DETAILED ACTION
The communication is in response to the application received September 18, 2025 wherein
claims 1-13 are amended;
claims 14-26 are cancelled; and
claims 27-33 are added.
Accordingly, claims 1-13 and 27-33 are pending and are examined as follows.
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 .
Priority
Applicant' s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application (Provisional Application No. 63/453,450) under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Specification
The following guidelines illustrate the preferred layout for the specification of a utility application. These guidelines are suggested for the applicant’s use.
Arrangement of the Specification
As provided in 37 CFR 1.77(b), the specification of a utility application should include the following sections in order. Each of the lettered items should appear in upper case, without underlining or bold type, as a section heading. If no text follows the section heading, the phrase “Not Applicable” should follow the section heading:
(a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION.
(b) CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS.
(c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT.
(d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT.
(e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM.
(f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR.
(g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION.
Field of the Invention.
Description of Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98.
(h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION.
(i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S).
(j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION.
(k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS (commencing on a separate sheet).
(l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE (commencing on a separate sheet).
(m) SEQUENCE LISTING. (See MPEP § 2422.03 and 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825). A “Sequence Listing” is required on paper if the application discloses a nucleotide or amino acid sequence as defined in 37 CFR 1.821(a) and if the required “Sequence Listing” is not submitted as an electronic document either on read-only optical disc or as a text file via the patent electronic system.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities.
Throughout the Applicant’s specification (e.g. ¶ [0017], ¶ [0018], ¶ [0029], ¶ [0030], and ¶ [0148] – ¶ [0151], Applicant uses the phrase “ignore to determine”. This phrasing is grammatically improper.
In ¶ [0007] line 6 and ¶ [0019], “receiving the video data” is improperly duplicated.
In ¶ [0086], “may determined as the luma block vector” should be written as “may be determined as the luma block vector”.
In ¶ [0112], the equation contains coefficients c0 through c6 but the text only ever defines “c0 – c5 … the first to the sixth coefficients” (¶ [0112] line 8). c6 is left undefined. .
¶ [0149] and ¶ [0191] state “when slice tree type … is the I-slice type” (emphasis added). “slice tree type” should be written as “slice type”.
¶ [0151] and ¶ [0193] state “when the DBV flag … indicates that the direct mode is applied” (emphasis added). The DBV flag indicates that DBV mode is applied; direct mode is a known mode of intra-prediction, different from DBV mode. In these paragraphs, “direct mode” should be written as “DBV mode” or the like.
In ¶ [0175], “the encoder module 614” should refer to “the encoder module 114” (cf. FIG. 1 and FIG. 6 of the Applicant’s Drawings).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1-12 recite a “machine-readable medium”, whereas, the Applicant’s specification recites only a “computer-readable medium” (cf. ¶ [0044]-[0045]). Similarly, claims 13 and 30 recite a “computer-readable medium”. The meaning of every term used in any of the claims should be apparent from the descriptive portion of the specification. See MPEP § 608.01(o).
Claim 6 recites “when chroma reference block is reconstructed”. This should be written as “when the chroma reference block is reconstructed”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 6 is 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 CLAIM 6, claim 6 recites the limitation "a chroma reference model of the chroma reference block" (emphasis added – cf. claim 6 lines 3-4), but then recites “the chroma reference model of the chroma current block” (emphasis added – cf. claim 6 line 7). As written, these terms describe facially different chroma reference models. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “the chroma reference model of the chroma current block” in the claim. It should be noted that any amendment made to this claim to overcome this rejection should be reflected in, and supported by, the Applicant’s specification.
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)(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.
(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 1-3, 7, 13, 27, and 30-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Xu ‘601 (U.S. Patent No. US 12,445,601 B2).
REGARDING CLAIM 1, Xu ‘601 discloses a non-transitory machine-readable medium of an electronic device storing one or more computer-executable instructions for decoding video data (e.g. decoder 110 of Xu ‘601 FIG. 1 or decoder 210 of Xu ‘601 FIG. 2, noting that Xu ‘601 discloses a decoder implemented as an electronic device [Xu ‘601 col. 4 lines 30-33], which includes “a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions which when executed by a computer cause the computer to perform the method for video encoding/decoding” – cf. Xu ‘601 col. 3 lines 8-11), the one or more computer-executable instructions, when executed by at least one processor (e.g. “processing circuitry, such as the processing circuitry that performs functions of the video decoder (110), the processing circuitry that performs functions of the video decoder (210), and the like.” – cf. Xu ‘601 col. 31 lines 13-17) of the electronic device, causing the electronic device to:
receive the video data (cf. Xu ‘601 col. 4 lines 55-57, noting that the “receiver (231) may receive one or more coded video sequences, in a bitstream for example, to be decoded by the video decoder (210)”.);
a chroma current block from a current frame included in the video data (cf. Xu ‘601 FIG. 13, col. 25 lines 57-60 and col. 26 lines 23-27, noting that “a region (or a coding region) (1102) in a picture or a current picture (1101) [i.e. current frame included in the video data] that is being coded (e.g., under reconstruction) includes a … chroma coding region (1110)” [cf. Xu ‘601 col. 25 lines 57-60] , where the “chroma coding region (1110) can be partitioned using any suitable coding tree structure. In the example shown in FIG. 13, the chroma coding region (1110) is partitioned into chroma blocks (1111)-(1112)” and “[t]he chroma block (1111) is to be coded (e.g., encoded or reconstructed) and can be referred to as a current chroma block”, or a chroma current block [cf. Xu ‘601 col 26 lines 23-27].);
determine a luma corresponding block reconstructed based on a luma reference block (cf. Xu ‘601 FIG. 4, FIG. 13, col. 12 lines 17-20 and lines 37-41, col. 25 lines 60-66, col. 26 lines 64-67 through col. 27 lines 1-6, and col. 28 lines 16-23, noting that any of the luma blocks (1121)-(1126), shown in Xu ‘601 FIG. 13 and described in col. 26 lines 64-67 through col. 27 lines 1-6, correspond to “the same physical region in the current picture (1120)” [col. 25 lines 60-66] and constitute a luma corresponding block, in keeping with the Applicant’s disclosure. See, for example, Applicant’s Specification ¶ [0008] and ¶ [0152]. Xu ‘601 teaches that these blocks may be “already coded (e.g., reconstructed) prior to coding the current chroma block (1111)” [cf. Xu ‘601 col. 27 lines 4-6] based on a luma reference block [e.g. reference block 411 or 412 in Xu ‘601 FIG. 4]. See Xu ‘601 col. 12 lines 17-20 and lines 37-41.), wherein:
