www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`17/527,546
`
`11/16/2021
`
`Yusuke KATO
`
`2021-2384A
`
`4480
`
`Cp
`Lind&
`Wenderoth,
`Wenderoth, Lind & Ponack, L.L.P.
`1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW
`Suite 500
`Washington, DC 20036
`
`KALAPODAS, DRAMOS
`
`ART UNIT
`2487
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`07/05/2024
`
`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):
`eoa@ wenderoth.com
`kmiller@wenderoth.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`1-12 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) _ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`C} Claim(s)__ is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-12 is/are rejected.
`(] Claim(s)__ is/are objectedto.
`C] Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you maybeeligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPHfeedback@uspto.gov.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`Application Papers
`10)( The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`11) The drawing(s) filed on 11/16/2021 is/are: a)[¥) accepted or b)(.) 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)£) Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d)or (f).
`Certified copies:
`_—_c)L) None ofthe:
`b)L) Some**
`a)Q) All
`1.1) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.1.) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No. |
`3.2.) Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been receivedin 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)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3)
`
`4)
`
`(LJ Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20240607
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`17/527 ,546
`KATOetal.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF)StatusExaminer
`DRAMOS KALAPODAS
`2487
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEof this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORYPERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensionsof time may be available underthe provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply betimely filed after SIX (6) MONTHSfrom 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) MONTHSfrom 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, evenif timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1) Responsive to communication(s) filed on 05/24/2024.
`C} A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)() This action is FINAL. 2b)¥)This action is non-final.
`3) An election was madeby the applicant in responseto a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`4)(2) 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 Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/527,546
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined
`
`underthe first inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
`
`2.
`
`A requestfor continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set
`
`forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), wasfiled 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 CFR 1.17(e) has beentimely paid, the finality of the previous Office action
`
`has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on
`
`05/24/2024 has been entered.
`
`Information Disclosure Statement
`
`3.
`
`The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 05/24/2024 after
`
`the Notice of Allowance of 02/27/2024 along with a request for reconsideration, RCE.
`
`The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the
`
`information disclosure statementis being considered by the examiner.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/527,546
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 3
`
`Double Patenting
`
`4.
`
`Claim 1 of the instant Application No. 17/527,546 is patentably indistinct from claims 1
`
`of the pending Application for Patent No. 18/673,719 pursuant to 37 CFR 1.78(f) or pre-AlA 37
`
`CFR 1.78(b).
`
`The provisional nonstatutory obviousness double patenting rejection is based on a
`
`judicially created doctrine groundedin public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to
`
`prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a
`
`patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees.
`
`Whentwo or more applications filed by the same applicant contain patentably indistinct
`
`claims, elimination of such claims from all but one application may be required in the absence
`
`of good andsufficient reason for their retention during pendencyin more than one application.
`
`Applicant is required to either cancel the patentably indistinct claims from all but one
`
`application or maintain a clear line of demarcation between the applications. See MPEP § 822
`
`A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at
`
`issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably
`
`distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either
`
`anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., /n
`
`re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d
`
`1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645
`
`(Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re
`
`Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and /In re Thorington, 418 F.2d
`
`528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/527,546
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 4
`
`A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d)
`
`may be used to overcome an actualor provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory
`
`double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to
`
`be commonly ownedwith this application, or claims an invention made asa result of
`
`activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal
`
`disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321 (b).
`
`The USPTOinternet Website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be
`
`used. Pleasevisit http:/Awww.uspto.gov/forms/. Thefiling date of the application will
`
`determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer maybefilled
`
`out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meetsall
`
`requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more
`
`information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to;
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-l.jsp.
`
`Claim 7 of the instant anplication is rejecteci on the ground of crovisional
`
`nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 of the pending
`
`Application for Patent No. 18/673,719 in view of the prior art to Karczewicz et al., (US
`
`10,904,548) /d., Provisional Application 62/776,379 and 62/787,681, obviating the
`
`operational similarity between the encoding source 102 and the destination decoding
`
`device 116 at Col.7 Lin.3-7.
`
`Although the claims af issue are not identical, they are nat patentably distinct
`
`from each other as explained below, the rationale for the provisional Obviousness
`
`Double Patenting determination is set below by the stipulation;
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/527,546
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 5
`
`“A generic claim cannot be allowed to an applicantif the prior art discloses a species
`
`falling within the claimed genus.” The species in that case will anticipate the genus. /n re
`
`Slayter, 276 F.2d 408, 411, 125 USPQ 345, 347 (CCPA 1960). See MPEP 2131.02.
