vs! “111%
`\.\_:
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMIVHSSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria1 Virginia 22313-1450
`wwwusptogov
`
`
`
`
`
`13/792,704
`
`03/11/2013
`
`Toru MATSUNOBU
`
`201370386A
`
`1871
`
`52349
`7590
`””9””
`WENDEROTH,LIND&PONACK L.L.P. —
`1030 15th Street, NW.
`LOTFI, KYLE M
`Suite 400 East
`
`Washington, DC 20005- 1503
`
`ART UNIT
`2489
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`12/29/2017
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`following e—mail address(es):
`ddalecki @wenderoth.c0m
`e0a@ wenderoth.c0m
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Applicant(s)
`Application No.
` 13/792,704 MATSUNOBU ET AL.
`
`Examiner
`Art Unit
`AIA (First Inventor to File)
`Office Action Summary
`
`KYLE LOTFI its“ 2489
`
`-- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING DATE OF
`THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR1. 136( a).
`after SIX () MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1 .704(b).
`
`In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`
`Status
`
`1)IZI Responsive to communication(s) filed on 8/24/2017.
`El A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2b)|ZI This action is non-final.
`2a)|:l This action is FINAL.
`3)I:I An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)|:| Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)IZI Claim(s) 12 4 6-10 12 and 14-16 is/are pending in the application.
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`6)I:I Claim(s)
`is/are allowed.
`
`7)|Z| Claim(s) 124 6- 10 12 and 14- 16is/are rejected.
`8)|:I Claim(s)_ is/are objected to.
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`9)I:I Claim((s)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`hit
`:/'/\W¢W.LISI>I‘.0. ovI’ atentS/init events/
`
`
`
`h/index.‘s or send an inquiry to PPI-iieedback{®usgtc.00v.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)I:l The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11)I:l The drawing(s) filed on
`is/are: a)I:I accepted or b)I:I objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`12)I:| Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a)I:l All
`
`b)|:l Some” c)I:l None of the:
`
`1.I:I Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.|:l Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.|:| Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`
`
`3) D Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`1) D Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date.
`.
`.
`4) I:I Other'
`2) I] InformatIon DIsclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL—326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20171122
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
`
`The present application is being examined under the pre-AlA first to invent provisions.
`
`Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.1 14
`
`A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR
`
`1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued
`
`examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR1.17(e) has been timely paid, the
`
`finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's
`
`submission filed on 8/24/2017 has been entered.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`Applicant's arguments filed 8/24/2017 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
`
`Upon further review of the cited prior art, the examiner has identified that Minoo discloses a multipass
`
`filtering ([0122]-[0135]) in which neighboring pixels which have been offset filtered in block 1430 of figure
`
`14 are the basis for classification of a current pixel- the neighbor SAO values are used to determine and
`
`apply a current SAO value. The examiner further notes that while the applicant argues “In other words,
`
`Minoo fails to disclose interpolation of an offset value for the sample adaptive offset (SAO).”, the claims
`
`do not limit the invention to "sample adaptive offset" filtering, or explicitly recite that the offset information
`
`is for sample adaptive offset, but are instead directly to non-limiting examples such as “offset information”,
`
`and the term “offset information” encompasses in non-limiting example pixel values, differences of pixel
`
`values etc.. Additionally, taken with preamble:
`
`coding an image on a per-region basis, the image
`
`coding method comprising:”, the claim language is not at all limited to the intended field of SAO filtering,
`
`but could apply as well to the formatting of image storage, where an “offset” is understood to be a byte
`
`offset of image data contents within a packet.
`
`In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of applicant’s
`
`invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “Minoo fails to disclose
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 3
`
`interpolation of an offset value for the sample adaptive offset (SAO)”) are not recited in the rejected
`
`claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification
`
`are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
`
`Additionally, the Claims recite: “a pixel included in a region which is included in the current region
`
`and which is in a neighborhood of the neighboring region”, however the claims do not provide any further
`
`limitations on the location and size of a "neighborhood of the neighboring region”, beyond that it “includes
`
`a plurality of lines.” However, “a neighborhood of a neighboring region” might reasonably be construed to
`
`encompass the entirety of the claimed current region, since the current region is defined as being a
`
`neighbor of the neighboring region.
