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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 07/02/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding section 101, Applicant argues: “Firstly, in Step 2A Prong One, the Examiner asserted that the claims include several categories of abstract idea: information, collecting information, outputting information and/or analyzing information at a high degree of algorithmic generality. However, please note that Claim 1 includes the step of "decoding a bitstream to determine a value for second syntax element identity information", which is a step that cannot be practically performed in the human mind.”
Examiner notes that Applicant’s argument fails to address the reason for rejection, which as noted by the Applicant above, is not based on performance in the human mind, it is based on claiming information and mathematical operations on information at a high degree of generality.
Applicant argues: “Secondly, in Step 2A Prong two, claim 1 includes the step of "performing intra prediction on the second color component of the current block using the target prediction mode".”
Examiner notes that this element performs a non-specific mathematical operation on color data belonging to a block which is not limited to any particular data and application. Although Specification provides examples of specific data (i.e video coded under VVC) and applications (encoding a video into a bitstream), the claims omit such limitations and thus omit limitations that could possibly direct the claims to a practical application.
Applicant argues: “It is also stipulated in MPEP that one way to demonstrate such integration is when the claimed invention improves the functioning of a computer or improves another technology or technical field. (see MPEP 2106.04( d)( 1 ), … Applicant respectfully submits that the claimed invention improves the functioning of a computer, for example, an encoder or a decoder.”
Examiner notes that Claims 1-19 are not directed to a computer a decodr or an encoder. Claim 20 executes a program on a general purpose computer, which does not modify the structure of the general purpose computer, and materially although it uses the term decoding “decoding a bitstream to determine a value” is not a specific operation and not a specific practical application. If decoding is meant to apply VVC decoding to an encoded video bitstream as in the Specification, such details should be present in the claims.
Applicant argues: “Thirdly, in step 2B, according to the above additional element and other elements recited in claim 1, the IBC mode is implicitly applied into chroma prediction, and related information of the co-located luma block is fully utilized, thereby improving accuracy of chroma prediction, improving coding performance, thus improving a functioning of a computer (an encoder or a decoder).”
Examiner notes that Applicant fails to provide citations that allow implicit unclaimed limitations to render the claims eligible for a patent.
Regarding section 103, Applicant argues: “Claim 1 recites the following technical features: in a case that the first syntax element identity information indicates that an IBC extension mode is enabled for the second color component of the current block, decoding a bitstream to determine a value for second syntax element identity information (feature a); … Regarding the feature a, Wang (see paragraph [0193]) recites the following content. A luma intra prediction mode (lumalntraPredMode) is obtained, and then a chroma intra prediction mode (intra_chroma_pred_mode) is obtained, for example, from a bitstream. It follows that, Wang just discloses obtaining two syntax elements from the bitstream, but fails to disclose a condition for obtaining the syntax element. In contrast, the feature a explicitly defines the condition: in a case that the first syntax element identity information indicates that an IBC extension mode is enabled for the second color component of the current block.”
Examiner notes that Applicant fails to address the complete reason for rejection that indicates that “CuPredMode[xCb][yCb] equal to MODE_IBC specifies that the current prediction block is applied with IBC mode,” where a block comprises at least a second color component. Wang, Paragraph 188. This indicates that a chroma prediction mode is to be obtained from be bitstream. “and then a chroma intra prediction mode (intra_ chroma_ pred_mode) is obtained, for example, from a bitstream” Wang, Paragraph, 193. This is what is claimed and it is consistent with the embodiments in the Specification, Paragraphs 89-92 and what Specification describes as VVC functionality.
Applicant argues: “Regarding the feature b, Wang (see paragraph [0190]) recites the following content. In an example, the chroma intra prediction mode IntraPredModeC[xCb][yCb] is derived using intra_chroma_pred_mode[xCb][yCb] and lumalntraPredMode as showed in Table 8-5 or Table 8-6. It follows that, Wang just discloses how to derive the chroma intra prediction mode IntraPredModeC[xCb][yCb], but fails to disclose there is any relationship between the chroma intra prediction mode and the IBC extension mode.”
Examiner again notes that Applicant fails to address the complete reason for rejection that indicates that “CuPredMode[xCb][yCb] equal to MODE_IBC specifies that the current prediction block is applied with IBC mode,” where a block comprises at least a second color component. Wang, Paragraph 188. This indicates that a chroma prediction mode is to be obtained from be bitstream. “and then a chroma intra prediction mode (intra_ chroma_ pred_mode) is obtained, for example, from a bitstream” Wang, Paragraph, 193. This is an example of what is claimed and it is consistent with the embodiments in the Specification, Paragraphs 89-92 and what Specification describes as VVC functionality.
