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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 4 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities: on the last line, there seems to be an extra space in “non- adjacent”. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 2-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,323,581 in view of Kim and Chen or Kim, Chen and Lim as mapped below.
The instant application's additional limitations are mapped with motivation below.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by the U.S. Patent with the missing limitations as taught by Kim to improve coding efficiency of a video signal or predict a current block more accurately based on an intra prediction mode (Kim [0035]).
As shown above, all of the limitations are known, they can be applied to a known device such as a processor to yield a predictable result of improving coding efficiency.
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) 2-10, 12-19 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (U.S. 2021/0227213), hereinafter Kim in view of Chen et al. (U.S. 2023/0231992), hereinafter Chen. Kim was cited on the Applicant’s IDS dated 4/1/26.
Regarding claim 2, Kim discloses a method of video decoding performed in a video decoder, the method comprising:
receiving coded information of a current block (Kim [0011]) from a coded video bitstream (Kim [0063] and fig. 2), the coded information indicating that the current block being coded based on a first reference line from a plurality of reference lines, each of the plurality of reference lines including a respective row of reference samples above a top side of the current block and a respective column of reference samples at a left side of the current block (Kim [0079], [0096] and fig. 11);
determining a first offset value from a first angle-to-offset mapping (Kim [0179]) associated with the first reference line (Kim [0128] and fig. 21) according to a first directional mode of the current block (Kim [0098], [0127] and [0131]), the plurality of reference lines including at least a second reference line (Kim [0135]) that is associated with a second angle- to-offset mapping (Kim [0179]), the second angle-to-offset mapping including at least one different angle-to-offset mapping from the first angle-to-offset mapping table (Kim [0098], [0127] and [0139]);
determining at least a first reference sample for a sample of the current block from the first reference line based on the first offset value (Kim [0127]); and
reconstructing the sample of the current block based on at least the first reference sample (Kim [0094] and fig. 5).
Kim does not explicitly disclose arranging the angle-to-offset mapping in a table.
However, Chen teaches arranging the angle-to-offset mapping in a table (Chen [0126], Table 1 and [0127]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kim’s method with the missing limitations as taught by Chen to more easily signal corresponding data values (Chen [0127]).
As shown above, all of the limitations are known, they can be applied to a known device such as a processor to yield a predictable result of improving coding efficiency.
Regarding claim 3, Kim in view of Chen teaches the method of claim 2, wherein:
the first angle-to-offset mapping table (Chen [0126], Table 1 and [0127]) indicates correlations between candidate directional modes (Kim [0098], [0127] and [0131]-[0134]) and first offset values (Kim [0179]) for prediction using the first reference line (Kim [0127]-[0128] and fig. 21), and
the second angle-to-offset mapping table (Chen [0126], Table 1 and [0127]) indicates correlations between the candidate directional modes (Kim [0098], [0127] and [0137]-[0142]) and second offset values (Kim [0179]) for prediction using the second reference line (Kim [0135]).
The same motivation for claim 2 applies to the missing limitations of claim 3.
Regarding claim 4, Kim in view of Chen teaches the method of claim 2, wherein:
one of the first angle-to-offset mapping table (Chen [0126], Table 1 and [0127]) is associated with an adjacent reference line of the current block (Kim [0135] and fig. 21), and
another of the first angle-to-offset mapping table (Chen [0126], Table 1 and [0127]) and the second angle-to-offset mapping table is associated with non- adjacent reference lines in the plurality of reference lines (Kim [0135] and fig. 21).
The same motivation for claim 2 applies to the missing limitations of claim 4.
Regarding claim 5, Kim in view of Chen teaches the method of claim 2, wherein:
the first angle-to-offset mapping table (Chen [0126], Table 1 and [0127]) and the second angle-to-offset mapping table (Chen [0126], Table 1 and [0127]) have same mapping relationships for base angles (Kim [0289], [0456], [0221] and [0179]), and
a base angle is mapped to a same offset value (Kim [0289] and [0456]) according to both the first angle-to-offset mapping table (Chen [0126], Table 1 and [0127]) and the second angle-to-offset mapping table (Kim [0289], [0456], [0221] and [0179] and Chen [0126], Table 1 and [0127])).