`
`35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
`
`Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or
`composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent
`therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
`
`Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-10, 12, and 14-16 are rejected under 35 USC 101 as being directed to non-
`
`statutory subject matter because claims 1 and 9 recites a method in the form of an abstract idea, without
`
`including significantly more than the abstract steps. The claim describes steps for obtaining, “determining
`
`first offset information;” and comparing intangible data, “determining whether or not the first offset
`
`information is the same as second offset information", when the first offset information is different
`
`between the current region and the neighboring region from the second offset information, determining a
`
`third offset value”, which has been found by the courts to be an “idea of itself” (Cybersource Corp. v.
`
`Retail Decisions, Inc., 654 F.3d 1366, 99 U.S.P.Q.2d 1690 (Fed. Cir. 2011)). The further steps of the
`
`claim recite similar features of comparing data objects, eg. “offset values” and acting on this data based
`
`on the comparison. The claims nowhere recite steps of specifically processing or decoding pictures or
`
`video data by the claimed video coding apparatus.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 4
`
`The claimed invention is directed to ajudicial exception (Le, a law of nature, a natural
`
`phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-10, 12, and 14-16 are
`
`directed to an abstract idea. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount
`
`to significantly more than the judicial exception because the claims recites method steps which in general
`
`could be performed as a mental process.
`
`The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness
`
`Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described
`as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to
`be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been
`obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which
`said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the
`invention was made.
`
`Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 14, and 15 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as
`
`being unpatentable over Chong et al., U.S. Publication 2012/0287988 A1, “Chong”, in view of
`
`Minoo et al., US 2013/0177068 A1.
`
`Regarding claim 1 , Chong teaches an image coding method of coding an image on a per-
`
`region basis, the image coding method comprising (See [0033], lines 1 1-17, “Previous coding
`
`standards...”. Chong describes that HEVC, unlike H.264, permits different offset values, i.e. sample
`
`adaptive offsets to be applied to different pixels or blocks.):
`
`determining first offset information to be used for applying offset to a current region (See
`
`figure 9, step 120, as described in lines 7-10 of [0103].);
`
`determining whether or not the first offset information is the same between the current
`
`region and a neighboring region of the current region (See [0038], lines 37, where Chong discloses
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 5
`
`comparing the offset information of the current partition with offset information of one or more neighbor
`
`partitions.);
`
`Chong does not disclose:
`
`m the first offset information is different from the second offset information,
`
`(i) determining a third offset value for a pixel included in a region which is included in the
`
`current region and which is in a neighborhood of the neighboring region by interpolating a first
`
`offset value included in the first offset information and a second offset value included in the
`
`second offset information, the region including a plurality of lines ([0069] discloses that interpolation
`
`of a current offset l is performed using a weighted combination of its two neighbors. The region in which
`
`the third offset value is included includes a plurality of lines, including two neighboring lines from which
`
`the interpolation is performed.)
