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 with respect to the 35 USC 112(a) rejection of claims 1 and 4 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 USC 112(a) rejection of claims 1 and 4 have been withdrawn.
Presented arguments have been fully considered but are held unpersuasive. Examiner’s response to the presented arguments follows below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Summary of Arguments:
Applicant argues that Kim fails to disclose:
Claim 1: the applicant argues [0043] of the Kim reference teaches only using the “partition type” information for applying a second transform rather than selecting a transform type to apply. See Remarks pg. 7, para. 2
Examiner’s Response:
Examiner contends that Kim does disclose:
[0038] and [0043] of Kim recites “secondary transform determination unit may be configured to determine whether a secondary transform is performed for a TU and/or determine a transform matrix (i.e. select a secondary transformation type to be applied) based on properties of an intra prediction mode associated with a CU (coding unit). Further, [0044] and [0045] teach when a secondary transform is applied, a flag tu_nsst_idx indicates a matrix for performing the secondary transform (i.e. a secondary transform type is determined). Further, [0060] of Kim teaches a secondary transform is applied based on the coding unit (CU) being of a NxN partition mode and the information for the intra prediction mode includes the intra mode being partitioned in a NxN type partitioning. (The examiner notes, Kim’s teachings in [0043] “a secondary transform is only performed in the case where a CU or TU exceed a maximum size” recite one possible method or performing the secondary transform and does not limit the selection of a secondary transform to be based only on a block size, as argued by the applicant in the applicant’s remarks pg. 7, para. 1).
Further, in [0060], Kim teaches “in the case of where a CU corresponds to an intra prediction N×N partition mode, in one example, video decoder 800 may be configured to generate a value based on whether secondary transforms are performed for one or more TUs.
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.
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) 1-3, 5-7, 9, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karczewicz et al. (Karczewicz) (US 2014/0056361) in view of Kim et al. (Kim) (US 2019/0149822).
Regarding claim 1, Karczewicz discloses an image decoding method, comprising:
obtaining one or more flags indicating whether one or more second transforms are applicable for a residual block of a current block ([0110], [0118], [0125], a flag is signaled for transforming residuals of a coding unit ([0125]) indicating an applicable transform type selection wherein the transform types include secondary transform types DST I, DST III, DST IV, DST VII, or different types of DCT transformations);
generating the residual block by transforming a transform coefficient of the current block ([0005], [0078], [0125], the residues of a coding unit are transformed to generate a transform unit including transform coefficients); and
performing the one or more second transforms on the residual block based on the one or more flags ([0110], [0118], [0125], a flag is signaled for transforming residuals of a coding unit ([0125]) indicating an applicable transform type selection wherein the transform types include secondary transform types DST I, DST III, DST IV, DST VII, or different types of DCT transformations), and
the one or more second transforms ([0110], [0118], [0125], a flag is signaled for transforming residuals of a coding unit ([0125]) indicating an applicable transform type selection wherein the transform types include secondary transform types DST I, DST III, DST IV, DST VII, or different types of DCT transformations)
Karczewicz is silent about wherein a second transform performed on the residual block is determined based on a block partition mode of the current block.
Kim from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses wherein a second transform performed on the residual block is determined based on a block partition mode of the current block ([0043], the application of a secondary transform (and inherently a type of secondary transform) is dependent upon a partitioning type of the current coding unit)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Kim into the teachings of Karczewicz for performing more efficient image encoding/decoding.
Regarding claim 2, Karczewicz discloses wherein a number of the one or more second transform is 2 or more ([0109], [0110], [0118], [0125], [0126], a flag is signaled for transforming residuals of a coding unit ([0125]) indicating a transform type selection wherein the transform types include secondary transform types DST I, DST III, DST IV, DST VII, or different types of DCT transformations).
Regarding claim 3, Karczewicz discloses wherein the one or more flags are obtained from a picture level of a bitstream ([0009], [0110], the transform selection flag is obtained at a frame level).
Regarding claim 5, Karczewicz discloses wherein a second transform, among the one or more second transforms, performed on the residual block is determined based on an encoding mode of the current block ([0106], [0113], [0125], an applicable transform is selected based on the current block being encoded in inter or intra mode).
Regarding claim 6, Karczewicz discloses wherein a second transform, among the one or more second transforms, performed on the residual block is determined based on an intra prediction mode of the current block ([0122]-[0125], a secondary transform is applied based on the prediction mode being an intra mode).
Regarding claim 7, Karczewicz discloses wherein a second transform, among the one or more second transforms, performed on the residual block is determined based on information obtained from a block level of a bitstream ([0110], [0116], [0126], the selection information is transmitted at a coding unit (CU or block) level).
Regarding claim 9, Karczewicz discloses an image encoding method (FIG. 2, performed by encoder 20), comprising:
performing one or more second transforms on a residual block of a current block ([0110], [0118], [0125], a flag is signaled for transforming residuals of a coding unit ([0125]) indicating a transform type selection wherein the transform types include secondary transform types DST I, DST III, DST IV, DST VII, or different types of DCT transformations);
generating a transform coefficient of the current block by transforming the residual block on which the one or more second transforms is performed ([0005], [0078], [0125], the residues of a coding unit are transformed to generate a transform unit including transform coefficients); and
encoding one or more flags indicating whether the one or more second transforms are applicable ([0110], [0118], [0125], a flag is signaled for transforming residuals of a coding unit ([0125]) indicating an applicable transform type selection wherein the transform types include secondary transform types DST I, DST III, DST IV, DST VII, or different types of DCT transformations), and
the one or more second transforms ([0110], [0118], [0125], a flag is signaled for transforming residuals of a coding unit ([0125]) indicating an applicable transform type selection wherein the transform types include secondary transform types DST I, DST III, DST IV, DST VII, or different types of DCT transformations)
Karczewicz is silent about wherein a second transform performed on the residual block is determined based on a block partition mode of the current block.
