DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed on 10/24/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending and are examined.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The reference(s) listed on the Information Disclosure Statement(s) submitted on 10/24/2025 has/have been considered by the examiner (see attached PTO-1449).
Claim Objections
Claims 6-7 and 17-18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding Claim 6, lines 1-2 recite, “the reference block” (i.e., lacking clear antecedent basis). For purposes of examination, the limitation will be reasonably interpreted as either - - a reference block - - or - - the neighboring block - - .
Regarding Claim 7, line 3 recites, “the reference block” (i.e., lacking clear antecedent basis). For purposes of examination, the limitation will be reasonably interpreted as either - - a reference block - - or - - the neighboring block - - .
Regarding Claim 17, lines 1-2 recite, “the reference block” (i.e., lacking clear antecedent basis). For purposes of examination, the limitation will be reasonably interpreted as either - - a reference block - - or - - the neighboring block - - .
Regarding Claim 18, line 3 recites, “the reference block” (i.e., lacking clear antecedent basis). For purposes of examination, the limitation will be reasonably interpreted as either - - a reference block - - or - - the neighboring block - - .
Examiner respectfully requests from Applicant verification and requires appropriate correction regarding these matters.
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 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Deng et al., US Patent Application Publication No.: 2022/0248025 A1, hereby Deng.
Claim 20 is directed to a computer-readable non-transitory storage medium storing a bitstream. Significantly, the claimed computer-readable non-transitory storage medium is merely memory with non-functional descriptive material and is NOT implementing any actual method; no instructions/steps are being executed. Instead, the claimed storage medium merely stores the data output from and/or generated by a series of acts. In other words, the claims are directed to a mere machine-readable medium storing data content.
Applicant therefore seeks to patent the storage of a bitstream in the abstract. In other words, the claim seeks to patent the content of the information (bitstream comprising video information) and not the process itself. Moreover, this stored bitstream does not impose any definitive physical organization on the data as there is no functional relationship between the bitstream and the storage medium. Overall, Claim 20 and any claims depending therefrom are directed to mere data content (bitstream generated by a series of acts) stored as a bitstream on a computer readable recording medium. Under MPEP 2111.05(III), such claims are merely machine-readable media. Furthermore, the Examiner found and continues to find that there is no disclosed or claimed functional relationship between the stored data and medium. Instead, the medium is merely a support or carrier for the data being stored. Therefore, the data stored and the way such data is generated should not be given patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.05 applying In re Lowry, 32 F.3d 1579, 1583-84, 32 USPQ2d 1031, 1035 (Fed. Cir. 1994) and In re Ngai, 367 F.3d 1336, 70 USPQ2d 1862 (Fed. Cir. 2004). As such, this claim is subject to a prior art rejection based on any non-transitory computer readable media known before the earliest effective filing date of the present application. Therefore, Claim 20 is anticipated by Deng, in which Deng discloses the following:
“A computer-readable non-transitory storage medium storing a bitstream (see Deng, Figs. 1-3, [0390])...”
EXAMINER’S NOTE: Applicant has not used the standard non-transitory CRM (non-transitory computer-readable media) claim formats of a) a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing executable instructions that, when implemented by a processor, perform an encoding/decoding method [steps of encoding/decoding method] or a b) non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by a computer, cause it to perform a specified method that was held to recite patent-eligible product under 35 USC 101 by In re Beauregard, 53 F.3d 1583 (Fed. Cir. 1995) and endorsed by the USPTO in 77 Fed. Reg. 74618 (Dec. 16, 2014), 2014 Interim Guidance on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Examples: Abstract Ideas at 1-3, 8-10.
However, such standard non-transitory CRM claim formats that recite execution/implementation of a method are not subject to a non-functional descriptive material claim interpretation because such a claimed media does not merely store output data but instead stores functional, method steps that have a functional relationship with the media.
Therefore, the examiner suggests either canceling the claim(s) or amending the claim(s) to a standard non-transitory CRM format or other standard statutory class.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claims 1-6, 9, and 11-17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhang et al., US Patent Application Publication No.: 2026/0032230 A1 (please note the US Provisional Application No.: 63/493,655, filed 03/31/2023), hereby Zhang.
