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) submitted on 7 November 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Examiner’s Notes
Examiner considers whether 112(f) is invoked for claim 15. Namely, the claims refer to a “video coder circuit configured to perform operations”. Review of this language notes that claimed video coder circuit is a structural term and relates hardware, meaning that the claimed video coder circuity does not invoke interpretation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
The limitations were also reviewed for single means claiming. A single means claim which covered every conceivable means for achieving the stated purpose is held nonenabling for the scope of the claim because the specification disclosed at most only those means known to the inventor. However, upon review of the specification, ¶128, 157, and 192 describes hardware implementation and supports description of the claimed circuit of modules while also supporting software instruction executed by one or more processing units of a computing device. This description provides enough support to avoid rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 5 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. In particular, the claim refers to “the neighboring reconstructed samples” without previously disclosing or claiming a/any “neighboring reconstructed samples” in the claim or the claims which claim 5 depends on, claims 1 and 4. This lack of disclosure renders the claimed neighboring reconstructed samples as indefinite. For the purposes of examination, “the neighboring reconstructed samples” will be interpreted as “
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.
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) 1-2,12,15-17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IWAMURA; Shunsuke et al. (US 20210176495 A1) in view of ZHAO; Xin et al. (US 20240015279 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Iwamura teaches,
A video coding method (Title, “IMAGE ENCODING DEVICE, IMAGE DECODING DEVICE AND PROGRAM”) comprising:
receiving data to be encoded or decoded as a current block of pixels of a current picture of a video; (¶38-39,89-90, fig. 1 and 5, “block divider 100” as part of image encoding device 1 depicted in fig. 1, “divides an input image” given in the form of a frame as part of a video into “sub-areas in the form of blocks” and “entropy code decoder 200 decodes encoded data generated by the image encoding device 1” depicted in fig. 5)
generating a first prediction by a current cross-component model of the current block; (¶57,99, fig. 1 and 5, “intra predictor 171 includes a cross-component intra predictor 171a configured to predict a chroma block of a CU through CCIP” and “intra predictor 241 includes a cross-component intra predictor 241a configured to predict a chroma block of a CU through cross-component intra prediction (CCIP)”)
generating a second prediction for the current block; (¶49-51,92-94, fig. 1 and 5, “inverse transformer 142”, of the inverse quantizer/inverse transformer 140, “restores prediction residuals” and “inverse transformer 212”, of the inverse quantizer/inverse transformer 210, “restores prediction residuals” by processing in each of the “horizontal direction and the vertical direction” on each block)
generating a combined (¶52,101, fig. 1 and 5, “combiner 150” adds “restored prediction residuals” to “individual pixel values of the prediction image”, and “combiner 220” combines “chroma prediction residuals” and “predicted chroma block”) prediction based on the first prediction (¶52,57,101, fig. 1 and 5, combiner 150 combines “prediction image inputted from the predictor 170” which is a predicted “chroma block of a CU through CCIP”, and combiner 220 combines “predicted chroma block inputted from the cross-component intra predictor 241a”) and the second prediction; (¶51-52,100-101,fig. 1 and 5, combiner 150 combines “restored prediction residuals”, and combiner 220 adds “chroma prediction residuals inputted from the inverse transformer 212”) and
But does not explicitly teach,
prediction using a cross-component model candidate selected from a list of cross-component model candidates for the current block;
encoding or decoding the current block using the generated combined prediction.
