CTNF 19/469,443 CTNF 89666 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 06-52 The information disclosure statement (IDS) was filed 02/26/2026. The submission 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 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-12-aia AIA (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. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim s 15, 17-19, 22, 25, 27-29, 32 and 33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Park et al., US 20240107011 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Park”) . Regarding claim 15 (New) , A video decoding device (Park: decoding method and a video encoding/decoding apparatus are provided. Abstract) comprising: a processor (methods or functions described in some embodiments may be implemented as instructions stored in a non-transitory recording medium that can be read and executed by one or more processors. ¶ [0175]) configured to: determine, for a current video block, that a reference block associated with the current video block is fully or partially coded using a template-based intra-mode derivation (TIMD) mode or a decoder-side intra-mode derivation (DIMD) mode (Park: A determination may be made as to whether a neighboring block at a specific position derives the intra prediction mode based on DIMD. When neighboring blocks of the current block use the intra prediction mode derivation method, the current block is also highly likely to use the intra prediction mode derivation method. ¶¶[0160]-[0161], Fig. 16. A histogram of the modes may be generated based on the intra prediction mode of the neighboring blocks adjacent to the current block. ¶ [0144], Fig. 10. responsive to the determination, generate a prediction block for the current video block by blending a plurality of intra prediction modes associated with the reference block (Park: FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating a DIMD blend mode in which a weight value is assigned to a prediction value of an intra prediction mode of a neighboring block according to a DIMD index according to another embodiment of the present disclosure. ¶ [0140]. Prediction mode of the neighboring block of the current block. M 1 , M 2 , and M 3 modes may be selected as the mode with the highest occurrence frequency in the histogram of the modes. Pred_M 1 , Pred_M 2 , and Pred_M 3 which are prediction blocks for M 1 , M .2 , and M 3 modes can be generated. Weight values W 1 , W 2 , and W 3 are assigned to Pred_M 1 , Pred_M 2 , and Pred_M 3 and added so that a final prediction block F_Pred can be generated. ¶ [0146], Fig. 10) ; and decode the current video block based on the generated prediction block (Park: A final prediction block is generated. Fig. 10 ). Regarding claim 17 (New) , Park discloses the video decoding device of claim 15, wherein the reference block is coded using the TIMD mode or the DIMD mode. ( Park: DIMD usage frequency of neighboring block. ¶¶ [0160]-[0161], Fig. 16. FIG. 8 is a diagram illustrating a DIMD blend mode in which a weight value is assigned to a prediction value of an intra prediction mode of a neighboring block according to a DIMD index according to another embodiment of the present disclosure. ¶ [0140]). Regarding claim 18 (New) , Park discloses the video decoding device of claim 15, wherein the plurality of intra prediction modes are TIMD modes or DIMD modes that are obtained from the TIMD mode or the DIMD mode of the reference block (Park: Fig. 10). Regarding claim 19 (New) , Park discloses the video decoding device of claim 15, wherein the plurality of intra prediction modes are TIMD modes or DIMD modes that are derived from a current template using a TIMD process or a DIMD process (Park: Fig. 10) . Regarding claim 22 (New) , Park discloses the device of claim 15, wherein the processor configured to blend the plurality of intra prediction modes comprises the processor being configured to: reuse or derive the prediction block based on blending the plurality of intra prediction modes (Park: Figs. 3A, 8 and 10) . Regarding claim 23 (New) , The device of claim 15, wherein the prediction block of the video block is obtained based on one or more of the DIMD mode, the TIMD mode, a combined inter-intra prediction (CIIP) mode or a geometric partition mode (GPM) mode (Park: DIMD mode. Figs. 8, 10) . Regarding claim 25 (New) , claim 15 is substantially similar to claim 25. Therefore, claim 25 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 15. Regarding claim 27 (New) , claim 17 is substantially similar to claim 26. Therefore, claim 27 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 17. Regarding claim 28 (New) , claim 18 is substantially similar to claim 28. Therefore, claim 28 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 18. Regarding claim 29 (New) , claim 19 is substantially similar to claim 29. Therefore, claim 29 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 19. Regarding claim 32 (New) , claim 22 is substantially similar to claim 32. Therefore, claim 32 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 22. Regarding claim 33 (New) , claim 23 is substantially similar to claim 30. Therefore, claim 33 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 23 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 16, 24, 26 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Zhao et al., US 20240196008 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Zhao”) . Regarding claim 16 (New) , Park does not explicitly disclose the video decoding device of claim 15, wherein the reference block is referred by a most probable mode (MPM) index. Park discloses a MPM list. An MPM index is not explicitly discussed. However, Zhao discloses the reference block is referred by a most probable mode (MPM) index (Zhao: intra prediction mode applied to the current block may be determined using the intra prediction modes of neighboring blocks. For example, the coding apparatus may select one of MPM candidates in a most probable mode (MPM) list derived based on an intra prediction mode and/or additional candidate modes of a neighboring block (e.g., a left and/or upper neighboring block) of a current block, based on the received MPM index. MPM flag may be signaled first, and the MPM index and non-planar flag may be signaled when the value of the MPM flag is 1. ¶ [0145]) . 