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 § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because it is drawn to a computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream generated by a video encoding method. A broadest reasonable interpretation of a computer-readable recording medium can encompass transitory forms of signal transmission, such as a propagating electrical or electromagnetic signal per se. See In re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 84 USPQ2d 1495 (Fed. Cir. 2007). A transitory signal, while physical and real, does not possess concrete structure that would qualify as a device or part under the definition of a machine, is not a tangible article or commodity under the definition of a manufacture (even though it is man-made and physical in that it exists in the real world and has tangible causes and effects), and is not composed of matter such that it would qualify as a composition of matter. Nuijten, 500 F.3d at 1356-1357, 84 USPQ2d at 1501-03. As such, a transitory, propagating signal does not fall within any statutory category. Mentor Graphics Corp. v. EVE-USA, Inc., 851 F.3d 1275, 1294, 112 USPQ2d 1120, 1133 (Fed. Cir. 2017); Nuijten, 500 F.3d at 1356-1357, 84 USPQ2d at 1501-03.
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)(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.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lim et al. (US 2023/0308647 A1, referred to herein as “Lim”).
Regarding claim 1, Lim discloses: A method of decoding a current block by a video decoding device (Lim: Fig. 2, paragraphs [0146]-[0148], disclosing a decoding device the performs video decoding methods), the method comprising:
decoding, from a bitstream, information of the current block on a luma component (Lim: paragraph [0136], disclosing that coding parameters may be signaled to the decoder and used in the decoding process; paragraphs [0068] and [0136], disclosing coding parameters for luma components; paragraph [0137], disclosing decoding from a bitstream), the information of the current block including a size of the current block, a current tree depth, and partitioning information of the current block (Lim: paragraph [0136], disclosing that the coding parameter may include information such as a block size, a tree depth, and partitioning information);
decoding, from the bitstream, tree structure information of the current block (Lim: paragraph [0136], disclosing decoding of tree structure information), the tree structure information comprising a single-tree depth indicating a depth to utilize a single tree in an entire tree (Lim: paragraph [0166], disclosing a tree structure of an indicated depth; paragraph [0362], disclosing signaling of a single tree structure for a luma component), a minimum single-tree block size indicating which block size utilizes the single tree in the entire tree (Lim: paragraphs [0367]-[0369], disclosing a minimum tree block size for a single tree), or a dual-tree enable flag indicating whether or not to utilize a dual tree (Lim: paragraphs [0360]-[0363], disclosing a duel-tree flag indicating whether or not to use a duel tree structure for luma and chroma blocks);
and determining a tree structure of the current block based on the size of the current block, the current tree depth, and the tree structure information (Lim: Fig. 11, paragraphs [0533]-[0538], disclosing that a current block may be partitioned based on decoded block partitioning information; paragraphs [0160] and [0359]-[0372], disclosing determining the tree partitioning based on the block size, tree depth, and tree structure),
wherein the tree structure is indicative of the single tree or the dual tree (Lim: paragraphs [0362]-[0063], disclosing single tree and duel tree structures).
Regarding claim 2, Lim discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein determining the tree structure comprises: determining the tree structure of the current block to be the single tree when the current tree depth is included in the single-tree depth (Lim: paragraphs [0073] and [0136], disclosing that a depth may be defined and signaled for a tree structure; paragraphs [0367]-[0368], disclosing single tree structure of partitioning), and determining the tree structure of the current block to be the dual tree when the current tree depth is not included in the single-tree depth (Lim: paragraphs [0073] and [0136], disclosing that a depth may be defined and signaled for a tree structure; paragraphs [0382]-[0383], disclosing duel tree partition structure ).
Regarding claim 3, Lim discloses: The method of claim 2, wherein the single-tree depth is set within a range comprising 0 to a maximum depth of the entire tree (Lim: paragraphs [0160], [0166] and [0256], disclosing that a depth of zero and a maximum depth may be defined).
Regarding claim 5, Lim discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein determining the tree structure comprises: responsive to when determining the tree structure of the current block to be the dual tree, determining a tree structure of lower level blocks of the current block to be the dual tree (Lim: paragraphs [0360]-[0363], disclosing use of a dual tree flag to determine blocks to be the dual tree partition structure).
Regarding claim 6, Lim discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein determining the tree structure comprises: determining the tree structure of the current block to be the single tree when the size of the current block is equal to or greater than the minimum single-tree block size, and determining the tree structure of the current block to be the dual tree when the size of the current block is smaller than the minimum single-tree block size (Lim: paragraphs [0367]-[0374], disclosing that the single-tree partitioning may be determined based on a width or height of the current block being equal to a minimum block size and that the dual-tree partitioning may be determined based on a size equal to or smaller than a minimum size).