Applicant argues: “Wang does not disclose a first syntax element identity information that indicates whether an IBC extension mode is enabled for the second color component of a current block.”
Examiner disagrees. Wang explicitly teaches an example where “CuPredMode[xCb][yCb] equal to MODE_IBC specifies that the current prediction block is applied with IBC mode,” where a block comprises at least a second color component Cb. Wang, Paragraph 188. This is consistent with the Specification.
Applicant argues: “The Office Action appears to equate Wang's luma-side IBC detection or DM-based mode derivation with the claimed first and second syntax element identity information and target prediction mode.”
Examiner notes that this argument is not persuasive. Cb is a chroma indicator. It indicates chroma in VVC, in prior art and in the present Specification, see paragraph 89.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected as being directed toward patent ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101, under the “Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance” issued on January 7, 2019 (Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 4, 50).
The claims are directed to statutory categories of methods, apparata under Step 1).
Upon analysis of the present claims under the broadest reasonable interpretation (under Step 2A, prong one), the claims appear to recite a judicial exception, an abstract idea, directed to information and mathematical relationships applied to information for “syntax element identity information” and “block vector parameters” that indicate IBC or non-IBC prediction modes related to a VVC video coding standard. However, the claims are directed to a logical representation of information without applying it to a practical application. This finding is consistent with the decision in Ex parte Desjardins, 2024-000567.
The claims include several categories of this abstract idea: information (“syntax element identity information, color component, block vector parameter, (modes such as) IBC mode”), collecting information (determining); outputting information (determining a value), and/or analyzing information at a high degree of algorithmic generality (selecting, determining, partitioning). These categories have been identified as abstract ideas by the Federal Circuit as summarized in Electric Power Group, LLC v. ALSTOM SA, 830 F. 3d 1350, 1354 (Fed. Cir. 2016):
Information as such is an intangible. See Microsoft Corp. v. AT & T Corp., 550 U.S. 437, 451 n.12, 127 S.Ct. 1746, 167 L.Ed.2d 737 (2007); Bayer AG v. Housey Pharm., Inc., 340 F.3d 1367, 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2003). Accordingly, we have treated collecting information, including when limited to particular content (which does not change its character as information), as within the realm of abstract ideas. See, e.g., Internet Patents, 790 F.3d at 1349; OIP Techs., Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363 (Fed. Cir. 2015); Content Extraction & Transmission LLC v. Wells Fargo Bank, Nat'l Ass'n, 776 F.3d 1343, 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2014); Digitech Image Techs., LLC v. Elecs. for Imaging, Inc., 758 F.3d 1344, 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2014); CyberSource Corp. 1354*1354 v. Retail Decisions, Inc., 654 F.3d 1366, 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2011). In a similar vein, we have treated analyzing information by steps people go through in their minds, or by mathematical algorithms, without more, as essentially mental processes within the abstract-idea category. See, e.g., TLI Commc'ns, 823 F.3d at 613; Digitech, 758 F.3d at 1351; SmartGene, Inc. v. Advanced Biological Labs., SA, 555 Fed.Appx. 950, 955 (Fed. Cir. 2014); Bancorp Servs., L.L.C. v. Sun Life Assurance Co. of Canada (U.S.), 687 F.3d 1266, 1278 (Fed. Cir. 2012); CyberSource Corp. v. Retail Decisions, Inc., 654 F.3d 1366, 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2011); SiRF Tech., Inc. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n, 601 F.3d 1319, 1333 (Fed. Cir. 2010); see also Mayo, 132 S.Ct. at 1301; Parker v. Flook, 437 U.S. 584, 589-90, 98 S.Ct. 2522, 57 L.Ed.2d 451 (1978); Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 67, 93 S.Ct. 253, 34 L.Ed.2d 273 (1972). And we have recognized that merely presenting the results of abstract processes of collecting and analyzing information, without more (such as identifying a particular tool for presentation), is abstract as an ancillary part of such collection and analysis. See, e.g., Content Extraction, 776 F.3d at 1347; Ultramercial, Inc. v. Hulu, LLC, 772 F.3d 709, 715 (Fed. Cir. 2014).
Upon consideration of the record (under Step 2A, prong two), Examiner did not find that the additional elements of the present claims integrate the judicial exception into a practical application of that judicial exception “in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the judicial exception.” The additional elements, when considered individually or in a claim as a whole, “A decoding method … An encoding method … A decoder, comprising a memory and a processor, wherein the memory is configured to store a computer program, and the processr is configured to execute the computer program stored in the memory to cause the decoder to perform a method”, do not seem to reflect a substantive improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field under the standards of the present judicial guidance (using a general purpose computer is not an improvement to the computer); do not seem use a judicial exception in conjunction with, a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim (a general purpose computer is not a particular machine); do not seem to effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing (transformation of data is not a physical transformation of an article).
