DETAILED ACTION
The present Office action is in response to the application filing on 2 JULY 2025.
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 07/02/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the Information Disclosure Statement is being considered by the Examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: --METHOD, APPARATUS, AND MEDIUM FOR VIDEO PROCESSING CROSS-COMPONENT PREDICTION CODING INFORMATION--
Claim Objections
Claims 9-11 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 9-11 include various abbreviations that have not previously been established within the same line of claim dependency. For instance, CCCM, MM-CCLM, and GLM have the full words established in claims 5 and 6; however, none of claims 9-11 depend on claims 5 and 6.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
With regard to claim 14, the limitation “the cross-component prediction coding information of a target chroma block” has antecedent basis to claim 1, yet it is not for “a target block” but for “a neighboring block or a set of samples non-adjacent to a current block of the video unit.” It is not clear if “the cross-component prediction information” is meant to have the same “information” for each of the blocks or if it is different “information.” The claim further defines at least partial overlap with a MxN region and it is not clear what region this is meant to represent, because there will be an MxN region for “a target chroma block” and therefore it appears to suggest at least partial overlap with some other MxN region, such as the block of claim 1. However, there is a lack of antecedent basis to the block of claim 1. For examination purposes, the limitation will be interpreted as, “a cross-component prediction coding information of a target chroma block.”
With regard to claim 15, the same rationale of claim 14 applies concerning the “the cross-component prediction coding information.” The claim requires the information to be “of a first coded/decoded block” and it is unclear if said coded/decoded block is meant to be the block of claim 1 or the block of claim 15, due to the antecedent basis in “the cross-component prediction coding information.” For examination purposes, each “the cross-component prediction coding information” will be interpreted as --a cross-component prediction coding information--.
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) 1-11 and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Publication No. 2026/0032281 A1 (hereinafter “Chiang”).
Regarding claim 1, Chiang discloses a method of video processing ([0120], “method and apparatus for video coding”), comprising:
determining, for a conversion between a video unit of a video and a bitstream of the video ([0120], “[t]he current block is encoded or decoded by using one or more predictors.” Note, the “conversion” covers both an encoding embodiment and a decoding embodiment. FIG. 1A depicts an encoder converting to a bitstream and FIG. 1B depicts a decoder converting from a bitstream), a cross-component prediction model ([0151], “cross-component prediction.” [0157], “cross-component modes (e.g. CCLM_LT, MMLM_LT, CCLM_L, CCLM_T, MMLM_L, MMLM_T […])”) based on one of: cross-component prediction coding information of a neighboring block or a set of samples non-adjacent to a current block of the video unit ([0304], “If chroma component or luma component of the current block has multiple neighbouring reference lines (including the adjacent reference line and/or non-adjacent reference lines), as shown in FIG. 12 for a current block 1210, the neighbouring samples for deriving model parameters in CCLM/MMLM can be adaptive by reference line selection.” [0310], “the final line selection of the current block is the CCLM/MMLM with the line(s) that can minimize the difference of the boundary samples of the current block and the neighbouring samples along the boundary”);
determining a prediction value of the current block by applying the cross-component prediction model to the current block ([0007], “apply prediction process.” [0128], “encode or decode a chroma block of the current block.” [0157], “generate the chroma prediction.” [0311], “the final chroma prediction of the current block is selected according to the model that has the minimal cost”); and
performing the conversion based on the prediction value ([0004], “[s]witch 114 selects Intra Prediction 110 or Inter-Prediction 112 and the selected prediction data is supplied to Adder 116 to form prediction errors, also called residues. The prediction error is then processed by Transform (T) 118 followed by Quantization (Q) 120. The transformed and quantized residues are then coded by Entropy Encoder 122 to be included in a video bitstream corresponding to the compressed video data.” [0006], “the decoder uses an Entropy Decoder 140 to decode the video bitstream into quantized transform coefficients and needed coding information (e.g. ILPF information, Intra prediction information and Inter prediction information). The Intra prediction 150 at the decoder side does not need to perform the mode search. Instead, the decoder only needs to generate Intra prediction according to Intra prediction information received from the Entropy Decoder 140”).
Regarding claim 2, Chiang discloses every limitation of claim 1, as outlined above. Additionally, Chiang discloses wherein the neighboring block is a spatial neighboring block of the current block, or the neighboring block is a temporal neighboring block of the current block ([0304], “If chroma component or luma component of the current block has multiple neighbouring reference lines (including the adjacent reference line and/or non-adjacent reference lines), as shown in FIG. 12 for a current block 1210, the neighbouring samples for deriving model parameters in CCLM/MMLM can be adaptive by reference line selection.” Note, the neighbouring samples are spatial, as illustrated in FIG. 12. In addition, the claim requires one of the only two types of neighboring blocks (i.e., spatial or temporal) and therefore the limitation is inherently taught when using a neighboring block of the current block).