However, Zhao teaches additionally,
generating a first prediction (¶261 and fig. 26, “prediction samples of the current chroma block are generated” for one of the “plurality of groups” at (S2640) depicted in fig. 26) using a cross-component model of the current block (¶261 and fig. 26, “prediction samples of the current chroma block” are generated based on the determined cross-component prediction modes)
generating a second prediction (¶261 and fig. 26, “prediction samples of the current chroma block are generated” for a second of the “plurality of groups” at (S2640) depicted in fig. 26) using a cross-component model candidate selected (¶260-261 and fig. 26, “cross-component prediction mode is determined” at (S2630) depicted in fig. 26) from a list of cross-component model candidates (¶258-262,226, and fig. 26, cross-component prediction mode is determined from “one of multiple cross-component prediction modes” at (S2630) for a “current chroma block” ) for the current block; (¶261 and fig. 26, “prediction samples of the current chroma” block generated based on the determined cross-component prediction modes)
encoding or decoding the current block using the generated combined prediction. (¶261,239 and fig. 26, “prediction samples of the current chroma block are generated based on the determined cross-component prediction modes of the plurality of groups” at (S2640) as part of “encoding process (2600)” used in the “reconstruction and/or encoding of a block” depicted in fig. 26)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine cross component prediction of Iwamura with the multiple cross-component mode selection of Zhao which select a cross-component prediction mode for different groups. This type of model sampling can help reduce complexity and result in more precise predictions.
Regarding claim 2, Iwamura with Zhao teaches the limitations of claim 1,
Zhao teaches additionally,
combined prediction is a weighted sum (¶234, “final prediction block can be further determined based on a weighted average of the first prediction block and the second prediction blocks”) of the first prediction and the second prediction. (¶234, final prediction block based on a weighted average of the first prediction block “generated based on the CCCM mode” in a “first group G0” and the second prediction blocks “generated based on CCLM mode” in a “second group G1”)
Regarding claim 12, Iwamura with Zhao teaches the limitations of claim 1,
Zhao teaches additionally,
current cross-component model (¶215 and 207, in a “multi-model CCCM method” of the Convolutional cross-component model (CCCM) applied to chroma samples) is set to be of a same cross-component prediction mode as that of the selected cross-component model. (¶215, models of a multi-model CCCM method “follow a same prediction mode (or cross-component prediction mode)”)
Regarding claim 15, it is the apparatus claim of coding method claim 1.
Iwamura teaches additionally,
An electronic apparatus (Title, “IMAGE ENCODING DEVICE, IMAGE DECODING DEVICE”) comprising:
a video coder circuit configured to perform operations comprising: (¶177, “A program may be provided to cause a computer to execute the operations of the image encoding device 1 and a program may be provided to cause a computer to execute the operations of the image decoding device 2”)
See the mapping of claim 1 to teach additional limitations of claim 15.
Regarding claim 16, it is the decoding method claim of coding method claim 1.
Iwamura teaches additionally,
A video decoding method comprising: (Title, “IMAGE DECODING DEVICE”)
Zhao teaches additionally,
reconstructing the current block using the generated combined prediction. (¶254, “reconstruct the current chroma block, in an example, prediction samples are generated for the chroma samples in each of the plurality of groups based on the respective cross-component prediction mode”)
See the mapping of claim 1 to teach additional limitations of claim 16.
Regarding claim 17, it is the encoding method claim of coding method claim 1.
Iwamura teaches additionally,
A video encoding method comprising: (Title, “IMAGE ENCODING DEVICE”)
Zhao teaches additionally,
encoding the current block using the generated combined prediction. (¶119,261, fig. 7 and 26, entropy encoder (725) configured to format “information in the bitstream” including “selected prediction information (e.g., intra prediction information or inter prediction information)” including prediction samples of the current chroma block “generated based on the determined cross-component prediction modes of the plurality of groups” as part of the encoding process (2600) disclosed in fig. 26)
See the mapping of claim 1 to teach additional limitations of claim 17.