`
`(ii) adding the third offset value to a reconstructed signal of the pixel included in the
`
`region in the neighborhood of the neighboring region, among reconstructed signals obtained by
`
`coding pixel signals of the current region and decoding the coded pixel signals ([0130] discloses
`
`that after a first SAO process, a second SAO pass may be performed in which decoded+deblocked+SAO
`
`values from the first pass are used for classification in the second pass; pixel+offset values of a pixel are
`
`used to interpolate the current pixel offset value, I, in the manner of fig. 7 for edge offset.), and
`
`(iii) adding the first offset value to a reconstructed signal of a pixel included in a region
`
`which is included in the current region and which is other than the region in the neighborhood of
`
`the neighboring region (As disclosed in [0072], the interpolated, third offset value" serves to limit a first
`
`offset "",0 insofar as the offset applied is C is C does not pass 0, and 0 if C passes 0. Thus certain of
`
`the pixels within a block will be offset by first value 0, and others by C, depending on the values of L and
`
`R relative to C. Note as disclosed in [0134]; “Additionally, it should be appreciated that any of the E0 and
`
`BO modifications may be applied as part of the multipass process.” Thus the interpolation in [0072] is
`
`compatible with a multipass SAO filter.); and
`
`coding the first offset information (See [0079]).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 6
`
`It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was
`
`made to perform interpolation of an offset value from neighboring offset values, as disclosed in Minoo in
`
`the context of multipass SAO filtering, and to perform said filtering in response to the determination steps,
`
`disclosed in Chong, of comparing a current offset information with neighboring offset information,
`
`because doing so has the potential to decrease distortion in the decoded image (Minoo [0130]), and in
`
`general offers the potential to improve visual quality and coding efficiency (Minoo [0132]).
`
`Regarding claim 2, the combination of Chong, in view of Minoo discloses all of the limitations of
`
`claim 1, upon which depends claim 2. This combination, specifically Chong, further discloses: the image
`
`coding method according to Claim 1, wherein the first offset information includes a total number
`
`of blocks in the current region, the blocks sharing the first offset information (See [0079]. Chong
`
`describes three different scenarios with respect to figure 6 of neighbor partitions sharing the same offset
`
`as a current partition.),
`
`and the total number of blocks which share the first offset information includes at least
`
`one of (i) a total number of horizontally successive blocks which share the first offset information
`
`and (ii) a total number of vertically successive blocks which share the first offset information (See
`
`[0082], where Chong describes that SAO unit 43 signals a neighbor partition index whose offset value is
`
`to be used is signaled in coding the video data, and that this signaling depends on the number of
`
`available merge candidates).
`
`Regarding claim 4, the combination of Chong in view of Minoo discloses the limitations of claim 1,
`
`upon which depends claim 4. This combination, specifically Chong, further discloses: the image coding
`
`method according to Claim 1, wherein, in the determining, (i) in the case where a difference
`
`between the first offset information between the current block and the neighboring block is
`
`smaller than a threshold, it is determined that the offset information is the same between the
`
`current block and the neighboring block (As disclosed in [0084], pred_type 0 uses a threshold level of
`
`difference when comparing neighbor and current offset values to determine whether the two are close
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 7
`
`enough- threshold level of difference- to make it worth sending a residual), and (ii) in the case where the
`
`difference is larger than the threshold, it is determined that the offset information is different
`
`between the current block and the neighboring block, and the image coding method further
`
`comprises inserting the threshold into a coded stream (If the difference between offsets exceeds this
`
`threshold, the current offset may be sent without residual prediction.).
`
`Regarding claim 6, the combination of Chong, in view of Minoo discloses all of the limitations of
`
`claim 1, upon which depends claim 6. This combination, specifically Chong, further discloses: the image
`
`coding method according to Claim 1, wherein the offset information includes a total number of
`
`lines for specifying a pixel for which an offset value is to be adjusted (See [0085], lines where
`
`Chong describes that in pred_type 0, neighbor partition index values are signaled in the bitstream so that
`
`neighbor partition values may be used).
`
`Regarding claim 7, the combination of Chong, in view of Minoo discloses all of the limitations of
`
`claim 1, upon which depends claim 7. This combination, specifically Chong, further discloses: the image
`
`coding method according to Claim 1, wherein the first offset information includes weighting
`
`factors (Chong discloses using different offset groups which are grouped according to offset bands,
`
`which are based on intensity value. See [0036].), and
`
`the weighting factors are such that an offset value is further decreased for a pixel at a
`
`shorter distance from the boundary with the neighboring region (See [0034]).
