UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`13/792,704
`
`03/11/2013
`
`Toru MATSUNOBU
`
`201370386151
`
`1871
`
`52349
`
`759°
`
`05/23/20”
`
`WENDEROTH, LIND & PONACK L.L.P.
`1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW
`Suite 500
`
`Washington DC 20036
`
`LOTF1' KYLE M
`
`ART UNIT
`2489
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`05/23/2019
`
`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 @ wenderothcom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`0/7709 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`13/792,704
`Examiner
`KYLE M LOTFI
`
`Applicant(s)
`MATSUNOBU et al.
`Art Unit
`AIA (FITF) Status
`2489
`No
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 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 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing
`date of this communication.
`|f 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).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 12—04—2018.
`[:1 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a)D This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)
`
`This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] 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 Expat/7e Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`5)
`Claim(s)
`
`1—2,4,6—1O and 12—16 is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`E] Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) 1—2,4,6—1O and 12—16 is/are rejected.
`
`[:1 Claim(s)
`
`is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[j Claim(s)
`9
`* If any claims have been determined aflowabie. 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
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`10)[:] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11)[:] The drawing(s) filed on
`
`is/are: a)D accepted or b)l:] 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:
`
`a)D All
`
`b)I:J Some**
`
`c)C] None of the:
`
`1.[:] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.[:] 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)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`2) D Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date_
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) C] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) CI Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20190207
`
`

`

`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-AIA first to invent provisions.
`
`Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
`
`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 CFR 1.17(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 10/05/2018 has been entered.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-9, filed 10/05/2018, with respect to the rejection of claim(s)
`
`1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 14, and 15 under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) have been fully considered and are
`
`persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. Specifically, the examiner is persuaded that
`
`the combination of Chong in view of Minoo does not disclose: ”i) determining, for each of current pixels
`
`included in the current region, whether or not the current pixel is a neighboring pixel positioned within a
`
`predetermined distance from a boundary between the current region and the neighboring region;”
`
`However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the newly found
`
`prior art, Suino, US 20040013310 A1.
`
`However, the examiner maintains that the prior art discloses the further elements of the
`
`amended claims.
`
`The applicant argues with respect to claim 1:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 3
`
`Based on a review of Chong, the reference at best discloses or suggests coding a merge
`
`instruction in the case that offset information of neighbor partitions is the same as the
`
`offset information of the current partition; and coding one of the prediction instructions
`
`in the case that the offset information of the neighbor partitions is not the same as the
`
`offset information of the current partition.
`
`The examiner agrees with this assessment. Chong discloses checking the offset information, i.e.
`
`”determining whether or not the first offset information is the same as second offset information for the
`
`SAC for a neighboring region of the current region;”, but takes different steps from those claimed in
`
`response to this check, for which the examiner has cited Minoo. The applicant further argues with
`
`respect to claim 1:
`
`Based on a review of Minoo, the reference only discloses interpolation of a pixel rather
`
`than interpolation of an offset value, as recited in independent claims 1 and 9. In other
`
`words, Minoo fails to disclose interpolation of an offset value for the sample adaptive
`
`offset (SAO).
`
`The examiner disagrees, however, that Minoo fails to disclose interpolation of an offset value
`
`for the SAC. Minoo discloses in [0130] using multipass SAO filtering in which SAO pixel values are in
`
`turn used to interpolate a neighbor pixel value. Minoo discloses in [0073] that the interpolated pixel
`
`value operates as a limit defined by a function (e.g. average) of its neighbors.
`
`In the instance where
`
`multipass SAO is used, these neighbors contain SAO values themselves, from a previous pass or passes.
`
`Thereby the third offset value is interpolated from neighboring offset values in the case of multipass
`
`SAO.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 4
`
`Minoo discloses interpolation of ”decoded+deblocked+SAO values”, as in [0130], which includes
`
`an SAO value, but which also includes a deblocked pixel value. The examiner however maintains that by
`
`disclosing interpolation of ”decoded+deblocked+SAO values”, Minoo is perform SAO interpolation
`
`combined with edge pixel value interpolation, while the claimed invention only explicitly requires
`
`performing interpolation of SAO values
`
`In this context, it is important to note that Minoo discloses in [0134]: ”Additionally, it should be
`
`appreciated that any of the E0 and BO modifications may be applied as part of the multipass process.”
`
`These aspects of Minoo taken together disclose performing SAO interpolation between pixel locations
`
`adjacent to a current region, in order to obtain an offset value for the current region.
`
`Additionally, the examiner notes that, because claims 1 and 9, and their dependent claims are
`
`directed to method claims, the limitations of claim steps based on contingent scenarios are not required
`
`if the scenario does not occur.