the luma corresponding block and the luma reference block are included in the current frame and are reconstructed prior to reconstructing the chroma current block (cf. Xu ‘601 FIG. 4, FIG. 13, col. 12 lines 17-20 and lines 37-41, noting that the luma reference block [e.g. reference luma block (1151) of FIG. 13 or reference blocks (411) and (412) of Xu ‘601 FIG. 4] and the luma corresponding block(s) may be “already coded (e.g., reconstructed) prior to coding the current chroma block (1111)” [cf. Xu ‘601 col. 27 lines 4-6]. These blocks are included in the current frame [e.g. Current picture 1101 in FIG. 13]. See also Xu ‘601 col. 13 lines 1-3.), and
the luma corresponding block is determined based on a luma current block collocated with the chroma current block (cf. Xu ‘601 FIG. 13, col. 26 lines 65-67 through col. 27 lines 1-3 and col. 27 lines 15-57, and col. 28 lines 7-26, noting that a luma block (1121) is collocated [cf. Xu ‘601 col. 27 lines 1-3] with current chroma block (1111) of FIG. 13. Based on the position of this collocated luma block [i.e. its “first position” TL within the “the reconstructed luma area (1141)” – cf. Xu ‘601 col. 27 lines 45-51], it is identified as a luma block [i.e. a luma corresponding block] from which the luma BV (1114) is obtained. Thus, a luma corresponding block [e.g. luma block (1121)] is determined based on a luma current block [e.g. luma block (1121)] collocated with the chroma current block1.);
determine a chroma reference block based on a luma block vector of the luma corresponding block, wherein the luma block vector of the luma corresponding block is directed from the luma corresponding block towards the luma reference block (cf. Xu ‘601 FIG. 13 and col. 27 lines 10-40, noting that a “reference chroma block (1131) in the picture (1101) can be indicated by a chroma block vector (BV) (1113) of the current chroma block (1111)” [cf. Xu ‘601 col. 27 lines 18-21], and that “[a]t least one of (i) one or more BVs and (ii) coding information derived from the luma area (1141) that is collocated with the current chroma block (1111) can be used to derive the chroma BV (1113)” [cf. Xu ‘601 col. 27 lines 21-25] – i.e. a chroma reference block is determined based on a luma block vector of the luma corresponding block. Further note, from Xu ‘601 FIG. 13, that the luma block vector(s) of the luma corresponding block [e.g. Luma BV 1114 shown in FIG. 13] is directed from the luma corresponding block [e.g. luma block 1121 in FIG. 13] towards the luma reference block [e.g. reference luma block 1151 in FIG. 13]).
derive a chroma prediction model of the chroma current block based on the chroma reference block (cf. Xu ‘601 col. 2 lines 31-44, col. 30 lines 16-46, and col. 34 lines 26-38, noting that a chroma prediction model – i.e. local illumination compensation, or LIC [Xu ‘601 col. 30 lines 39-45] – is derived based on the chroma reference block, where “LIC parameters (e.g., the scale a and the offset β used in the LIC function described in the disclosure) for the current chroma block (1111) can be determined based on a current template (1160) of the current chroma block (1111) and a reference template (1170) of the reference chroma block (1131)” [cf. Xu ‘601 col. 30 lines 28-33]) ; and
reconstruct the chroma current block based on the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block (cf. Xu ‘601 col. 30 lines 39-46. “A prediction (also referred to as a prediction signal) can be determined based on the initial prediction and the LIC [i.e. the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block] parameters using the LIC mode. For example, the scale a and the offset β are obtained, and the prediction signal can be equal to α*p[x]+β where p[x] indicates the initial prediction signal. The current chroma block (1111) can be reconstructed based on the prediction”.).
REGARDING CLAIM 2, as shown above, Xu ‘601 teaches all limitations of claim 1. Xu ‘601 further teaches that:
the luma corresponding block is one of the luma current block and a luma neighboring block neighboring the luma current block (As discussed above, with respect to claim 1, Xu ‘601 teaches a first luma block (1121) which corresponds to both the recited luma current block and the luma corresponding block. As such, the luma corresponding block is the luma current block.)
REGARDING CLAIM 3, as shown above, Xu ‘601 teaches all limitations of claim 1. Xu ‘601 further teaches that:
the luma block vector of the luma corresponding block is determined using one of an intra block copy (IBC) mode and an intra template matching prediction (intraTMP) mode to indicate the luma reference block for reconstructing the luma corresponding block (cf. Xu ‘601 col. 2 lines 4-6 and lines 57-58 and col. 27 lines 29-37. “[T]he first luma block is coded with a valid BV in the IBC mode or the IntraTMP mode.).
REGARDING CLAIM 7, as shown above, Xu ‘601 teaches all limitations of claim 1. Xu ‘601 further discloses:
determine a chroma reference region based on the chroma reference block (cf. Xu ‘601 FIG. 13 and col. 30 lines 16-46. As shown in FIG. 13, a reference template (1170) [i.e. a chroma reference region] is determined based on a reference chroma block (1131) [i.e. a chroma reference block]. See col. 30 lines 36-39.) ; and
determine a chroma current region based on the chroma current block (cf. Xu ‘601 FIG. 13 and col. 30 lines 16-46. As shown in FIG. 13, a current template (1160) [i.e. a chroma current region] is determined based on a current chroma block (1111) [i.e. a chroma current block]. See col. 30 lines 29-31.), wherein:
deriving the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block comprises deriving the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block based on the chroma reference region and the chroma current region,and reconstructing the chroma current block comprises reconstructing the chroma current block based on the chroma reference block and the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block (cf. Xu ‘601 col. 30 lines 16-46, noting that the chroma prediction model [i.e. LIC] is derived by determining LIC parameters – the scale, α, and offset, β – for the current chroma block (1111) “based on a current template (1160) [i.e. the chroma current region] of the current chroma block (1111) and a reference template (1170) [i.e. the chroma reference region] of the reference chroma block (1131)” [cf. Xu ‘601 col. 30 lines 28-33]. “A prediction (also referred to as a prediction signal) can be determined based on the initial prediction and the LIC parameters using the LIC mode. For example, the scale α and the offset β are obtained, and the prediction signal can be equal to α*p[x]+β where p[x] indicates the initial prediction signal. The current chroma block (1111) [i.e. the chroma current block ] can be reconstructed based on the prediction” [cf. Xu ‘601 col. 30 lines 39-45], where the initial prediction signal, p[x], “can be from the reference chroma block (1131) indicated by the chroma BV (1113)” [cf. Xu ‘601 col. 30 lines 26-27]).
REGARDING CLAIM 13, Xu ‘601 discloses an electronic device for decoding video data (e.g. decoder 110 of Xu ‘601 FIG. 1 or decoder 210 of Xu ‘601 FIG. 2, noting that Xu ‘601 discloses a decoder implemented as an electronic device [Xu ‘601 col. 4 lines 30-33]), the electronic device comprising:
one or more processors (e.g. “processing circuitry, such as the processing circuitry that performs functions of the video decoder (110), the processing circuitry that performs functions of the video decoder (210), and the like.” – cf. Xu ‘601 col. 31 lines 13-17);
one or more non-transitory computer-readable media coupled to the one or more processors and storing one or more computer-executable instructions (e.g. “a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions which when executed by a computer cause the computer to perform the method for video encoding/decoding” – cf. Xu ‘601 col. 3 lines 8-11. As shown in Xu ‘601 FIG. 16, computer readable media 1645, 1646, and 1647 are coupled to one or more processors, 1641 and 1642.)
