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(s) (IDS) was/were submitted on 24 September 2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are 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.
Claims 3 and 7 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.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 3 recites the broad recitation “one or more hypotheses of predictions, and the claim also recites “two or more hypotheses of predictions” (in claim 1) which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted steps are: while the variables are transposed, there is nothing done with them after the fact, and appear to not be used.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, 8-9, 11, and 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Huo et al. (US 2022/0329862 A1).
Regarding Claims 1 and 20, Huo discloses an apparatus to perform a method of video coding, the method comprising. receiving input data associated with a current block, wherein the input data comprise pixel data to be encoded at an encoder side or data associated with the current block to be decoded at a decoder side; determining a target Matrix-based Intra Prediction (MTP) mode using an MTP mode setting, wherein the MTP mode setting incorporates blending setting [Huo: ¶ [0096]: selecting one LFNST transform kernel candidate set from multiple LFNST transform kernel candidate sets according to the value of the LFNST intra prediction mode index; selecting a transform kernel indicated by the LFNST index from the selected LFNST transform kernel candidate set and setting the transform kernel as an LFNST transform kernel used for the current block; performing a matrix transposition processing on the LFNST transform kernel used for the current block when a value of the MIP transposition indication parameter indicates to perform a transposition processing on a sample input vector used in a MIP mode, and setting a transform kernel obtained after the transposition processing as the LFNST transform kernel used for the current block], transposing setting [Huo: ¶ 0055] It should be noted that for a MIP mode, input data of MIP prediction includes: a position of the current block (xTbCmp, yTbCmp), a MIP prediction mode applied to the current block (which may be represented by modeId), a height of the current block (represented by nTbH), a width of the current block (represented by nTbW), and a transposition processing indication flag (which may be represented by isTransposed) for whether it needs to be transposed, etc.], representative mode setting [Huo: ¶ [0097] It should be noted that the MIP mode index is used for indicating a MIP mode used for the current block, and the MIP mode is used for indicating a calculation and derivation method for determining an intra prediction value of the current block by using MIP], inheriting setting [Huo: ¶ [0043]: The intra prediction unit 203 may be used for generating prediction data of a current video coding block based on the determined intra prediction mode and data from a previous coding block of a current frame or picture. The motion compensation unit 204 determines prediction information for the video coding block by analyzing a motion vector and another related syntax element, and uses the prediction information to generate a predictive block of the video coding block being decoded], or a combination thereof, wherein the MTP mode setting with the blending setting includes a blended matrix candidate formed by combining two or more hypotheses of predictions [Huo: ¶ [0096]], wherein the MTP mode setting with the transposing setting includes a transposed matrix candidate generated by transposing one or more matrix coefficients or one or more reference samples [Huo: ¶ [0055]], wherein the MTP mode setting with the representative mode setting includes a representative mode generated according to the representative mode setting [Huo: ¶ [0096]], or wherein the MIP mode setting with the inheriting setting includes an inherited MTP candidate [Huo: ¶ [0043]]; and encoding or decoding the current block using the target MTP mode [Huo: ¶ [0002] Embodiments of the present application relate to the technical field of picture processing, and more particularly, to a transform method, an encoder, a decoder, and a storage medium].
Regarding Claim 2, Huo discloses all the limitations of Claim 1, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Huo discloses wherein the target MTP mode is used as an additional mode or a replacement mode [Huo: FIG. 2A].
Regarding Claim 3, Huo discloses all the limitations of Claim 1, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Huo discloses wherein when the blending setting is used, said one or more hypotheses of predictions are generated according to one or more pieces of matrix information [Huo: ¶ [0096]: according to the value of the LFNST intra prediction mode index].
Regarding Claim 4, Huo discloses all the limitations of Claim 3, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Huo discloses wherein combining weighting for the blended matrix candidate is block-based weighting [Huo: ¶ [0056]: generating a MIP final prediction value 444, wherein the constructing the matrix multiplication output sampling block 441 may include acquiring a weight matrix].