Kim from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses wherein a second transform performed on the residual block is determined based on a block partition mode of the current block ([0043], the application of a secondary transform (and inherently a type of secondary transform) is dependent upon a partitioning type of the current coding unit; [0044], [0045] when a secondary transform is applied, a flag tu_nsst_idx indicates a matrix for performing the secondary transform (i.e. a secondary transform type is determined; [0060], a secondary transform is applied based on the coding unit (CU) being of a NxN partition mode and the information for the intra prediction mode includes the intra mode being partitioned in a NxN type partitioning).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Kim into the teachings of Karczewicz for performing more efficient image encoding/decoding.
Regarding claim 10, Karczewicz discloses a method for transmitting a bitstream, comprising:
performing one or more second transforms on a residual block of a current block ([0110], [0118], [0125], a flag is signaled for transforming residuals of a coding unit ([0125]) indicating a transform type selection wherein the transform types include secondary transform types DST I, DST III, DST IV, DST VII, or different types of DCT transformations);
generating a transform coefficient of the current block by transforming the residual block on which the one or more second transforms is performed ([0005], [0078], [0125], the residues of a coding unit are transformed to generate a transform unit including transform coefficients);
encoding, into the bitstream, one or more flags indicating whether the one or more second transforms are applicable ([0110], [0118], [0125], a flag is signaled for transforming residuals of a coding unit ([0125]) indicating a transform type selection wherein the transform types include secondary transform types DST I, DST III, DST IV, DST VII, or different types of DCT transformations); and
transmitting the bitstream (FIG. 3, [0003], the encoded bitstream is transmitted to decoder 30), and
the one or more second transforms ([0110], [0118], [0125], a flag is signaled for transforming residuals of a coding unit ([0125]) indicating an applicable transform type selection wherein the transform types include secondary transform types DST I, DST III, DST IV, DST VII, or different types of DCT transformations)
Karczewicz is silent about wherein a second transform performed on the residual block is determined based on a block partition mode of the current block.
Kim from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses wherein a second transform performed on the residual block is determined based on a block partition mode of the current block ([0043], the application of a secondary transform (and inherently a type of secondary transform) is dependent upon a partitioning type of the current coding unit; [0044], [0045] when a secondary transform is applied, a flag tu_nsst_idx indicates a matrix for performing the secondary transform (i.e. a secondary transform type is determined; [0060], a secondary transform is applied based on the coding unit (CU) being of a NxN partition mode and the information for the intra prediction mode includes the intra mode being partitioned in a NxN type partitioning).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Kim into the teachings of Karczewicz for performing more efficient image encoding/decoding.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karczewicz et al. (Karczewicz) (US 2014/0056361) in view of Kim et al. (Kim) (US 2019/0149822), and further in view of Lu (CN 1031555553 B).
Regarding claim 8, Karczewicz in view of Kim discloses the image decoding method of claim 1 (see claim 1 above).
Karczewicz in view of Kim is silent about further comprising: deriving a quantization parameter prediction value for the current block based on a quantization parameter set at a unit higher than the current block or a quantization parameter set at the same unit as the current block; and deriving the transform coefficient based on the quantization parameter prediction value and a quantization parameter difference value for the current block, wherein the quantization parameter difference value is obtained from a bitstream based on first information included in the bitstream.
Lu from the same or similar field of endeavor discloses deriving a quantization parameter prediction value for the current block based on a quantization parameter (pg. 6, para. 7, pg. 11, para. 5 and 8, pg. 12, para. 4 and 6, pg. 13, para. 5, a quantization parameter (QP) prediction value of a current block is determined using a signaled QP of an adjacent block) set at a unit higher than the current block (pg. 3, para. 5, pg. 11, para. 5 and 8, pg. 4, para. 1 and 11, the QP is signaled at a slice or block level and QP adjustment is performed at a block level (i.e. block level is lower than slice level signaling) or a quantization parameter set at the same unit as the current block (pg. 3, para. 5, pg. 11, para. 5 and 8, pg. 4, para. 1 and 11, the QP is signaled at a slice or block level and QP adjustment is performed at a block level); and deriving the transform coefficient (pg. 5, para. 5-6, the quantization parameter QPY is used for generating transform coefficients) based on the quantization parameter prediction value and a quantization parameter difference value for the current block (pg. 11, para. 5-6, QPY (QP of current block)=QPY, PREV + qp-delta (2) (i.e. qp_delta=quantization parameter difference value) wherein QPY, PREV is the quantization parameter of the last macro block in the current chip in decoding order), wherein the quantization parameter difference value is obtained from a bitstream based on first information included in the bitstream (para. 13, para. 5, delta_QP is encoded into the bitstream).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Lu into the teachings of Karczewicz in view of Kim for more efficient image encoding.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Lee (US 2014/0341276) ([0175], a quantization prediction parameter is derived).
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 JEFFERY A WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)270-7579. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00.
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, Sath Perungavoor can be reached at 571-272-7455. 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.
/JEFFERY A WILLIAMS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488