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 (IDS) submitted on 05/20/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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) 1-8, 12-17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Racape et al. (“Rac”) (U.S. PG Publication No. 2019/0273918).
In regards to claim 1, Rac teaches a method, performed by a video decoding apparatus, for decoding a current block by using intra-prediction (See ¶0006-0007 wherein it is understood by one of ordinary skill in the art that such techniques are performed within a codec [encoding-decoding system], as per coding standards described in ¶0002-0005), the method comprising:
decoding related information including an intra-prediction mode of the current block from a bitstream (See ¶0006-0007 in view of 0002-0005 as described above for codec systems such as those described, e.g. HEVC, AVC, MPEG-4, etc.);
based on availability of a reference sample at a position to be referenced in a first prediction direction indicated by the intra-prediction mode (See ¶0028-0030 wherein the availability of a reference sample is determined with regards to one of a plurality of intra directional modes), determining a direction for the intra-prediction in consideration of a second prediction direction different than the first prediction direction (See ¶0028-0030 wherein once the determination has been made, one or a plurality of intra directional modes may be considered in the opposite direction if they are available for prediction); and
performing the intra-prediction according to the direction for the intra-prediction to generate a prediction block of the current block (See ¶0028-0031).
In regards to claim 2, Rac teaches the method of claim 1, wherein determining the direction for the intra-prediction comprises:
determining whether a reference sample is available at a position to be referenced in the first prediction direction based on a position of the current block (See ¶0028-0030 in view of FIG. 2).
In regards to claim 3, Rac teaches the method of claim 1, wherein determining the direction for the intra-prediction comprises:
when the first prediction direction is related to a prediction direction using one reference sample group which is either a first reference sample group on the top of the current block or a second reference sample group on the left of the current block, and when at least part of samples in the one reference sample group is not available for reference, setting the direction for the intra-prediction to the second prediction direction to use the other reference sample group which is either the first reference sample group or the second reference sample group (See ¶0028-0030 in view of FIG. 2 wherein various reference samples among a plurality of intra directions are unavailable, then various reference samples among a plurality of intra directions in the opposite direction may be used).
In regards to claim 4, Rac teaches the method of claim 1, wherein determining the direction for the intra-prediction comprises:
configuring a first reference sample group on the top of the current block and a second reference sample group on the left of the current block (See ¶0028-0030 in view of FIG. 1 and 2 wherein it is understood by one of ordinary skill in the art that the first group may be on top and the second [opposite] group may be on the left, or vice versa, as these are the two directions that comprise the previously decoded or reconstructed samples are considered with Intra prediction as described in 0006-0007);
performing a comparison between a proportion of reference samples in one reference sample group of the first reference sample group and the second reference sample group that are available for intra-prediction in the first prediction direction and a proportion of reference samples in the other reference sample group that are available for intra-prediction in the second prediction direction (See ¶0028-0030 in view of FIG. 2 wherein a first group of reference sample may be a directional mode 2 [of the plurality given in the example of intra directional modes 2-9] and a second may be one of the others 3-9, with the second directions being one of the opposites such as 34); and
setting the direction for the intra-prediction to one of the first prediction direction and the second prediction direction based on a result of the comparison (See ¶0028-0031).
In regards to claim 5, Rac teaches the method of claim 4, wherein generating the prediction block comprises:
determining the value of a reference sample in the other reference sample group that is not available for reference for intra-prediction in the second prediction direction by using the values of other reference samples (See ¶0025 wherein the value of one [set] of reference sample values may be used for another set of reference sample values, this is taken in view of 0028-0030 wherein such a technique is taken one step further by finding replacement values of a group of intra directions from an opposite direction).
In regards to claim 6, Rac teaches the method of claim 1, wherein determining the direction for the intra-prediction comprises:
configuring a first reference sample group on the top of the current block and a second reference sample group on the left of the current block (See ¶0028-0030 in view of FIG. 1 and 2 as described above, as per intra-prediction standardizations described in various standards such as HEVC, MPEG, etc.);
performing a comparison between a number of reference samples in one reference sample group of the first reference sample group and the second reference sample group that are available for intra-prediction in the first prediction direction and a number of reference samples in the other reference sample group that are available for intra-prediction in the second prediction direction (See ¶0028-0030 in view of FIG. 2 wherein a first group of reference sample may be a directional mode 2 [of the plurality given in the example of intra directional modes 2-9] and a second may be one of the others 3-9, with the second directions being one of the opposites such as 34); and
setting the direction for the intra-prediction to one of the first prediction direction and the second prediction direction based on a result of the comparison (See ¶0028-0030).