Note that the functional steps set forth in claim 13 are substantially identical to those set forth in claim 1. As such, the rationales provided above in the rejection of claim 1 are applicable to the corresponding steps recited in claim 13. Therefore, Xu ‘601 anticipates the electronic device for decoding video data set forth in claim 13, for the same reasons articulated above with respect to claim 1.
REGARDING CLAIM 27, as shown above, Xu ‘601 teaches all limitations of claim 13. Note that the functional steps set forth in claim 27 are substantially identical to those set forth in claim 3. As such, the rationales provided above in the rejection of claim 3 are applicable to the corresponding steps recited in claim 27. Therefore, Xu ‘601 anticipates the electronic device for decoding video data set forth in claim 27, for the same reasons articulated above with respect to claim 3.
REGARDING CLAIM 30, Xu ‘601 discloses an electronic device for encoding video data (e.g. encoder 103 of Xu ‘601 FIG. 1 or encoder 303 of Xu ‘601 FIG. 3, noting that Xu ‘601 discloses an encoder implemented as an electronic device [Xu ‘601 col. 4 lines 30-33]), the electronic device comprising:
one or more processors (e.g. “processing circuitry, such as the processing circuitry that performs functions of the video encoder (103), the processing circuitry that performs functions of the video encoder (303), and the like” – cf. Xu ‘601 col. 33 lines 16-19);
one or more non-transitory computer-readable media coupled to the one or more processors and storing one or more computer-executable instructions (e.g. “a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions which when executed by a computer cause the computer to perform the method for video encoding/decoding” – cf. Xu ‘601 col. 3 lines 8-11. As shown in Xu ‘601 FIG. 16, computer readable media 1645, 1646, and 1647 are coupled to one or more processors, 1641 and 1642.)
Note that, according to Xu ‘601 (col. 8 lines 52-55), “decoder technology except the parsing/entropy decoding that is present in a decoder is present, in an identical or a substantially identical functional form, in a corresponding encoder”. Accordingly, the functional steps set forth in claim 30 are substantially identical to those set forth in claim 1. As such, the rationales provided above in the rejection of claim 1 are applicable to the corresponding steps recited in claim 30. Therefore, Xu ‘601 anticipates the electronic device for encoding video data set forth in claim 30, for the same reasons articulated above with respect to claim 1.
REGARDING CLAIM 31, as shown above, Xu ‘601 teaches all limitations of claim 30. Note that the functional steps set forth in claim 31 are substantially identical to those set forth in claim 3. As such, the rationales provided above in the rejection of claim 3 are applicable to the corresponding steps recited in claim 31. Therefore, Xu ‘601 anticipates the electronic device for encoding video data set forth in claim 31, for the same reasons articulated above with respect to claim 3.
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:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention
Claims 4-5, 28-29 and 32-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu ‘601 (U.S. Patent No. US 12,445,601 B2), in view of Zhang et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2025/0386011 A1).
REGARDING CLAIM 4, as shown above, Xu ‘601 teaches all limitations of claim 1. Xu ‘601 further teaches to:
determine a chroma reference region based on the chroma reference block (cf. Xu ‘601 FIG. 13 and col. 30 lines 10-46. A chroma reference region [e.g. reference template (1170) in FIG. 13], based on a chroma reference block [e.g. reference chroma block (1131)], is determined. See, for example, Xu ‘601 col. 30 lines 31-39.);
determine a luma reference region based on the luma reference block (cf. Xu ‘601 FIG. 10, FIG. 13, col. 21 lines 1-15, and col. 28, lines 43-53, noting that in the IBC-LIC mode of Xu ‘601 [col. 28, lines 43-53], a reference region [e.g. template (1020) in FIG. 10] is determined that corresponds to a reference block [e.g. reconstructed block (1021) in FIG. 10]. See col. 21 lines 1-15.)
cf. Xu ‘601 FIG. 13, col. 30 lines 22- 39, noting that LIC [i.e. the chroma prediction model] of a current chroma block (1111) [i.e. a chroma current block] is derived based on the reference template (1170) [i.e. the chroma reference region]).
However, Xu ‘601 does not expressly teach to:
derive the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block based on the chroma reference region and the luma reference region, wherein:
the chroma current block is reconstructed based on the luma corresponding block and the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block.
In contrast, Zhang et al., from a similar field of endeavor (i.e. chroma prediction in video coding) teaches:
deriving a chroma prediction model of the chroma current block based on the chroma reference region and the luma reference region (cf. Zhang et al. § 2.7, § 2.19, and § 2.28. A model [i.e. a chroma prediction model] “of cross-component prediction, such as CCLM or CCCM, in a block [i.e. a chroma current block – cf. Zhang et al. ¶ [0569]-[0570] ] may be derived based on a set of samples non-adjacent to the current block, known as non-adjacent cross-component prediction (NA-CCP)” [ ¶ 0555] ], such that the set of samples non-adjacent to the current block may comprise [ cf. ¶ [0558] ] “chroma samples [i.e. a chroma reference region] and/or their corresponding luma samples [i.e. a luma reference region]”, with “luma samples corresponding to a set of non-adjacent chroma samples may be prepared or generated, to be used to train the cross-component model” [ ¶ [0581] ]. See also ¶ [0133] in § 2.7 and ¶ [0272]-[0273] in § 2.19), wherein:
the chroma current block is reconstructed based on the luma corresponding block and the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block (cf. Zhang et al. FIG. 9, FIG. 10, FIG. 24, § 2.7, and § 2.19. As shown in ¶ [0133] line 6, for a CCLM chroma prediction model, the predicted chroma sample,
p
r
e
d
C
i
,
j
, used for reconstruction of the chroma current block is a linear function of the reconstructed luma samples,
r
e
c
L
i
,
j
, of the same CU [i.e. are based on the luma corresponding block]. Similarly, for a CCCM chroma prediction model, the predicted chroma sample, predChromaVal, used to reconstruct the chroma current block is based on a luma corresponding block(s) – i.e. “luma inputs” [ cf. ¶ [0272]-[0273] ], “collocated with the chroma sample to be predicted” [cf. ¶ [0268] line 5].).
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 decoder of Xu ‘601, to predict the chroma current block using NA-CCP, as taught by Zhang et al., in lieu of LIC, taught by Xu ‘601, in order to provide more flexible reference data for estimating chroma from luma (which LIC generally lacks), thereby improving compression efficiency and prediction quality (cf. Zhang et al. ¶ [0005] and ¶ [0108]).