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 teachings of Park wherein the reference block is referred by a most probable mode (MPM) index, as taught by Zhao, in order to significantly reduce the number of bits required to signal intra-prediction modes. Regarding claim 24 (New) , Park does not disclose the device of claim 15, wherein the processor is further configured to: receive a multiple prediction mode (MPM) flag in video data indicating that the prediction block uses one or more of the following as the reference block: above left, above, above right, left, and below left; and decode the video block using the prediction block. However, Zhao discloses receive a multiple prediction mode (MPM) flag in video data indicating that the prediction block uses one or more of the following as the reference block: above left, above, above right, left, and below left; and decode the video block using the prediction block (Zhao: intra prediction mode applied to the current block may be determined using the intra prediction modes of neighboring blocks. For example, the coding apparatus may select one of MPM candidates in a most probable mode (MPM) list derived based on an intra prediction mode and/or additional candidate modes of a neighboring block (e.g., a left and/or upper neighboring block) of a current block, based on the received MPM index. MPM flag may be signaled first, and the MPM index and non-planar flag may be signaled when the value of the MPM flag is 1. ¶ [0145]) . 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 teachings of Park with receive a multiple prediction mode (MPM) flag in video data indicating that the prediction block uses one or more of the following as the reference block: above left, above, above right, left, and below left; and decode the video block using the prediction block, as taught by Zhao, in order to in order to significantly reduce the number of bits required to signal intra-prediction modes. Regarding claim 26 (New) , claim 16 is substantially similar to claim 26. Therefore, claim 26 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 16. Regarding claim 34 (New) , claim 24 is substantially similar to claim 24. Therefore, claim 34 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 24 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 20, 21, 30 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Yu et al., US 20260164024 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Yu”) . Regarding claim 20 (New) , Park does not disclose the video decoding device of claim 15, wherein the reference block is coded using an intra prediction mode associated with a combined inter-intra prediction (CIIP) or a geometric partition mode (GPM). However, Yu discloses a reference block is coded using an intra prediction mode associated with a combined inter-intra prediction (CIIP) or a geometric partition mode (GPM). (Yu: one or more index-specified reference lines among a plurality of reference lines having a plurality of reconstructed samples spatially neighboring a block associated with a spatial geometric partitioning mode (SGPM). ¶ [0005]) . 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 teachings of Park with wherein the reference block is coded using an intra prediction mode associated with a combined inter-intra prediction (CIIP) or a geometric partition mode (GPM), as taught by Yu, in order to improved compression efficiency and better visual quality, achieved by allowing a coding block to be split into two separate segments. Regarding claim 21 (New) , Park does not disclose the video decoding device of claim 20, wherein the GPM comprises a spatial GPM (SGPM). However, Yu discloses wherein the GPM comprises a spatial GPM (SGPM) (Yu: one or more index-specified reference lines among a plurality of reference lines having a plurality of reconstructed samples spatially neighboring a block associated with a spatial geometric partitioning mode (SGPM). ¶ [0005]) . 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 teachings of Park wherein the GPM comprises a spatial GPM (SGPM), as taught by Yu, in order to improved compression efficiency and better visual quality, achieved by allowing a coding block to be split into two separate segments. Regarding claim 30 (New) , claim 20 is substantially similar to claim 30. Therefore, claim 30 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 20. Regarding claim 31 (New) , claim 21 is substantially similar to claim 30. Therefore, claim 30 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 21. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEIRDRE L BEASLEY whose telephone number is (571)270-0452. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8 a.m. -5 p.m. 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. /DLB/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2482 /CHRISTOPHER S KELLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2482 Application/Control Number: 19/469,443 Page 2 Art Unit: 2482 Application/Control Number: 19/469,443 Page 3 Art Unit: 2482 Application/Control Number: 19/469,443 Page 4 Art Unit: 2482 Application/Control Number: 19/469,443 Page 5 Art Unit: 2482 Application/Control Number: 19/469,443 Page 6 Art Unit: 2482 Application/Control Number: 19/469,443 Page 7 Art Unit: 2482 Application/Control Number: 19/469,443 Page 8 Art Unit: 2482 Application/Control Number: 19/469,443 Page 9 Art Unit: 2482 Application/Control Number: 19/469,443 Page 10 Art Unit: 2482
Prosecution Insights