`
`In this case, the conflicting application claiming a decoder, similarly performs
`
`each and every coding limiting steps of the encoderat the prediction loop, as affirmed in
`
`Application at Par.[0416] where the decoder 200 performs similar operations to those of
`
`the encoder 100.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`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 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 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basisfor 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148
`
`USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 betweenthe prior art and the claimsat issue.
`3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/527,546
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 6
`
`4. Considering objective evidence presentin the application indicating
`obviousness or nonobviousness.
`This application does not currently name joint inventors.
`
`5.
`
`Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over H.265
`
`(ISO/IEC 23008-2 HEVC) / HEVC (High Efficiency Video Coding), December1, 2013
`
`(hereinafter “IEC 23008”) and Kai Zhanget al., (hereinafter Zhang) (US
`
`2022/0094986)in view of the NPL to BROSS,B, etal., (hereinafter “BROSS-CE8”)
`
`“Non-CE8: Unified Transform Type 1-8 Signaling and Residual Coding for
`
`Transform Skip, Joint Video Experts Team (JVET), 15 January 2019,[JUVET-
`
`M0O464-v4] and further in view of B. BROSS, Benjamin et al., (hereinafter “BROSS-
`
`VVC”) Versatile Video Coding 1-8 (Draft 4), Joint Video Experts Team (JVET), 17
`
`March 2019, pp. 49-54, 98, 271, 275-276, [JVET-M1001-v7] (version 7).
`
`Re Claim 1. (Currently Amended) “IEC 23008” discloses, an encoder (encoder
`
`flowchart in Fig.9-10 or 9-11, Sec.06 with reference to encoding engine
`
`processing by an encoder, Sec.9.3.5) comprising:
`
`circuitry (the encoder structure is obviated by the encoding process
`
`described for encoding slice segmentsof data, at Sec.9.3.5.2); and
`
`memory coupled to the circuitry (memory at Prologue Sec.0.2, or Sec.7.4.3.2,
`
`or 9.3.2.3), wherein:
`
`in both ofafirst case where an orthogonal transform is performed and a second
`
`case wherethe orthogonal transform is skipped in residual coding of a current block
`
`(the implied encoding circuitry performing both cases of coding by applying an
`
`orthogonal transform and skipping the transform process,firstly a DCT transform
`
`is applied to the horizontal and vertical block coefficients at Sec.D.3.13, Pg.254-
`
`256 and secondly the transform skip coding mode, Table 9-25 as being enabled
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/527,546
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 7
`
`by a flag, transform_skip_enabled_flag, signaled in the residual coding syntax by
`
`PPS parameterat the program codelin. 13, in Table 7.3.2.3, Table 7.3.8.11,
`
`Sec.7.4.3.3),
`
`when a number of Context-based Adaptive Binary Arithmetic Coding (CABAC)
`
`processes is within an allowable range.,:
`
`
`
`processesis considered, and constrained to a number/range of bins
`
`Sec.7.4.3.10), the circuitry (initiating a CABAC binarization signaled via PPS to
`
`decoderbya flag, cabac_init_present_flag, equal to 1, Sec.7.4.3.3, Sec.7.4.3.10 or,
`
`7.4.7, Fig.9-1 Sec.9.3.1-9.3.2, 9.3.2.2 etc.):
`
`encodesa plurality of coefficient information flags by CABAC, each of the
`
`plurality of coefficient information flags relating to a coefficient included in the current
`
`block (encoding the flags signaling the CABACapplied to the block coefficients,
`
`Sec.7.4.3.3, Sec.7.4.3.10 or, 7.4.7, Fig.9-1 Sec.9.3.1-9.3.2, 9.3.2.2 and/or the
`
`binarization process for coeff_abs_level_remaining[n] at Sec.9.3.3.9 ); and
`
`encodes a remainder value of the coefficient with Golomb-Rice code (encoding
`
`by applying the Golomb-Rice binarization to the remaining block transform
`
`coefficients, by encoder signaling the coeff_abs_level_remaining[n], Sec.7.4.9.11,
`
`Pg.92); and
`
`in both of the first case and the second case, when the number of CABAC
`
`processesis not within the allowable range (for both casesof a unified transform
`
`type signaling including the transform skip mode by signaling
`
`transform_skip_flag[x0][y0][cldx], at code Table 7.3.8.11 and the regular
`
`orthogonal
`
`transform of the coding unit per code Table 7.3.8.5 at Pg.45-46 and
`
`the transform tree syntax at Table 7.3.8.8, defining a current range, for the CABAC
`
`context range Sec.3.6.1 according to the iviLpsRange at Expression (3-32) and
`
`further considering the Golomb-Rice binarization Sec.9.3, per iviCurrRange, being