The same motivation for claim 2 applies to the missing limitations of claim 5.
Regarding claim 6, Kim in view of Chen teaches the method of claim 2, wherein:
the first angle-to-offset mapping table (Chen [0126], Table 1 and [0127]) and the second angle-to-offset mapping table (Chen [0126], Table 1 and [0127]) respectively include a plurality of base angles that corresponds to a plurality of candidate directional modes (Kim [0098], [0127] and [0131]-[0134]), and
the plurality of base angles is mapped to same offset values (Kim [0289] and [0456]) in the first angle-to-offset mapping table (Chen [0126], Table 1 and [0127]) and the second angle-to-offset mapping table (Kim [0289], [0456], [0221] and [0179] and Chen [0126], Table 1 and [0127]).
The same motivation for claim 2 applies to the missing limitations of claim 6.
Regarding claim 7, Kim in view of Chen teaches the method of claim 6, wherein:
the first angle-to-offset mapping table maps a first angle to a first mapped offset value (Kim [0127] and [0179] and Chen [0126], Table 1 and [0127]),
the second angle-to-offset mapping table maps the first angle to a second mapped offset value (Kim [0131]-[0134] and [0179] and Chen [0126], Table 1 and [0127]), and
when the first angle is equal to or greater than 45 degrees (Kim [0098] and [0454]), a difference of the first mapped offset value and the second mapped offset value is within a range that is smaller than a range threshold (Kim [0179], [0187] and [0101]).
The same motivation for claim 2 applies to the missing limitations of claim 7.
Regarding claim 8, Kim in view of Chen teaches the method of claim 7, wherein:
when the first reference line is an adjacent reference line of the current block among the plurality of reference lines (Kim [0128] and fig. 21),
the second mapped offset value is in a preset range about the first mapped offset value (Kim [0179], [0187] and [0101]).
Regarding claim 9, Kim in view of Chen teaches the method of claim 8, wherein:
a lower boundary of the preset range is equal to or larger than the first mapped offset value minus a positive integer (Kim [0269]), and
an upper boundary of the preset range is equal to or smaller than the first mapped offset value plus the positive integer (Kim [0269]).
Regarding claim 10, Kim in view of Chen teaches the method of claim 9, wherein the positive integer is one of 1, 2, 3 or 4 (Kim [0269]).
Regarding claim 12, Kim in view of Chen teaches a method of video encoding performed in a video encoder, comprising: determining to code a current block in a current picture based on a first reference line in a plurality of reference lines in the current picture, each of the plurality of reference lines including a respective row of reference samples above a top side of the current block and a respective column of reference samples at a left side of the current block; determining a first offset value from a first angle-to-offset mapping table associated with the first reference line according to a first directional mode of the current block, the plurality of reference lines including at least a second reference line that is associated with a second angle- to-offset mapping table, the second angle-to-offset mapping table including at least one different angle-to-offset mapping from the first angle-to-offset mapping table; determining at least a first reference sample for a sample of the current block from the first reference line based on the first offset value; encoding the sample of the current block based on at least the first reference sample; and generating coded information of the current block in a coded video bitstream, the coded information indicating that the current block being coded based on the first reference line from the plurality of reference lines (claim 12 recites analogous limitations to claim 2 above, and is therefore rejected on the same premise. Furthermore, claim 12 discloses an inverse of decoding and Kim discloses both encoding and decoding methods (Kim figs. 1-2)).
Regarding claim 13, Kim in view of Chen teaches the method of claim 12, wherein: the first angle-to-offset mapping table indicates correlations between candidate directional modes and first offset values for prediction using the first reference line, and the second angle-to-offset mapping table indicates correlations between the candidate directional modes and second offset values for prediction using the second reference line (see claim 3).
Regarding claim 14, Kim in view of Chen teaches the method of claim 12, wherein: one of the first angle-to-offset mapping table is associated with an adjacent reference line of the current block, and another of the first angle-to-offset mapping table and the second angle-to-offset mapping table is associated with non- adjacent reference lines in the plurality of reference lines (see claim 4).
Regarding claim 15, Kim in view of Chen teaches the method of claim 12, wherein: the first angle-to-offset mapping table and the second angle-to-offset mapping table have same mapping relationships for base angles, and a base angle is mapped to a same offset value according to both the first angle-to-offset mapping table and the second angle-to-offset mapping table (see claim 5).