`
`Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness
`
`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 Chang et al., U.S. Publication 2012/0287988 A1, "Chong", in view of Suino, US
`
`2004/0013310 A1, in view of Minoo et al., US 2013/0177068 A1,.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 5
`
`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 11-17, ”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, [or each of regions of the image, offset information for a sample adaptive offset
`
`(SAO) to be commonly used in a same region (See figure 9, step 120, as described in lines 7-10 of
`
`[0103].);
`
`determining whether or not the first offset information for the SAO for a current region is the
`
`same as second offset information for the SAO for 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:
`
`when the first offset information is different from the second offset information,
`
`(i) determining, for each of current pixels included in the current region, whether or not the
`
`current pixel is a neighboring pixel positioned within a predetermined distance from a boundary
`
`between the current region and the neighboring region
`
`However, Suino discloses in an analogous prior art reference for suppressing boundary tile
`
`distortion making a determination as to whether a current pixel of the pixels within a tile is within a
`
`pretermined distance from the tile boundary, and using this determination as the basis for where to
`
`apply a low-pass filter for suppressing tile boundary distortion, as disclosed in [0281].
`
`It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant’s
`
`effective filing date to incorporate into the Chong teaching, disclosed in Suino, of using the criteria of a
`
`predetermined distance between tile boundaries as the basis for determining where to apply a sample
`
`adaptive offset filter of the type used in Chong, because the tile/region boundary artifacts, are known to
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 6
`
`have properties which depend on their distance from a region boundary artifacts, such that weighting a
`
`strength of the filter based on distance from a region/tile boundary would lead to a more effective
`
`distortion of suppression while preserving video quality than would indiscriminate application (See
`
`Suino [0249]—[0250].)
`
`(ii) when the current gixel is the neighboring pixel, determining a third offset value for the SAO
`
`by interpolating a first offset value for the SAO included in the first offset information and a second
`
`offset value for the SAO included in the second offset information ([0069] discloses that interpolation
`
`of a current offset | 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.);
`
`(iii) adding the third offset value to a reconstructed signal of the neighboring pixel, 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, 3*0, in the manner of
`
`fig. 7 for edge offset.), and
`
`(iv) when the current pixel is not the neighboring pixel, 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, if 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, which is a third 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
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 7
`
`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]).
`
`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 Suino, 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).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 8
`
`Regarding claim 4, the combination of Chong, in view of Suino, 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 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 Suino, 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 Suino, 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
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 9
`
`weightingfactors (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 ofcoding an image on a per-
`
`region basis, the image coding method comprising (See [0033], lines 11-17, ”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, for each of regions for the image, offset information for a sample adaptive offset
`
`(5A0) to be commonly used in a same region (See figure 9, step 120, as described in lines 7-10 of
`
`[0103].);
`
`determining whether or not first offset information for the SAO for a current region is the
`
`same as second information for the SAO between for 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:
`
`when the first offset information is different from the second offset information,
`
`(i) determining, for each of current pixels included in the current region, whether or not the
`
`current pixel is a neighboring pixel positioned within a predetermined distance from a boundary
`
`between the current region and the neighboring region
`
`However, Suino discloses in an analogous prior art reference for suppressing boundary tile
`
`distortion making a determination as to whether a current pixel of the pixels within a tile is within a
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 10
`
`pretermined distance from the tile boundary, and using this determination as the basis for where to
`
`apply a low-pass filter for suppressing tile boundary distortion, as disclosed in [0281].
`
`It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the applicant’s
`
`effective filing date to incorporate into the Chong teaching, disclosed in Suino, of using the criteria of a
`
`predetermined distance between tile boundaries as the basis for determining where to apply a sample
`
`adaptive offset filter of the type used in Chong, because the tile/region boundary artifacts, are known to
`
`have properties which depend on their distance from a region boundary artifacts, such that weighting a
`
`strength of the filter based on distance from a region/tile boundary would lead to a more effective
`
`distortion of suppression while preserving video quality than would indiscriminate application (See
`
`Suino [0249]—[0250].)
`
`(ii) when the current pixel is the neighboring pixel, determining a third offset value for the SAO
`
`by interpolating a first offset value for the SAO included in the first offset information and a second
`
`offset value for the SAO included in the second offset information, ([0069] discloses that interpolation
`
`of a current offset | 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.)
`
`(iii) adding the third offset value to a reconstructed signal of the neighboring pixel, 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
`
`(iv) when the current pixel is not the neighboring pixel, adding the first offset value to a
`
`reconstructed signal of the current pixel and when the first offset information is the same as the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 11
`
`second offset information, adding the first off set value to the reconstructed signal of the current pixel.
`
`(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
`
`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 Suino 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
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 12
`
`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
`
`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 Suino 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 11, 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).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 13
`
`Regarding claim 15, the combination of Chong, in view of Suino, 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
`
`weightingfactors (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(3) as being unpatentable over
`
`Chong, in view of Suino, 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 Suino, 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 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
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 13/792,704
`Art Unit: 2489
`
`Page 14
`
`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 Suino, 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]).
`
`Conclusion
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
`
`should be directed to KYLE M LOTFI whose telephone number is (571)272-8762. The examiner can
`
`normally be reached on 9:00-5:00.
`
`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.
`
`