This is further evidenced in that the additional elements, merely recite the words ‘‘apply it’’ (or an equivalent “determine or using”) with the judicial exception, or merely includes instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (formatting or representing information using broadly termed data structures); adds insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception i.e. determining, using, or selecting information for use with the judicial exception as in CyperSource and Mayo); do no more than generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e. linked to encoding, decoding, or used with a general purpose computer).
Substantially similar subject matter has been found ineligible in In re Prater, 415 F.2d 1393, 1404-05, 162 USPQ 541, 550-51 (CCPA 1969) (An abstract idea rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101, for claiming a process of analyzing data by selecting the data to be analyzed and by subjecting the data to a mathematical manipulation); Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 175 U.S.P.Q. 673 (1972) (using common computing elements in conversion of numerical information is ineligible); Digitech Image Techs., LLC v Electronics for Imaging, Inc., 758 F.3d 1344, 111 U.S.P.Q.2d 1717 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (Using profiles in a digital image processing system is ineligible); RecogniCorp, LLC v. Nintendo Co., Ltd., 855 F. 3d 1322 (Fed. Cir. 2017) (Encoding and decoding of an image is an abstract concept long utilized to transmit information, and addition of a mathematical equation that simply changes the data into other forms of data cannot render it patent eligible); Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Fin. Corp., 850 F.3d 1332, 1340-41 (Fed. Cir. 2017) (organizing, displaying, and manipulating data encoded for human and machine readability is directed to an abstract concept).
Finally, the claimed elements, when considered individually and in combination (under step 2B), do not seem to provide an Inventive Concept that is “significantly more” than the ineligible subject matter. The claims simply append well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry to the judicial exception, at a high level of generality (A decoding method … An encoding method … A decoder, comprising a memory and a processor, wherein the memory is configured to store a computer program, and the processr is configured to execute the computer program stored in the memory to cause the decoder to perform a method).
The claims should be amended to include meaningful limitations within the technical field. Examiner recommends incorporating the claimed subject matter into a practical application such as converting recorded images into a bitstream that is transmitted or stored for consumption.
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.
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:
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20220007034 to Wang (“Wang”) also cited in an IDS, in view of US 20190246143 to Zhang (“Zhang”).
Regarding Clam 1. “A decoding method, comprising:
determining a value for first syntax element identity information; … in a case that the first syntax element identity information indicates that an IBC extension mode is enabled for the second color component of the current block, (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and ordinary skill in the art, the second color component can be one of the chroma components. See Specification, Paragraph 4 and Zhang, Paragraph 118. Further, Specification defines IBC to be intra block copy mode in VVC vide coding standard. Specification, Paragraph 3. Prior art teaches an example of this claim feature: “CuPredMode[xCb][yCb] equal to MODE_IBC specifies that the current prediction block is applied with IBC mode,” where a block comprises at least a second color component. Wang, Paragraph 188. This is consistent with the embodiments of the VVC in Specification Paragraphs 89-92.)
decoding a bitstream (“In an embodiment, the video coding device 400 may be a decoder such as video decoder 30 of FIG. 1A or an encoder such as video encoder 20 of FIG. 1A.” Wang, Paragraph 163. “a luma intra prediction mode (lumalntraPredMode) is obtained, and then a chroma intra prediction mode (intra_ chroma_ pred_mode) is obtained, for example, from a bitstream” Wang, Paragraph, 193.)
to determine a value for second syntax element identity information; and in a case that the second syntax element identity information indicates that a target prediction mode is used for the second color component of the current block, (For example the target prediction mode can be “the chroma intra prediction mode IntraPredModeC[xCb][yCb] is derived using intra_chroma_pred_mode[ xCb] [yCb] and lumalntraPredMode” Wang, Paragraph 190, 176, and Fig. 9. This is consistent with the embodiments of the VVC in Specification Paragraphs 89-92.)
performing intra prediction on the second color component of the current block using the target prediction mode, to determine a predicted value for the second color component of the current block.” “The entropy decoding unit 304 is configured to parse the bitstream 21 … to provide inter prediction parameters, intra prediction parameter and/or other syntax elements to the mode application unit 360 Mode application unit 360 may be configured to perform the prediction (intra or inter prediction) per block” Wang, Paragraphs 136, 149.)