Regarding claim 3, Chiang discloses every limitation of claim 2, as outlined above. Additionally, Chiang discloses wherein the spatial neighboring block is adjacent to the current block, or wherein the spatial neighboring block is non-adjacent to the current block ([0304], “If chroma component or luma component of the current block has multiple neighbouring reference lines (including the adjacent reference line and/or non-adjacent reference lines), as shown in FIG. 12 for a current block 1210, the neighbouring samples for deriving model parameters in CCLM/MMLM can be adaptive by reference line selection.” Note, the neighbouring samples are spatial, as illustrated in FIG. 12. In addition, the claim requires one of the only two types of neighboring blocks (i.e., spatially adjacent and non-adjacent) and therefore the limitation is inherently taught when using a spatially neighboring block of the current block).
Regarding claim 4, Chiang discloses every limitation of claim 1, as outlined above. Additionally, Chiang discloses wherein the cross-component prediction coding information comprises at least one of:
a type of cross-component prediction method ([0157], “variations of CCLM here mean that some optional modes can be selected when the block indication refers to using one of cross-component modes (e.g. CCLM_LT, MMLM_LT, CCLM_L, CCLM_T, MMLM_L, MMLM_T, and/or an intra prediction mode, which is not one of traditional DC, planar, and angular modes) for the current block”),
a position of a sample ([0304], “the neighbouring samples for deriving model parameters in CCLM/MMLM can be adaptive by reference line selection”),
the number of models ([0157], “variations of CCLM here mean that some optional modes can be selected when the block indication refers to using one of cross-component modes (e.g. CCLM_LT, MMLM_LT, CCLM_L, CCLM_T, MMLM_L, MMLM_T, and/or an intra prediction mode, which is not one of traditional DC, planar, and angular modes) for the current block”),
at least one threshold to classify samples for different models ([0312], “if the current block width is smaller than a threshold, then more than one reference line is used in CCLM_A or MMLM_A. Similarly, if the current block height is smaller than a threshold, then more than one reference line is used in CCLM_L or MMLM_L. If the (width+height) of the current block is smaller than a threshold, then more than one reference line is used in CCLM_LA or MMLM_LA. For still another example, if the area of the current block is smaller than a threshold, then more than two reference lines are used in CCLM or MMLM. In another embodiment, more than one reference line is used in CCLM_A, CCLM_L, MMLM_A, or MMLM_L”),
at least one luma sample value offset ([0308] describes an offset used in three different equations to be used on either luma or chroma samples),
at least one chroma sample value offset ([0308] describes an offset used in three different equations to be used on either luma or chroma samples),
at least one model for at least one chroma component ([0311], “the final chroma prediction of the current block is selected according to the model that has the minimal cost”), or at least one sample location shift ([0080] describes a shift applied to MMLM_LT. [0184] describes applying weights calculated based on a shift for multiple line referencing).
Regarding claim 5, Chiang discloses every limitation of claim 4, as outlined above. Additionally, Chiang discloses wherein the type of cross-component prediction method comprises at least one of:
a cross-component linear model (CCLM), a convolutional cross-component model (CCCM), a gradient linear model (GLM), a GLM with luma method, a gradient and location based convolutional cross-component model (GL-CCCM), or a CCCM using non-downsampled luma samples, and/or wherein the number of models is 1 or 2, and/or wherein the number of models is considered as a part of the type of cross-component prediction method, and/or wherein if the number of models is at least 2, the at least one threshold to classify samples for different models is used, and/or wherein the at least one luma sample value offset is added to or subtracted from a luma sample if the luma sample is used to derive a chroma prediction value, and/or wherein the at least one luma sample value offset is used for a target type of cross-component prediction method, and/or wherein the at least one chroma sample value offset is added to or subtracted from a chroma prediction value derived by a cross-component prediction model to generate a final prediction, and/or wherein the at least one model for at least one chroma component includes different models for Cb and Cr components, and/or wherein the number of models for each component is included as a part of the cross-component prediction coding information, and/or wherein the at least one sample location shift is added to or subtracted from a location of a sample if the sample is used to derive a chroma prediction value, and/or wherein the at least one sample location shift is used for a target cross-component prediction type ([0084], “a cross-component linear model (CCLM) prediction mode.” Note, the limitations are written in the alternative and as such, the broadest reasonable interpretation only requires a single selection).
