DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to application 19/476,076 filed on 10/16/2025.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. 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
3. 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 of this title, 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.
4. Claims 1-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsukuba (“Tsukuba”) (US Pub. No.: 2022/0201305 A1) in view of Jung et al. (“Jung”) (US Pub. No.: 2021/0266581 A1).
In regards to claims [1], [13], and [15], Tsukuba discloses a method for decoding (see fig. 12 and/or fig. 13, paragraph [0423]) and encoding an image (see fig. 8 and/or fig. 9, paragraph [0461]), and a method for transmitting a bitstream (see paragraph [0211]), the bitstream being generated (see fig. 6, e.g., “bitstream”) by a method for encoding an image (see fig. 8 and/or fig. 9, paragraph [0461]), the method (see fig. 9 and/or fig. 13) comprising: obtaining a bin string (see fig. 1 and/or fig. 2 and/or fig. 35, e.g., “bin string = bin sequence 10 or 110 or 1110 or 1111”, paragraph [0590]) corresponding to a syntax element (see fig. 1 and/or fig. 2 and/or fig. 35, e.g., “syntax element = mts_idx”) from a bitstream (see fig. 10, e.g., “bitstream”, paragraphs [0231-0232]); obtaining the syntax element (see fig. 1 and/or fig. 2 and/or fig. 35, e.g., “syntax element = mts_idx”) by inverse-binarizing the bin string (see paragraphs [0325] and [0610]); generating a bin string (see fig. 1 and/or fig. 2 and/or fig. 35, e.g., “bin string = bin sequence 10 or 110 or 1110 or 1111”, paragraphs [0087] and [0590]) by binarizing the syntax element (see fig. 1 and/or fig. 2 and/or fig. 35, e.g., “syntax element = mts_idx”); generating a bitstream (see fig. 6, e.g., “bitstream”) by encoding each bin of the bin string according to an encoding method corresponding to the each bin (see fig. 5, paragraphs [0461] and [0594]), and performing the intra prediction of the current block based on the syntax element (see paragraphs [0239-0240]), wherein at least a portion of bins of the bin string are obtained and applied by bypass decoding (see fig. 5, paragraph [0614]) and bypass coding (see fig. 5, paragraph [0109]), and bins of the bin string other than the bypass-coded bins are obtained and applied by arithmetic decoding (see paragraphs [0125] and [0323]) and arithmetic coding (see paragraphs [0109] and [0220]).
Yet, Tsukuba fails to explicitly disclose wherein the syntax element represents a combination of an intra prediction mode of a current block and a reference sample lines used for intra prediction as claimed.
However, Jung teaches the well-known concept of wherein the syntax element represents a combination of an intra prediction mode of a current block and a reference sample lines used for intra prediction (see paragraph [0347] and [0350]).
Therefore, it 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 could recognize the advantage of modifying the proposed teachings of Tsukuba above by incorporating the proposed teachings of Jung above to perform such a modification to provide an system and method encoding and decoding that implements wherein the syntax element represents a combination of an intra prediction mode of a current block and a reference sample lines used for intra prediction as well as to the solve the problem in a case where In the case where only a transform kernel based on one of the transform types is used for transformation of a video signal, it is difficult to perform adaptive transformation according to the pattern of the residual signal, which differs depending on the characteristics of the original signal and a prediction mode as taught by Jung et al. (see Jung, paragraph [0151]), thus improving video compression efficiency.
As per claim [2], most of the limitations have been noted in the above rejection of claim 1. Yet, Tsukuba fails to explicitly disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the intra prediction of the current block uses an intra prediction mode indicated by the syntax element and a reference sample line indicated by the syntax element among a plurality of reference sample lines adjacent to the current block as claimed.
However, Jung teaches the method of claim 1 (see the above rejection of claim 1), wherein the intra prediction of the current block uses an intra prediction mode indicated by the syntax element (see paragraph [0347] and [0350]) and a reference sample line indicated by the syntax element (see paragraph [0347] and [0350]) among a plurality of reference sample lines adjacent to the current block (see fig. 5, paragraph [0347]). Same motivation as to claim 1 applies here.
As per claim [3], most of the limitations have been noted in the above rejection of claim 1. Yet, Tsukuba fails to explicitly disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the syntax element indicates one candidate in a candidate list including candidates indicating different combinations of intra prediction modes and reference sample lines used for intra prediction as claimed.
However, Jung teaches the method of claim 1 (see the above rejection of claim 1), wherein the syntax element indicates one candidate in a candidate list including candidates (see paragraph [0122]) indicating different combinations of intra prediction modes (see fig. 6) and reference sample lines used for intra prediction (see paragraph [0347] and [0350]). Same motivation as to claim 1 applies here.