Regarding Claim 6, Huo discloses all the limitations of Claim 3, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Huo discloses wherein said one or more pieces of matrix information are obtained by using a suggestion scheme to select from a set of candidate matrix information [Huo: ¶ [0105] It may be understood that the value of predModeIntra may be determined according to a value of a MIP mode index (modeId). Then, according to the value of predModeIntra, a value of SetIdx may be directly determined according to Table 2, that is, the LFNST transform kernel candidate set selected for the current block is determined. Here, the value of SetIdx indicates a transform kernel candidate set used when an LFNST is performed. Since a value of modeId may include 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, the value of predModeIntra is also 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. A corresponding relationship between predModeIntra and SetIdx is as follows], and wherein the set of candidate matrix information includes all or any subset of inheriting matrix information [Huo: ¶ [0043]: The intra prediction unit 203 may be used for generating prediction data of a current video coding block based on the determined intra prediction mode and data from a previous coding block of a current frame or picture].
Regarding Claim 7, Huo discloses all the limitations of Claim 1, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Huo discloses wherein said one or more matrix coefficients or said one or more reference samples are transposed as one or more additional candidate matrixes for the current block [Huo: ¶ [0056]: the constructing the reference sample buffer 432 may include… a buffer filling method 4322 when transposition is required].
Regarding Claim 9, Huo discloses all the limitations of Claim 1, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Huo discloses wherein the representative mode is generated according to block width, block height, block area or a combination thereof [Huo: ¶ [0055] It should be noted that for a MIP mode, input data of MIP prediction includes: a position of the current block (xTbCmp, yTbCmp), a MIP prediction mode applied to the current block (which may be represented by modeId), a height of the current block (represented by nTbH), a width of the current block (represented by nTbW), and a transposition processing indication flag (which may be represented by isTransposed) for whether it needs to be transposed, etc.].
Regarding Claim 11, Huo discloses all the limitations of Claim 1, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Huo discloses wherein the representative mode is used by one or more subsequent blocks after the current block [Huo: ¶ [0043]: The intra prediction unit 203 may be used for generating prediction data of a current video coding block based on the determined intra prediction mode and data from a previous coding block of a current frame or picture].
Regarding Claim 14, Huo discloses all the limitations of Claim 1, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Huo discloses wherein when the inheriting setting is used, matrix information is recorded [Huo: ¶ [0043].
Regarding Claim 15, Huo discloses all the limitations of Claim 14, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Huo discloses wherein the matrix information comprises matrix size, matrix mode index, transposing information, target information for the target MIP mode to determine one or more predictors, or a combination thereof [Huo: ¶ [0007] In a first aspect, an embodiment of the present application provides a transform method, which is applied to an encoder, the method includes: determining a prediction mode parameter of a current block; determining a Matrix-based Intra Prediction (MIP) parameter when the prediction mode parameter indicates that MIP is used for the current block to determine an intra prediction value; determining an intra prediction value of the current block according to the MIP parameter and calculating a residual value between the current block and the intra prediction value; determining a Low-Frequency Non-Separable Transform (LFNST) transform kernel used for the current block according to the MIP parameter when an LFNST is used for the current block, setting an LFNST index, and signalling the LFNST index in a video bitstream; and performing a transform processing on the residual value by using the LFNST transform kernel].
Regarding Claim 16, Huo discloses all the limitations of Claim 14, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Huo discloses wherein an inheriting list is built for the current block [Huo: ¶ [0043]].
Regarding Claim 17, Huo discloses all the limitations of Claim 16, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Huo discloses wherein an inheriting index is signalled, parsed, or inferred to indicate target matrix information from the inheriting list [Huo: ¶ [0043]].
Regarding Claim 18, Huo discloses all the limitations of Claim 17, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Huo discloses wherein the target matrix information indicated by the inheriting index is used for the current block to generate a target MIP predictor [Huo: ¶ [0043]].
Regarding Claim 19, Huo discloses all the limitations of Claim 18, and is analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Huo discloses wherein if one or more matrix sizes of the target matrix information are not belonging to a block size category of the current block, down-sampling or up-sampling setting is applied [Huo: ¶ [0056]: A process of acquiring reference pixels adjacent to an upper side (indicated by refT) and reference pixels adjacent to a left side (indicated by refL) of the current block is an acquisition process of reference pixels. For constructing the input sample 43, this act is used for an input of matrix multiplication, and may mainly include: obtaining a reference sample 431, constructing a reference sample buffer 432, and deriving a matrix multiplication input sample 433; wherein a process of obtaining the reference sample is a down-sampling process].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huo as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Chen et al. (US 2020/0404253 A1).
Regarding Claim 5, Huo disclose(s) all the limitations of Claim 3, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Huo may not explicitly disclose wherein combining weighting for the blended matrix candidate is sample-based or position-based weighting.