Regarding claim 6, Chiang discloses every limitation of claim 5, as outlined above. Additionally, Chiang discloses wherein GLMs using different down-sampling filters are considered as different types of cross-component prediction method, or wherein GLMs with luma method using different down-sampling filters are considered as different types of cross-component prediction method, or wherein the type of cross-component prediction method further comprises at least one of: 4 types of GLM using different down-sampling filters, 4 types of GLM with luma using different down-sampling filters, GL-CCCM, CCCM with non-downsampled luma samples, or a non-cross-component prediction method, and/or wherein CCLM and multiple model-CCLM (MM-CCLM) are considered as two types of cross- component prediction method, and/or wherein the target type of cross-component prediction method comprises at least one of: CCCM, GLM with luma, GL-CCCM and CCCM using non-down-sample luma samples, and/or wherein the at least one model for at least one chroma component comprises at least one of: a model form of CCLM, a model form of CCCM, a model form of GLM, a model form of GLM with luma method, a model form of GL-CCCM, or a model form of CCCM using non-downsampled luma samples, and/or wherein the target cross-component prediction type is GL-CCCM ([0084], “a cross-component linear model (CCLM) prediction mode.” [0111], “multiple model CCLM mode (MMLM).” Note, the limitations are written in the alternative and as such, the broadest reasonable interpretation only requires a single selection).
Regarding claim 7, Chiang discloses every limitation of claim 1, as outlined above. Additionally, Chiang discloses wherein the cross-component prediction coding information is stored after a chroma block is coded or decoded ([0004], “The side information associated with Intra Prediction 110, Inter prediction 112 and in-loop filter 130, are provided to Entropy Encoder 122 as shown in FIG. 1A.” [0006], “the decoder only needs to generate Intra prediction according to Intra prediction information received from the Entropy Decoder 140.” [0104], “For chroma intra mode coding, a total of 8 intra modes are allowed for chroma intra mode coding. Those modes include five traditional intra modes and three cross-component linear model modes (LM_LA, LM_A, and LM_L). Chroma mode signalling and derivation process are shown in Table 4.” Table 4 includes the prediction modes and Table 5 includes the context bins for each mode, including CCLM modes. [0188], “an index is signalled to indicate the selected combination for the current block and a combination refers to an intra prediction mode, the first reference line, and the second reference line”).
Examiner’s Note: Claims 7-11 depend on the “cross-component prediction coding information” and dependent on the interpretation of claim 1, these claims may have no patentable weight due to the alternative language. In other words, claim 1 could be interpreted as (A) “…based on one of: (i) cross-component prediction coding information of a neighboring block or (ii) a set of samples non-adjacent to a current block of the video unit” or (B) “…based on one of: cross-component prediction coding information of (i) a neighboring block or (ii) a set of samples non-adjacent to a current block of the video unit.” The interpretation of (A) renders the limitations of claims 7-11 as having no patentable weight.
Regarding claim 8, Chiang discloses every limitation of claim 7, as outlined above. Additionally, Chiang discloses wherein the cross-component prediction coding information is stored if the chroma block is coded with a cross-component prediction mode, and/or wherein the cross-component prediction coding information is stored for the chroma block regardless a coding mode of the chroma block, and/or wherein if the chroma block is coded with a cross-component prediction mode, a type of cross- component prediction information is stored as depending on a coding mode, and/or wherein the number of models is stored as the number of models of the chroma block, and/or wherein at least one of the following in the cross-component prediction coding information is stored as those used by the chroma block: a threshold to classify samples for different models, a luma sample value offset, a chroma sample value offset, or a sample location shift, and/or wherein a cross-component prediction model of one component is stored as a model used by the chroma block ([0104], “For chroma intra mode coding, a total of 8 intra modes are allowed for chroma intra mode coding. Those modes include five traditional intra modes and three cross-component linear model modes (LM_LA, LM_A, and LM_L). Chroma mode signalling and derivation process are shown in Table 4.” Note, the limitations are written in the alternative and as such, the broadest reasonable interpretation only requires a single selection).
