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
`
`17/582,950
`
`01/24/2022
`
`Che-Wei KUO
`
`735256.447C1
`
`1139
`
`Seed IP Law Group LLP/Panasonic (PIPCA)
`701 5th Avenue, Suite 5400
`Seattle, WA 98104
`
`TORRENTE, RICHARD T
`
`ART UNIT
`
`2485
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`09/28/2023
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`Thetime 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*
`1-14 is/are pending in the application.
`)
`Claim(s)
`5a) Of the above claim(s) ___ is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`Cj} Claim(s)
`is/are allowed.
`Claim(s) 1-14 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://Awww.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 1/24/22 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)1) 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
`1.2) Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.2 Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.4.) 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)
`
`(LJ Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) (J Other:
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mail Date 20230921
`
`Application No.
`Applicant(s)
`47/582,950
`KUO etal.
`
`Office Action Summary Art Unit|AIA (FITF) StatusExaminer
`RICHARD T TORRENTE
`2485
`Yes
`
`
`
`-- The MAILING DATEof this 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 1/24/22.
`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)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: 17/582,950
`Art Unit: 2485
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AlA or AIA Status
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined underthe
`
`first inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Information Disclosure Statement
`
`The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/24/22 is/are in compliance
`
`with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statementis being
`
`considered by the examiner.
`
`Specification
`
`The lengthy specification has not been checkedto the extent necessary to determine the
`
`presenceof all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any
`
`errors of which applicant may become awarein the specification.
`
`The drawings were received on 1/24/22, These drawings are acceptable.
`
`Drawings
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`1.
`
`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 ofrejection if the prior art
`
`relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same undereitherstatus.
`
`2.
`
`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 of thistitle, if the differences
`between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/582,950
`Art Unit: 2485
`
`Page 3
`
`would have been obvious before the effectivefiling 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.
`
`3.
`
`Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Misraetal.
`
`(US 2022/0248007)in view of Li et al. (US 2016/0234492).
`
`Regarding claim 1, Misra discloses an encoder (see 200 in fig. 6), comprising: circuitry;
`
`and memory coupledto the circuitry (e.g. see ¢ [0138]); wherein the circuitry, in operation:
`
`generatesa first coefficient value by applying a CCALF (cross componentadaptive loop
`
`filtering) process (see 412 in fig. 11A) to a first reconstructed image sample of a luma
`
`component (see 402 in fig. 11A); generates a second coefficient value by applying an ALF
`
`(adaptive loopfiltering) process (see 410 in fig. 11A) to a second reconstructed image sample
`
`of achroma component (see 404in fig. 11A); generates a third coefficient value (see “+” of Cb
`
`in fig. 11A) by adding the first coefficient value to the second coefficient value; encodesa third
`
`reconstructed image sample of the chroma componentusing the third coefficient value (see
`
`“Filter Data” and 218 in fig. 6); writing a first parameter into a sequence parameter set (see
`
`sps_cross_component_alf_enabled_flag in Table 3; e.g. see | 0186]); writing a third parameter
`
`into a slice headerin responseto the value of the first parameter being 1 (see
`
`slice_cross_component_alf_cb_enabled_flag in J [0191]; e.g. see § 0186]); and writing a fourth
`
`parameterinto a coding unit in responseto a value of the third parameter being 1 (see
`
`slice_cross_component_cb_coeff_data in Table 3), the fourth parameterindicatingafilter to be
`
`used in the CCALF process (seefigs. 14A-15D; e.g. see ¢ [0180)).
`
`Although Misra discloses implementing a second parameterin responseto a value of
`
`the first parameter being 1 (see 422C upon 404 enabledin fig. 12B), it is noted that Misra does
`
`not provide the particular wherein the implementing includes writing the second parameterinto a
`
`parametersetof a picture, and the fourth parameteris in the coding tree unit.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/582,950
`Art Unit: 2485
`
`Page 4
`
`However,Li disclosesthat it is well-known in adaptive loopfiltering wherein the
`
`implementing includes writing the second parameter into a parameterset of a picture (see 602
`
`in fig. 6, wherein a CTU is a picture containing parameter set of ALF), and the fourth parameter
`
`is in the coding tree unit (see 602in fig. 6).
