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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 18/269506, filed on 6/23/23.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because all diagrams and features in Figure 4 are required to be distinctly labeled to indicate contents or function with legends (37 C.F.R. 1.83(a), 1.84(o)) since they are necessary for understanding of the drawing. Correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 8, 9, 11-13, 16, 17, 19, and 21-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Minoo et al (Description of the exploratory test model (ETM) for HDR/WCG extension of HEVC) and the ETM syntax attachment for the same reasons as set forth in Sec. 8 of the last OA, dated 3/19/26.
Regarding claims 1, 9, 17, and 19, Minoo discloses a method comprising obtaining a syntax element (e.g. p. 3, parameters are signaled in the PPS syntax) associated with video data (e.g. HDR), wherein the syntax element specifies that a cross-color component transform process (e.g. Fig. 2) in which a function of a first color (e.g. chroma) component is applied to at least one second color (e.g. chroma) component different from the first color component is to be applied to the video data as a post processing process following a decoding process (e.g. Fig. 3) to be applied to the video data (e.g. Sec. 3 and 4 HDR video analysis, reshaping, reconstruction process), wherein the cross-color component transform process (e.g. cross-plane reshaping) is a luma mapping (e.g. co-located luma) with chroma scaling process (e.g. mode 1, cross-component scaling) and the syntax element specifies that the cross-color component transform process (e.g. paragraph 3, mode 0) is applied to the video data as a post processing process following the decoding process to be applied to the video data with a first value (e.g. Fig. 3, Inverse reshaper), and wherein the syntax element specifies that the cross-color component transform process (e.g. paragraph 3, mode 1) is applied to the video data in a prediction loop comprised in the decoding process with a second value (e.g. Fig. 3, Inverse reshaper).
Regarding claims 3, 11, 21, and 25, Minoo discloses wherein the syntax element further specifies with a third value that samples of the first color component before an intra component transform (e.g. paragraph 3, mode 0) have to be used for the cross-color component transform process of the at least one second component (e.g. Fig. 3, Inverse reshaper).and with a fourth value that the samples of the first color component after the intra component transform have to be used for the cross-color component transform of the at least one second component (e.g. paragraph 3, mode 1).
Regarding claims 4, 12, 22, and 26. Minoo discloses wherein the cross-color component transform process (e.g. p. 2-3, paragraph 3, mode 1, 2nd bullet) is specified in the syntax element by parameters representative of at least one transform (e.g. table on p. 8 of ETM syntax attachment).
Regarding claims 5, 13, 23, and 27. Minoo discloses wherein a transform (e.g. cross-plane reshaping) intended to be applied on one of the at least one second color component is derived from parameters representative of a transform to be applied on another one of the at least one second color component specified in the syntax element (e.g. reshape_num_comps_minus2) or from parameters representative of a transform to be applied on the first color component specified in the syntax element (e.g. second syntax element = 0 specifies the parameters for the send chroma component are copied from the ones of the first chroma component).
Regarding claims 8, 16, 24, and 28. Minoo discloses wherein the cross-color component transform process (e.g. cross-plane reshaping) is applied to the video data as a post processing process following the decoding process (e.g. Fig. 3) to be applied to the video data responsive to a deactivation of a second cross-color component transform process (e.g. paragraph 3, mode 0) to be applied in a prediction loop of the decoding process (e.g. reshaper is applied independently).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/12/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant asserts on p. 9 of the Remarks that Fig. 4A has been labeled. However, is noted that elements 40 and 405 of Figs. 4A and 4B are required to be labeled.
Applicant asserts on p. 9-10 of the Remarks that the reference fails to disclose the newly amended limitations from claims 2, 6, 7. However, it is noted that Fig. 3 of Minoo already discloses the concept of such common reshaping process during encoding with a corresponding Inverse reshaper to apply to the video data as a post processing process during the decoding process.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
20260075256 discloses CODING-LOOP-EXTERNAL SMOOTHING OF A BOUNDARY BETWEEN TWO IMAGE REGIONS
20260067453 discloses METHOD AND DEVICE FOR VIDEO CODING USING CC-ALF BASED ON NONLINEAR CROSS-COMPONENT RELATIONSHIPS
20260067507 discloses CROSS-COMPONENT SAMPLE OFFSET (CCSO)
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOUNG LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-7334. The examiner can normally be reached M - F, 11 - 7.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jay Patel can be reached at 571-272-2988. 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.
/Y LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2485
Prosecution Insights