Regarding Claims 1, 12, and 20, Zhang discloses a video signal decoding device comprising a processor, a video signal encoding device comprising a processor, and a computer-readable non-transitory storage medium storing a bitstream, wherein the bitstream is decoded according to a decoding method (Figs. 1-4, 9, 26-27, and 32-39), comprising:
“configure a cross-component prediction (CCP) list for obtaining a chroma component block of a current block from a luma component block of the current block (Figs. 1-4, 9, 26-27, and 32-39, [0419]-[0578] (primarily List Mode Section), disclosing generating a CCP list including multiple types of CCP models, such as CCCM and CCLM, for chroma components, in which multiple candidates are put into the list; see also Figs. 9, 26-27, and 32, and [0129]-[0145], [0247]-[0248], [0256], [0260], and [0289]-[0290], additionally disclosing various model, including CCLM, CCCM, GL-CCCM, and GLM),
select one CCP model candidate in the CCP list (Figs. 1-4, 9, 26-27, and 32-39, [0419]-[0578] (primarily List Mode Section), disclosing generating a CCP list including multiple types of CCP models, such as CCCM and CCLM, for chroma components, in which multiple candidates are put into the list, checked, and one is selected; see also Figs. 9, 26-27, and 32, and [0129]-[0145], [0247]-[0248], [0256], [0260], and [0289]-[0290], additionally disclosing various model, including CCLM, CCCM, GL-CCCM, and GLM), and
obtain, based on the one CCP model candidate, a chroma component block of the current block (Figs. 1-4, 9, 26-27, and 32-39, [0419]-[0578] (primarily List Mode Section), disclosing generating a CCP list including multiple types of CCP models, such as CCCM and CCLM, for chroma components, in which multiple candidates are put into the list, checked, and one is selected, thereby a chroma block may be predicted with a CCP model in the list; see also Figs. 9, 26-27, and 32, and [0129]-[0145], [0247]-[0248], [0256], [0260], and [0289]-[0290], additionally disclosing various model, including CCLM, CCCM, GL-CCCM, and GLM).”
Regarding Claims 2 and 13, Zhang discloses:
“wherein the CCP list comprises one or more CCP model candidates, and wherein the one or more CCP model candidates comprise a first CCP model candidate used by a neighboring block of the current block (Figs. 1-4, 9, 26-27, and 32-39, [0419]-[0578] (List Mode Section and Non-Adjacent CCP Section), disclosing generating a CCP list including multiple types of CCP models, such as CCCM and CCLM, for chroma components, in which multiple candidates are put into the list (including a CCP model of an adjacent neighboring block or a non-adjacent neighboring block), checked, ordered, and one is selected, thereby a chroma block may be predicted with a CCP model in the list; see also Figs. 9, 26-27, and 32, and [0129]-[0145], [0247]-[0248], [0256], [0260], and [0289]-[0290], additionally disclosing various model, including CCLM, CCCM, GL-CCCM, and GLM).”
Regarding Claims 3 and 14, Zhang discloses:
“wherein the one or more CCP model candidates are obtained using at least one of a type of CCP model derived from the first CCP model candidate, a parameter coefficient for the first CCP model candidate, coordinate information of a neighboring block, an average value of samples configured in the neighboring block, a luma offset value of the neighboring block, encoding mode information of the neighboring block, and a quantization parameter of the neighboring block (Figs. 1-4, 9, 26-27, and 32-39, [0419]-[0578] (List Mode Section and Non-Adjacent CCP Section), disclosing generating a CCP list including multiple types of CCP models, such as CCCM and CCLM, for chroma components, in which multiple candidates are put into the list (including a CCP model of an adjacent neighboring block or a non-adjacent neighboring block), checked, ordered, and one is selected, thereby a chroma block may be predicted with a CCP model in the list; see also Figs. 9, 26-27, and 32, and [0129]-[0145], [0247]-[0248], [0256], [0260], and [0289]-[0290], additionally disclosing various model, including CCLM, CCCM, GL-CCCM).”
Regarding Claims 4 and 15, Zhang discloses:
“wherein the one or more CCP model candidates are predefined CCP models (Figs. 1-4, 9, 26-27, and 32-39, [0419]-[0578] (List Mode Section and Non-Adjacent CCP Section), disclosing generating a CCP list including multiple types of CCP models, such as CCCM and CCLM, for chroma components, in which multiple candidates are put into the list (including a CCP model of an adjacent neighboring block or a non-adjacent neighboring block), checked, ordered, and one is selected, thereby a chroma block may be predicted with a CCP model in the list; see also Figs. 9, 26-27, and 32, and [0129]-[0145], [0247]-[0248], [0256], [0260], and [0289]-[0290], additionally disclosing various model, including CCLM, CCCM, GL-CCCM).”
