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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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, 2, 12, 13, 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 20260214204 A1 Naser; Karam et al. (hereafter Naser).
Regarding claim 1, Naser discloses A method of video processing (Fig.4), comprising: obtaining, for a conversion between a video unit of a video and a bitstream of the video (Fig.2, [115], encoder is the conversion), a prediction or reconstruction of the video unit based on at least one of (Fig.3, [94], intra prediction 360 and inter prediction 375 will generate prediction block/prediction signal, and the output of adder 355 is the reconstructed image block): one or more intra template matching prediction (TMP) candidates ([10], [142], obtaining a prediction from spatial geometric prediction mode based on intraTMP), or a prediction signal of a current template that is generated using at least one of: an intra TMP candidate ([137]-[138], a prediction block of a current template is the prediction signal generated, or a reconstructed part is generated from prediction block a current template) or an intra prediction ([143]), and wherein the video unit is applied with a fusion of intra TMP mode and a coding tool (Fig.2, [92], [137], the video input is applied into the combination of an intra TM prediction/ inter prediction (e.g. motion compensation) and filter as an coding tool); and performing the conversion based on the prediction or reconstruction of the video unit (Fig.2, [137], entropy coding is the conversion).
Regarding claim 2, Naser discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the prediction signal of the current template is used in intra TMP ([143]).
Regarding claim 12, Naser discloses The method of claim 1, wherein a pruning operation is used to derive the one or more intra TMP candidates (]129]-[130]).
Regarding claim 13, Naser discloses The method of claim 1, wherein a reordering operation is used to derive the one or more intra TMP candidates ([149]).
Regarding claim 16, Naser discloses The method of claim 1, wherein intra TMP prediction signals indicated by the one or more intra TMP candidates are fused first, and the fused intra TMP prediction signals are fused with an intra prediction signal, and/or wherein intra TMP prediction signals and an intra prediction signals are directly fused, and/or wherein a mode index of intra prediction modes (IPMs) derived using template-based intra mode derivation (TIMD) is mapped to a range of [0, 66], and/or wherein IPMs derived using TIMD are used directly, and/or wherein IPMs are derived using a decoder-side intra mode derivation (DIMD) or TIMD, and/or wherein if DIMD or TIMD is disabled, pre-defined IPMs are used, and/or wherein coding information is used for the fusion, and/or wherein a search method same as other IntraTMP methods is used for a derivation of the one or more intra TMP candidates, and/or wherein an intra prediction signal and an intra TMP prediction signal are used in the fusion of the intra TMP mode and the coding tool, and/or wherein adaptive weighting parameters are used for the fusion ( Fig.2, [92], [137], {143]).
Regarding claim 17, Naser discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the conversion includes encoding the video unit into the bitstream, or wherein the conversion includes decoding the video unit from the bitstream (Fig.3).
Regarding claims 18-20.
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) 3-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naser, and further in view of US 20170353719 A1 LIU; Shan et al. (hereafter Liu).
Regarding claim 3, Naser discloses The method of claim 2, wherein the prediction signal of the current template is used to obtain the one or more intra TMP candidates ([143]), Liu teaches and/or wherein the prediction signal of the current template is used to derive one or more weighting parameters for the fusion ([16]-[19]).
Therefore 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 of video processing disclosed by Naser to include the teaching in the same field of endeavor of Liu, in order to reduce the complexity or improve the coding efficiency associated with template-based Intra prediction, as identified by Liu.
Regarding claim 4, Liu teaches The method of claim 1, wherein a derivation of the one or more intra TMP candidates is different from intra TMP, and wherein a plurality of templates is used to derive the one or more intra TMP candidates ([29]).
Regarding claim 5, Naser discloses The method of claim 4, wherein the one or more intra TMP candidates are derived using an L-shape template ([138]).
Regarding claim 6, Liu teaches The method of claim 4, wherein the one or more intra TMP candidates are derived using a left template (Fig.9, [33]).
Regarding claim 7, Liu teaches The method of claim 6, wherein the left template comprises at least one of: left samples, left-top samples, or left-bottom samples ([22]).
Regarding claim 8, Liu teaches The method of claim 4, wherein the one or more intra TMP candidates are derived using an above template ([33]).
Regarding claim 9, Liu teaches The method of claim 8, wherein the above template comprises at least one of: above samples, left-top samples, or right-above samples ([22]).
Regarding claim 10, Liu teaches The method of claim 4, wherein the plurality of templates is used, if both left and above samples are available (Fig.9, [59]).
Regarding claim 11, Liu teaches The method of claim 4, wherein a non-adjacent template is used (Figs.16, [85]).
Claim(s) 14, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naser, and further in view of US 20240357153 A1 CHEN; Chun-Chia et al. (hereafter Chen).
Regarding claim 14, Chen teaches The method of claim 1, wherein the one or more intra TMP candidates are sub-pel precision ([72]).
Therefore 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 of video processing disclosed by Naser to include the teaching in the same field of endeavor of Chen, in order to reduce the complexity or improve the coding efficiency associated with template-based Intra prediction, as identified by Liu.
Regarding claim 15, Chen teaches The method of claim 14, wherein whether an IntraTMP candidate is sub-pel precision and/or how to obtain a sub-pel IntraTMP candidate is derived, and/or wherein whether an IntraTMP candidate is sub-pel precision and/or how to obtain a sub-pel IntraTMP candidate is signalled, and/or wherein an interpolation filter used to obtain a sub-pel intra TMP candidate and/or which samples are used for interpolation is pre-defined, or derived, or signalled, and/or wherein a target intra TMP candidate is integer precision or sub-pel precision, and other intra TMP candidates are integer precision ([11]-[12], [72]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: WO 2024145857 A1, WO 2022221013 A1, US 20170339404 A1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRACY Y. LI whose telephone number is (571)270-3671. The examiner can normally be reached Monday Friday (8:30 AM- 4:30 PM) 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, David Czekaj can be reached at (571) 272-7327. 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.
/TRACY Y. LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
Prosecution Insights