Regarding Claim 2: “The method according to claim 1, wherein the target prediction mode is determined by:
determining a first color component block of a current block; (For example a luma component: “In some examples, MIP (or IBC, or Palette) mode are applied for the luma component” Wang, Paragraph 175.)
determining a first block vector parameter of the first color component block in a case that a prediction mode of the first color component block is an IBC mode; (“In IBC, sample values are predicted from other samples in the same picture by means of a displacement vector called a block vector, in a manner conceptually similar to motion-compensated prediction.” Wang, Paragraph 173.)
determining a target block vector parameter of a second color component of the current block based on the first block vector parameter of the first color component block; and (“When perform chroma intra prediction mode derivation using DM mode (derive mode from corresponding luma component),” Wang, Paragraph 175.
Wang does not explicitly describe determining the vector parameters, however since vector parameters are inherent to the IBC mode, deriving the IBC mode on the second color necessarily means deriving IBC vector parameters. Cumulatively, Zhang teaches this feature in the context of vide coding under the VVC: “For IBC prediction mode, to reduce the amount of information that video encoder 200 may need to signal to video decoder 300, rather than signaling information indicative of the block vector for a chroma block, it may be possible for the chroma block to inherit the block vector of its corresponding luma block” Zhang, Paragraph 116.
Where necessary, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to supplement the teachings of Wang to determine the vector parameters in the claimed manner as taught in Zhang, in order to “to reduce the amount of information that video encoder 200 may need to signal to video decoder 300.” Zhang, Paragraph 116.
Finally, in reviewing the present application, there does not seem to be objective evidence that the claim limitations are particularly directed to: addressing a particular problem which was recognized but unsolved in the art, producing unexpected results at the level of the ordinary skill in the art, or any other objective indicators of non-obviousness.)
performing IBC extension mode-based prediction on the second color component of the current block by using the target block vector parameter, to determine a predicted value for the second color component of the current block.” (“When perform chroma intra prediction mode derivation using DM mode (derive mode from corresponding luma component),” which is used to predict chroma values. Wang, Paragraph 175. See use of block vectors in Zhang, Paragraph 116 and statement of motivation above.)
Regarding Claim: 3: “The method according to claim 2, wherein the determining a first color component block of a current block comprises:
determining a first color component region co-located with the current block; and (“a picture may be, for example, an array of luma samples in monochrome format or an array of luma samples and two corresponding arrays of chroma samples in 4:2:0, 4:2:2, and 4:4:4 colour format.” Wang, Paragraph 76.)
determining the first color component block of the current block from a plurality of blocks obtained by partitioning the first color component region; (“the partitioning unit 262 may be configured to partition the block 203 into smaller block partitions or sub-blocks (which form again blocks), … For example, a coding tree unit (CTU) may be or comprise a CTB of luma samples, two corresponding CTBs of chroma samples of a picture that has three sample arrays” Wang, Paragraphs 107, 112. See similarly in Zhang, Paragraphs 114-117.)
wherein the determining the first color component block of the current block from a plurality of blocks obtained by partitioning the first color component region comprises: … selecting a target block from the plurality of blocks obtained by partitioning the first color component region, as the first color component block of the current block.” (“coding unit (CU) may be or comprise a coding block of luma samples, two corresponding coding blocks of chroma samples of a picture that has three sample array” Wang, Paragraph 112. See similarly in Zhang, Paragraphs 114-117.)
Regarding Claim 4: “The method according to claim 3, wherein the determining the first color component block of the current block from a plurality of blocks obtained by partitioning the first color component region comprises:
determining at least one candidate block at a preset location from the plurality of blocks obtained by partitioning the first color component region; and (“a coding tree block (CTB) may be an NxN block of samples for some value of N such that the division of a component into CTBs is a partitioning. A coding unit (CU) may be or comprise a coding block of luma samples, two corresponding coding blocks of chroma samples.” Wang, Paragraph 112. Note that the sub-block partitions necessarily have preset locations relative to the blocks, relative to other sub-blocks, and relative to other color blocks and sub-blocks. See Wang Fig. 7.)
acquiring the at least one candidate block according to a preset order and performing mode determination on the at least one candidate block; and (Note that blocks can be provided according to a preset coding order in the bitstream: “The entropy decoding unit 304 is configured to parse the bitstream 21 (or in general encoded picture data 21) and perform, for example, entropy decoding to the encoded picture data 21 to obtain, e.g., quantized coefficients 309 and/or decoded coding parameters (not shown in FIG. 3), e.g. any or all of inter prediction parameters (e.g. reference picture index and motion vector), intra prediction parameter (e.g. intra prediction mode or index),” Wang, Paragraph 136.)
in a case that it is determined that the IBC mode is used for a first candidate block among the at least one candidate block, using the first candidate block as the first color component block of the current block.” (“In some examples, MIP (or IBC, or Palette) mode are applied for the luma component” corresponding to the first color component. See Wang, Paragraph 175.)
