DETAILED ACTION
The communication is in response to the application and preliminary amendment, both received September 18, 2025, wherein:
claims 1-13 are cancelled; and
claims 14-26 are added.
Accordingly, claims 14-26 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 (U.S. Provisional Application No. 63/458,940, filed on April 13, 2023, and U.S. Provisional Application No. 63/454,721, filed on March 27, 2023) under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on September 18, 2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
On page 28 ¶ [0159] line 2, the Specification refers to “the DM mode”. The acronym DM is not defined anywhere in the Specification.
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 26 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 26, the preamble recites “a method for transmitting a bitstream generated by an image encoding method”, yet the body of the claim recites only the steps corresponding to an image encoding method. No step is claimed that pertains to transmitting a bitstream. It is unclear, therefore, whether the claim is directed to a method for transmitting a bitstream or to an image encoding method. As such, the metes and bounds of the claimed invention are not sufficiently defined and the claim is indefinite.
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 14-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Pfaff et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2023/0328287 A1).
REGARDING CLAIM 14, Pfaff et al. discloses a video decoding method (cf. Pfaff et al. FIG. 4), comprising:
determining whether a matrix-based intra prediction (MIP) mode is applied to a current block (cf. Pfaff et al. FIG. 6 and Abstract lines 4-14, noting that a “one out of a list (204) of matrix-based intra-prediction modes” is used to “to predict samples (108) of the predetermined block (18) by computing a matrix-vector product (206) between an input vector (102) derived from reference samples (17) in a neighbourhood of the predetermined block (18) and a prediction matrix (19) associated with the matrix-based intra-prediction mode (k) pointed to by the mode index (200)”, where “the predetermined block (18)” constitutes the recited “current block) ; and
generating a prediction block of the current block based on the MIP mode being applied to the current block (cf. Pfaff et al. FIG. 6 and Abstract lines 4-14, noting that a “one out of a list (204) of matrix-based intra-prediction modes” is used to “to predict samples (108) of the predetermined block (18) by computing a matrix-vector product (206) between an input vector (102) derived from reference samples (17) in a neighbourhood of the predetermined block (18) and a prediction matrix (19) associated with the matrix-based intra-prediction mode (k) pointed to by the mode index (200)”, where “the predetermined block (18)” constitutes the recited current block),
wherein the prediction block is generated based on a left reference sample or a top reference sample of the current block (cf. Pfaff et al. FIG. 5.1 through FIG. 5.4, ¶ [0058], and ¶ [0069]-[0070], where input boundary 17a,
b
d
r
y
l
e
f
t
, constitutes a left reference sample of the current block and input boundary 17c,
b
d
r
y
t
o
p
, constitutes a top reference sample of the current block. As shown in FIG. 5.1 through 5.4, these samples are used to generate the prediction block
p
r
e
d
.).
REGARDING CLAIM 15, as shown above, Pfaff et al. teaches all limitations of claim 14. Pfaff et al. further teaches that:
the prediction block is generated based on the top reference sample in at least one top reference sample line (cf. Pfaff et al. FIG. 5.1 through FIG. 5.4 and ¶ [0056]. “Affine-linear weighted intra prediction (ALWIP) (or MIP) may take … one line of W reconstructed neighbouring boundary samples above the block as input”, where “one line of … reconstructed neighbouring boundary samples above the block” [i.e. the row to which
b
d
r
y
t
o
p
belongs] constitutes at least one top reference sample line. As shown in FIG. 5.1 through FIG. 5.4, the line of boundary samples above the block includes
b
d
r
y
t
o
p
, the top reference sample, which is used to generate the prediction
p
r
e
d
.).
REGARDING CLAIM 16, as shown above, Pfaff et al. teaches all limitations of claim 15. Pfaff et al. further teaches that:
the top reference sample includes a top-right reference sample of the current block (cf. Pfaff et al. FIG. 5.1 through FIG. 5.4, ¶ [0058], ¶ [0067]-[0070], ¶ [0073], and ¶ [0094]. As shown in FIG. 5.1 through FIG. 5.4,
b
d
r
y
t
o
p
[17c], the top reference sample, may include a top-right reference sample of the current block. See, for example, the annotated figure [drawn from Pfaff et al. FIG. 5.1] below).
