a functional relationship. A functional relationship can be found where the descriptive material performs some function with respect to the CRM to which it is associated. See MPEP §2111.05(I)(A). When a claimed “computer-readable medium merely serves as a support for information or data, no functional relationship exists”. MPEP §2111.05(III).
The CRM storing the claimed bitstream in claim 20 merely services as a support for the CRM of the bitstream and provides no functional relationship between the stored bitstream and the CRM.
Therefore, the structure bitstream, which scope is implied by the method steps, is non-functional descriptive material and given no patentable weight. MPEP §2111.05(III).
Thus, the claim scope is just a storage medium storing data and is anticipated by Joshi et al. (US 20160150234 A1) which recites a storage medium storing a bitstream ([0156] storing the encoded bitstream on a storage medium).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10, 12, 15 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications form the examiner should be directed to Nam Pham, whose can be contacted by phone at (571)270-7352. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon—Thurs.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, CZEKAJ DAVID, can be reached on (571)272-7327.
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 (too 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.
/NAM D PHAM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
Prosecution Insights