Regarding Claim 5: “The method according to claim 3, wherein the determining the first color component block of the current block from a plurality of blocks obtained by partitioning the first color component region comprises:
determining at least one candidate block at a preset location from the plurality of blocks obtained by partitioning the first color component region, and (“a coding tree block (CTB) may be an NxN block of samples for some value of N such that the division of a component into CTBs is a partitioning. A coding unit (CU) may be or comprise a coding block of luma samples, two corresponding coding blocks of chroma samples.” Wang, Paragraph 112. Note that the sub-block partitions necessarily have preset locations relative to the blocks, relative to other sub-blocks, and relative to other color blocks and sub-blocks. See Wang Fig. 7)
determining the at least one candidate block as the first color component block of the current block.” (“In some examples, MIP (or IBC, or Palette) mode are applied for the luma component” corresponding to the first color component. See Wang, Paragraph 175.)
Regarding Claim 6: “The method according to claim 5, wherein the determining a first block vector parameter of the first color component block in a case that a prediction mode of the first color component block is an IBC mode comprises:
determining at least one target block for which the IBC mode is used from the at least one candidate block, (For example “The entropy decoding unit 304 is configured to parse the bitstream 21 (or in general encoded picture data 21) and perform, for example, entropy decoding to the encoded picture data 21 to obtain, e.g., quantized coefficients [target block coefficients] 309 and/or decoded coding parameters (not shown in FIG. 3), e.g. any or all of inter pone target block; … In IBC, sample values are predicted from other samples in the same picture by means of a displacement vector called a block vector, in a manner conceptually similar to motion-compensated prediction.” Wang, Paragraphs 136, 173.)
calculating an average of the first block vector parameters of all of the at least one target block, as the first block vector parameter of the first color component block; and (Note that an average of one vector or parameter is the value of the one vector or parameter. See Wang, Paragraphs 136, 173. Also note an example, “motion compensation unit 224 may retrieve data for two reference blocks [parameters] identified by respective motion vectors and combine the retrieved data, e.g., through sample-by-sample averaging or weighted averaging.” Zhang, Paragraph 214. See statement of motivation in Claim 2.)
performing searching on the at least one target block using a template matching manner, to determine an optimal block vector parameter, as the first block vector parameter of the first color component block.” (“flag is signalled to indicate which method (bilateral matching or template matching) is to be used to derive motion information for the block” Zhang, Paragraphs 139, 142. See statement of motivation in Claim 2.)
Regarding Claim 7: “The method according to claim 2, wherein the determining a target block vector parameter of a second color component of the current block based on the first block vector parameter of the first color component block comprises: … adjusting the first block vector parameter of the first color component block to determine the target block vector parameter of the second color component of the current block.” (“it may be possible for the chroma block to inherit the block vector of its corresponding luma block, with some scaling [adjusting] to address the subsampling.” Zhang, Paragraph 116. See statement of motivation in Claim 2.)
Regarding Claim 8: “The method according to claim 7, wherein the adjusting the first block vector parameter of the first color component block to determine the target block vector parameter of the current block comprises:
determining a color sampling format for the current block; and (“for the chroma block … For instance, if 4:2:2 subsampling format is used,” Zhang, Paragraphs 116, 121. See statement of motivation in Claim 2.)
performing scaling on the first block vector parameter of the first color component block based on the color sampling format, to determine the target block vector parameter of the current block.” (“it may be possible for the chroma block to inherit the block vector of its corresponding luma block, with some scaling [adjusting] to address the subsampling. … For instance, if 4:2:2 subsampling format is used, then video encoder 200 and video decoder 300 may divide both the x- and y-component of the block vectors by two.” Zhang, Paragraphs 116, 121. See statement of motivation in Claim 2.)
Regarding Claim 9: “The method according to claim 8, wherein the adjusting the first block vector parameter of the first color component block to determine the target block vector parameter of the current block further comprises:
performing scaling on the first block vector parameter of the first color component block based on the color sampling format, to obtain an initial block vector parameter of the current block; and (“it may be possible for the chroma block to inherit the block vector of its corresponding luma block, with some scaling [adjusting] to address the subsampling. … For instance, if 4:2:2 subsampling format is used, then video encoder 200 and video decoder 300 may divide both the x- and y-component of the block vectors by two.” Zhang, Paragraphs 116, 121. See statement of motivation in Claim 2.)
modifying the initial block vector parameter of the current block to determine the target block vector parameter of the current block; or directly determining the target block vector parameter of the current block based on the initial block vector parameter of the current block.” (Note that block vectors or blocks can be modified / scaled if the chroma blocks are sub-sampled or not scaled if the chroma blocks are not sub-sampled. See Zhang, Paragraphs 116, 121. See statement of motivation in Claim 2.)
