www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and TrademarkOffice
`Address; COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`16/593, 186
`
`10/04/2019
`
`Ryuichi KANOH
`
`735256.423C1
`
`2311
`
`Seed IP Law Group LLP/Panasonic (PIPCA)
`701 5th Avenue, Suite 5400
`Seattle, WA 98104
`
`BRUMFIELD, SHANIKA M
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2487
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`04/02/2021
`
`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):
`USPTOeAction @ SeedIP.com
`
`pairlinkdktg @seedip.com
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`7-18 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`5a) Of the above claim(s) ___ is/are withdrawn from consideration.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) 7-18 is/are rejected.
`S)
`) © Claim(s)____is/are objected to.
`Cj) Claim(s
`are subjectto restriction and/or election requirement
`)
`S)
`* 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 04 October 2019 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)¥) All
`1.4) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.2) 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)
`
`2) (J Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) (J Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`(Qj Other:
`
`4)
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20210326
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`16/593, 186
`KANOH etal.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF) StatusExaminer
`SHANIKA M BRUMFIELD
`2487
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEofthis communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLYIS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of 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 RCE filed 05 January 2021.
`C) A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/werefiled on
`
`2a)L) This action is FINAL. 2b)¥)This action is non-final.
`3)02 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\0) 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: 16/593,186
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 2
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined
`
`under the 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 been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action
`
`has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05
`
`January 2021 has been entered.
`
`Responseto Arguments
`
`3.
`
`Applicant's arguments with respect to claim(s) 7 - 18 have been considered but
`
`are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in
`
`the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the
`
`argument.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`4.
`
`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
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/593,186
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 3
`
`rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be
`
`the same under either status.
`
`5.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all
`
`obviousnessrejections setforth 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 beforethe 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.
`
`6.
`
`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 between the prior art and the claims at issue.
`
`3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
`
`4. Considering objective evidence presentin the application indicating
`
`obviousness or nonobviousness.
`
`7.
`
`Claims 7 - 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
`
`Norkin et al. (US 2013/0329814) (hereinafter Norkin), as cited by applicant in view
`
`of Rusanovskyy (US 2016/028219) (hereinafter Rusanovskyy) in view of
`
`Narroschkeetal. (US 2014/0233659) (hereinafter Narroschke).
`
`Regarding claims 7 and 13, Norkin teaches a decoder, and a decoding method
`
`comprising:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/593,186
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 4
`
`-
`
`processing circuitry; and a memory coupled to the processing circuitry, wherein,
`
`using the memory,the processing circuitry is configured to:
`
`o
`
`change values of pixels in a first block and a second blocktofilter a
`
`boundary between the first block and the second block(e.g. Figs. 2 and
`
`6, and pars. 42 and 130: depicting and describing that the system
`
`modifies pixel values of neighboring blocks [element s41], then
`
`performs deblocking filtering over block boundaries of neighboring
`
`blocks, neighboring blocksis the equivalent of the first block and the
`
`second block, and wherein modifying pixel values is the equivalent
`
`of changing valuesofpixels),
`
`o using clipping such that change amounts of the respective values are
`
`within respective clip widths (e.g. pars. 136 — 137: depicting and
`
`describing that they system clips the change amounts such that the
`
`respective values are within respective thresholds of clip widths),
`
`othe pixels in the first block and the second block being arranged along a
`
`straight line across the boundary (e.g. Figs. 2A and 2B, and par. 50:
`
`describing that the pixels of the first block [element 10], and pixels of
`
`the second block [element 20] are arranged along a line across the
`
`boundary [element1]),
`
`o wherein, in changing the values of the pixels, the processing circuitry is
`
`configured to (i) calculate a first change value of a first value, the first
`
`value being one of the respective values of pixels in the first block and the
`
`second block, and(il) in response to a first change amount between the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/593,186
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 5
`
`first value and the first changed value being notwithinafirst clip width, the
`
`first clip width being one of the clip widths, clipping the first change
`
`amount to the first clip width (e.g. pars. 136 — 137: describing that the
`
`system calculates a change value of one of the valuesin the block to
`
`be filtered, the system then clipping the change value to be within a
`
`clip width, the clip width being one of a plurality of clip widths,in
`
`responseto the change value not being within the clip width) , and
`
`o wherein the pixels include type one pixels and type twopixels different
`
`from the type one pixels (e.g. pars. 45 — 46: describing that each pixel
`
`includes luminance and chrominance pixel components).
