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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/22/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim 1-11, 13, and 17-24 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.
Regarding claims 1-11, 13, and 17-24, the phrase "determining if" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. When using the conditional “if”, it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are to be given patentable weight if the condition is not met. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the IntraTMP mode" in claim 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 10-11 and 13 are rejected for the same reasons due to dependence.
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.
Claim(s) 1-11, 13, and 17-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jhu et al. (WO 2022271756 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Jhu et al. teaches a method for indicating an intra template matching prediction (IntraTMP) (Paragraphs 128-129), comprising:
determining if a current block is in an IntraTMP mode (Paragraphs 128-129; Paragraph 135);
parsing and identifying an IntraTMP flag in response to a determination that the current block is in the IntraTMP mode (Paragraphs 128-135); and
parsing and identifying an IntraTMP index for indicating a selected IntraTMP block from an IntraTMP candidate list (Paragraphs 128-137),
wherein the method further comprises: in response to a determination that the current block is in the IntraTMP mode, parsing and identifying an IntraTMP fusion flag in response to a determination that the current block is in an IntraTMP fusion mode (Paragraphs 128-137);
in response to a determination that the current block is in the IntraTMP fusion mode, generating a fused IntraTMP predictor in response to a determination that the current block is configured to use an IntraTMP fusion method (Paragraphs 128-137; Paragraph 144);
in response to a determination that the current block is not in the IntraTMP fusion mode, parsing and identifying an IntraTMP filter flag in response to a determination that the current block is in an IntraTMP filter mode (Paragraphs 128-137; Paragraphs 138-146); and
in response to a determination that the current block is in the IntraTMP filter mode, generating a filter IntraTMP predictor in response to a determination that the current block is configured to use an IntraTMP filter method (Paragraphs 128-137; Paragraphs 138-146).
Regarding Claim 2, Jhu et al. teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: determining if the current block is configured to use a fractional-pel precision (Paragraph 54).
Regarding Claim 3, Jhu et al. teaches the method of claim 2, further comprising: parsing and identifying a fractional-pel flag in response to a determination that the current block is configured to use the fractional-pel precision (Paragraphs 54-56).
Regarding Claim 4, Jhu et al. teaches the method of claim 2, further comprising: parsing and identifying a fractional-pel index to indicate a fractional-pel position in response to a determination that the current block is configured to use the fractional-pel precision (Paragraphs 54-56).
Regarding Claim 5, Jhu et al. teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the IntraTMP fusion method includes a Decoder-side Intra Mode Derivation (DIMD) method (Paragraph 120-123; Paragraphs 128-137; Paragraphs 138-146).
Regarding Claim 6, Jhu et al. teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the IntraTMP fusion method includes a Template-based Intra Mode Derivation (TIMD) method (Paragraph 120-123; Paragraphs 128-137; Paragraphs 138-146).
Regarding Claim 7, Jhu et al. teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the IntraTMP fusion method includes a planar mode method (Paragraphs 127-137; Paragraphs 138-146).
Regarding Claim 8, Jhu et al. teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the IntraTMP fusion method includes a weight calculation method (Paragraphs 116-118; Paragraphs 127-137; Paragraphs 138-146).
Claims 9-11, and 13 contain similar limitations as those of claims 1-8 and are rejected for the same reasons as used above. Jhu et al. further teaches determining if a current block is in a combined inter-intra prediction (CIIP) mode; parsing and identifying a spatial CIIP flag in response to a determination that the current block is in the CIIP mode (Paragraphs 113-118; Paragraphs 127-137; Paragraphs 138-146).
Claims 17-20 contain similar limitations as those of claims 1-8 above and are rejected for the same reasons as used above. Jhu et al. further teaches parsing and identifying a template shape flag for indicating that the specific-shaped template is used; and determining if the current block is configured to use a specific-shaped template (Paragraphs 15-16; Paragraphs 95-99; Paragraphs 102-107; Paragraphs 127-137; clearly teaches that the template matching and any associated flags are also based on shape; Paragraphs 138-146).
Claims 21-24 contain similar limitations as those rejected in claims 1-4 and are rejected for the same reasons as used above. Jhu et al. further teaches that signaling an IntraTMP flag in response to a determination that the current block is in the IntraTMP mode; and signaling an IntraTMP index to indicate a selected IntraTMP block from an IntraTMP candidate list (Paragraphs 128-137; clearly teaches signaling the usage of the mode; Paragraphs 138-146).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARHAN MAHMUD whose telephone number is (571)272-7712. The examiner can normally be reached 10-7.
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, Joseph Ustaris can be reached at 5712727383. 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.
/FARHAN MAHMUD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483
Prosecution Insights