Regarding Claim 10: “The method according to claim 2, further comprising:
after the target block vector parameter of the current block is determined, determining whether the target block vector parameter meets an available condition; and in a case that the target block vector parameter meets the available condition, (Note that scaled vector addresses the subsampling condition of the block “that may be present with IBC prediction mode in VVC.” See Zhang, Paragraphs 116, 121-123. See statement of motivation in Claim 2.)
performing IBC extension mode-based prediction on the second color component of the current block by using the target block vector parameter, to determine a predicted value for the second color component of the current block.” ((“to provide inter prediction parameters, intra prediction parameter and/or other syntax elements to the mode application unit 360 Mode application unit 360 may be configured to perform the prediction (intra or inter prediction) per block” Wang, Paragraphs 136, 149. “it may be possible for the chroma [second color] block to inherit the block vector of its corresponding luma block, with some scaling [adjusting] to address the subsampling.” Zhang, Paragraphs 116, 121. See statement of motivation in Claim 2.)
Regarding Claim 11: “The method according to claim 2, wherein the performing IBC extension mode-based prediction on the second color component of the current block by using the target block vector parameter, to determine a predicted value for the second color component of the current block comprises:
determining an offset location of the current block based on the target block vector parameter and location information of the current block; (“The encoder 20 may, e.g., be configured to select a reference block from a plurality of reference blocks of the same or different pictures of the plurality of other pictures and provide a reference picture (or reference picture index) and/or an offset (spatial offset) between the position (x, y coordinates) of the reference block and the position of the current block as inter prediction parameters to the motion estimation unit. This offset is also called motion vector (MV).” Wang, Paragraph 125.)
performing block copying based on the offset location of the current block, to obtain a first predicted block; and (“and IBC (Intra Block Copy) … In IBC, sample values are predicted [copied] from other samples in the same picture by means of a displacement vector called a block vector, in a manner conceptually similar to motion-compensated prediction.” Wang, Paragraph 173.)
determining the predicted value for the second color component of the current block based on the first predicted block.” (As noted above, “it may be possible for the chroma [second color] block to inherit the block vector of its corresponding luma [first color] block, with some scaling [adjusting] to address the subsampling.” Zhang, Paragraphs 116, 121. See statement of motivation in Claim 2.)
Regarding Claim 12: “The method according to claim 11, wherein the determining the predicted value for the second color component of the current block based on the first predicted block comprises:
determining the first predicted block as the predicted value for the second color component of the current block; or performing modification on the first predicted block to determine the predicted value for the second color component of the current block; or performing intra prediction on the second color component of the current block using a second preset mode, to obtain a second predicted block; and (As noted in Claim 9, the block vectors or blocks can be modified / scaled if the chroma blocks are sub-sampled or not scaled if the chroma blocks are not sub-sampled. See Zhang, Paragraphs 116, 121. See statement of motivation in Claim 2.)
performing weighted fusion on the first predicted block and the second predicted block to determine the predicted value for the second color component of the current block, (For example: “A bilateral template is generated as the weighted combination of the two prediction blocks, from the initial MV0 of list0 and MVl of list1” Zhang, Paragraphs 149, 162. See statement of motivation in Claim 2.)
wherein the second preset mode comprises at least one of: a planar mode, a DM mode, a DC mode, or a CCLM mode.” (Note that this describes an optional second present mode. Cumulatively, prior art teaches this option as well: “There are many documents refers to Chroma intra prediction mode derivation process, for example, ITU JVET-O0925 discloses set Chroma derive mode, DM, as Planar mode … ITU JVET-O06 5 1 discloses set Chroma DM mode as DC if IBC is enabled. … sps_cclm_enabled_flag equal to 1 specifies that the cross-component linear model intra prediction from luma component to chroma component is enabled.” Wang, Paragraphs 176, 192.)
Regarding Claim 13: “The method according to claim 1, wherein the performing intra prediction on the second color component of the current block using the target prediction mode, to determine a second color component block for the current block comprises:
determining a first color component block of the current block; (For example a luma component: “In some examples, MIP (or IBC, or Palette) mode are applied for the luma component” Wang, Paragraph 175.)
determining a first block vector parameter of the first color component block in a case that a prediction mode of the first color component block is an IBC mode, and (“In IBC, sample values are predicted from other samples in the same picture by means of a displacement vector called a block vector, in a manner conceptually similar to motion-compensated prediction.” Wang, Paragraph 173.)
determining a target block vector parameter of the second color component of the current block based on the first block vector parameter of the first color component block; and (See reasons for rejection in Claim 2 in view of Wang, Paragraph 175 and Zhang, Paragraph 116.)
performing IBC extension mode-based prediction on the second color component of the current block by using the target block vector parameter, to determine a predicted value for the second color component of the current block.” (“When perform chroma intra prediction mode derivation using DM mode (derive mode from corresponding luma component),” which is used to predict chroma values. Wang, Paragraph 175. See use of block vectors in Zhang, Paragraph 116 and statement of motivation above.)