Claim(s) 3 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IWAMURA; Shunsuke et al. (US 20210176495 A1) in view of ZHAO; Xin et al. (US 20240015279 A1) in view of ZHAO; Xin et al. (US 20220232233 A1)(Zhao2)
Regarding claim 3, Iwamura with Zhao teaches the limitations of claim 2,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 3,
However, Zhao2 teaches additionally,
weights assigned to the first and second predictions are predefined, (¶165, “first weight and/or the second weight can be selected from the group of pre-defined weights based on a pre-defined cost measurement”) determined by neighboring prediction modes, or implicitly derived by neighboring template cost. (¶188, “weights can be selected to be the weight based on a pre-defined cost measurement performed using the current neighboring reconstructed samples of the current block”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine cross component prediction of Iwamura with the multiple cross-component mode selection of Zhao with the weight determination of Zhao2 which predefines weights based on a cost measurement. This type of assignment of weights can be used in a way to not significantly increasing encoder complexity.
Claim(s) 4,6-7,9-11 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IWAMURA; Shunsuke et al. (US 20210176495 A1) in view of ZHAO; Xin et al. (US 20240015279 A1) in view of Sim; Dong Gyu et al. (US 20260032282 A1)
Regarding claim 4, Iwamura with Zhao teaches the limitations of claim 1,
Zhao teaches additionally,
identifying the list of cross-component model candidates (¶190 and Table 4, “chroma mode signalling and derivation process” as shown in Table 4 with at least “three cross-component linear model modes”)
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 4,
However, Sim teaches additionally,
specifying a cross-component prediction mode for the current block; (¶112-114 and Table 2, “if (CclmEnabled)” shown on Table 2 indicates if the “CCLM mode is applied for intra prediction of the current chroma block” as part of process of parsing the intra prediction mode of the chroma block)
deriving the current cross-component model (¶113-114 and Table 2, “parses the cclm_mode_flag”) according to the specified cross-component prediction mode for the current block; (¶113-114 and Table 2, parses the cclm_mode_flag if the “CCLM mode is applied for intra prediction of the current chroma block” as indicated by if (CclmEnabled) shown on Table 2)
list of cross-component model candidates for the current block; (¶161 and 139 and fig. 13A, “top or left region holding the samples for modeling may include adjacent regions for the blocks predicted by using the adjacent reference lines” which correspond to “index indicative of the region holding the samples used for modeling”) and
selecting the cross-component model candidate (¶113, “parses cclm_mode_idx”) from the list of candidate cross-component models. (¶113 and 139, “video decoding device parses cclm_mode_idx which indicates the CCLM mode” if cclm_mode_flag is 1 to enable CCLM mode as shown in Table 2, where an index is indicative of a “region holding the samples used for modeling”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine cross component prediction of Iwamura with the multiple cross-component mode selection of Zhao with the signalling of Sim which can be parsed by a video decoding device. The techniques can be used to improve coding efficiency.
Regarding claim 6, Iwamura with Zhao with Sim teaches the limitations of claim 4,
Sim teaches additionally,
determining the specified cross-component prediction mode (¶113, “Depending on the value of cclm_mode_idx, the CCLM mode may indicate one of the three modes” of the cross-component linear model (CCLM) modes) and whether to use the combined prediction to encode or decode the current block. (¶113, “parses intra_chroma_pred_mode which indicates intra prediction mode” if cclm_mode_flag is 0 for the “current chroma block” as performed by the video decoding device)
Regarding claim 7, Iwamura with Zhao with Sim teaches the limitations of claim 6,
Sim teaches additionally,
a first syntax element (¶113, “cclm_mode_idx”) indicating whether to use the selected cross-component model candidate is explicitly signaled, (¶113, “Depending on the value of cclm_mode_idx, the CCLM mode may indicate one of the three modes” of the cross-component linear model (CCLM) modes) and a second syntax element (¶113, “intra_chroma_ pred_mode”) indicating whether to use the combined prediction to encode current block is explicitly signaled, (¶113, “video decoding device parses intra_chroma_pred_mode which indicates intra prediction mode”) wherein the first syntax element is signaled before the second syntax element. (¶113 and Table 2, parsing the intra prediction mode in the order as shown on Table 2, such that “If cclm_mode_flag is 1 to enable CCLM mode, the video decoding device parses cclm_mode_idx”, whereas “if cclm_mode_flag is 0,” video decoding device “parses intra_chroma_pred_mode” which occurs only if cclm_mode_idx is not parsed)
Regarding claim 9, Iwamura with Zhao with Sim teaches the limitations of claim 4,
Zhao teaches additionally,
specified cross-component prediction mode (¶229, “a second cross-component prediction mode”) is implicitly derived. (¶229, a second cross-component prediction mode can be “implicitly derived or signaled”)
Namely, the prior art Sim is important in disclosing the specifying of a cross-component linear model mode but does not explicitly describe such a specifying as being implicit. However, Zhao does teach a cross-component prediction mode as implicitly derived as claimed. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine cross component prediction of Iwamura with the multiple cross-component mode selection of Zhao with the signalling of Sim which select a cross-component prediction mode for different groups. This type of model sampling can help reduce complexity and result in more precise predictions.