`
`Given the teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art before the effectivefiling date to incorporate Li teachings of ALF signaling into Misra CCALF
`
`signaling for the benefit of improving ALF coding efficiency (e.g. see J [0089]-[0090)).
`
`Regarding claims 2, 5, 8 and 11, Misra discloses wherein, the first reconstructed image
`
`sample is located adjacent to the second reconstructed image sample (see neighbor in 602 in
`
`fig. 6).
`
`Regarding claims 3, 6, 9 and 12, Misra discloses wherein the circuitry, in operation, sets
`
`the first coefficient value to zero in responseto the first coefficient value being less than 64 (e.g.
`
`see ¥ [0182]. Clipping is commonly performing using rounding ofright-shifting operations. By
`
`shifting bits to the right, the clipped value can bezeroif the original value is small and the
`
`number of shifted bits is high. Thus, it is obvious that an original value below 64 is converted
`
`into zero after a clipping operation).
`
`Regarding claim 4, the claim(s) recite analogous limitations to claim 1, and is/are
`
`therefore rejected on the same premise.
`
`Furthermore, Misra discloses a blocksplitter (see CTU and CU in fig. 1), which, in
`
`operation, splits a first image into a plurality of blocks; an intra predictor (see 212 in fig. 6),
`
`which, in operation, predicts blocks includedin the first image, using reference blocks included
`
`in the first image (see inputs to 212 in fig. 6); an inter predictor (see 214 in fig. 6), which, in
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/582,950
`Art Unit: 2485
`
`Page 5
`
`operation, predicts blocks includedin the first image, using reference blocks included in a
`
`second image different from the first image (see inputs to 214 in fig. 6); a loop filter (see 216 in
`
`fig. 6), which, in operation, filters blocks includedin the first image; a transformer(see 204in fig.
`
`6), which, in operation, transforms a prediction error between an original signal and a prediction
`
`signal generated by the intra predictor or the inter predictor (see 202 in fig. 6), to generate
`
`transform coefficients; a quantizer (see 206in fig. 6), which, in operation, quantizes the
`
`transform coefficients to generate quantized coefficients; and an entropy encoder(see 218 in
`
`fig. 6), which, in operation, variably encodes the quantized coefficients to generate an encoded
`
`bitstream including the encoded quantized coefficients and control information (see inputs
`
`leading to 218 in fig. 6)
`
`Regarding claim 7, the claim(s) recite a decoder(see 124 in fig. 5) with analogous
`
`limitations to claim 4, and is/are therefore rejected on the same premise.
`
`Regarding claim 10, the claim(s) recite a decoding apparatus (see 124in fig. 5) with
`
`analogous limitations to claim 1, and is/are therefore rejected on the same premise.
`
`Regarding claim 13, the claim(s) recite a method with analogous limitations to claim 1,
`
`and is/are therefore rejected on the same premise.
`
`Regarding claim 14, the claim(s) recite a method with analogous limitations to claim 7,
`
`and is/are therefore rejected on the same premise.
`
`Citation of Pertinent Art
`
`The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
`
`disclosure.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 17/582,950
`Art Unit: 2485
`
`Page 6
`
`1.
`
`He et al. (US 2018/0220138), discloses chroma coding using cross component adaptive
`
`coding.
`
`Conclusion
`
`Anyinquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner
`
`should be directed to RICHARD T TORRENTE whosetelephone numberis (571)270-3702. The
`
`examiner can normally be reached M-F: 6:45-3:15 pm.
`
`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 AutomatedInterview Request(AIR) at
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
`
`supervisor, Jay Patel can be reached on (571) 272-2988. The fax phone numberfor the
`
`organization where this 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 Centeris 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:/Awww.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about
`
`filing 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.
`
`/RICHARD T TORRENTE/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2485
`
`