REGARDING CLAIM 5, as shown above, Xu ‘601 teaches all limitations of claim 1.
However, Xu ‘601 does not expressly teach that:
the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block is determined using one of a plurality of intra prediction model modes including a cross-component linear model (CCLM) mode, a multi-model linear model (MMLM) mode, a convolutional cross-component intra prediction model (CCCM) mode, a gradient linear model (GLM) mode, and a slope adjustment of a linear model mode.
In contrast, Zhang et al., from a similar field of endeavor (i.e. chroma prediction in video coding) teaches that:
the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block is determined using one of a plurality of intra prediction model modes including a cross-component linear model (CCLM) mode, a multi-model linear model (MMLM) mode, a convolutional cross-component intra prediction model (CCCM) mode, a gradient linear model (GLM) mode, and a slope adjustment of a linear model mode (cf. Zhang et al. FIG. 32 § 2.24, and ¶ [0515]-[0525], noting that Zhang et al. teaches using each of the recited intra prediction model modes – cf. ¶ [0311]-[0318], listing “cross-component linear model (CCLM) mode, a multi-model linear model (MMLM) mode, a convolutional cross-component intra prediction model (CCCM)” mode, ¶ [0520], listing slope adjustment of a linear model [e.g. CCLM-L, MM-CCLM-L], and ¶ [0521], listing GLM. As shown in the binarization tree of FIG. 32 and ¶ [0518]-[0525], these modes are used as alternative intra prediction model modes for chroma prediction.).
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 decoder of Xu ‘601, to predict the chroma current block using any one of the cross-component prediction (CCP) models, taught by Zhang et al., in lieu of LIC, taught by Xu ‘601, in order to provide more flexible reference data for estimating chroma from luma (which LIC generally lacks), thereby improving compression efficiency and prediction quality (cf. Zhang et al. ¶ [0005] and ¶ [0108]).
REGARDING CLAIM 28, as shown above, Xu ‘601 teaches all limitations of claim 13. Note that the functional steps set forth in claim 28 are substantially identical to those set forth in claim 4. As such, the rationales provided above in the rejection of claim 4 are applicable to the corresponding steps recited in claim 28. Therefore, the electronic device for decoding video data set forth in claim 28 would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of the teachings of Xu ‘601 and Zhang et al., for the same reasons articulated above with respect to claim 4.
REGARDING CLAIM 29, as shown above, Xu ‘601 teaches all limitations of claim 13. Note that the functional steps set forth in claim 29 are substantially identical to those set forth in claim 5. As such, the rationales provided above in the rejection of claim 5 are applicable to the corresponding steps recited in claim 29. Therefore, the electronic device for decoding video data set forth in claim 29 would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of the teachings of Xu ‘601 and Zhang et al., for the same reasons articulated above with respect to claim 5.
REGARDING CLAIM 32, as shown above, Xu ‘601 teaches all limitations of claim 30. Note that the functional steps set forth in claim 32 are substantially identical to those set forth in claim 4. As such, the rationales provided above in the rejection of claim 4 are applicable to the corresponding steps recited in claim 32. Therefore, the electronic device for encoding video data set forth in claim 32 would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of the teachings of Xu ‘601 and Zhang et al., for the same reasons articulated above with respect to claim 4.
REGARDING CLAIM 33, as shown above, Xu ‘601 teaches all limitations of claim 30. Note that the functional steps set forth in claim 33 are substantially identical to those set forth in claim 5. As such, the rationales provided above in the rejection of claim 5 are applicable to the corresponding steps recited in claim 33. Therefore, the electronic device for encoding video data set forth in claim 33 would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of the teachings of Xu ‘601 and Zhang et al., for the same reasons articulated above with respect to claim 5.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu ‘601 (U.S. Patent No. US 12,445,601 B2), in view of Tsai et al. (Tsai, Chia-Ming et al. 2023. “Non-EE2: Cross-component merge mode for chroma intra coding”. Joint Video Experts Team (JVET). 29th Meeting. Document JVET-AC0315-v2, Jan. 16, 2023).
REGARDING CLAIM 6, as shown above, Xu ‘601 teaches all limitations of claim 1.
However, Xu ‘601 does not expressly teach that:
the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block is identical to a chroma reference model of the chroma reference block when chroma reference block is reconstructed based on the chroma reference model, and
the chroma reference model of the chroma current block is determined using one of a plurality of intra prediction model modes including a CCLM mode, a MMLM mode, a CCCM mode, a GLM mode, and a slope adjustment of a linear model mode
In contrast, Tsai et al., from a similar field of endeavor (i.e. chroma prediction in video coding) teaches that:
the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block is identical to a chroma reference model of the chroma reference block when chroma reference block is reconstructed based on the chroma reference model (cf. Tsai et al. pages 1-3. Tsai et al. teaches a cross-component merge [CCMerge] mode that involves “cross-component model parameters inheritance for the current chroma block from its spatial adjacent and non-adjacent neighbors”, where “spatial adjacent and non-adjacent neighboring information [i.e. information from chroma reference block(s)] is collected from the previously blocks coded [i.e. reconstructed] by CCLM, MMLM, CCCM, GLM, chroma fusion, and CCMerge modes” [cf. Tsai et al. Abstract and page 2 lines 5-12]. The “final cross-component model parameters of the current chroma block [i.e. the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block] can be inherited from its spatial adjacent and non-adjacent neighbors” when “the spatial adjacent and non-adjacent neighbors [i.e. chroma reference block(s)] are coded in [i.e. reconstructed based on] CCLM, MMLM, CCCM, GLM, chroma fusion, and CCMerge modes” [i.e. the chroma reference model(s)]. See Tsai et al. page 1 lines 21-25. Note that, in the case of CCCM being used, all parameters are inherited so that the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block is identical to a chroma reference model of the chroma reference block [cf. Tsai et al. page 2 lines 25-26]), and
the chroma reference model of the chroma current block is determined using one of a plurality of intra prediction model modes including a CCLM mode, a MMLM mode, a CCCM mode, a GLM mode, and a slope adjustment of a linear model mode (cf. Tsai et al. Section 2.1, noting that Tsai et al. discloses that any one of the listed intra prediction model modes, which includes CCLM, MMLM, CCCM, and GLM, can be inherited from the chroma reference block(s) and used as the chroma reference model of the chroma current block.).
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 decoder of Xu ‘601, so as to incorporate CCCM for cross-component prediction, with CCMerge mode for inheriting model parameters from reference blocks, as taught by Tsai et al., in order to allow for cross-component prediction (CCP) in chroma intra-coding to “be more efficient with less signaling overhead (cf. Tsai et al. page 1 lines 18-19).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu ‘601 (U.S. Patent No. US 12,445,601 B2), in view of Li et al. (Li, X. et al. 2022. “Non-EE2: On chroma intra prediction mode”. Joint Video Experts Team (JVET), 25th Meeting. Document JVET-Y0092-v3. January 14, 2022.).