Regarding claim 10, Iwamura with Zhao teaches the limitations of claim 1,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 10,
However, Sim teaches additionally,
determining whether the cross-component model candidate is used; (¶113, video decoding device parses the cclm_mode_flag, which “indicates whether to use cross-component linear model (CCLM) mode”) and
determining whether to generate the combined prediction. (¶113, video decoding device parses intra_chroma_pred_mode which “indicates intra prediction mode”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine cross component prediction of Iwamura with the multiple cross-component mode selection of Zhao with the syntax of Sim which can be parsed by a video decoding device. The techniques can be used to improve coding efficiency.
Regarding claim 11, Iwamura with Zhao with Sim teaches the limitations of claim 10,
Sim teaches additionally,
a first syntax element (¶113, “cclm_mode_flag”) indicating whether to use the selected cross-component model candidate is explicitly signaled, (¶113, “video decoding device parses the cclm_mode_flag, which indicates whether to use cross-component linear model (CCLM) mode”) and a second syntax element (¶113, “intra_chroma_pred_mode”) indicating whether to use the combined prediction to encode current block is explicitly signaled, (¶113, “video decoding device parses intra_chroma_pred_mode which indicates intra prediction mode”) wherein the first syntax element is signaled before the second syntax element. (¶113, “if cclm_mode_flag is 0, indicating no use of CCLM mode, the video decoding device parses intra_chroma_pred_mode”)
Claim(s) 5 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IWAMURA; Shunsuke et al. (US 20210176495 A1) in view of ZHAO; Xin et al. (US 20240015279 A1) in view of Sim; Dong Gyu et al. (US 20260032282 A1) in view of Deng; Zhipin et al. (US 20220248025 A1)
Regarding claim 5, Iwamura with Zhao with Sim teaches the limitations of claim 4,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 5,
However, Deng teaches additionally,
current cross-component model is derived (¶308, determining “model parameters for a cross-component prediction model for the current video block”) based on the neighboring reconstructed samples of the current block or predicted samples of the current block (¶308,139, and fig. 16, determining model parameters for a cross-component prediction model for the current video block based on “filtering neighbor samples for a cross-component prediction” such as “reconstructed neighboring samples” as depicted in fig. 16) that are identified by the specified cross-component prediction mode. (¶308, determining model parameters for a cross-component prediction model based on neighbor samples for a “conversion between a current video block of a video that is a chroma block coded with a cross-component prediction mode”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine cross component prediction of Iwamura with the multiple cross-component mode selection of Zhao with the syntax of Sim with the model determination of Deng which determines model parameters based on neighboring samples. This arrangement takes advantage of multiple reference line coding tools in a way that can reduce storage requirements.