Regarding claim 7, Lim discloses: The method of claim 1, wherein determining the tree structure comprises: responsive to when the current block is a node that falls in a range of partitioning by a quad tree (QT) in the entire tree, determining the tree structure of the current block to be the single tree (Lim: paragraph [0362], disclosing a node in quad-tree partitioning scheme and a single-tree structure).
Regarding claim 11, Lim discloses: The method of claim 10, wherein determining the tree structure comprises: applying either the single tree or the dual tree per coding tree unit (CTU) containing the current block (Lim: paragraphs [0067] and [0367]-[0372], disclosing use of single tree or dual tree partition structure on a coding tree unit).
Regarding claim 12, Lim discloses: The method of claim 1, further comprising, when determining the tree structure of the current block to be the dual tree: decoding partitioning information of a chroma component of the current block (Lim: paragraphs [0067], [0136] and [0252], disclosing that coding parameters may be signaled to the decoder and used in the decoding process including partitioning information of a chroma component).
Regarding claim 13, Lim discloses: A method of encoding a current block by a video encoding device (Lim: paragraphs [0121]-[0124], disclosing an encoding apparatus to perform an encoding method), the method comprising:
obtaining information of the current block on a luma component (Lim: paragraphs [0068] and [0136], disclosing coding parameters for luma components of a current block), the information of the current block including a size of the current block, a current tree depth, and partitioning information of the current block (Lim: paragraph [0136], disclosing that the coding parameter may include information such as a block size, a tree depth, and partitioning information);
determining tree structure information of the current block (Lim: paragraph [0136], disclosing coding of tree structure information), the tree structure information comprising a single-tree depth indicating a depth to utilize a single tree in an entire tree (Lim: paragraph [0166], disclosing a tree structure of an indicated depth; paragraph [0362], disclosing signaling of a single tree structure for a luma component), a minimum single-tree block size indicating which block size utilizes the single tree in the entire tree (Lim: paragraphs [0367]-[0369], disclosing a minimum tree block size for a single tree), or a dual-tree enable flag indicating whether or not to use a dual tree (Lim: paragraphs [0360]-[0363], disclosing a duel-tree flag indicating whether or not to use a duel tree structure for luma and chroma blocks); and
determining a tree structure of the current block based on the size of the current block, the current tree depth, and the tree structure information (Lim: Fig. 11, paragraphs [0533]-[0538], disclosing that a current block may be partitioned based on decoded block partitioning information; paragraphs [0160] and [0359]-[0372], disclosing determining the tree partitioning based on the block size, tree depth, and tree structure),
wherein the tree structure is indicative of the single tree or the dual tree (Lim: paragraphs [0362]-[0063], disclosing single tree and duel tree structures).
Regarding claim 14, Lim discloses: The method of claim 13, further comprising: encoding the information of the current block and the tree structure information (Lim: paragraphs [0124], [0157] and [0159], disclosing encoding information of the block and partitioning structure).
Regarding claim 15, Lim discloses: The method of claim 13, further comprising, when determining the tree structure of the current block to be the dual tree: determining partitioning information of a chroma component of the current block; and encoding the partitioning information of the chroma component (Lim: paragraphs [0067], [0136] and [0252], disclosing that coding parameters may be signaled by the encoder including partitioning information of a chroma component; paragraphs [0124], [0157] and [0159], disclosing encoding information of the block and partitioning structure).
Regarding claim 16, the claim recites analogous limitations to claim 13, above, and is therefore rejected on the same premise. (Note that Lim discloses implementation via computer-readable medium in paragraph [0579].)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 8, 9, and 10, are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 4, Lim, either alone or in combination with other prior art of record, does not teach, suggest, or disclose holding from decoding of the dual-tree enable flag for lower level blocks of the current block.
Regarding claim 8, Lim, either alone or in combination with other prior art of record, does not teach, suggest, or disclose where determining the tree structure comprises: determining the tree structure of the current block to be the dual tree when the size of the current block does not satisfy a condition of a minimum quad tree (QT) size that represents a minimum block size among block sizes subject to QT partitioning.
Regarding claim 9, Lim, either alone or in combination with other prior art of record, does not teach, suggest, or disclose where the single-tree depth and the minimum single-tree block size are set differently based on a type of a slice containing the current block.
Regarding claim 10, Lim, either alone or in combination with other prior art of record, does not teach, suggest, or disclose where determining the tree structure comprises: determining the tree structure of the current block to be the dual tree when the single tree is utilized up to depth 0 of the entire tree, and determining the tree structure of the current block to be the single tree when the single tree is utilized up to a maximum depth of the entire tree.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christopher Braniff whose telephone number is (571) 270-5009. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7AM to 4PM.
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, Thai Tran can be reached at (571) 272-7382. 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.
CHRISTOPHER T. BRANIFF
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2484
/CHRISTOPHER BRANIFF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2484
Prosecution Insights