In regards to claim 7, Rac teaches the method of claim 1, wherein determining the direction for the intra-prediction comprises:
configuring a first reference sample group on the top of the current block and a second reference sample group on the left of the current block (See ¶0028-0030 in view of FIG. 1 and 2 wherein it is understood by one of ordinary skill in the art that the first group may be on top and the second [opposite] group may be on the left, or vice versa, as these are the two directions that comprise the previously decoded or reconstructed samples are considered with Intra prediction as described in 0006-0007);
dividing the current block into a plurality of regions based on whether part of samples in one reference sample group of the first reference sample group and the second reference sample group is unavailable for reference for intra-prediction in the first prediction direction (See FIG. 1 and 2 wherein current block is “divided” according to reference sample availability); and
setting the direction for intra-prediction for each region to one of the first prediction direction and the second prediction direction (See ¶0028-0031).
In regards to claim 8, Rac teaches the method of claim 7, wherein the boundaries between the plurality of regions are in parallel with the first prediction direction (See FIG. 1 and 2).
In regards to claim 12, the claim is rejected under the same basis as claim 1 by Rac.
In regards to claim 13, the claim is rejected under the same basis as claim 3 by Rac.
In regards to claim 14, the claim is rejected under the same basis as claim 4 by Rac.
In regards to claim 15, the claim is rejected under the same basis as claim 6 by Rac.
In regards to claim 16, the claim is rejected under the same basis as claim 7 by Rac.
In regards to claim 17, the claim is rejected under the same basis as claim 8 by Rac.
In regards to claim 19, the claim is rejected under the same basis as claim 1 by Rac.
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.
Claim(s) 9 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Racape et al. (“Rac”) (U.S. PG Publication No. 2019/0273918) in view of Kang et al. (“Kang”) (U.S. PG Publication No. 2020/0059642).
In regards to claim 9, Rac fails to teach the method of claim 7, wherein generating the prediction block comprises: performing the intra-prediction in the first prediction direction for a region in which there are neither reference samples available for the first prediction direction nor reference samples available for the second prediction direction.
In a similar endeavor Kang teaches wherein generating the prediction block comprises: performing the intra-prediction in the first prediction direction for a region in which there are neither reference samples available for the first prediction direction nor reference samples available for the second prediction direction (See ¶0325-0329 wherein regions which have no available samples would then get padding from an area where a reference pixel does indeed exist, thus the padding itself is still used as the same direction chosen yet with pixel values from another direction).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, and before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teaching of Kang into Rac because it allows for reference sampling even when values don’t exist in the desired direction, this is done through the use of available values from the nearest area to the unavailable area preventing a decrease in intra prediction accuracy as described in at least ¶0329.
In regards to claim 18, the claim is rejected under the same basis as claim 9 by Rac in view of Kang.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Racape et al. (“Rac”) (U.S. PG Publication No. 2019/0273918) in view of Heo et al. (“Heo”) (U.S. PG Publication No. 2021/0112252).
In regards to claim 10, Rac fails to teach the method of claim 1, wherein the related information includes an ARS flag, and wherein the ARS flag is information indicating that the second prediction direction is determined based on availability of a reference sample.
In a similar endeavor Heo teaches wherein the related information includes an ARS flag, and wherein the ARS flag is information indicating that the second prediction direction is determined based on availability of a reference sample (See ¶0122 wherein a flag may be used to indicate a type of intra prediction for a direction and its opposite, this is taken in view of Rac’s teachings wherein the determination based on direction is based on availability of a reference sample).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, and before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teaching of Heo into Rac because it allows for the use of a flag in order to indicate Intra prediction directional determination as described in at least ¶0122.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Racape et al. (“Rac”) (U.S. PG Publication No. 2019/0273918) in view of Tsai et al. (“Tsai”) (U.S. PG Publication No. 2020/0396444).
In regards to claim 11, Rac fails to teach the method of claim 1, wherein determining the direction for the intra-prediction comprises:
determining the direction for the intra-prediction in consideration of the first prediction direction and the second prediction direction when the current block is positioned on at least one of a CTU boundary, a picture boundary, or a slice boundary.
That is, although it is clear that this is occurring at a boundary as seen in FIG. 1 and 2, an additional prior art will be searched for purposes of a clearer teaching and compact prosecution.
In a similar endeavor Tsai teaches determining the direction for the intra-prediction in consideration of the first prediction direction and the second prediction direction when the current block is positioned on at least one of a CTU boundary, a picture boundary, or a slice boundary (See ¶0007 of Tsai wherein an example of such a situation is at a picture or slice boundary, this is taken in view of Tac’s teachings as seen in ¶0002-0008 and 0028-0031).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, and before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teaching of Tsai into Rac because it allows for determination of reference sample values when there is unavailability by using sample values of locations near it or providing average sample values as described in at least ¶0007, thus providing an approximation to a proper sample value within the region of the image data.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDEMIO NAVAS JR whose telephone number is (571)270-1067. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, ~ 9 AM -6 PM.
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 5712727383. 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.
EDEMIO NAVAS JR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2483
/EDEMIO NAVAS JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483
Prosecution Insights