`
`Regarding claim 9, Chong teaches an image decoding method of coding an image on a per-
`
`region basis, the image coding method comprising (See [0033], lines 1 1-17, “Previous coding
`
`standards...”. Chong describes that HEVC, unlike H.264, permits different offset values, i.e. sample
`
`adaptive offsets to be applied to different pixels or blocks.):
`
`obtaining offset information of a current region (See figure 9, step 120, as described in lines
`
`7-10 of [0103].);
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 8
`
`determining whether or not the offset information is the same between the current region
`
`and a neighboring region of the current region (See [0038], lines 3-7, where Chong discloses
`
`comparing the offset information of the current partition with offset information of one or more neighbor
`
`partitions);
`
`Chong does not disclose:
`
`m the first offset information is different from the second offset information,
`
`(i) determining a third offset value for a pixel included in a region which is included in the
`
`current region and which is in a neighborhood of the neighboring region by interpolating a first
`
`offset value included in the first offset information and a second offset value included in the
`
`second offset information, the region including a plurality of lines ([0069] discloses that interpolation
`
`of a current offset l is performed using a weighted combination of its two neighbors. The region in which
`
`the third offset value is included includes a plurality of lines including two neighboring lines from which
`
`the interpolation is performed.)
`
`(ii) adding the third offset value to a reconstructed signal of the pixel included in the
`
`region in the neighborhood of the neighboring region, among reconstructed signals obtained by
`
`coding pixel signals of the current region and decoding the coded pixel signals ([0130] discloses
`
`that after a first SAO process, a second SAO pass may be performed in which decoded+deblocked+SAO
`
`values from the first pass are used for classification in the second pass; pixel+offset values of a pixel are
`
`used to interpolate the current pixel offset value, I, in the manner of fig. 7 for edge offset), and
`
`(iii) adding the first offset value to a reconstructed signal of a pixel included in a region
`
`which is included in the current region and which is other than the region in the neighborhood of
`
`the neighboring region (As disclosed in [0072], the interpolated, third offset value" serves to limit a first
`
`offset "",0 insofar as the offset applied is C is C does not pass 0, and 0 if C passes 0. Thus certain of
`
`the pixels within a block will be offset by first value 0, and others by C, depending on the values of L and
`
`R relative to C. Note as disclosed in [0134]; “Additionally, it should be appreciated that any of the E0 and
`
`BO modifications may be applied as part of the multipass process.” Thus the interpolation in [0072] is
`
`compatible with a multipass SAO filter.); and
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 9
`
`It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was
`
`made to perform interpolation of an offset value from neighboring offset values, as disclosed in Minoo in
`
`the context of multipass SAO filtering, and to perform said filtering in response to the determination steps,
`
`disclosed in Chong, of comparing a current offset information with neighboring offset information,
`
`because doing so has the potential to decrease distortion in the decoded image (Minoo [0130]), and in
`
`general offers the potential to improve visual quality and coding efficiency (Minoo [0132]).
`
`Regarding claim 10, the combination of Chong, in view of Minoo discloses all of the limitations of
`
`claim 9, upon which depends claim 10. This combination, specifically Chong, further discloses: the
`
`image decoding method according to Claim 9, wherein the offset information includes a total
`
`number of blocks in the current region, the blocks sharing the offset information (See [0079].
`
`Chong describes three different scenarios with respect to figure 6 of neighbor partitions sharing the same
`
`offset as a current partition.),
`
`and the total number of blocks which share the offset information includes at least one of
`
`(i) a total number of horizontally successive blocks which share the offset information and (ii) a
`
`total number of vertically successive blocks which share the offset information (See [0082], where
`
`Chong describes that SAO unit 43 signals a neighbor partition index whose offset value is to be used is
`
`signaled in coding the video data, and that this signaling depends on the number of available merge
`
`candidates).