`
`Norkin does not explicitly teach:
`
`- wherein the respective clip widths for the type one pixels in the first block and the
`
`second block are selected to be asymmetrical with respect to the boundary, and
`
`- wherein the filtering is selected to be asymmetrical based on blocksizes of the
`
`first block and the second block
`
`Narroschke, however, teaches a decoder and decoding method:
`
`- wherein the respective clip widths for the type one pixels in the first block and the
`
`second block are selected to be asymmetrical with respect to the boundary(e.g.
`
`pars. 136 — 141: describing that the system applies clip widths
`
`asymmetrically across the boundary by using respective thresholds Tc1,
`
`Tc2, or Tc3 for controlling the maximum and minimum clip width).
`
`Rusanovskyy, however, teaches an decoder, and decoding method:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/593,186
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 6
`
`- wherein the filtering is selected to be asymmetrical based on blocksizes of the
`
`first block and the second block(e.g. Figs. 4 and 8, and pars. 90 — 92, and 109
`
`-— 113: depicting and describing that the system determines whether
`
`deblockfilter strength applied to the right block and the left block with
`
`respect to a boundaryis the sameor different based on whether the right
`
`block and the left block have the sameor different block sizes, wherein the
`
`right block and theleft block are the equivalent of the first block and the
`
`second block, and wherein applying the same filtering strength or a
`
`different filtering strength is the equivalent of the respective clip widthsin
`
`the first block and the second block being selected to be symmetrical or
`
`asymmetrical), and
`
`It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the
`
`teachings of Norkin by adding the teachings of Narroschkein order to apply
`
`asymmetrical clip widths, and by adding the teachings of Rusanovskyyin order for the
`
`respective thresholds for the first block and the second block to be selected to be
`
`symmetrical or asymmetrical with respect to the boundary based on block sizes of the
`
`first block and the secondblock. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been
`
`motivated to make such a modification because the modification allows the system to
`
`adjust subjective quality by controlling the ratio between strong, weak or no filtering
`
`across a boundary (Narroschke, e.g. par. 117: describing the desire to adjust
`
`subjective quality by controlling the ratio of filtering across a boundary), and
`
`because the modification allowsfor efficient sampling in a deblocking filtering process
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/593,186
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 7
`
`(Rusanovskyy, e.g. par. 4: describing a desire to provide a moreefficient
`
`sampling method in a deblocking filtering process).
`
`Turning to claims 8 and 14, Norkin, Rusanovskyy, and Narroschke teachall of the
`
`limitations of claims 7 and 13, respectively. Norkin further teaches:
`
`- wherein the type one pixels are luma pixels (e.g. pars. 45 — 46: describing that
`
`the type one pixels are luma or luminancepixels).
`
`Regarding claims 9 and 15, Norkin, Rusanovskyy, and Narroschke teachall of the
`
`limitations of claims 7, and 13, respectively, as discussed above. Norkin further teaches:
`
`- wherein the type one pixels are chroma pixels (e.g. pars. 45 — 46: describing
`
`that the type one pixels are chrominancepixels values).
`
`Turning to claims 10, and 16, Norkin, Rusanovskyy, and Narroschketeachall of the
`
`limitations of claims 7, and 13, respectively, as discussed above. Norkin further teaches:
`
`- wherein the clip widths for the type two pixels in the first block and the second
`
`block are symmetrical with respect to the boundary(e.g. pars. 136 — 137:
`
`describing that the system calculates a change value of one of the values
`
`in the block to befiltered, the system then clipping the change value to be
`
`within a clip width, the clip width being oneof a plurality of clip widths, in
`
`responseto the change value not being within the clip width, the clip width
`
`being the sameacross a boundary).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/593,186
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 8
`
`Regarding claims 11, and 17, Norkin, Rusanovskyy, and Narroschke teachall of the
`
`limitations of claims 7, and 13, respectively, as discussed above. Norkin does not
`
`explicitly teach:
`
`- wherein at least one of the respective clip widths for the type one pixels located
`
`at respective positions in the first block is different from a clip width for the type
`
`one pixel located at a corresponding position in the second block with respectto
`
`the boundary.
