DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on 02/17/2025, wherein claims 1-17 have been examined and are pending.
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 § 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 9-13 and 15-17 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.
Claims 9 and 16-17 are independent claims that cite “a second filter processing unit”. However, the claims do not previously claim a first processing unit so the claims lack of antecedent basis because they imply a preceding element that has not been defined. Therefore, claims 9 and 16-17 are unclear.
Claim 15 are independent claim that cite “a second filter processing step”. However, the claims do not previously claim a first processing step so the claims lack antecedent basis because they imply a preceding element that has not been defined. Therefore, claims 9 and 16-17 are unclear.
Claim 10 dependent on claim 9 and recites “the first filter processing unit”. However, the first processing unit are not previously mentioned in claims 9 and 10, so claim 10 lacks of antecedent basis.
Claims 10-13 are rejected because they depend on rejected parent claim 9 as set forth above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8 and 14 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 1, the prior arts Kim et al. (US 2025/0071341) and Takahashi et al. (2014/0063350) individually or in combination fail to discloses within the context of the claim the feature of a learning device comprising: a first filter processing unit that performs component separation on frequency components included in reference pixels based on feature vectors of the reference pixels in a vicinity of a pixel to be predicted in image data; and a learning unit that learns a model that outputs a prediction value of the pixel to be predicted by using, as learning data, a set of a high-frequency vector, which is a feature vector of a high-frequency component among frequency components obtained by the component separation, and high- frequency information, which relates to a high-frequency component among frequency components included in the pixel to be predicted as cited in claim 1.
Regarding claim 14, the prior arts of record individually or in combination fail to discloses within the context of the claim the feature of a filter processing step of performing component separation on frequency components included in reference pixels based on feature vectors of the reference pixels in a vicinity of a pixel to be predicted in image data; and a learning step of learning a model that outputs a prediction value of the pixel to be predicted by using, as learning data, a set of a high-frequency vector, which is a feature vector of a high-frequency component among frequency components obtained by the component separation, and high-frequency information, which relates to a high-frequency component among frequency components included in the pixel to be predicted as cited in claim 14.
Claims 2-8 are allowed because they depend on allowed parent claim 1 as set forth above.
Claim 9-13 and 15-17 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 9 and 16-17, the prior arts of record individually or in combination fail to discloses within the context of the claim the feature of a second filter processing unit that performs component separation on frequency components included in reference pixels based on feature vectors of the reference pixels in a vicinity of a pixel to be predicted in image data; and an intra prediction unit that performs intra prediction for a pixel value of the pixel to be predicted based on a prediction value output by the learned model by using, as input, a high- frequency vector, which is a feature vector of a high-frequency component among frequency components obtained by the component separation as cited in claims 9 and 16-17.
Regarding claim 15, the prior arts of record individually or in combination fail to discloses within the context of the claim the feature of device that performs inference processing by using a learned model learned by a learning device, the inference device comprising: a second filter processing step of performing component separation on frequency components included in reference pixels based on feature vectors of the reference pixels in a vicinity of a pixel to be predicted in image data; and an intra prediction process of performing intra prediction for a pixel value of the pixel to be predicted based on a prediction value output by the learned model by using, as input, a high-frequency vector, which is a feature vector of a high- frequency component among frequency components obtained by the component separation as cited in claim 15.
Claims 10-13 are allowable because they depend on allowed parent claim 9 as set forth above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHLEEN V NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-0626. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:00am-6:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jamie Atala can be reached on 571-272-7384. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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.
/KATHLEEN V NGUYEN/Primary examiner, Art Unit 2486
Prosecution Insights