Claim(s) 8 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IWAMURA; Shunsuke et al. (US 20210176495 A1) in view of ZHAO; Xin et al. (US 20240015279 A1) in view of Sim; Dong Gyu et al. (US 20260032282 A1) in view of ZHANG; Kai et al. (US 20210344902 A1)
Regarding claim 8, Iwamura with Zhao with Sim teaches the limitations of claim 6,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 8,
However, Zhang teaches additionally,
when the combined prediction is used to encode the current block, (¶870 and fig. 23A, determining “final prediction P(x, y) of a chroma sample” in the current video block is a “combination of prediction results”) the first candidate in the list of candidates (¶870 and 1038, “selected” multiple cross-component linear models “MCCLMs” which can include “first linear model whose parameters are derived only from left-neighboring samples”) is the selected cross-component model candidate. (¶870, combination of prediction results of “selected” multiple cross-component linear models (MCCLMs) “based on the (position (x, y) of the chroma sample”)
The teaching of Zhang describes selected cross-component linear models based on a determined combination of prediction results. It is based on a position of the chroma sample and can select from models which includes a first linear model. The selected models in the combination of prediction results would include the first linear model when the sample position (x, y) corresponds to a position that selects first linear model. It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine cross component prediction of Iwamura with the multiple cross-component mode selection of Zhao with the syntax of Sim with the processing of Zhang which associates a combination of prediction results with selected cross-component linear models. This use of cross-component prediction provides coding with higher coding efficiencies and lower computational complexity.
Claim(s) 13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IWAMURA; Shunsuke et al. (US 20210176495 A1) in view of ZHAO; Xin et al. (US 20240015279 A1) in view of Yang; Kyeong H. et al. (US 20120269258 A1)
Regarding claim 13, Iwamura with Zhao teaches the limitations of claim 1,
Zhao teaches,
the selected cross-component model candidate and the current cross-component model (¶215 and 207, in a “multi-model CCCM method” of the Convolutional cross-component model (CCCM) applied to chroma samples with “multiple models”) are of the same cross-component prediction mode, (¶215, models of a multi-model CCCM method “follow a same prediction mode (or cross-component prediction mode)”)
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 13,
However, Yang teaches additionally,
based on a condition, (¶78, “update the model parameter, alpha, for the predetermined rate control function, based at least on the actual number of bits used by the coding component 228”) the combined prediction is generated (¶78, “update the model parameter”) by computing weighted averages of model parameters (¶78, “update the model parameter” using a “weighted average of current model data and history model data”) of the selected cross-component model candidate (¶78, “history model data”) and the current cross-component model. (¶78, “current model data”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine cross component prediction of Iwamura with the multiple cross-component mode selection of Zhao with the update component of Yang which uses a weighted average to adapt model data. Such a process can increase the accuracy of the bit estimation performed during the encoding of the video frame.
Claim(s) 14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over IWAMURA; Shunsuke et al. (US 20210176495 A1) in view of ZHAO; Xin et al. (US 20240015279 A1) in view of Zhang; Na et al. (US 20200404256 A1)(Zhang2)
Regarding claim 14, Iwamura with Zhao teaches the limitations of claim 1,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 14,
However, Zhang2 teaches additionally,
determining whether to use the combined prediction (¶143, “determine whether the first reference block or the combined prediction block is selected for the to-be-processed block”) to encode or decode the current block (¶143, video coding apparatus determines “whether to use the combined prediction block or the first reference block as the prediction block of the to-be-processed block”) based on a size constraint of the current block. (¶143, “if the size of the to-be-processed block or the temporal or spatial neighboring block of the to-be-processed block meets the preset threshold”, the combined prediction block is used as the prediction block of the to-be-processed block)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine cross component prediction of Iwamura with the multiple cross-component mode selection of Zhao with the size comparison of Zhang2 which determines whether to use a combined prediction block. This process allows for determining a prediction block without the need to introduce identification information.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY S LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7322. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 10AM-8PM 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, Joseph G. Ustaris can be reached at (571) 272-7383. 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.
/JOSEPH G USTARIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2483
/JIMMY S LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2483
Prosecution Insights