`
`set rangelimit to a value 520, at Sec.9.3.2.5), the circuitry:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/527,546
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 8
`
`skips the encodingofthe plurality of coefficient information flags (using bypass
`
`and/or skipping the encoding of coefficient flags, Table 9-4, Sec.9.3.2.2 and
`
`skipping the coding unit flags by the syntax cu_skip_flag, in Table 9-4 and
`
`referenced in Table 9-9 cited below
`
`Table 9-9 — Values of initValue for ctxIds of cu_skipflag
`
`ctxEds of cu_siapflag
`
`Initialization
`varninle
`
`nut¥ alue and at the
`
`coding unit syntax Sec.9.3.3.1 Table 9-32, Pg.173 of associated binarizations of
`
`syntax elements representing the coefficients flag skipping cu_skip_Flag , of the
`
`coding_ unit () according to the input parameters binarized value, cMax ),
`wherein in the first case 3
`
`(for the first case where regular coding processis applying the orthogonal
`
`transform e.g., DCT transform is applied to the horizontal and vertical block
`
`coefficients at Sec.D.3.13, Pg.254-256) when the number of CABAC processesis not
`
`within the allowable range, (setting a CBAC rangeTabLpsper the Least Probable
`
`State (Lps) specified at Table 9-40 Sec.9.3.4.3.2, 9.3.4.3.2.1-9.3.4.3.2.2,i.e., the bin
`
`value is “NO”in the range per Fig.9-6) the circuitry:
`
`However, while “IEC 23008”, discloses the coding process underregular data
`
`block coefficient transform and the alternative of using binarization of the coding syntax
`
`under CABAC and Golomb-Rice methods, the document doesnot teach the conversion
`
`of the current pixel to a second value derived from collocated neighboring coefficients
`
`positioned within the data block, named “poszero’,
`
`Zhang discloses a similar coding process setting the CABAC range (where the
`
`numberof codedbinsis limited to 8, Par.[0144]) and further teaching the following
`
`claimed limitations,
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/527,546
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 9
`
`wherein in the first case-wheretheerthegenalransfermis_perfermed, when the
`
`number of CABAC processesis not within the allowable range, (the numberof
`
`CABACcontext codedbinsis restricted to a threshold no larger than 2 bins per
`
`sample, Par.[0170] Pg.45 of 65) the circuitry:
`
`converts the coefficient to a second coefficient by using a poszero value thatis
`
`determined using a plurality of surrounding coefficients of the coefficient within the
`
`current block (determining a second coefficient value of “poszero” concept by
`
`computing the sum of absolute values of neighboring pixels, sumAbs, Par.[0145-
`
`0149], i.e., Fig.18); and
`
`encodesa value of the second coefficient with the Golomb-Rice code (encoding
`
`the second coefficient value by Golomb-Rice coding, Par.[0138-0149]), and
`
`wherein in the second case where+he-orthegenaltransterrs-skisped, when the
`
`number of CABAC processesis not within the allowable range, (the number of CABAC
`
`context codedbins is restricted to a threshold no larger than 2 bins per sample,
`
`Par.[0170] Pg.45 of 65) the circuitry:
`
`encodesthe value of the coefficient with the Golomb-Rice code (encoding the
`secondcoefficient value by Golomb-Rice coding, Par.[0138-0149]), without
`
`converting the coefficient to the second coefficient by using the poszero value
`
`(encoding the value of the coefficient according to a signaled flag,
`
`transform_skip_enabled_flag, code Table 7.3.6.10, without converting the
`
`coefficients to poszero values, at Par.[0170] where the variables Rice parameter
`
`ricePar and poszero are determined based on dependent quantization and
`
`sumAbsvalues, Par.[0145] and conditionally applying the poszero per
`
`absLevel[k] at Par.[0146-0149] andin relation to the coefficients Context modeling
`
`Sec.2.5.1.1 according to admissible reconstruction values, Par.[0150-0157],
`
`etc.,).
`
`The analogous art to “BROSS-CE8”teaches about, (a unified transform type
`
`including multiple transform sets, MTS and transform skip, TS signaling and a
`
`bitstream restriction to limit the number of context coded bins at Abstract and the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/527,546
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 10
`
`binarization of the of the context index along with modified Rice parameter
`
`derivation for the remained binarization, Sec.1 and 2, along with the residual
`
`coding for Transform skip, Sec.3 and the reduction of the numberof context
`
`coded bins, CCB, at Sec.4.3.