Regarding Claim 14: “The method according to claim 1, wherein the performing intra prediction on the second color component of the current block using the target prediction mode, to determine a second color component block for the current block comprises:
decoding a bitstream (“In an embodiment, the video coding device 400 may be a decoder such as video decoder 30 of FIG. 1A or an encoder such as video encoder 20 of FIG. 1A.” Wang, Paragraph 163. “The entropy decoding unit 304 is configured to parse the bitstream 21 … to provide inter prediction parameters, intra prediction parameter and/or other syntax elements to the mode application unit 360 Mode application unit 360 may be configured to perform the prediction (intra or inter prediction) per block” Wang, Paragraphs 136, 149. “a luma intra prediction mode (lumalntraPredMode) is obtained, and then a chroma intra prediction mode (intra_ chroma_ pred_mode) is obtained, for example, from a bitstream” Wang, Paragraph, 193.)
to determine a target block vector parameter of the current block; and (For example the target prediction mode can be “the chroma intra prediction mode IntraPredModeC[xCb][yCb] is derived using intra_chroma_pred_mode[ xCb] [yCb] and lumalntraPredMode” Wang, Paragraph 190, 176, and Fig. 9.)
performing IBC extension mode-based prediction on the second color component of the current block by using the target block vector parameter, to determine a predicted value for the second color component of the current block.” (“When perform chroma intra prediction mode derivation using DM mode (derive mode from corresponding luma component),” which is used to predict chroma values. Wang, Paragraph 175. See use of block vectors in Zhang, Paragraph 116 and statement of motivation above.)
Regarding Claim 15: “The method according to claim 1, wherein the determining a value for first syntax element identity information comprises:
decoding a bitstream to determine a value for third syntax element identity information; … in a case that the value for the third syntax element identity information is a first value and the current block meets a preset condition, determining that the value for the first syntax element identity information is the first value; and … in a case that the value for the third syntax element identity information is a second value, determining that the value for the first syntax element identity information is the second value; … in a case that the value for the third syntax element identity information is the first value, determining that the third syntax element identity information indicates that an IBC mode is enabled for a current image; … and in a case that the value for the third syntax element identity information is the second value, determining that the third syntax element identity information indicates that an IBC mode is disabled for a current image, (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and ordinary skill in the art, the third value can be an enable signal for the IBC mode. Note that Wang indicates that the published industry standards check “if IBC is enabled. … CuPredMode[xCb][yCb] equal to MODE_IBC [first value] specifies that the current prediction block is applied with IBC mode.” Conversely if CuPredMode[xCb][yCb] is equal to another “second value” the mode will be disabled, for example “if Matrix-based Intra Prediction, MIP, is enabled, ITU JVET-O0258 discloses disable Intra Block Copy, IBC, for Chroma component,” See Wang, Paragraph 176, 188.)
wherein the current image comprises the current block; (“CuPredMode[xCb][yCb] equal to MODE_IBC specifies that the current prediction block is applied with IBC mode.” See Wang, Paragraph 176, 188.)
wherein the current block meeting a preset condition comprises at least: a slice type of the current block is an I-frame; and (“When the video slice is coded as an intra coded (I) slice, intra prediction unit 354 of mode application unit 360 is configured to generate prediction block 365 for a picture block of the current video slice based on a signaled intra prediction mode and data from previously decoded blocks of the current picture.” Wang, Paragraph 150. As noted above, IBC is an intra prediction mode.)
a size of the current block meets a requirement of a preset upper limit.” (“ensures mode IBC's position and luma intra prediction mode's position is aligned when in a given block size, the partition of luma component is different from the partition … e.g. a maximum tree depth or minimum block size is reached,” ensuring it is larger than a preset upper limit. Wang, Paragraphs 24, 110.)
Regarding Claim 16: “The method according to claim 1, further comprising: … in a case that the value for the first syntax element identity information is a first value, determining that the first syntax element identity information indicates that an IBC extension mode is enabled for the second color component of the current block; and … in a case that the value for the first syntax element identity information is a second value, determining that the first syntax element identity information indicates that an IBC extension mode is disabed for the second color component of the current block.” (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and ordinary skill in the art, the third value can be an enable signal for the IBC mode. Note that Wang indicates that the published industry standards check “if IBC is enabled. … CuPredMode[xCb][yCb] equal to MODE_IBC [first value] specifies that the current prediction block is applied with IBC mode.” Conversely if CuPredMode[xCb][yCb] is equal to another “second value” the mode will be disabled, for example “if Matrix-based Intra Prediction, MIP, is enabled, ITU JVET-O0258 discloses disable Intra Block Copy, IBC, for Chroma component,” See Wang, Paragraph 176, 188.)
