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 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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-13, and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng et al. (WO 2022174783 A1) in view of Brandenburg et al. (US 20220132108 A1).
Re claim 1, Deng discloses an apparatus for video decoding, comprising:
processing circuitry (Deng: paragraph [0091]) configured to:
determine one of a filter and an intra prediction mode based on reconstructed samples in a first region that are within a current picture (Deng: paragraphs [0029], [00162], [00245], and [00260]),
Deng also discloses padding using samples outside the reference picture boundary (Deng: paragraph [0076]). Deng does not specifically disclose the first region including a first template and a second template, the second template including reconstructed samples on a boundary of the current picture and being located between the first template and the boundary of the current picture; and extrapolate, using the one of the filter and the intra prediction mode, values of samples in a third template that is outside the boundary of the current picture based on values of the reconstructed samples in the second template.
However, Brandenburg discloses padding using samples from multiple border extension areas (Brandenburg: Fig. 11). Brandenburg additionally discloses applying filter taps in conjunction with intra prediction (Brandenberg: paragraphs [0108]-[0121]). Since Deng and Brandenburg relate to systems which pad boundary samples for prediction, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would have found it obvious to combine the border extension areas of Brandenburg with the system of Deng in order to improve approximation of samples outside a boundary (Brandenburg: paragraph [0008]).
Re claim 2, Deng does not specifically disclose wherein the one of the filter and the intra prediction mode is the filter; and the processing circuitry is configured to: determine filter coefficients of the filter based on (i) predicted samples obtained by applying the filter to the first template and (i) the reconstructed samples in the second template; and extrapolate the values of the samples in the third template by applying the filter with the determined filter coefficients to one of (i) the reconstructed samples in the second template and (ii) previously extrapolated samples in the third template.
However, Brandenburg discloses padding using samples from multiple border extension areas (Brandenburg: Fig. 11). Brandenburg additionally discloses applying filter taps in conjunction with intra prediction (Brandenberg: paragraphs [0108]-[0121]). Since Deng and Brandenburg relate to systems which pad boundary samples for prediction, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would have found it obvious to combine the border extension areas of Brandenburg with the system of Deng in order to improve approximation of samples outside a boundary (Brandenburg: paragraph [0008]).
Re claim 3, Deng discloses that a dimension of the second template along a side of the boundary is a dimension of a coding block along the side of the boundary, and a dimension of the first template along the boundary is greater than the dimension of the second template along the side of the boundary (Deng: Fig. 4; paragraphs [0082] and [0083]).
Re claim 4, Deng discloses that a dimension of the first template along a side of the boundary includes a sum of (i) a dimension of a coding block along the side of the boundary and (ii) a parameter that depends on a minimum of a width of the coding block and a height of the coding block (Deng: Fig. 4; paragraphs [0082] and [0083]).
Re claim 5, Deng does not specifically disclose that a position of the first template relative to the second template depends on a position of the second template relative to the boundary of the current picture. However, Brandenburg discloses padding using samples from multiple border extension areas (Brandenburg: Fig. 11). Brandenburg additionally discloses applying filter taps in conjunction with intra prediction (Brandenberg: paragraphs [0108]-[0121]). Since Deng and Brandenburg relate to systems which pad boundary samples for prediction, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would have found it obvious to combine the border extension areas of Brandenburg with the system of Deng in order to improve approximation of samples outside a boundary (Brandenburg: paragraph [0008]).
Re claim 7, Deng does not specifically disclose wherein the processing circuitry is configured to: determine whether to extrapolate the values of the samples in the third template based on whether the second template is reconstructed using intra prediction; and when the second template is reconstructed using intra prediction, perform the extrapolation of the values of the samples in the third template.
However, Brandenburg discloses padding using samples from multiple border extension areas (Brandenburg: Fig. 11). Brandenburg additionally discloses applying filter taps in conjunction with intra prediction (Brandenberg: paragraphs [0108]-[0121]). Since Deng and Brandenburg relate to systems which pad boundary samples for prediction, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would have found it obvious to combine the border extension areas of Brandenburg with the system of Deng in order to improve approximation of samples outside a boundary (Brandenburg: paragraph [0008]).