`
`In summary, “BROSS-CE8”, teaches (for both cases of regular orthogonal
`
`multiple transform MTS,and the transform skip, TS, applying a unified syntax,
`
`tu_mts_index at TU level embeddedin the residual Intra and Inter coding stages,
`
`at Sec.2.2 — Sec.3 and sets the case of the maximum coded context bins (CBBs)
`
`per sample being within an allowable within a k range of level coding mode as
`
`valid or out of rangee.g., invalid for CCB>k, for transform skip of residual coding
`
`syntax,i.e., coefficient information regarding the flags as depicted from the
`
`citation below,
`
`Reduction of context coded bins: The first scanning pass, Le., thetransmission ofthe sig_coeff_flag,
`abs_level_gtlflag, andpar_level_flag syntax elements,is unchanged,However,the limit oa the maximam
`number of context coded bins per sample (CCBs) is removed and handleddifferently. The reduction of
`CCBs. can be guaranteed byspecifying a mode with CCB> k as invalid with k bemg a positive integer
`number. Notethat k=2 forthe regular level coding mode of the current VVC development. Sucha limitation
`corresponds to a reduction ofthe quantization space.
`
`at Sec.3 Pg.1 with residual coding for transform skip at Sec.4.3 in the code table
`
`at Pg.1, to furthermore include sig_coeff_flag_context_modeling modifying the
`
`significant coefficient flag sig_coeff_flag, determined by using the neighboring
`
`coefficients (NBO and NB1) i.e., “surrounding coefficients of the coefficient within the
`
`current block”, below cited for brevity
`
`coell_flag context modelling: Thelocal template in sigcoeffflag context modeling is modifiedto
`sig
`
`only biclude the neighborto the right (NBo) and the neighbor below(NB) the current scanting position,
`The context model offset is jast the numberof significant neighboring positions sigcoellNag[NBal +
`sig_coetf_flag[NB|. Hetice, the selection of different context sets depending on the diagonal d within the
`current transform block is remeved. This results in three Context models and a single context nmlodel set for
`coding the sig_coeff_flagflag.
`
`Pg.1, with application of the syntax information skip,TS, at Sec.3).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/527,546
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 11
`
`Similarly,“BROSS-VVC” complements the prior teachings by disclosing the
`
`claimed matter representing in summary, the coding processrecited where,
`
`in both ofafirst case where an orthogonal transform is performed (codelines in
`
`table 7.3.6.10 at Pg.49) and a second case wherethe orthogonal transform is skipped
`
`in residual coding (code table 7.3.6.10 at Pg.50]) of a current block,
`
`when a number of Context-based Adaptive Binary Arithmetic Coding (CABAC)
`
`processes (Sec.7.4.2.1, CABAC syntax elements) is within an allowable range, the
`
`circuitry (value of TransCoeffLevel[x0][y0][cldx][xC][yC] is in the range of CoeffMin
`
`to CoeffMax):
`
`wherein in the first case-where+the-erthegenalransferris-perfermed, when the
`
`number of CABAC processesis not within the allowable range, the circuitry:,
`
`wherein in the second case where+he-orthegenaltransterrs-skisped, when the
`
`number of CABAC processesis not within the allowable range, the circuitry:
`
`(these limitations include both, the orthogonal and skip transform of applying the
`
`abs_remainder[n] such that the corresponding value of
`
`TransCoeffLevel[x0][y0][cldx][xC][yC] is in the range of CoeffMin to CoeffMax,
`
`then codding the intermediate remaining values with Golomb-Rice and deriving
`
`the ZeroPos[n] according to the absolute level [n] of transform coefficients, at
`
`location (xC,yC) AbsLevel[xC][yC], at Clause 9.5.3.2 per Pg.55 and Clause
`
`9.5.3.11-9.5.3.12 and Table 9-10 for RiceParam and applying ZeroPos[n]).
`
`It would have been obvious to the ordinary skilled in the art, prior to the effective
`
`filing date of the invention, to consider the non-patentliterature of “IEC 23008” teaching
`
`various coding methods and apparatus principles of data coding, as being applied to
`
`transformed blocks or transform skip modes, along with the use of CABAC, Golomb-
`
`Rice binarization under specific conditions, which would have determined the ordinary
`
`skilled to seek other methods deemed to improve the compression performanceof the
`
`previous video coding standardsfor providing a higher coding efficiency as identified in
`
`the art to Zhang, (Par.[0037-0038]), which in combination would have proved
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/527,546
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 12
`
`predictable for adopting coding methodsto limit CABAC syntax within a rangei.e.,
`
`allowable, to either orthogonal transforms or skip residual coding mode and using
`
`poszero coefficient modification and perform Golomb-Rice coding to the remaining
`
`coefficients under the described conditions, as commonly applied to video coding
`
`process, with support for the rationale to combine is found in “BROSS-CE8”along with
`
`“BROSS-VVC”by teaching the rationale under whichtheprior arts to “IEC 23008”,
`
`Zhang, ‘BROSS-CE8” may be obviously combined for similar methods of orthogonal or
`
`transform skip without signaling the coefficients’ flags, thus finding the combination
`
`predictable.