Regarding Claim 17: “The method according to claim 1, further comprising:
in a case that the value for the second syntax element identity information is a first value, determining that the second syntax element identity information indicates that a target prediction mode is used for the second color component of the current block; … in a case that the value for the second syntax element identity information is a second value, determining that the second syntax element identity information indicates that a target prediction mode is not used for the second color component of the current block; (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and ordinary skill in the art, the third value can be an enable signal for the IBC mode. Note that Wang indicates that the published industry standards check “if IBC is enabled. … CuPredMode[xCb][yCb] equal to MODE_IBC [first value] specifies that the current prediction block is applied with IBC mode.” Conversely if CuPredMode[xCb][yCb] is equal to another “second value” the mode will be disabled, for example “if Matrix-based Intra Prediction, MIP, is enabled, ITU JVET-O0258 discloses disable Intra Block Copy, IBC, for Chroma component,” exemplifying the second color component See Wang, Paragraph 176, 188.)
in a case that the value for the second syntax element identity information is the second value, decoding a bitstream to determine a value for fourth syntax element identity information; … determining a first intra prediction mode of the second color component of the current block based on the value for the fourth syntax element identity information; and … performing intra prediction on the second color component of the current block using the first intra prediction mode, to determine the predicted value for the second color component of the current block.” (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and ordinary skill in the art, the fourth value is or indicates an intra prediction mode of the second color which is used in decode the second color. Prior art teaches an example of this: “Chroma intra prediction mode derivation process, for example, ITU JVET-O0925 discloses set Chroma derive mode, DM, as Planar mode if Matrix-based Intra Prediction, MIP, is enabled, ITU JVET-O0258 discloses disable Intra Block Copy, IBC, for Chroma component,” See Wang, Paragraph 176.)
Regarding Claim 18: “The method according to claim 1, further comprising:
in a case that the first syntax element identity information indicates that the IBC extension mode is enabled for the second color component of the current block, decoding a bitstream to determine a value for fifth syntax element identity information; and determining a second intra prediction mode of the second color component of the current block based on the value for the fifth syntax element identity information, and performing intra prediction on the second color component of the current block using the second intra prediction mode, to determine the predicted value for the second color component of the current block, (As noted in Claim 17, “if IBC is enabled. … CuPredMode[xCb][yCb] equal to MODE_IBC [fifth syntax element identity information] specifies that the current prediction block is applied with IBC mode.” See Wang, Paragraph 176, 188.)
in a case that the first syntax element identity information indicates that the IBC extension mode is disabled for the second color component of the current block, decoding a bitstream to determine a value for sixth syntax element identity information; and determining a third intra prediction mode of the second color component of the current block based on the value for the sixth syntax element identity information, and performing intra prediction on the second color component of the current block using the third intra prediction mode, to determine the predicted value for the second color component of the current block, (As noted in Claim 17, Planar mode [fifth syntax element identity information] is used if Matrix-based Intra Prediction, MIP, is enabled and IBC is disabled See Wang, Paragraph 176, 188.)
wherein the second intra prediction mode comprises the target prediction mode, and the third intra prediction mode does not comprise the target prediction mode.” (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and ordinary skill in the art, the IBC mode is the target of the enabling described in the above claim language. As noted above, the target / IBC mode is enabled as the second intra prediction mode and another mode MIP / Planar mode is enabled as the third intra prediction mode. See Wang, Paragraph 176, 188.)
Claim 19, “An encoding method,” is rejected for reasons stated for Claims 1-2, because Claim 1 recites the same steps as Claim 19, and because prior art teaches: “In an embodiment, the video coding device 400 may be a decoder such as video decoder 30 of FIG. 1A or an encoder such as video encoder 20 of FIG. 1A.” Wang, Paragraph 163.)
Claim 20 “A decoder, comprising a memory and a processor, wherein the memory is configured to store a computer program, and the processor is configured to execute the computer program stored in the memory to cause the decoder to perform a method comprising operations of: …” is rejected for reasons stated for Claims 1-2, and because prior art teaches: “computer-readable storage medium having stored thereon instructions that when executed cause one or more processors configured to code video data is proposed. The instructions cause the one or more processors to perform a method according to the first or second aspect or any possible embodiment of the first or second aspect.” Wang, Paragraph 19.)
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MIKHAIL ITSKOVICH whose telephone number is (571)270-7940. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Thu. 9am - 8pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph Ustaris can be reached at (571)272-7383. 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.
/MIKHAIL ITSKOVICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483
Prosecution Insights