Regarding claim 16, Kim in view of Chen teaches the method of claim 12, wherein: the first angle-to-offset mapping table and the second angle-to-offset mapping table respectively include a plurality of base angles that corresponds to a plurality of candidate directional modes, and the plurality of base angles is mapped to same offset values in the first angle-to-offset mapping table and the second angle-to-offset mapping table (see claim 6).
Regarding claim 17, Kim in view of Chen teaches the method of claim 12, wherein: the first angle-to-offset mapping table maps a first angle to a first mapped offset value, the second angle-to-offset mapping table maps the first angle to a second mapped offset value, and when the first angle is equal to or greater than 45 degrees, a difference of the first mapped offset value and the second mapped offset value is within a range that is smaller than a range threshold (see claim 7).
Regarding claim 18, Kim in view of Chen teaches the method of claim 17, wherein: when the first reference line is an adjacent reference line of the current block among the plurality of reference lines, the second mapped offset value is in a preset range about the first mapped offset value (see claim 8).
Regarding claim 19, Kim in view of Chen teaches the method of claim 18, wherein: a lower boundary of the preset range is equal to or larger than the first mapped offset value minus a positive integer, and an upper boundary of the preset range is equal to or smaller than the first mapped offset value plus the positive integer (see claim 9).
Regarding claim 21, Kim in view of Chen teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions which when executed by a processor cause the processor to perform (Kim [0555]) an encoding method comprising:
determining to code a current block in a current picture based on a first reference line in a plurality of reference lines in the current picture, each of the plurality of reference lines including a respective row of reference samples above a top side of the current block and a respective column of reference samples at a left side of the current block;
determining a first offset value from a first angle-to-offset mapping table associated with the first reference line according to a first directional mode of the current block, the plurality of reference lines including at least a second reference line that is associated with a second angle- to-offset mapping table, the second angle-to-offset mapping table including at least one different angle-to-offset mapping from the first angle-to-offset mapping table;
determining at least a first reference sample for a sample of the current block from the first reference line based on the first offset value;
encoding the sample of the current block based on at least the first reference sample;
generating coded information of the current block in a bitstream, the coded information indicating that the current block being coded based on the first reference line from the plurality of reference lines (see claim 12 for remaining limitations); and
transmitting the encoded bitstream (Kim [0071] and fig. 1 and Chen fig. 2).
The same motivation or claim 2 applies to claim 21.
Claim(s) 11 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Chen as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Lim et al. (U.S. 2022/0109846), hereinafter Lim. Lim was cited on the Applicant’s IDS dated 4/1/26.
Regarding claim 11, Kim in view of Chen teaches the method of claim 2, wherein chroma and luma have the same structure (Kim [0200]). Kim does not explicitly disclose the current block is a co-located luma block of a chroma block, and the method further comprises: reconstructing the chroma block based on an adjacent reference line of the chroma block and the first angle-to-offset mapping table that is associated with the first reference line of the co-located luma block.
However, Lim teaches a method, wherein:
the current block is a co-located luma block of a chroma block (Lim [0509]), and
the method further comprises:
reconstructing (Lim [0215] and [0522]) the chroma block based on an adjacent reference line of the chroma block and the first angle-to-offset mapping table that is associated with the first reference line of the co-located luma block (Lim [0509]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Kim in view of Chen with the missing limitations as taught by Lim provide an image encoding/decoding method and apparatus with improved encoding/decoding efficiency (Lim [0004]).
As shown above, all of the limitations are known, they can be applied to a known device such as a processor to yield a predictable result of improving coding efficiency.
Regarding claim 20, Kim in view of Chen and Lim teaches the method of claim 12, wherein: the current block is a co-located luma block of a chroma block, and the method comprises: encoding the chroma block based on an adjacent reference line of the chroma block and the first angle-to-offset mapping table that is associated with the first reference line of the co- located luma block (see claims 11 and 12).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Alshina et al. (U.S. 2014/0192891) discloses deriving chroma offset based on luma offset (Alshina [0071]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW KWAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7073. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
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 on (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.
/MATTHEW K KWAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482
Prosecution Insights