Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/046,412

METHOD AND SYSTEM OF VIDEO CODING USING A SUBSET OF AVAILABLE INTRA PREDICTION MODES FOR MULTIPLE REFERENCE LINES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 05, 2025
Examiner
LI, TRACY Y
Art Unit
2487
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Tencent America LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
594 granted / 739 resolved
+22.4% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
764
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.3%
-31.7% vs TC avg
§103
66.6%
+26.6% vs TC avg
§102
12.7%
-27.3% vs TC avg
§112
6.3%
-33.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 739 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 1-16, 19, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20240297994 A1 LEE; Bae Keun et al. (hereafter Lee), and further in view of US 20190141318 A1 Li; Bin et al. (hereafter Li). Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses A video decoding method (Fig.2), comprising: obtaining a video bitstream that includes a plurality of encoded blocks including a current block (Fig.2, [91]); and when a multiple reference line intra prediction (MRLP) mode is enabled for the current block and a non-adjacent reference line is used for the current block (Fig.40, [372]-[375], intra prediction may be performed by selecting any one of a plurality of intra reference lines configured with an non adjacent intra reference lines): determining a first allowed intra prediction mode (AIPM) set for the current block ([390], the second group is the AIPM), wherein the first AIPM includes: a set of one or more intra prediction modes of neighboring blocks of the current block (Figs.32-35, Fig.40, [378], each indexed subset of adjacent reference line is the AIPM); and reconstructing the current block using an intra prediction mode from the first AIPM set (Fig.2, [78], [390]-[391]). Lee fails to disclose a set of one or more intra prediction modes derived based on a signaled nominal angular mode and an angle delta value. However, Li teaches a set of one or more intra prediction modes derived based on a signaled nominal angular mode and an angle delta value (Figs.7, [130], [133], [206], for some allowed intra prediction modes, a predicted sample value is calculated along the prediction direction for an angular prediction mode, and the value of an offset region tend to indicate appropriate corrections to the predicted sample values of the current block along that prediction direction). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the video decoding method disclosed by Lee to include the teaching in the same field of endeavor of Li, in order to improve the effectiveness of the intra-picture prediction, as identified by Li. Regarding claim 2, Lee discloses The method of claim 1, wherein all prediction modes with nominal angles are included in the first AIPM set regardless of a size of the current block ([145], [388]). Regarding claim 3, Li teaches The method of claim 1, wherein the first AIPM set does not include any non-directional SMOOTH modes regardless of a size of the current block ([100]). Regarding claim 4, Li teaches The method of claim 1, wherein the first AIPM set includes a SMOOTH_V mode and a SMOOTH_H mode regardless of a size of the current block ([100], [134]). Regarding claim 5, Lee discloses The method of claim 1, further comprising, when the MRLP mode is enabled for the current block and an adjacent reference line is used for the current block: determining a second AIPM set for the current block, wherein the first AIPM set comprises a subset of the second AIPM set; and reconstructing the current block using an intra prediction mode from the second AIPM set (Fig.38, [78]). Regarding claim 6, Li teaches The method of claim 5, wherein the second AIPM set includes two or more levels, each level of the two or more levels including a respective subset of intra prediction modes ([272]). Regarding claim 7, Lee discloses The method of claim 5, wherein the first AIPM set includes all angular modes from the second AIPM set (Figs.34, 35). Regarding claim 8, Lee discloses The method of claim 5, wherein the second AIPM set includes at least one non-angular smooth mode that is not included in the first AIPM set (Fig.34). Regarding claim 9, Lee discloses The method of claim 5, wherein the first AIPM set includes at least one angular mode that is not included in the second AIPM set (Figs.37-38). Regarding claim 10, Li teaches The method of claim 1, wherein: when the set of one or more intra prediction modes of neighboring blocks of the current block includes an angular mode, the first AIPM set includes at least one angular model with a non-zero angle delta (Fig.10, [133]). Regarding claim 11, Li teaches The method of claim 1, wherein a size of the first AIPM set is equal to a power of 2 ([171]). Regarding claim 12, Lee discloses The method of claim 1, wherein a size of the first AIPM set is equal to a sum of multiples of power of 2 (Figs.38, 39). Regarding claim 13, Lee discloses The method of claim 1, wherein a size of the first AIPM set is based on modes of the neighboring blocks of the current block (Fig.38). Regarding claim 14, Lee discloses The method of claim 13, wherein, when the neighboring blocks of the current block have less than a threshold number of non-angular modes, the size of the first AIPM set is than when the neighboring blocks of the current block have more than the threshold number of non-angular modes (Figs.36-38). Regarding claim 15, Lee discloses The method of claim 14, wherein, when the size of the first AIPM is set to zero, the non- adjacent reference line is not applied to the current block ([379]-[380]). Regarding claim 16, Lee discloses The method of claim 1, wherein a size of the first AIPM set is based on modes of the neighboring blocks of the current block and a reference line index for the MRLP mode ([377]). Regarding claim 19, see the rejection for claim 1. Lee further discloses A video encoding method, comprising: obtaining video data that includes a plurality of blocks including a current block ([53], [83]); and encoding the current block using an intra prediction mode from the first AIPM set ([67]). Regarding claim 20, see the rejection for claim 1, further Lee discloses A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing one or more sets of instructions configured for execution by a computing device having control circuitry and memory ([500]-[501], the one or more sets of instructions comprising instructions for: the plurality of encoded blocks including a current block encoding using a multiple reference line intra prediction mode ([373]-[375]); Li teaches obtaining a source video sequence that comprises a plurality of frames (Fig.3); and performing a conversion between the source video sequence and a video bitstream of visual media data according to a format rule ([49], codec/compression standard is the format rule, encoding is the conversion ), wherein the video bitstream comprises a plurality of encoded blocks corresponding to the plurality of frames ([69], [155]). Claim(s) 17, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee, in view of Li, and further in view of US 10484712 B2 Zhang; Li et al. (hereafter Zhang). Regarding claim 17, Zhang teaches The method of claim 1, further comprising, for a chroma component of the current block, not applying the non-adjacent reference line to the chroma component when at least one of the neighboring blocks has a corresponding non-angular mode (col.4 line 49-col.5 line 10). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention having all the references Lee, Li and Zhang before him/her, to modify the video decoding method disclosed by Lee to include the teaching in the same field of endeavor of Li and Zhang, in order to improve the effectiveness of the intra-picture prediction, as identified by Li, and improve overall coding quality, as identified by Zhang. Regarding claim 18, Zhang teaches The method of claim 1, further comprising, for a chroma component of the current block, not applying the non-adjacent reference line to the chroma component when at least one of the neighboring blocks has a different prediction mode than another of the neighboring blocks (col.19, lines 20-33). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: US 20220279162 A1, US 20220109835 A1, US 20200007870 A1. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRACY Y. LI whose telephone number is (571)270-3671. The examiner can normally be reached Monday Friday (8:30 AM- 4:30 PM) EST. 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. /TRACY Y. LI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 05, 2025
Application Filed
Mar 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598298
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR RECONSTRUCTING 360-DEGREE IMAGE ACCORDING TO PROJECTION FORMAT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12587661
VIDEO ENCODING METHOD, VIDEO DECODING METHOD, AND APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579629
Systems and methods for utilizing remote visualization for performing micro-trenching
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574556
DECODED PICTURE BUFFER MEMORY ALLOCATION AND PICTURE OUTPUT IN SCALABLE VIDEO CODING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12574567
VIDEO PROCESSING METHOD AND APPARATUS, DEVICE, AND MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

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

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+16.4%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 739 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

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

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

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month