Regarding claim 9, Chiang discloses every limitation of claim 8, as outlined above. Additionally, Chiang discloses wherein the cross-component prediction coding information is stored if the chroma block is coded with at least one cross-component prediction mode, and/or wherein if the chroma block is not coded with a cross-component prediction mode, a cross-component prediction type is stored as non- cross-component prediction, and/or wherein the type is set to be CCCM if the coding mode is one of: CCCM, CCCM-top (CCCM-T), or CCCM-left (CCCM-L), MM-CCCM, MM-CCCM-T, or MM-CCCM-L, and/or wherein the type is set to be CCLM, if the coding mode is one of: CCLM, CCLM-T, CCLM-L, MM- CCLM, MM-CCLM-T, or MM-CCLM-L, and/or wherein the type is set to be CCLM if the coding mode is one of: CCLM, CCLM-T, CCLM-L, MM- CCLM, MM-CCLM-T, or MM-CCLM-L with slope adjustments, and/or wherein the type is set to be GLM using a filter, if the coding mode is GLM using the filter, and/or wherein the type is set to be GLM with luma using a filter, if the coding mode is GLM with luma using the filter, and/or wherein the type is set to be GL-CCCM, if the coding mode is GL-CCCM, and/or wherein the type is set to be CCCM using non-down-sample, if the coding mode is CCCM using non- down-sample, and/or wherein the type is set to be CCLM, if the coding mode is a fusion of chroma intra prediction mode, and/or wherein the number of models is set to be 2, if the coding mode is one of: MM-CCLM, MM-CCLM- T, MM-CCLM-L, MM-CCLM, MM-CCLM-T, MM-CCLM-L or other multi-model cross-component prediction modes ([0104], “For chroma intra mode coding, a total of 8 intra modes are allowed for chroma intra mode coding. Those modes include five traditional intra modes and three cross-component linear model modes (LM_LA, LM_A, and LM_L). Chroma mode signalling and derivation process are shown in Table 4.” [0111], “multiple model CCLM mode (MMLM).” Note, the limitations are written in the alternative and as such, the broadest reasonable interpretation only requires a single selection).
Regarding claim 10, Chiang discloses every limitation of claim 9, as outlined above. Additionally, Chiang discloses wherein the cross-component prediction coding information is stored if the chroma block is coded with a fusion of chroma intra prediction mode, and/or wherein the model is used by a cross-component prediction method, and/or wherein the stored model is a final applied model ([0104], “For chroma intra mode coding, a total of 8 intra modes are allowed for chroma intra mode coding. Those modes include five traditional intra modes and three cross-component linear model modes (LM_LA, LM_A, and LM_L). Chroma mode signalling and derivation process are shown in Table 4.” [0083], “he fusion of chroma intra prediction modes.” Note, the limitations are written in the alternative and as such, the broadest reasonable interpretation only requires a single selection).
Regarding claim 11, Chiang discloses every limitation of claim 10, as outlined above. Additionally, Chiang discloses wherein a stored type of cross-component prediction coding information is set to be a cross-component prediction type used in the fusion of chroma intra prediction mode, and/or wherein the cross-component prediction method comprises at least one of: CCLM, CCLM-T, CCLM- L, MM-CCLM, MM-CCLM-T, MM-CCLM-L CCCM, CCCM-T, CCCM-L, MM-CCCM, MM-CCCM-T, MM-CCCM-L or GLM using different down-sampling filters, GLM with luma using different down-sampling filters, or GL-CCCM or CCCM using non-downsampled luma samples ([0104], “For chroma intra mode coding, a total of 8 intra modes are allowed for chroma intra mode coding. Those modes include five traditional intra modes and three cross-component linear model modes (LM_LA, LM_A, and LM_L). Chroma mode signalling and derivation process are shown in Table 4.” [0083], “he fusion of chroma intra prediction modes.” Note, the limitations are written in the alternative and as such, the broadest reasonable interpretation only requires a single selection).
Regarding claim 17, Chiang discloses every limitation of claim 1, as outlined above. Additionally, Chiang discloses wherein the conversion includes encoding the video unit into the bitstream, or wherein the conversion includes decoding the video unit from the bitstream ([0120], “[t]he current block is encoded or decoded by using one or more predictors.” FIG. 1A depicts an encoder converting to a bitstream and FIG. 1B depicts a decoder converting from a bitstream).
Regarding claim 18, the limitations are the same as those in claim 1; however, written in machine form instead of method form. Therefore, the same rationale of claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 18. Additionally, Chiang discloses an apparatus for video processing comprising a processor and a non-transitory memory with instructions thereon, wherein the instructions upon execution by the processor, cause the processor to perform a method ([0316], “individual processing units, they may correspond to executable software or firmware codes stored on a media, such as hard disk or flash memory, for a CPU (Central Processing Unit) or programmable devices (e.g. DSP (Digital Signal Processor) or FPGA (Field Programmable Gate Array))”).
Regarding claim 19, the limitations are the same as those in claim 18. Therefore, the same rationale of claim 18 applies equally as well to claim 19.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Publication No. 2014/0294063 A1 (hereinafter “Chen”).