PNG
media_image1.png
496
890
media_image1.png
Greyscale
REGARDING CLAIM 17, as shown above, Pfaff et al. teaches all limitations of claim 14. Pfaff et al. further teaches that:
the prediction block is generated based on the left reference sample in at least one left reference sample line (cf. Pfaff et al. FIG. 5.1 through FIG. 5.4 and ¶ [0056]. “Affine-linear weighted intra prediction (ALWIP) (or MIP) may take one line of H reconstructed neighbouring boundary samples left of the block … as input”, where “one line of … reconstructed neighbouring boundary samples left of the block” [i.e. the column to which
b
d
r
y
l
e
f
t
belongs] constitutes at least one left reference sample line. As shown in FIG. 5.1 through FIG. 5.4, the line of boundary samples left of the block includes
b
d
r
y
l
e
f
t
, the left reference sample, which is used to generate the prediction
p
r
e
d
.).
REGARDING CLAIM 18, as shown above, Pfaff et al. teaches all limitations of claim 17. Pfaff et al. further teaches that:
the left reference sample includes a bottom-left reference sample of the current block (cf. Pfaff et al. FIG. 5.1 through FIG. 5.4, ¶ [0058], ¶ [0067]-[0070], ¶ [0073], and ¶ [0094]. As shown in FIG. 5.1 through FIG. 5.4,
b
d
r
y
l
e
f
t
[17a], the left reference sample, may include a bottom-left reference sample of the current block. See, for example, the annotated figure [drawn from Pfaff et al. FIG. 5.1] below).
PNG
media_image2.png
498
888
media_image2.png
Greyscale
REGARDING CLAIM 19, as shown above, Pfaff et al. teaches all limitations of claim 14. Pfaff et al. further teaches that:
the prediction block is generated based on the left reference sample and the top reference sample of the current block (cf. Pfaff et al. FIG. 5.1 through FIG. 5.4, ¶ [0075], ¶ [0084], and ¶ [0090], noting that the “two reduced boundaries
b
d
r
y
r
e
d
t
o
p
[i.e. a top reference sample of the current block] and
b
d
r
y
r
e
d
l
e
f
t
[i.e. the left reference sample of the current block] may be concatenated to a reduced boundary vector
b
d
r
y
r
e
d
(associated to the reduced set 102), also indicated with 17P” [cf. ¶ [0075] lines 1-4 and FIG. 5.1 through FIG. 5.4]. As shown in FIG. 5.1 through FIG. 5.4,
b
d
r
y
r
e
d
is then used to generate the prediction
p
r
e
d
. See also ¶ [0084] lines 1-3 and ¶ [0090].).
REGARDING CLAIM 20, as shown above, Pfaff et al. teaches all limitations of claim 19. Pfaff et al. further teaches that:
at least one of the left reference sample or the top reference sample is adjacent to the current block (cf. Pfaff et al. FIG. 5.1 through FIG. 5.4, noting that left reference sample,
b
d
r
y
l
e
f
t
[17a], and top reference sample,
b
d
r
y
t
o
p
[17c], are both adjacent to the current block.).
REGARDING CLAIM 21, as shown above, Pfaff et al. teaches all limitations of claim 19. Pfaff et al. further teaches that:
the left reference sample includes a bottom-left reference sample of the current block, and the top reference sample includes a top-right reference sample of the current block. (cf. Pfaff et al. FIG. 5.1 through FIG. 5.4. As shown above, with respect to claim 18, the left reference sample includes a bottom-left reference sample of the current block. As shown above, with respect to claim 16, the top reference sample includes a top-right reference sample of the current block. Please refer to the corresponding discussion above.).