`
`Re Claim 2. (Original) “IEC 23008”, Zhang, “BROSS-CE8” and “BROSS-VVC”
`
`disclose, the encoder according to claim 1,
`
`Zhang teaches, wherein the poszero value is determined based on a sum of
`
`absolute valuesof the plurality of surrounding coefficients (Par.[0151-0155, 0238)).
`
`Re Claim 3. (Original) “IEC 23008”, Zhang, ‘BROSS-CE8”and “BROSS-VVC”
`
`disclose, the encoder according to claim 1,
`
`Zhang teaches each of these conditions, wherein in the conversion of the
`
`coefficient, when the value of the coefficient is zero, the value of the second coefficient
`
`is equal to the poszero value, when an absolute value of the coefficient is equal to or
`
`smaller than the poszero value, the value of the secondcoefficient is a value obtained
`
`by subtracting one from the absolute value of the coefficient, and when the absolute
`
`value of the coefficient is larger than the poszero value, the value of the second
`
`coefficient is equal to the absolute value of the coefficient (see all conditions at
`
`Par.[0145-0148)).
`
`Re Claim 4. (Original) “IEC 23008”, Zhang, “BROSS-CE8” and “BROSS-VVC”
`
`disclose, the encoderaccording to claim 1, wherein the plurality of coefficient
`
`information flags include:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/527,546
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 13
`
`Zhang teaches about,afirst flag indicating whether the value of the coefficientis
`
`zero or non-zero (the sig_coeff_flag for non-zero coefficients, Par.[0151]);
`
`a secondflag indicating whether an absolute value of the coefficient is greater
`
`than a certain value (the gt1_flag and gt2_flag, Par.[0156]); and
`
`a third flag indicating whether the coefficient is an odd numberor an even
`
`number (a parity flag, par_flag, Par.[0156)).
`
`Re Claim 5. (Original) “IEC 23008”, Zhang, “BROSS-CE8”and “BROSS-VVC”
`
`disclose, the encoder according to claim 1,
`
`Zhang teaches, wherein the current block includesa plurality of coefficients, and
`
`wherein the encoding of the plurality of coefficient information flags and the remainder
`
`value, or,
`
`the encoding of the value of the coefficient or the value of the second coefficient
`
`is performed for each of the plurality of coefficients (Par.[0145-0148)).
`
`Re Claim 6. (Original) “IEC 23008”, Zhang, “‘BROSS-CE8”and “BROSS-VVC”
`
`disclose,, the encoder according to claim 1,
`
`Zhang teaches, wherein the remainder value is a value to be used with the
`
`plurality of coefficient information flags to reconstruct the value of the coefficient (the
`
`remainder value information flag is used at decoder to reconstruct the current
`
`coefficient, Par.[0141-0145, 0150-0151, 0159] or remainder code line in Table at
`
`Pg.6, etc..,).
`
`Re Claim 7. (Currently Amended) This claim represents the encoding method
`
`implementing each and every limitation in the same order as the method claim 1, hence
`
`it is rejected on the same evidentiary probe mapped mutatis mutandis.
`
`Re Claims 8-12. (Original) These Claims represent the encoding method
`
`implementing each and everylimitation in the same order as the method claims 2-6
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/527,546
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 14
`
`respectively, hence are rejected on the same evidentiary probe mapped mutatis
`
`mutandis.
`
`Conclusion
`
`6.
`
`The prior art made of record and not relied upon, is considered pertinent to applicant's
`
`disclosure. See PTO-892 form. Applicant is required under 37 C.F.R. 1.111(c) to consider
`
`these references when respondingto this action.
`
`Anyinquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to DRAMOS KALAPODASwhosetelephone numberis
`
`(571)272-4622. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
`
`Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video
`
`conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-basedcollaboration tool. To schedule an
`
`interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request
`
`(AIR) at http:/Avwww.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's
`
`supervisor, David Czekaj can be reached on 571-272-7327. The fax phone numberfor
`
`the organization wherethis 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
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/527,546
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 15
`
`you have questions on accessto 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.
`
`/DRAMOS KALAPODAS/
`
`DRAMOS . KALAPODAS
`Primary Examiner
`Art Unit 2487
`
`