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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 11/06/2025. 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
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4, 7, 10-11 and 18-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Galpin et al. (herein after will be referred to as Galpin) (US 20190200044).
Regarding claim 1, Galpin discloses a video coding method comprising:
receiving data to be encoded or decoded as a current block of pixels of a current picture of a video; [See Galpin [0004] Encoding/clipping for a block of a picture.]
signaling or receiving a first set of range definitions; and [See Galpin [0053] Clipping parameters including upper/lower clipping bounds are signaled.]
encoding or decoding the current block by processing the received data in one or more coding stages, wherein data samples produced by a first coding stage are constrained to be within a first numerical range defined by the first set of range definitions. [See Galpin [0049] Clipping is applied during or after various operations such as prediction, ALF, deblocking filter, SAO filter. Also, see 0053, Clipping bounds used in operations inside the encoder/decoder.]
Regarding claim 2, Galpin discloses the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Galpin discloses
wherein the first set of range definitions applies a clipping function upon the data samples produced by the first coding stage. [See Galpin [Equations 1-3] Clipping functions.]
Regarding claim 3, Galpin discloses the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Galpin discloses
wherein the first set of range definitions imposes a maximum allowed value and a minimum allowed value upon data samples produced by the first coding stage. [See Galpin [0053] Clipping parameters including upper/lower clipping bounds.]
Regarding claim 4, Galpin discloses the method of claim 3. Furthermore, Galpin discloses
wherein the maximum and minimum allowed values are applicable to luma and chroma components. [See Galpin [0052] Clipping chroma/luma components.]
Regarding claim 7, Galpin discloses the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Galpin discloses
wherein data samples produced by a second coding stage are constrained to be within the first numerical range defined by the first set of range definitions. [See Galpin [0049] Clipping is applied during or after various operations such as prediction, ALF, deblocking filter, SAO filter. Also, see 0053, Clipping bounds used in operations inside the encoder/decoder.]
Regarding claim 10, Galpin discloses the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Galpin discloses
wherein the first set of range definitions is enabled to be applied to data samples of a same slice, or a same tile, or a same coding tree unit (CTU) row, or a same coding unit. [See Galpin [0060] Clipping bounds applied at sequence level, slice level, CTU level or other coding levels.]
Regarding claim 11, Galpin discloses the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Galpin discloses
wherein the first set of range definitions is used for defining a first range for mapping luma values from an original domain to a reshaped domain. [See Galpin [0052] Clipping chroma/luma components. Also, see 0053, Clipping parameters including upper/lower clipping bounds are signaled.]
Regarding claim 18, Galpin discloses the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Galpin discloses
wherein the first set of range definitions is signaled in at least one of a slice header, a picture header, an adaptation parameter set (APS), and a picture parameter set (PPS). [See Galpin [0053] Clipping parameters including bounds are indicated in VPS, SPS, PPS, slice header or CTU header.]
Regarding claim 19, see examiners rejection for claim 1 which is analogous and applicable for the rejection of claim 19.
Regarding claim 20, see examiners rejection for claim 1 which is analogous and applicable for the rejection of claim 20.
Regarding claim 21, see examiners rejection for claim 1 which is analogous and applicable for the rejection of claim 21.
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galpin (US 20190200044) in view of Keating et al. (herein after will be referred to as Keating) (AGH13: Luma Clipping instead of LMCS).
Regarding claim 5, Galpin discloses the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Galpin does not explicitly disclose
wherein the maximum and minimum allowed values are applicable to samples of luma component only and not samples of chroma components.
However, Keating does disclose
wherein the maximum and minimum allowed values are applicable to samples of luma component only and not samples of chroma components. [See Keating [Implementation] Adaptive clipping…only luma is clipped.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the method by Galpin to add the teachings of Keating, in order to utilize only luma values for LMCS since LMCS uses clipping as part of its function [See Keating [Introduction]].
Claims 6, 8-9 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Galpin (US 20190200044) in view of Kim et al. (herein after will be referred to as Kim) (US 20210160507).
Regarding claim 6, Galpin discloses the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Galpin does not explicitly disclose
wherein differences between the maximum and minimum allowed values and predefined maximum and minimum values are signaled by an encoder or decoded by a decoder.
However, Kim does disclose
wherein differences between the maximum and minimum allowed values and predefined maximum and minimum values are signaled by an encoder or decoded by a decoder. [See Kim [0056] Signaling Max and Min delta values.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the method by Galpin to add the teachings of Kim, in order to improve upon adaptive clipping compression efficiency by incorporating prediction techniques for clipping bounds.
Regarding claim 8, Galpin discloses the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Galpin does not explicitly disclose
further comprising signaling or receiving a second set of range definitions, wherein data samples produced by a second coding stage are constrained to be within a second numerical range defined by the second set of range definitions.
However, Kim does disclose
further comprising signaling or receiving a second set of range definitions, wherein data samples produced by a second coding stage are constrained to be within a second numerical range defined by the second set of range definitions. [See Kim [0048] Areas within a picture may have different minimum sample values and maximum sample values. Therefore, different coding stages (i.e. stages that code 1st area and 2nd area) will have different max/min.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the method by Galpin to add the teachings of Kim, in order to improve upon adaptive clipping compression efficiency by incorporating different clipping bounds for different portions of images.
Regarding claim 9, Galpin discloses the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Galpin does not explicitly disclose
wherein the first set of range definitions is one set of a plurality of sets of range definitions received or signaled, the method further comprising selecting the first set of range definitions from the plurality of sets of range definitions to be applied to the data samples produced by the first coding stage.
However, Kim does disclose
wherein the first set of range definitions is one set of a plurality of sets of range definitions received or signaled, the method further comprising selecting the first set of range definitions from the plurality of sets of range definitions to be applied to the data samples produced by the first coding stage. [See Kim [0048] Areas within a picture may have different minimum sample values and maximum sample values. Therefore, the decoder will select the max/min based on the area being coded.]
Applying the same motivation as applied in claim 8.
Regarding claim 12, Galpin discloses the method of claim 10. Furthermore, Galpin does not explicitly disclose
wherein the first set of range definitions comprises a maximum value and a minimum value for defining the first range and a number of non-zero codewords.
However, Kim does disclose
wherein the first set of range definitions comprises a maximum value and a minimum value for defining the first range and a number of non-zero codewords. [See Kim [0030 VLC value adjusts reference clipping bounds.]
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the method by Galpin to add the teachings of Kim, in order to improve upon adaptive clipping compression efficiency by variable length coding the clipping parameters.
Regarding claim 13, Galpin (modified by Kim) disclose the method of claim 11. Furthermore, Galpin does not explicitly disclose
wherein the number of non-zero codewords is not a power of two number.
However, Kim does disclose
wherein the number of non-zero codewords is not a power of two number. [See Kim [0030 VLC value adjusts reference clipping bounds.]
Applying the same motivation as applied in claim 12.
Regarding claim 14, Galpin discloses the method of claim 10. Furthermore, Galpin does not explicitly disclose
wherein a second set of range definitions is used for defining a second range for mapping luma values from the original domain to the reshaped domain.
However, Kim does disclose
wherein a second set of range definitions is used for defining a second range for mapping luma values from the original domain to the reshaped domain. [See Kim [0048] Areas within a picture may have different minimum sample values and maximum sample values. Therefore, luma clipping in different areas will have different max/min.]
Applying the same motivation as applied in claim 8.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES T BOYLAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8242. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-3pm.
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, JAMIE ATALA can be reached at 571-272-7384. 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.
/JAMES T BOYLAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2486
Prosecution Insights