REGARDING CLAIM 22, as shown above, Pfaff et al. teaches all limitations of claim 19. Pfaff et al. further teaches that:
based on the MIP mode being applied to the current block, it is determined whether the MIP mode is performed based on the left reference sample or the top reference sample (cf. Pfaff et al.. FIG. 6, Abstract lines 4-14, and ¶ [0007], ¶ [0057]-[0060], noting that a “mode index (200) points to one out of a list (204) of matrix-based intra-prediction modes” [Abstract lines 4-5]. Based on the indicated matrix-based intra-prediction (MIP) mode, “predicted samples (108) of the predetermined block (18) [are determined] by computing a matrix-vector product (206) between an input vector (102) derived from reference samples (17) in a neighbourhood of the predetermined block (18) and a prediction matrix (19) associated with the matrix based intra-prediction mode (k)” [Abstract lines 5-11], where “[t]he reference samples represent, for example, samples left of the predetermined block and samples above the predetermined block” [¶ [0007] lines 20-24]. Note that Pfaff et al. suggests here that MIP is performed, in accordance to mode k, for example, based on the left reference sample and the top reference sample. This teaching is, however, within the scope of the recited disjunction, “based on the left reference sample or the top reference sample”, of claim 22, when this limitation is given its broadest reasonable interpretation, consistent with the Applicant’s disclosure. See, for example, ¶ [0197] Equation 5 and ¶ [0272] of the Applicant’s Specification.).
REGARDING CLAIM 23, as shown above, Pfaff et al. teaches all limitations of claim 22. Pfaff et al. further teaches that:
whether the MIP mode is performed based on the left reference sample or the top reference sample is determined based on information obtained from a bitstream (cf. Pfaff et al. FIG. 6, Abstract lines 4-14 and lines 39-41 and ¶ [0007]. As shown above, with respect to claim 21, Pfaff et al. teaches that, according to an indicated matrix-based intra-prediction (MIP) mode, matrix-based intra-prediction is preformed based on the left reference sample,
b
d
r
y
l
e
f
t
, and the top reference sample,
b
d
r
y
t
o
p
. The MIP mode is indicated by information [i.e. a mode index or MIP index [200]] obtained from a bitstream [e.g. data stream 12]. See FIG. 6 and ¶ [0007] lines 5-6.).
REGARDING CLAIM 24, Pfaff et al. discloses a video encoding method performed by a video encoding apparatus (cf. Pfaff et al. FIG. 2). Note that the disclosure of Pfaff et al. regarding matrix-based intra-prediction (MIP) applies to both encoding and decoding processes. See, for example, Pfaff et al. ¶ [0054]-[0055]. Further note that the limitations of claim 24 are recited in a substantially identical manner as the corresponding limitations of claim 14. Therefore, the rationales given above with respect to the limitations of claim 14 are applicable to the corresponding encoding steps recited in claim 24. Accordingly, the encoding method set forth in claim 24 is anticipated by Pfaff et al. for the same reasons articulated above with respect to claim 14.
REGARDING CLAIM 25, please note the following:
A bit stream generated by a method, the method comprising… is a product by process claim limitation where the product is the bit stream and the process is the method steps to generate the bitstream. MPEP §2113 recites “Product-by-Process claims are not limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps”. Thus, the scope of the claim is the storage medium storing the bitstream (with the structure implied by the method steps). The structure includes the information and samples manipulated by the steps.
“To be given patentable weight, the printed matter and associated product must be in a functional relationship. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated”. 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 storage medium storing the claimed bitstream in claim 18 merely serves as a support for the storage of the bitstream and provides no functional relationship between the stored bitstream and storage medium. 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 Pfaff et al. which recites a storage medium storing a bitstream (cf. Pfaff et al. ¶ [0154]).
REGARDING CLAIM 26, Pfaff et al. discloses a method for transmitting a bitstream generated by an video encoding method (cf. Pfaff et al. [0160]). As discussed above, with respect to the rejection of claim 24, Pfaff et al. discloses a video encoding method comprising steps that are substantially identical to those set forth in claim 26. As such, the rationales provided above in the rejection of claim 24 are applicable to the corresponding steps set forth in claim 26. Therefore, Pfaff et al. anticipates the method for transmitting a bitstream generated by a video encoding method set forth in claim 26, for the same reasons articulated above with respect to claim 24.
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.
Kang et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2022/0070482 A1. METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR INTRA-PREDICTION CODING OF VIDEO DATA, Published: March 03, 2022.
