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
`
`17/233,804
`
`04/19/2021
`
`Kiyofumi ABE
`
`2021-0678A
`
`4468
`
`UP
`Lind&
`Wenderoth,
`Wenderoth, Lind & Ponack, L.L.P.
`1025 Connecticut Avenue, NW
`Suite 500
`Washington, DC 20036
`
`BECKER,JOSEPH W
`
`2483
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`01/06/2022
`
`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`5a) Of the above claim(s) ___ is/are withdrawn from consideration.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.
`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 04/19/2021 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)Z) 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)X) All
`1.2 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)
`
`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) (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 20220101
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`17/233,804
`ABE etal.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF) StatusExaminer
`JOSEPH W BECKER
`2483
`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 04/19/2021.
`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: 17/233,804
`Art Unit: 2483
`
`Page 2
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA or AIA Status
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first
`
`inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`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-AlA 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 eitherstatus.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections
`
`set forth in this Office action:
`
`A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is
`not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102,if the differences between the claimed invention
`and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the
`effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinaryskill 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 for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C.
`
`103 are summarized as follows:
`
`1. Determining the scope and contents ofthe 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 present in the application indicating obviousness or
`
`nonobviousness.
`
`This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the
`
`examiner presumesthat the subject matter of the various claims was commonly ownedas of the
`
`effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised
`
`of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/233,804
`Art Unit: 2483
`
`Page 3
`
`was not commonly ownedas of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner
`
`to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art
`
`against the later invention.
`
`Claim 1-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. US
`
`2008/0304760from IDS in view of Ikai US 2016/0134869 from IDS.
`
`Lee discloses:
`
`1. and under similar rationale 11 and complementary rationale 6 and 12. An encoder,
`
`comprising: circuitry; and memory connected to the circuitry, wherein, in operation, the circuitry (0087):
`
`derives a correction parameter using only a neighboring reconstructed image that neighbors a
`
`processing unit which has a determined size and is located at an upper left of a current block to be
`
`processed in an image, among neighboring reconstructed images that neighbor the current block (Figs.
`
`2, 4; 0046-49; 0053)
`
`Lee does not explicitly disclose the following, however Ikai teaches performs correction
`
`processing of the current block based on the correction parameter derived, when the current block has
`
`a size larger than the determined size (0414-8; Fig. 27)
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinaryskill before the effective
`
`filing date to modify the reference(s) as above in order to when the blocksize is small, calculation load
`
`of the illumination compensation is high, so that, when illumination compensation for a small block in
`
`which calculation load is high is not performed, an effect of reducing an amountofcalculation for a
`
`worst casein the illumination compensation is achieved (Ikai 0418)
`
`2. and 7. The encoder according to claim 1, wherein, when the size of the current blockis larger
`
`than the determinedsize, the circuitry splits the current block into processing units each having the
`
`determinedsize, derives the correction parameter for the processing unit located at the upper left of
`
`the current block, and performs the correction processing of each of the processing units in the current
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/233,804
`Art Unit: 2483
`
`Page 4
`
`block commonly using the correction parameter derived for the processing unit (Figs. 2, 4; 0046-49;
`
`0053).
`
`3. and 8. The encoder according to claim 1, wherein, when the size of the current blockis larger
`
`than the determinedsize in local illumination compensation (LIC) processing in inter prediction, the
`
`circuitry derives an LIC correction parameter using a neighboring reconstructed image that neighbors
`
`the processing unit located at the upper left of the current block and a neighboring reconstructed block
`
`that neighbors a reference block corresponding to the processing unit located at the upper left, and
`
`performs correction processing by LIC processing of a prediction image for the current block using the
`
`LIC correction parameter derived (Figs. 2, 4; 0046-49; 0053).
`
`4. and 9. The encoder according to claim 1, wherein the determinedsize is a size of a pipeline
`
`processing unit (Figs. 2, 4; 0046-49; 0053).
`
`5. and 10. The encoderaccording to claim 1,
`
`Lee does not explicitly disclose the following, however Ikai teaches wherein the determined size
`
`is 64x64 pixels (0069; 0071).
`
`Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinaryskill before the effective
`
`filing date to modify the reference(s) as above in order to use more updated block sizes as technology
`
`advanceslike largest coding unit (Ikai 0069)
`
`Conclusion
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/233,804
`Art Unit: 2483
`
`Page 5
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
`
`should be directed to JOSEPH W BECKER whose telephone number is (571)270-7301. The examiner can
`
`normally be reached flexible usually 10-6.
`
`Examiner interviewsare available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a
`
`USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use
`
`the USPTO Automated Interview Request(AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor,
`
`Joseph G Ustaris can be reached on 5712727383. The fax phone numberfor the organization wherethis
`
`application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from
`
`Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To
`
`file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit
`
`https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and
`
`https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information aboutfiling in DOCX format. For additional
`
`questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like
`
`assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA)or
`
`571-272-1000.
`
`/JOSEPH W BECKER/
`Examiner, Art Unit 2483
`
`