REGARDING CLAIM 8, as shown above, Xu ‘601 teaches all limitations of claim 1. Xu ‘601 further teaches to:
predict the chroma current block based on the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block to generate a first chroma predicted block determined based on the luma block vector (cf. Xu ‘601 FIG. 13 and col. 30 lines 16-46, noting that a “prediction (also referred to as a prediction signal) can be determined based on the initial prediction and the LIC [i.e. the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block] parameters using the LIC mode. For example, the scale a and the offset β are obtained, and the prediction signal can be equal to α*p[x]+β where p[x] indicates the initial prediction signal” [Xu ‘601 col. 30 lines 39-44], which “can be from the reference chroma block (1131) indicated by the chroma BV (1113)” [Xu ‘601 col. 30 lines 26-27], which, in turn, “can be derived by scaling the first luma BV (1114)” [Xu ‘601 col. 28 lines 64-65]. As such, the aforesaid prediction signal [equal to α*p[x]+β] constitutes a first chroma predicted block determined based on the luma block vector.);
wherein[[; and]] reconstructing the chroma current block comprises reconstructing the chroma current block based on the chroma prediction block of the chroma current block (cf. Xu ‘601 col. 30 lines 10-15 and lines 44-46, noting that “the LIC is used to generate the chroma predictors” [col. 30 line 15], whereupon the “current chroma block (1111) [i.e. the chroma current block] can be reconstructed based on the prediction” [i.e. the chroma prediction block of the chroma current block]. See Xu ‘601 col. 30 lines 44-46.).
However, Xu ‘601 does not expressly teach to:
predict the chroma current block further based on one of a plurality of intra prediction modes other than a plurality of intra prediction model modes to generate a second chroma predicted block; and
weightedly combine the first chroma predicted block and the second chroma predicted block to generate a chroma prediction block of the chroma current block.
In contrast, Li et al., from a similar field of endeavor (i.e. chroma prediction in video coding) teaches to:
predict the chroma current block further based on one of a plurality of intra prediction modes other than a plurality of intra prediction model modes to generate a second chroma predicted block (cf. Li et al. pages 1-3 and page 4 lines 1-3. Li et al. proposes deriving two predictions, pred0 and pred1 [Li et al. page 3 line 4], where pred0 “is the predictor obtained by applying the non-LM mode” [Li et al. page 3 line 5] and pred1 is the predictor obtained by applying an LM-mode [Li et al. page 1 lines 6-7, page 2 lines 6-7, and page 3 § 2.2], with “LM” indicating “linear model”. A “non-LM mode”, such as any of the “DM and four default chroma intra modes” disclosed by Li et al. [page 1 line 8], constitutes an intra prediction mode other than a plurality of intra prediction model modes, when that limitation is given its broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the Applicant’s disclosure2. It follows that pred0 corresponds to the recited second chroma prediction block.); and
weightedly combine the first chroma predicted block and the second chroma predicted block to generate a chroma prediction block of the chroma current block (cf. Li et al. page 1 lines 6-8, page 2 lines 6-7 and page 3 § 2.2, noting that a chroma prediction block, pred, of the current block is derived through a “fusion”, or weighted sum [cf. Li et al. page 3 line 4], of the non-LM predictor, pred0 [i.e. the second chroma predicted block] and the LM predictor, pred1 [i.e. the first chroma predicted block]).
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 decoder of Xu ‘601, so as to apply a fusion of a non-linear model (non-LM) mode and a linear-model (LM) mode, as taught by Li et al., to the linear-model (i.e. LIC) taught by Xu ‘601, in order to achieve improvements to coding performance similar to those reported in Li et al. (cf. Abstract, Simulation Results, and Conclusion).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu ‘601 (U.S. Patent No. US 12,445,601 B2), in view of Li et al. (Li, X. et al. 2022. “Non-EE2: On chroma intra prediction mode”. Joint Video Experts Team (JVET), 25th Meeting. Document JVET-Y0092-v3. January 14, 2022.), and in further view of Huo et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2025/0294167 A1).
REGARDING CLAIM 9, Xu ‘601 and Li et al., as combined in the manner discussed above, have been shown to teach or suggest all limitations of claim 8. Li et al. further teaches that:
the plurality of intra prediction modes other than the plurality of intra prediction model modes includes a direct current (DC) mode, a Planar mode, and a plurality of intra angular modes (cf. Li et al. Introduction, noting that, among the non-LM modes [i.e. the intra prediction modes other than the plurality of intra prediction model modes] given in Li et al., are “[t]he four default modes are given by the list {0, 50, 18, 1}”. Though Li et al. does not expressly state that the values in this list correspond to a DC mode, a planar mode, and intra angular modes, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that, within the context of ECM 3.1 [cf. Li et al. page 1 lines 16-17], a default mode with a value of 0 corresponds to the PLANAR mode, a default mode with a value of 1 corresponds to the DC mode, and the values 18 and 50 correspond to intra angular modes.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify the decoder of Xu ‘601, so as to utilize the default intra mode list, shown in Li et al., in order to achieve improvements to coding performance similar to those reported in Li et al. (cf. Abstract, Simulation Results, and Conclusion).
However, neither Xu ‘601 nor Li et al. expressly teach that:
the plurality of intra prediction modes other than the plurality of intra prediction model modes includes a direct block vector (DBV) mode, a direct current (DC) mode, a Planar mode, and a plurality of intra angular modes.
In contrast, Huo et al., from a similar field of endeavor (i.e. chroma prediction in video coding) teaches that:
the plurality of intra prediction modes other than the plurality of intra prediction model modes includes a direct block vector (DBV) mode, a direct current (DC) mode, a Planar mode, and a plurality of intra angular modes (cf. Huo et al. ¶ [0043], ¶ [0203], ¶ [0281], ¶ [0287], ¶ [0487], Table 10, and Table 12, noting that, like Li et al., Huo et al. distinguishes between intra prediction model modes [i.e. those associated with a cclm_mode_idx and enabled when intra_mode_flag is asserted – cf. Table 12] and intra prediction modes other than the plurality of intra prediction model modes [i.e. those associated with dbv_flag and/or intra_chroma_pred_mode and enabled when CCLM is not enabled – cf. Table 12]. As shown in Table 10, the value of intra_chroma_pred_mode corresponds to default intra mode values of 0, 50, 18, and 1, where “0 represents the Planar mode, 1 represents the DC, 18 represents the horizontal prediction mode, 50 represents the vertical prediction mode” [cf. Huo et al. ¶ [0281] ], the horizontal and vertical prediction modes constituting a plurality of intra angular modes. Further note, from Table 10, that when intra_chroma_pred_mode has a value of 4, Direct Block Vector (INTRA_DBV) intra prediction mode is enabled. See also ¶ [0203] and ¶ [0487].).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify the decoder obtained by combining Xu ‘601 and Li et al., so as to utilize the pool of intra prediction modes other than the plurality of intra prediction model modes, disclosed in Huo et al., in order to address the problem of monotonicity in chroma prediction, make full use of the information of the collocated luma region, and effectively enhance the accuracy of chroma prediction (cf. Huo et al. ¶ [0287]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu ‘601 (U.S. Patent No. US 12,445,601 B2), in view of Xu ‘215 (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2023/0247215 A1).
