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 .
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/17/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claims limitation are not falling within one of the four statutory categories of invention because all claims directed to a computer readable medium may encompass transitory signals. In an effort to assist the patent community in overcoming a rejection or potential rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 in this situation, the USPTO suggests the following approach. A claim drawn to such a computer readable medium that covers both transitory and non-transitory embodiments may be amended to narrow the claim to cover only statutory embodiments to avoid a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 by adding the limitation "non-transitory" to the claim. See http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/og/2010/week08/TOC.htm#ref20
Amending to a “One or more non-transitory computer-readable media …” would resolve this issue.
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)(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 1-4, 8 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sim et al. (US 20220191531 A1, hereinafter “Sim”).
Regarding Claim 1. Sim discloses a method of decoding an image (Abstract), the method comprising:
partitioning a chroma block into a plurality of partitions (0095-0096 and 0108-0110; Figure 7); and
performing an intra prediction for each of the partitions in the chroma block (0038-0040),
wherein a partition type of the chroma block is determined based on at least one of a partition type or a directionality of a collocated luma block of the chroma block (0035-0037).
Regarding Claim 2. Sim discloses the method of claim 1, wherein:
the partition type of the chroma block is set to be the same as the partition type of the collocated luma block (0095, 0136).
Regarding Claim 3. Sim discloses the method of claim 1, wherein:
the plurality of partitions are generated by partitioning the chroma block in a horizontal direction or in a vertical direction (0095; Figures 5A-5D; Claims 6 and 10), and
a partition direction of the chroma block is determined based on the directionality of the collocated luma block (0095; Figures 5A-5D; Claims 6 and 10).
Regarding Claim 4. Sim discloses the method of claim 1, wherein a decoding order for a plurality of partitions in the chroma block is determined based on the directionality of the collocated luma block (0096; Figures 5A-5D).
Regarding Claim 8. Sim discloses the method of claim 1, wherein an intra prediction mode of each of the plurality of partitions in the chroma block is set to be the same as an intra prediction mode of each of a plurality of partitions included in the collocated luma block (0095; Figures 5A-5D).
Regarding Claim 14. The encoding method claim 14 is drawn to the reverse method of the encoding method of using the corresponding decoding method claimed in claim 1. Therefore, encoding method claim 14 corresponds to decoding claim 1 and is rejected for same reasons of anticipation as used above.
Regarding Claim 15. Claim 15 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 instructions, 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 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 15 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 Sim which recites a storage medium storing a bitstream (0147).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sim in view of ZHAO et al. (US 20220191551 A1, hereinafter “ZHAO”).
Regarding Claim 5. Sim discloses the method of claim 1, but failed to disclose wherein the method further includes determining whether to perform a flipping on the chroma block, and
wherein the flipping for the chroma block is performed for at least one of a horizontal direction or a vertical direction.
ZHAO, however, shows a method wherein the method further includes determining whether to perform a flipping on the chroma block (0134-0135; Figures 10A-10D), and
wherein the flipping for the chroma block is performed for at least one of a horizontal direction or a vertical direction (0134-0135; Figures 10A-10D).
It would have been obvious to the person of having ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the determining whether to perform a flipping on the chroma block performed for at least one of a horizontal direction or a vertical direction as shown by ZHAO in efficiently code residual blocks obtained from block-based motion compensation of Sim in order to improve coding efficiency.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-7 and 9-13 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASMAMAW G TARKO whose telephone number is (571)272-7493. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8am-5pm 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, Chris Kelley can be reached at (571) 272-7331. 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.
/ASMAMAW G TARKO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482
Prosecution Insights