Re claim 8, Deng does not specifically disclose the one of the filter and the intra prediction mode is the intra prediction mode; and the processing circuitry is configured to: determine the intra prediction mode used to extrapolate as the intra prediction mode used to obtain the reconstructed samples in the first region; and extrapolate the values of the samples in the third template from the reconstructed samples in the second template using the intra prediction mode.
However, Brandenburg discloses padding using samples from multiple border extension areas (Brandenburg: Fig. 11). Brandenburg additionally discloses applying filter taps in conjunction with intra prediction (Brandenberg: paragraphs [0108]-[0121]). Since Deng and Brandenburg relate to systems which pad boundary samples for prediction, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would have found it obvious to combine the border extension areas of Brandenburg with the system of Deng in order to improve approximation of samples outside a boundary (Brandenburg: paragraph [0008]).
Claim 9 recites the corresponding method of video encoding that is implemented by the apparatus of claim 1. Therefore, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 1 are applicable to claim 9. Accordingly, claim 9 has been analyzed and rejected with respect to claim 1 above.
Claim 10 has been analyzed and rejected with respect to claim 2 above.
Claim 11 has been analyzed and rejected with respect to claim 3 above.
Claim 12 has been analyzed and rejected with respect to claim 4 above.
Claim 13 has been analyzed and rejected with respect to claim 5 above.
Claim 15 has been analyzed and rejected with respect to claim 7 above.
Claim 16 has been analyzed and rejected with respect to claim 8 above.
Claim 17 recites the corresponding non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions which when executed by a processor cause the processor of claim 1 to operate. Therefore, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 1 are applicable to claim 17. Accordingly, claim 17 has been analyzed and rejected with respect to claim 1 above.
Claim 18 has been analyzed and rejected with respect to claim 2 above.
Claim 19 has been analyzed and rejected with respect to claim 3 above.
Claim 20 has been analyzed and rejected with respect to claim 4 above.
Claim(s) 6 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deng et al. (WO 2022174783 A1) in view of Brandenburg et al. (US 20220132108 A1), and further in view of Jhu et al. (US 20260089340 A1).
Re claim 6, neither Deng nor Brandenburg specifically discloses wherein three filter shapes include a first filter shape F0 with a number of input samples in a vertical direction that is equal to a number of the input samples in a horizontal direction, a second filter shape F1 with a number of input samples in the horizontal direction that is greater than a number of the input samples in the vertical direction, and a third filter shape F2 with a number of input samples in the vertical direction that is greater than a number of the input samples in the horizontal direction; and the processing circuitry is further configured to: receive coded information including a syntax element indicating a filter shape of the filter as one of the three filter shapes; and determine the filter shape of the filter based on the syntax element.
However, Jhu discloses methods for filtered intra block copy wherein the method includes determining a reference template based on a current template associated with the current block and a second block vector; obtaining a set of filter coefficients corresponding to a filter shape based at least on sample values from both the current template and the reference template; and deriving, by applying the set of filter coefficients and the filter shape to the initial prediction block, a final prediction block of the current block comprising predicted sample values of the current block; and generating a bitstream based on the final prediction block (Jhu: paragraph [0006]). The filter may be one of several different shapes and sizes (Jhu: Figs. 29 and 30). Since Deng, Brandenburg, and Jhu relate to filtering reference samples, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would have found it obvious to combine the filters of Jhu with the system of Deng and Brandenburg in order to improve the coding efficiency of intra block copy processing (Jhu: paragraph [0295]).
Claim 14 has been analyzed and rejected with respect to claim 6 above.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER G FINDLEY whose telephone number is (571)270-1199. 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 at (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.
/CHRISTOPHER G FINDLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482
Prosecution Insights