REGARDING CLAIM 10, as shown above, Xu ‘601 teaches all limitations of claim 1.
However, Xu ‘601 does not expressly teach that:
the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block is before reconstructing the chroma current block.
In contrast, Xu ‘215, from a similar field of endeavor (i.e. VVC and/or ECM video coding) teaches that:
the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block is adjusted by at least one of a plurality of adjustment parameters before reconstructing the chroma current block (cf. Xu ‘215 FIG. 12A, FIG. 12B, FIG. 17 ¶ [0142]-[0160] . Xu ‘215 discloses adjusting the linear model [Xu ‘215 ¶ [0123] Eq. 4] used in CCLM [i.e. the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block] by adjusting a “slope adjustment parameter”, u, and an offset adjustment parameter yr . See FIG. 12A, FIG. 12B, ¶ [0143] Eq. 7, ¶ [0146], and ¶ [0147]-[0148]. According to the decoding process 1700, shown in FIG. 17, adjustment to the model [steps S1720-S1730] occurs before reconstruction of the chroma block [Step S1740].).
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 decoder of Xu ‘601, so as to apply parameters for adjusting the scale and offset of a linear model, as taught by Xu ‘215, to the scale and offset of the linear model (LIC) used in Xu ‘601, in order to provide a more content-adaptive way to choose luma-based adjustment values for chroma prediction, thereby rendering linear chroma prediction more responsive to local content (cf. Xu ‘215 ¶ [0140]-[0142] and ¶ [0161]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu ‘601 (U.S. Patent No. US 12,445,601 B2), in view of JVET-AC0071 (Huo, J et al. “EE2-3-1: Direct block vector mode for chroma prediction”. Joint Video Experts Team (JVET), 29th Meeting. Document JVET-AC0071-v1. January 4, 2023).
REGARDING CLAIM 11, as shown above, Xu ‘601 teaches all limitations of claim 1. Xu ‘601 further teaches to:
determine whether a tree type of the chroma current block is a dual tree (cf. Xu ‘601 FIG. 13, FIG. 14, col. 21 lines 21-62, col. 25 lines 35-56, col. 26 lines 10-20 and lines 59-61, col. 27 line 15, and col. 30 lines 61-67 through col. 31 lines 1-10, noting that Xu ‘601 refers to dual tree, “separate coding tree”, and “chroma separate tree (CST)” interchangeably. See, for example, FIG. 14 Step S1410 and col. 26 lines 10-13. Xu ‘601 teaches evaluating a flag, sps_qtbtt_dual_tree_intra_flag, “indicating that the luma coding region (1120) and the chroma coding region (1110) are partitioned using two separate coding tree structures” [i.e. determining that the tree type of the chroma coding region, including the chroma current block, is a dual tree]. See FIG. 14 Step S1410, col. 30 lines 61-65, and FIG. 13, noting that the chroma and luma regions depicted therein display separate coding structures.);
when the tree type of the chroma current block is the dual tree, determine, from the video data, a syntax element indicating whether the chroma current block is reconstructed based on the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block derived based on the luma block vector (cf. Xu ‘601 FIG. 14, col. 25 lines 28-56, col. 28 lines 54-61, and col. 30 lines 10-46, noting that, in the separate-tree (CST) [cf. col. 25 lines 35-49] decoding embodiment, depicted in FIG. 14, an intra prediction mode or IBC mode may be signaled in the bitstream [i.e. video data] “indicating that (i) the chroma prediction mode of the current chroma block (1111) is derived from the luma coding information of the first luma block (1121) or (ii) the chroma BV (1113) is derived from the first luma BV (1114) of the first luma block (1121)” [cf. Xu ‘601 col. 28 lines 54-61]. Within the context of the VVC-based video coding [cf. Xu ‘601 col. 4 lines 40-43] disclosed by Xu ‘601, the signaled intra prediction mode or IBC mode information would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to constitute a syntax element. In the case of the IBC-LIC mode disclosed by Xu ‘601 [cf. col. 30 lines 10-46], this information indicates that LIC [i.e. the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block] is used to arrive at a prediction upon which the reconstruction [cf. Xu ‘601 col. 30 lines 44-46] of the current chroma block is based.).
However, Xu ‘601 does not expressly teach that:
when the tree type of the chroma current block is not the dual tree, ignore determining the syntax element from the video data.
In contrast, JVET-AC0071, from a similar field of endeavor (i.e. VVC and/or ECM video coding) teaches that:
when the tree type of the chroma current block is not the dual tree, ignore determining the syntax element from the video data (cf. JVET-AC0071 pages 1-2. JVET-AC0071 teaches conditionally signaling the use of “[BVs] of corresponding luma blocks to derive the prediction for chroma components when dual tree is activated in intra slice” [cf. JVET-AC0071 Abstract]. In particular, JVET-AC0071 proposes, in implementation 3.1a, adding a signaled DBV bin to the intra_chroma_pred_mode syntax [cf. Table 2], when dual tree is activated in an intra slice [cf. JVET-AC0071 page 2 lines 5-6 ] in order “to indicate whether the CU is coded as DBV [Direct Block Vector] mode or not” [cf. JVET-AC0071 page 2 line 9], while the baseline intra_chroma_pred_mode syntax shown in Table 1 contains no DBV bin. Thus, when it is not the case that “dual tree is activated in intra slice”, the DBV syntax for this block-vector-based tool for “deriv[ing] the prediction for chroma components” is not signaled in the bitstream and, as such, it is not parsed – i.e. it is “ignored”, when that term is given its broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the Applicant’s disclosure 3).
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 decoder of Xu ‘601, so as to apply the conditional intra prediction mode signaling method, disclosed by JVET-AC0071, to the analogous bitstream-signaled intra prediction mode information of Xu ‘601, in order to realize coding efficiency gains (cf. JVET-AC0071 page 1 lines 6-11 and page 2 line 5) by avoiding unnecessary signaling and parsing when a luma-BV based chroma prediction tool (e.g. IBC-LIC) is inapplicable.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu ‘601 (U.S. Patent No. US 12,445,601 B2), in view of Huo et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2025/0294167 A1).