Regarding claim 20, Chen discloses a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream of a video which is generated by a method performed by an apparatus for video processing […] (The claim recites a product-by-process and the broadest reasonable interpretation is limited to the product (i.e., a bitstream that is stored on a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium) as there is no structure implied by the recited steps of the method. MPEP § 2113 recites, “Product-by-Process claims are not limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps.” Thus, the scope of the claim is the recording medium storing the bitstream (with any structure implied by the method steps). Additionally, MPEP § 2111.05(I)(A) recites, “To be given patentable weight, the printed matter and associated product must be in a function relationship. A functional relationship can be found when the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated.” The recording medium storing the bitstream merely services as a support for the storage of the bitstream and provides no functional relationship between the stored bitstream and the recording medium. MPEP § 2111.05(III) recites, when a claimed “computer-readable medium merely serves as a support for information or data, no functional relationship exists.” Therefore, the bitstream structure, which scope is implied by the method steps, is non-functional material and given no patentable weight. Thus, the claim scope is just a recording medium storing a bitstream and is anticipated by Chen, which recites, [0053], “encoded data may be output from interface 22 to a storage device”).
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) 12-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 2026/0032281 A1 (hereinafter “Chiang”) in view of WO 2021/190440 A1 (hereinafter “Wang”).
Regarding claim 12, Chiang discloses every limitation in claim 1, as outlined above. Chiang fails to expressly disclose wherein the cross-component prediction coding information is stored in MxN granularity, wherein M and N are integer numbers.
However, Zhang teaches wherein the cross-component prediction coding information is stored in MxN granularity, wherein M and N are integer numbers (p. 38, “11. In the CCLM parameter derivation process, T1 rows and T2 columns of top-left neighbouring luma samples are assigned. [¶] a. In one example, T1 = 2 and T2 = 2.” Note, T1 and T2 are integer numbers).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have stored a granularity, as taught by Wang (p. 38), in Chiang’s invention, one would have been motivated to modify Chiang’s invention, by incorporating Wang’s invention, to improve the quality of decompressed or decoded digital video or images (Wang: p. 5, [0039]).
Regarding claim 13, Chiang and Wang disclose every limitation of claim 12, as outlined above. Additionally, Wang discloses wherein M is equal to 2 and N is equal to 2 (p. 38, “11. In the CCLM parameter derivation process, T1 rows and T2 columns of top-left neighbouring luma samples are assigned. [¶] a. In one example, T1 = 2 and T2 = 2”). The same motivation of claim 12 applies to claim 13.
Regarding claim 14, Chiang and Wang disclose every limitation of claim 12, as outlined above. Additionally, Wang discloses wherein the cross-component prediction coding information of a target chroma block which is covered by or covering or overlapped with a MxN region is stored to the MxN region (p. 38, “11. In the CCLM parameter derivation process, T1 rows and T2 columns of top-left neighbouring luma samples are assigned. [¶] a. In one example, T1 = 2 and T2 = 2.” Note, the current block to be predicted is chroma utilizing cross-component, hence the luma samples). The same motivation of claim 12 applies to claim 14.
Regarding claim 15, Chiang and Wang disclose every limitation of claim 14, as outlined above. Additionally, Wang discloses wherein the cross-component prediction coding information of a first coded/decoded block with cross-component prediction information covered by or covering or overlapped with the MxN region is stored, and/or wherein the cross-component prediction coding information of a last coded/decoded block with cross- component prediction information covered by or covering or overlapped with the MxN region is stored, and/or wherein the cross-component prediction coding information of a coded/decoded block with cross- component prediction information covered by or covering or overlapped a target position of the MxN region is stored (p. 38, “11. In the CCLM parameter derivation process, T1 rows and T2 columns of top-left neighbouring luma samples are assigned. [¶] a. In one example, T1 = 2 and T2 = 2”). The same motivation of claim 12 applies to claim 15.
Regarding claim 16, Chiang and Wang disclose every limitation of claim 15, as outlined above. Additionally, Wang discloses wherein the target position is one of: top-left, bottom-right, top-right, bottom-left or center position of the MxN region (p. 38, “11. In the CCLM parameter derivation process, T1 rows and T2 columns of top-left neighbouring luma samples are assigned. [¶] a. In one example, T1 = 2 and T2 = 2”). The same motivation of claim 12 applies to claim 16.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
U.S. Publication No. 2021/0092395 A1 – Discloses cross-component prediction with a linear model generated from training samples of a luma block. See [0182].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STUART D BENNETT whose telephone number is (571)272-0677. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday from 9:00 AM - 5PM EST.
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, William Vaughn can be reached at 571-272-3922. 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.
/STUART D BENNETT/Examiner, Art Unit 2481
Prosecution Insights