`
`Narroschke, however, teaches a decoder and a decoding method:
`
`- wherein at least one of the respective clip widths for the type one pixels located
`
`at respective positions in the first block is different from a clip width for the type
`
`one pixel located at a corresponding position in the second block with respectto
`
`the boundary (e.g. pars. 136 — 141: describing that different clip width
`
`thresholds are used acrossthe block boundary).
`
`It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the
`
`teachings of Norkin by adding the teachings of Narroschkein order to apply
`
`asymmetrical clip widths. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to
`
`make such a modification because the modification allows the system to adjust
`
`subjective quality by controlling the ratio between strong, weakor no filtering across a
`
`boundary (Narroschke, e.g. par. 117: describing the desire to adjust subjective
`
`quality by controlling the ratio of filtering across a boundary).
`
`Turning to claims 12, and 18, Norkin, Rusanovskyy, and Narroschketeachall of the
`
`limitations of claims 7, and 13, respectively, as discussed above. Norkin further teaches:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/593,186
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 9
`
`- wherein the type one pixels in the first block include a first type one pixel located
`
`at a first position, and the type one pixels in the second block include a second
`
`type one pixel located at a second position corresponding to the first position with
`
`respect to the boundary, wherein the thresholds includeafirst threshold and a
`
`second threshold corresponding to the first type one pixel and the second type
`
`one pixel, respectively, and wherein the first threshold is different from the
`
`second threshold (e.g. Fig. 1, elements S1 and S2, and pars. 46, and 48 — 53:
`
`depicting and describing that pixel values of the first block are compared
`
`to the first threshold, corresponding pixel values of the second block are
`
`comparedto the second threshold, the first and second thresholds being
`
`different [see, e.g. Fig. 5, and pars. 126 — 127: depicting and describing that
`
`the threshold values are based on the quantization value of pixels in the
`
`first and second blocks, respectively, reasonably suggesting that thefirst
`
`and second threshold values are different], the thesholding being applied
`
`to the luminance componentof the pixels valuesin the first block and the
`
`corresponding luminance component ofpixel values in the second block
`
`[see, e.g. par. 46: describing that the filtering control is applied to the
`
`luminance componentof the pixels], wherein the luminance component is
`
`the equivalent of type onepixel).
`
`Norkin does not explicitly teach:
`
`- Wherein the thresholds corresponds toafirst clip width and a secondclip width,
`
`the first clip width being different from the second clip width.
`
`Narroschke, however, teaches a decoding method and decoder:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/593,186
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 10
`
`- Wherein the thresholds corresponds toafirst clip width and a secondclip width,
`
`the first clip width being different from the second clip width (e.g. pars. 136 —
`
`141: describing that different clip width thresholds are used across the
`
`block boundary).
`
`It therefore would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the
`
`teachings of Norkin by adding the teachings of Narroschkein order to apply
`
`asymmetrical clip widths. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to
`
`make such a modification because the modification allows the system to adjust
`
`subjective quality by controlling the ratio between strong, weakor no filtering across a
`
`boundary (Narroschke, e.g. par. 117: describing the desire to adjust subjective
`
`quality by controlling the ratio of filtering across a boundary).
`
`Conclusion
`
`8.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to SHANIKA M BRUMFIELD whosetelephone number is
`
`(571)270-3700. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:30 - 5 PM AWS.
`
`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:/Awww.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 number for
`
`the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 16/593,186
`Art Unit: 2487
`
`Page 11
`
`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 https://ppair-
`
`my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should 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.
`
`SHANIKA M. BRUMFIELD
`Examiner
`
`Art Unit 2487
`
`/SHANIKA M BRUMFIELD/
`Examiner, Art Unit 2487
`
`/Dave Czekaj/
`Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2487
`
`