REGARDING CLAIM 12, as shown above, Xu ‘601 teaches all limitations of claim 1. Xu ‘601 further teaches:
determine whether a slice type of the chroma current block is [[a ]]an I-slice type (cf. Xu ‘601 FIG. 13, col. 26 lines 10-19 and col. 30 lines 61-67 through col. 31 lines 1-10, noting that “coding information in the bitstream includes a flag (e.g., sps_qtbtt_dual_tree_intra_flag) indicating that the luma coding (1120) region and the chroma (1110) coding region [which contains the chroma current block] are partitioned using two separate coding tree structures” [Xu ‘601 col. 30 lines 61-64], where “the flag sps_qtbtt_dual_tree_intra_flag equal to 1 specifies that, for I slices, each CTU is split into coding units ... and these coding units are the root of two separate coding_tree syntax structure” [Xu ‘601 col. 30 line 67 to col. 31 lines 1-4]; and sps_qtbtt_dual_tree_intra_flag “equal to 0 specifies separate coding_tree syntax structure is not used for I slices … [and w]hen sps_qtbtt_dual_tree_intra_flag is not present, it is inferred to be equal to 0” [Xu ‘601 col. 30 line 67 to col. 31 lines 6-10]. Further note that picture (1101) in the embodiment depicted in FIG. 13 is an “intra picture (I picture)” [Xu ‘601 col. 26 lines 15-20].);
when the slice type of the chroma current block is the I-slice type, determine, from the video data, a syntax element indicating whether the chroma current block is reconstructed based on the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block derived based on the luma block vector (cf. Xu ‘601 FIG. 13, FIG. 14, col. 25 lines 28-50, col. 26 lines 15-20, col. 28 lines 54-61, and col. 30 lines 10-46, noting that the embodiment shown in FIG. 13 and FIG. 14 is applied when the frame is an I picture [cf. Xu ‘601 col. 26 lines 15-20 and FIG. 13] using a dual-tree coding structure such that, when the slice type of the chroma current block is the I-slice type, intra prediction mode or IBC mode may be signaled in the bitstream [i.e. video data] “indicating that (i) the chroma prediction mode of the current chroma block (1111) is derived from the luma coding information of the first luma block (1121) or (ii) the chroma BV (1113) is derived from the first luma BV (1114) of the first luma block (1121)” [cf. Xu ‘601 col. 28 lines 54-61]. Within the context of the VVC-based video coding [cf. Xu ‘601 col. 4 lines 40-43] disclosed by Xu ‘601, the signaled intra prediction mode or IBC mode information would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to constitute a syntax element. In the case of the IBC-LIC mode disclosed by Xu ‘601 [cf. col. 30 lines 10-46], this information indicates that LIC [i.e. the chroma prediction model of the chroma current block] is used to arrive at a prediction upon which the reconstruction [cf. Xu ‘601 col. 30 lines 44-46] of the current chroma block is based.);
However, Xu ‘601 does not expressly teach:
when the slice type of the chroma current block is not the I-slice type, ignore determining
In contrast, Huo et al., from a similar field of endeavor (i.e. VVC and/or ECM video coding) teaches that:
when the slice type of the chroma current block is not the I-slice type, ignore determining the syntax element from the video data (cf. Huo et al. ¶ [0477]-[0487] and Table 12 to Table 16. As the syntax in Table 12 shows, the syntax element dbv_flag is parsed only if DbvEnabled == 1. However, for DbvEnabled to be equal to 1 sh_slice must be equal to I [cf. Huo et al. ¶ [0480] and [0482]; otherwise DbvEnabled is set to 0 and the syntax element dbv_flag is inferred to FALSE rather than parsed [ cf. Huo et al. ¶ [0486] ] . Thus, when the slice type is not the I-slice type [i.e. sh_slice is not equal to I], the syntax element dbv_flag, controlling the use of a luma-vector-based chroma prediction tool [cf. Huo et al. ¶ [0202]-[0203] is not parsed – i.e. it is “ignored” [see the discussion above with respect to claim 11].).
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 decoder of Xu ‘601, so as to apply the conditional intra prediction mode signaling method, disclosed by Huo et al., to the analogous bitstream-signaled intra prediction mode information of Xu ‘601, in order to "[reduce] the bitrate ... [and improve] the encoding and decoding efficiency" (cf. Huo et al. ¶ [0292] lines 22-25) by avoiding unnecessary signaling and parsing when a luma-BV based chroma prediction tool (e.g. IBC-LIC) is inapplicable to a given slice.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see PTO 892 for additional references.
Chiang et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2026/0230650 A1, METHOD AND APPARATUS OF TRANSFORM SELECTION DEPENDING ON INTRA PREDICTION MODE IN VIDEO CODING SYSTEM. Published: August 06, 2026; Earliest Provisional Application Filing Date: February 24, 2023.
Relevance: Chiang et al. concerns selecting or controlling transforms based on the prediction mode of a block, while discussing extensively several intra-prediction tools – e.g. IntraTMP, TIMD, DIMD, angular prediction, CCLM, MMLM, CCCM, GLM, and chroma prediction fusion. Chiang et al. discusses multi-hypothesis/fused chroma prediction, including weighted fusion of non-linear-model and linear-model predictions, as well as the conditional use of coding tools based on slice/tree-type conditions.
Youvalari et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2024/0292005 A1, AN APPARATUS, A METHOD, AND A COMPUTER PROGRAM FRO VIDEO CODING AND DECODING. Published August 29, 2024; Parent PCT Filed: June 07, 2022.
Relevance: Youvalari et al. discloses cross-component prediction by deriving a CCLM-type model and then tuning its parameters based on the prediction error using reconstructed luma and chroma samples from neighboring regions. Youvalari et al. discloses that separate luma and chroma partitioning are enabled in I-slices, and in dual-tree operation CCLM is permitted for certain luma and chroma partitioning configurations and prohibited in others.
Deng et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2022/0248025 A1, METHODS AND APPARATUSES FOR CROSS-COMPONENT PREDICTION. Published August 04, 2022.
Relevance: Deng et al. discuss cross-component prediction extensively, including cross-component model derivation using non-local reference samples, multi-hypothesis/weighted fusion of a cross-component prediction and non-cross-component prediction, such as direct-mode or other intra prediction mode. Deng et al. also contemplates applying methods to either single tree or dual tree coding schema.
Nader et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2025/0039357 A1, CHROMA PREDICTION FOR VIDEO ENCODING AND DECODING BASED ON TEMPLATE MATCHING. Published January 30, 2025. Parent PCT Filed: August 29, 2022.
Relevance: Naser et al. applies template matching to chroma prediction using a template-matching derived luma block vector to determine corresponding chroma block vectors and chroma blocks (cf. Naser et al. FIG. 8). Naser et al. additionally discloses a related luma-guided template matching method for chroma prediction where dual coding trees are expressly applied.