Relevance: Kang et al. discloses intra-prediction methods, involving matrix-based intra-prediction (MIP), where boundary reference samples are analyzed for directional characteristics relative to the coding block, a MIP mode is selected accordingly, and, based on the selected MIP mode, a left column of neighboring reference samples, a top row of neighboring reference samples, or both are used to derive a prediction for the coding block using MIP.
Deng et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2022/0264124 A1. SYNTAX SIGNALING AND PARSING BASED ON COLOUR COMPONENT, Published: August 18, 2022.
Relevance: Deng et al. discloses generating a prediction block using selected reconstructed neighboring samples from the top row and/or left neighboring column adjacent to the current block. In particular, Deng et al. teaches that only selected neighboring samples may be used, such that the top sample row size and/or left sample column size need not correspond to the full width and/or height, respectively, of the current block. Deng et al. also teaches that MIP may be used in conjunction with multiple-reference line (MRL) prediction, where MIP uses reconstructed neighboring samples from a designated reference line rather than strictly the adjacent reference line(s).
Le Leannec et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2023/0024223 A1. INTRA SUB PARTITIONS FOR VIDEO ENCODING AND DECODING COMBINED WITH MULTIPLE TRANSFORM SELECTION, MATRIX WEIGHTED INTRA PREDICTION OR MULTI-REFERENCE-LINE INTRA PREDICTION, Published: January 26, 2023.
Relevance: Le Leannec et al. is directed to combining existing VVC intra-coding tools, including intra sub-partitioning (ISP), MIP, and MRL intra-prediction within a unified coding framework.
Ramasubramonian et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 2020/0359033 A1. AFFINE LINEAR WEIGHTED INTRA PREDICTION IN VIDEO CODING. Published: November 12, 2020.
Relevance: Ramasubramonian et al. discloses affine weighted intra prediction (ALWIP) – aka MIP – in conjunction with MRL intra-prediction, with reference lines being selectable as sources for reference samples.
Rapaka et al., U.S. Patent No. US 11252418 B2. Multi-stage Block Coding. Published: February 15, 2022.
Relevance: Rapaka et al. discloses a multi-stage block coding method that includes MIP. In particular, Rapaka et al. discloses that the matrices used in MIP can be derived using neural network and/or machine learning techniques.
Pfaff, J. et al. “CE3: Affine linear weighted intra prediction (CE3-4.1, CE3-4.2)”. Joint Video Experts Team (JVET) of ITU-T SG 16 WP 3 and ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 29/WG 11 14th Meeting: Geneva, CH, DOCUMENT: JVET-N0217, 19–27 March 2019.
Relevance: Pfaff et al. discloses the foundational MIP framework from which the MIP tool in VVC evolved. Pfaff et al. describes the use of neighboring boundary samples, prediction matrices, and mode signaling.
Coban M. et al. “Algorithm description of Enhanced Compression Model 8 (ECM 8)”. Joint Video Experts Team (JVET) of ITU-T SG 16 WP 3 and ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 29 29th Meeting, by teleconference, DOCUMENT: JVET-AC2025, 11–20 January 2023
Relevance: Coban et al. provides a description of coding tools and methods implemented in the Enhanced Compression Model (ECM 8), including MIP.
Chen, J. etal. "Algorithm description for Versatile Video Coding and Test Model 8 (VTM 8)" Joint Video Experts Team (JVET) of ITU-T SG 16 WP 3 and ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 29/WG 11 17th Meeting: Brussels, BE, DOCUMENT: JVET-Q2002-v3, 7–17 January 2020
Relevance: Chen et al. discloses the coding tools and methods of the VVC Test Model (VTM 8), including the use of MIP as one of the standardized intra-prediction tools.
Schäfer, M et al., "Efficient Fixed-Point Implementation Of Matrix-Based Intra Prediction," 2020 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 2020, pp. 3364-3368, doi: 10.1109/ICIP40778.2020.9190883.
Relevance: Schäfer et al. discloses an efficient fixed-point implementation of MIP using trained prediction matrices. Schäfer et al. provides a technical background for the MIP framework within the context of VVC.
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
/JAMIE J ATALA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2486
Prosecution Insights