`
`Regarding claim 12, the combination of Chong in view of Minoo discloses the limitations of claim
`
`9, upon which depends claim 12. This combination, specifically Chong, further discloses: the image
`
`coding method according to Claim 9, wherein, in the determining, (i) in the case where a
`
`difference in the offset information between the current block and the neighboring block is
`
`smaller than a threshold, it is determined that the offset information is the same between the
`
`current block and the neighboring block (As disclosed in [0084], pred_type 0 uses a threshold level of
`
`difference when comparing neighbor and current offset values to determine whether the two are close
`
`enough- threshold level of difference- to make it worth sending a residual), and (ii) in the case where the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 10
`
`difference is larger than the threshold, it is determined that the offset information is different
`
`between the current block and the neighboring block (If the difference between offsets exceeds this
`
`threshold, the current offset may be sent without residual prediction.) and, the image decoding method
`
`further comprises obtaining the threshold from a coded stream ([0086] “offset type and offset values
`
`are signaled in the bitstream”).
`
`Regarding claim 14, the combination of Chong, in view of Minoo discloses all of the limitations of
`
`claim 14, upon which depends claim 11. This combination, specifically Chong, further discloses: the
`
`image decoding method according to Claim 1 1, wherein the offset information includes a total
`
`number of lines for specifying a pixel for which an offset value is to be adjusted (See [0085], lines
`
`where Chong describes that in pred_type 0, neighbor partition index values are signaled in the bitstream
`
`so that neighbor partition values may be used).
`
`Regarding claim 15, the combination of Chong, in view of Minoo discloses all of the limitations of
`
`claim 11, upon which depends claim 15. This combination, specifically Chong, further discloses: the
`
`image decoding method according to Claim 11, wherein the offset information includes weighting
`
`factors (Chong discloses using different offset groups which are grouped according to offset bands,
`
`which are based on intensity value. See [0036].), and
`
`the weighting factors are such that an offset value is further decreased for a pixel at a
`
`shorter distance from the boundary with the neighboring region (See [0034]).
`
`Claims 8 and 16 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over
`
`Chong, in view of Minoo, and further in view of Van der Auwera, et al., U.S. Publication
`
`2013/0101031 A1 .
`
`Regarding claim 8, the combination of Chong, in view of Minoo discloses all of the limitations of
`
`claim 1, upon which depends claim 8. This combination does not disclose: the image coding method
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 11
`
`according to Claim 1, wherein the offset information includes weighting factors, and the weighting
`
`factors are such that an offset value having a larger absolute value is further decreased.
`
`However, Van der Auewere discloses this limitation in an analogous art.
`
`In [0149], Van der
`
`Auwera discloses that when the absolute value of the difference between horizontal or vertical
`
`components is at least one, the boundary strength between two coding units is set to 1, versus 0 when
`
`the absolute value of this difference is less than 1.
`
`It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was
`
`made to adjust a strength of a boundary value based on the absolute value of a difference of boundary
`
`value strength criteria, as described in van der Auwera, for the purpose of allowing a video decoder to
`
`apply deblocking and edge offset filtering which are most appropriate for a given coding unit within a
`
`frame (See Van der Auwera, [0025]).
`
`Regarding claim 16, the combination of Chong in view of Minoo teaches all of the limitations of
`
`claim 9, upon which depends claim 16. Chong does not disclose: the image decoding method
`
`according to Claim 9, wherein the offset information includes weighting factors, and the weighting
`
`factors are such that an offset value having a larger absolute value is further decreased.
`
`However, Van der Auewere discloses this limitation in an analogous art.
`
`In [0149], Van der
`
`Auwera discloses that when the absolute value of the difference between horizontal or vertical
`
`components is at least one, the boundary strength between two coding units is set to 1, versus 0 when
`
`the absolute value of this difference is less than 1.
`
`It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was
`
`made to adjust a strength of a boundary value based on the absolute value of a difference of boundary
`
`value strength criteria, as described in van der Auwera, for the purpose of allowing a video decoder to
`
`apply deblocking and edge offset filtering which are most appropriate for a given coding unit within a
`
`frame (See Van der Auwera, [0025]).
`
`