As per claim [4], most of the limitations have been noted in the above rejection of claim 1. In addition, Tsukuba discloses the method of claim 3 (see the above rejection of claim 3), wherein the intra prediction modes of the candidates are intra prediction modes other than a predetermined mode (see paragraph [0240] and [0250]).
As per claim [5], most of the limitations have been noted in the above rejection of claim 1. Yet, Tsukuba fails to explicitly disclose the method of claim 3 , wherein the candidates of the candidate list are a plurality of candidates that are selected based on a cost value of intra prediction based on a combination of an intra prediction mode and a reference sample line as claimed.
However, Jung teaches the method of claim 3 (see the above rejection of claim 3), wherein the candidates of the candidate list are a plurality of candidates that are selected (see paragraph [0154] and [0157]) based on a cost value of intra prediction (see paragraph [0215]) based on a combination of an intra prediction mode and a reference sample line (see paragraph [0347] and [0350]). Same motivation as to claim 1 applies here.
As per claim [6], most of the limitations have been noted in the above rejection of claim 1. Yet, Tsukuba fails to explicitly disclose the method of claim 5, wherein the cost value is determined based on a comparison result between a result value of intra prediction based on the combination of the intra prediction mode and the reference sample line, and a prediction value corresponding to a template including samples adjacent to the current block as claimed.
However, Jung teaches the method of claim 5 (see the above rejection of claim 5), wherein the cost value is determined (see paragraph [0215]) based on a comparison result between a result value of intra prediction (see fig. 13a, paragraph [0105] and [0343]) based on the combination of the intra prediction mode and the reference sample line (see paragraph [0347] and [0350]), and a prediction value (see paragraph [0086]) corresponding to a template including samples adjacent to the current block (see fig. 5, paragraph [0347]). Same motivation as to claim 1 applies here.
As per claim [7], most of the limitations have been noted in the above rejection of claim 1. Yet, Tsukuba fails to explicitly disclose the method of claim 6, wherein the template includes samples of a reference sample line that is most adjacent to the current block as claimed.
However, Jung teaches the method of claim 6 (see the above rejection of claim 6), wherein the template includes samples of a reference sample line that is most adjacent to the current block (see fig. 5, paragraph [0347]). Same motivation as to claim 1 applies here.
As per claim [8], most of the limitations have been noted in the above rejection of claim 8. In addition, Tsukuba discloses the method of claim 5 (see the above rejection of claim 5), wherein the cost value is measured through one method among a sum of absolute differences (SAD) measurement method, a sum of squared difference (SSD) measurement method, and a sum of absolute transformed differences (see paragraph [0180]).
As per claim [9], most of the limitations have been noted in the above rejection of claim 1. In addition, Tsukuba discloses the method of claim 1 (see the above rejection of claim 1), wherein the bin string is a bin string binarized in a form of a truncated Golomb-Rice code (see fig. 1, paragraphs [0087] and [0215]), and the bin string includes a prefix and a suffix (see fig. 35B, paragraphs [0612]).
As per claim [10], most of the limitations have been noted in the above rejection of claim 1. In addition, Tsukuba discloses the method of claim 9 (see the above rejection of claim 9),wherein bins corresponding to the prefix of the bin string (see fig. 35B, paragraph [0612]) are obtained by the arithmetic decoding (see paragraphs [0125] and [0323]), and bins corresponding to the suffix of the bin string (see fig. 35B, [0612]) are obtained by the bypass decoding (see paragraphs [0324] and [0344]).
As per claim [11], most of the limitations have been noted in the above rejection of claim 1. In addition, Tsukuba discloses the method of claim 9 (see the above rejection of claim 9), wherein at least a portion of the bins corresponding to the prefix of the bin string (see fig. 35B, paragraph [0612]) and the bins corresponding to the suffix of the bin string (see fig. 35B, [0612]) are obtained by the arithmetic decoding (see paragraphs [0125] and [0323]).
As per claim [12], most of the limitations have been noted in the above rejection of claim 1. In addition, Tsukuba discloses the method of claim 1 (see the above rejection of claim 1), wherein the bin string is a bin string binarized in a form of a truncated unary code (see fig. 1, paragraphs [0087] and [0215]), and bins not exceeding a predetermined number in the bin string are obtained by the arithmetic decoding (see paragraphs [0125] and [0323]).
Conclusion
5. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sze et al. (US Pub. No.: 2022/0007026 A1) discloses reducing context coded and bypass coded bins to improve content adaptive binary arithmetic coding (CABAC) throughput.
Chien et al. (US Patent No.: 9,538,172 B2) discloses grouping bypass coded syntax elements in video coding.
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Richard Carter whose telephone number is (571)270-1220. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Jay Patel can be reached on 571-272-2988. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/R.B.C/Examiner, Art Unit 2485
/JAYANTI K PATEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2485
September 29, 2026
Prosecution Insights