Zhu et al. 2021. “Adaptive Dual Tree Structure for Screen Content Coding. IEEE Internation Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, p. 1550-1554.
Relevance: Zhu et al. proposes adaptively switching each CTU between dual-tree operation and single-tree operation via a signaled flag (cf. Zhu et al. FIG. 4). Zhu et al. also states that VVC dual tree can be enabled only for intra. Zhu et al. indicates that a general design pattern involving gating coding functionality according to whether the coding structure is dual tree or single tree is known in the art.
Li et al. 2022. Adaptive Cross Component Linear Model for Chroma Intra-Prediction in VVC. 10th International Conference on Communications and Broadcast Networking (ICCBN), February 25-27, 2022, Shanghai, China. ACM, New York, NY.
Relevance: Li et al. proposes an enhanced CCLM based on polynomial regression and texture-complexity. Li et al. discusses prior use of multi-hypothesis combinations of angular prediction modes and CCLM. Li et al. additionally state that separate block partitioning for luma and chroma is enabled in I slices., so a chroma block may correspond to multiple luma blocks and, as a consequence, for chroma direct mode, the intra mode of a luma block corresponding to the center position of the chroma coding block is inherited.
Zhang, K et al. 2023. “Non-EE2: Non-Local Cross-Component Prediction”. Joint Video Experts Team (JVET), 29th Meeting, 11-20 January 2023. Document: JVET-AC0176-v3.
Relevance: Zhang et al. proposes deriving a CCCM chroma model from non-adjacent reference regions and, alternatively, inheriting previously derived CCCM and/or CCLM models from a history table.
Wang, Y et al. 2023. “EE2-3.8: Combination of chroma IBC tests”. Joint Video Experts Team (JVET), 29th Meeting, 11-20 January 2023. Document: JVET-AC0125-v4
Relevance: Wang et al. disclose a dual-tree chroma direct block vector (DBV) chroma prediction method in which a block vector, determined via an IBC or intraTMP-coded luma block, is scaled to obtain a chroma block vector. This chroma block vector is then used to identify a chroma reference block location.
Le Léannec, F. 2022. “Cross-check of JVET AB0131: EE2-3.1a: IntraTMP for chroma component”. Joint Video Experts Team (JVET), 28th Meeting, Mainz, Germany, 20-28 October 2022. Document: JVET-AB0213-v1.
Relevance: Le Léannec et al. discuss extending intraTMP from an application to solely luma blocks to an application to chroma blocks.
Li, X et al. 2022. “EE2-1.2: On chroma intra prediction.” Joint Video Experts Team (JVET), 26th Meeting, 20-29 April 2022. Document: JVET Z0051-v1.
Relevance: Li et al. proposes chroma intra-prediction techniques that include deriving a chroma mode from collocated reconstructed luma samples. Li et al. further disclose fusing non-linear model predictors with an MMLM_LT cross-component predictor, where the fusion is conditionally applied to I slices.
Naser et al. 2022. “IntraTMP for chroma Components”. Joint Video Experts Team (JVET), 28th Meeting, Mainz, Germany, 20-28 October 2022. Document: JVET-AB0131.
Relevance: Naser et al. extend intraTMP from luma to chroma, providing a background for a chroma intraTMP and block vector guided prediction framework similar to the Applicant’s claimed invention.
Naser et al. 2022. “EE2-3.1a: IntraTMP for chroma component”. Joint Video Experts Team (JVET), 27th Meeting, 13-22 July 2022. Document: JVET-AA0044-r2.
Relevance: Naser et al. proposes enabling intraTMP for both chroma components when a separate chroma tree/dual tree is activated in an I slice, with a coding-unit level flag signaling use of this mode. The disclosed syntax gating based on coding tree type and/or slice type is similar those of the Applicant’s claimed invention.
Naser et al. 2023. “EE2-2.1: Block Vector Guided Chroma Direct Mode”. Joint Video Experts Team (JVET), 31st Meeting, Geneva, Switzerland, 11-19 July 2023. Document: JVET-AE0186.
Relevance: This document post-dates the claimed priority date of the instant application. However, they are cited here for their technical and contextual relevance, rather than as prior art, unless a particular claim of the instant application is not entitled to the March 20, 2023 provisional filing date.
Naser et al. modifies chroma direct mode so that, when a collocated luma block uses IBC or intraTMP, its block vector identifies a reference luma block with an inherited intra prediction mode during chroma prediction. Naser et al. discloses that CCCM parameters are obtained from luma blocks determined by luma block-vectors rather than the collocated location. The prediction mode is then obtained from the reference luma block pointed to by the luma block-vector.
Youvalari et al. 2023. “AHG12: Block vector guided CCCM”. Joint Video Experts Team (JVET), 30th Meeting, Antalya, Türkiye, 21-28 April 2023. Document JVET-AD100-v1.
Relevance: This document post-dates the claimed priority date of the instant application. However, they are cited here for their technical and contextual relevance, rather than as prior art, unless a particular claim of the instant application is not entitled to the March 20, 2023 provisional filing date.
Youvalari et al. disclose a block-vector guided CCCM in which the block vector of a collocated luma block, determined via IBC or intraTMP, points to a non-local reference area. This reference area is then used to derive the CCCM chroma prediction model. This disclosure mirrors many, if not most, aspects of the Applicant’s claimed invention.
Huo J. et al. 2024. “Non-EE2: Block vector guided LUT for chroma prediction”. Joint Video Experts Team (JVET), 33rd Meeting, 17-26 January 2024. Document: JVET-AG0121-v3
Relevance: This document post-dates the claimed priority date of the instant application. However, they are cited here for their technical and contextual relevance, rather than as prior art, unless a particular claim of the instant application is not entitled to the March 20, 2023 provisional filing date.
Huo et al. discloses a block-vector (BV) guided cross-component LUT in which BVs from collocated luma blocks, derived from IBC or intraTMP, are used to identify reference regions that are, in turn, used to derive a LUT mapping luma values to chroma values. The mapping described in the LUT is used to predict the chroma block. Huo et al. indicates that the disclosed method expressly operates when dual tree is activated in an I slice.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN SIANGCHIN whose telephone number is (571)270-0982. The examiner can normally be reached M, W-F 10:00am-06:00pm and Tu 09:00am-05:00pm 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, Jamie Atala can be reached at (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 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.
/K S/
Examiner
Art Unit 2486
/K S/ Examiner, Art Unit 2486
/JAMIE J ATALA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2486
1 Note that this construction is consistent with the Applicant’s disclosure where, in claim 2 and in ¶ [0081] of the Specification, for example, the Applicant expressly contemplates embodiments in which the luma current block is determined as the luma corresponding block.
2 See, for example, ¶ [0023] and ¶ [0027] of the Applicant’s specification.
3 See, for example, ¶ [0148] lines 11-14 of the Applicant’s specification.
Prosecution Insights