Regarding Claims 5 and 16, Zhang discloses:
“wherein the one or more CCP model candidates are determined based on a predefined CCP model type (Figs. 1-4, 9, 26-27, and 32-39, [0419]-[0578] (List Mode Section and Non-Adjacent CCP Section), disclosing generating a CCP list including multiple types of CCP models, such as CCCM and CCLM (including variants), for chroma components, in which multiple candidates are put into the list (including a CCP model of an adjacent neighboring block or a non-adjacent neighboring block), checked, ordered, and one is selected, thereby a chroma block may be predicted with a CCP model in the list; see also Figs. 9, 26-27, and 32, and [0129]-[0145], [0247]-[0248], [0256], [0260], and [0289]-[0290], additionally disclosing various model, including CCLM, CCCM, GL-CCCM).”
Regarding Claims 6 and 17, Zhang discloses:
“wherein the reference block is temporally spaced apart from the current block (Figs. 1-4, 9, 26-27, and 32-39, [0419]-[0578] (List Mode Section and Non-Adjacent CCP Section), disclosing generating a CCP list including multiple types of CCP models, such as CCCM and CCLM, for chroma components, in which multiple candidates are put into the list (including a CCP model of an adjacent neighboring block or a non-adjacent neighboring block), checked, ordered, and one is selected, thereby a chroma block may be predicted with a CCP model in the list; see also Figs. 9, 26-27, and 32, and [0129]-[0145], [0247]-[0248], [0256], [0260], and [0289]-[0290], additionally disclosing various model, including CCLM, CCCM, GL-CCCM, and GLM).”
Regarding Claim 9, Zhang discloses:
“wherein the CCP list comprises one or more CCP model candidates, and wherein the one or more CCP model candidates are determined based on a product of a width size of the current block and a height size of the current block ([0556], disclosing, for example, whether NA-CCP is applicable based on the dimension of the current block; Figs. 1-4, 9, 26-27, and 32-39, [0419]-[0578] (List Mode Section and Non-Adjacent CCP Section), disclosing generating a CCP list including multiple types of CCP models, such as CCCM and CCLM, for chroma components, in which multiple candidates are put into the list (including a CCP model of an adjacent neighboring block or a non-adjacent neighboring block), checked, ordered, and one is selected, thereby a chroma block may be predicted with a CCP model in the list; see also Figs. 9, 26-27, and 32, and [0129]-[0145], [0247]-[0248], [0256], [0260], and [0289]-[0290], additionally disclosing various model, including CCLM, CCCM, GL-CCCM).”
Regarding Claim 11, Zhang discloses:
“wherein the processor reorders the CCP list, based on a cost ([0824]-[0843], disclosing the CCP candidates in the CCP candidate list may be reordered based on cost comparison; Figs. 1-4, 9, 26-27, and 32-39, [0419]-[0578] (List Mode Section and Non-Adjacent CCP Section), disclosing generating a CCP list including multiple types of CCP models, such as CCCM and CCLM, for chroma components, in which multiple candidates are put into the list (including a CCP model of an adjacent neighboring block or a non-adjacent neighboring block), checked, ordered, and one is selected, thereby a chroma block may be predicted with a CCP model in the list; see also Figs. 9, 26-27, and 32, and [0129]-[0145], [0247]-[0248], [0256], [0260], and [0289]-[0290], additionally disclosing various model, including CCLM, CCCM, GL-CCCM).”
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.
Claims 7 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang, in view of Chiang et al., US Patent Application Publication No.: 2026/0222556 A1 (please note the US Provisional Application No.: 63/439,257, filed 01/16/2023), hereby Chiang.
Zhang discloses the invention substantially as claimed. Regarding Claims 7 and 18, although Zhang does not expressly disclose the claimed differing POCs, Chiang does expressly disclose the following:
“wherein a picture order count (POC) of a picture including the current block and a POC of a picture including the reference block are different from each other (Figs. 15-16, and [0168]-[0169]).”
Accordingly, before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Zhang and Chiang, to modify a video signal decoding device comprising a processor, a video signal encoding device comprising a processor, and a computer-readable non-transitory storage medium storing a bitstream, wherein the bitstream is decoded according to a decoding method of Zhang to use the claimed differing POCs as in Chiang. The motivation for doing so would have been to create the advantage of precisely deriving temporal candidates and associated prediction mode (see Chiang, Figs. 15-16, and [0168]-[0169]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 10, and 19 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Examiner notes that multiple references cited disclose CCP in video coding. For example, the following references show similar features in the claims, although not relied upon: Zhang (US 20250337886 A1), Figs. 1-4, 9, and 32-34.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHLEEN M WALSH whose telephone number is (571)270-0423. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 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, 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.
/KATHLEEN M WALSH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482
Prosecution Insights