However, Chen discloses wherein combining weighting for the blended matrix candidate is sample-based [Chen: ¶ [0143] After the motion information of each triangle partition is inferred and uni-directional motion compensation is performed, a weighted-averaging operation (FIG. 10) is applied by a video coder to blend the prediction signals of the two triangle partitions to form the resulting signals of motion compensation. FIG. 10 is a conceptual diagram illustrating sample-based weighting values used in triangle partition merge (TPM) mode] or position-based weighting.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the process of Huo with the selection process of Chen in order to provide reduce computational load.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huo as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen et al. (US 2025/0274583 A1) (hereinafter referred to as Chen2)
Regarding Claim 8, Huo disclose(s) all the limitations of Claim 1, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Huo may not explicitly disclose wherein the representative mode is generated according to DIM/D (Decoder-side Intra Mode Derivation) or TID (Template-based Intra Mode Derivation).
However, Chen2 discloses wherein the representative mode is generated according to DIM/D (Decoder-side Intra Mode Derivation) or TID (Template-based Intra Mode Derivation) [Chen2: ¶ [0004] The video device may be configured to select, based on information associated with an intra prediction mode associated with a coding block, a cost function from the plurality of cost functions for predicting a residual hypothesis for the coding block. The information associated with the intra prediction mode may be or may include an intra prediction mode associated with the coding block (e.g., decoder-side intra mode derivation (DIMD) mode, matrix-weighted intra prediction (MIP) mode, template-based intra mode derivation (TIMD) mode, etc.)].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the process of Huo with the modes of Chen2 in order to provide improved output for specific circumstances.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huo as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Choi et al. (US 2025/0203113 A1).
Regarding Claim 10, Huo disclose(s) all the limitations of Claim 1, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Huo discloses wherein the representative mode is used to select a transform set of primary or secondary transforms for the current block [Huo: ¶ [0036] Specifically, on the encoder side, firstly, for data, such as a residual, a first transform (which may be called “Core Transform” or “primary transform” or “main transform”) is performed by the forward primary transform unit 11 to obtain a transform coefficient matrix after the first transform. Then, an LFNST transform (which may be called “Secondary Transform” or “second transform”) is performed on coefficients in the transform coefficient matrix to obtain an LFNST transform coefficient matrix].
Huo may not explicitly disclose wherein the representative mode is used to select a transform set of separable or non-separable.
However, Choi discloses wherein the representative mode is used to select a transform set of separable or non-separable [Choi: ¶ [0042] According to the present disclosure, it is possible to provide an index signaling method when separable transform and non-separable primary transform are both included] primary or secondary transforms for the current block [Choi: ¶ [0178] In the present disclosure, the MTS-based transform is applied as primary transform, and secondary transform may be further applied].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the process of Huo with the optional processing of Choi in order to provide coding for more circumstances.
Claim(s) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huo as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zhu et al. (US 2022/0078410 A1).
Regarding Claim 12, Huo disclose(s) all the limitations of Claim 1, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Huo may not explicitly disclose wherein the representative mode is used as chroma DM (Direct Mode) of a subsequent chroma block.
However, Zhu discloses wherein the representative mode is used as chroma DM (Direct Mode) of a subsequent chroma block [Zhu: ¶ [0010] In yet another example aspect, another video processing method is disclosed. The method includes performing a conversion between a current video block of a video that is a chroma block and a coded representation of the video, wherein a chroma DM mode for the current video block is disabled due to a corresponding luma block used to derive the chroma DM mode and not coded using an intra mode].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the process of Huo with the optional processing of Zhu in order to provide coding for more circumstances.
Regarding Claim 13, Huo disclose(s) all the limitations of Claim 1, and is/are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Huo may not explicitly disclose wherein the representative mode is used as MPM (Most Probable Mode) of one or more subsequent intra or inter blocks.
However, Zhu discloses wherein the representative mode is used as MPM (Most Probable Mode) of one or more subsequent intra or inter blocks [Zhu: ¶ [0013] In yet another example aspect, another video processing method is disclosed. The method includes determining, during a construction of a most probable mode (MPM) list, that a current video block of a video is coded with a direct current (DC) prediction mode due to a neighboring block coded in a pulse coded modulation (PCM) mode in which samples values are quantized; and performing a conversion between the current video block and a coded representation of the video].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN R MESSMORE whose telephone number is (571)272-2773. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5 EST/EDT.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chris Kelley can be reached at 571-272-7331. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JONATHAN R MESSMORE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482
Prosecution Insights