Ex Parte Mathew et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Aug 22, 2016

13005665 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 22, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
13/005,665 01/13/2011
23494 7590 08/24/2016
TEXAS INSTRUMENTS IN CORPORA TED
P 0 BOX 655474, MIS 3999
DALLAS, TX 75265
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
ManuMathew
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
TI-68940 3014
EXAMINER
ZHOU, ZHIHAN
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2482
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
08/24/2016 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):
uspto@ti.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte MANU MATHEW and SUMIT KANDPAL
Appeal2015-004841
Application 13/005,665
Technology Center 2400
Before CAROLYN D. THOMAS, JEFFREYS. SMITH, and
TERRENCE W. MCMILLIN, Administrative Patent Judges.
SMITH, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appeal2015-004841
Application 13/005,665
STATEivIENT OF THE CASE
This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner's final
rejection of claims 1---6. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b ).
We reverse.
Representative Claim
1. A method of scalable video data encoding comprising the
steps of:
encoding a video in groups of pictures in a base layer resolution
and refresh rate;
encoding the video in groups of pictures in an enhanced layer
resolution and refresh rate, at least one of the enhanced layer
resolution or refresh rate greater than the corresponding base layer
resolution or refresh rate;
determining a key picture for each group of pictures;
forming a combined key picture from a corresponding base
layer key picture and a corresponding enhanced layer key picture for
at least one of the groups of pictures; and
substituting the combined key picture for the corresponding
base layer key picture and the corresponding enhanced layer key
picture in an output video data stream.
Prior Art
Li US 2011/0122945 Al May 26, 2011
Feng Wu et al., Efficient and Universal Scalable Video Coding, IEEE
ICIP 2002, pp. 37--40 (2002).
2
Appeal2015-004841
Application 13/005,665
Examiner's Rejection
Claims 1---6 stand rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Li and Wu.
ANALYSIS
Claim 1 recites:
forming a combined key picture from a corresponding
base layer key picture and a corresponding enhanced layer key
picture for at least one of the groups of pictures; and
substituting the combined key picture for the
corresponding base layer key picture and the corresponding
enhanced layer key picture in an output video data stream.
The Examiner finds the scope of "forming a combined key picture,"
as recited in claim 1, encompasses Wu's predicted picture formed using a
quality enhancement layer picture and base layer picture. See Ans. 11.
Appellants contend the key pictures of Wu are not combined, therefore, an
individual key picture can be dropped; which means the dropped key picture
is not contained in the output video stream. App. Br. 10.
We agree with Appellants. The Examiner's finding shows that Wu
utilizes two separate key pictures to predict a next picture. However, the
Examiner has not shown the predicted picture of Wu is a key picture. Nor
has the Examiner shown that the predicted picture of Wu is substituted for
the combined key picture "in an output video data stream," as recited in
claim 1. For example, Section 2 of Wu teaches the enhancement layers are
optional, and the bitstream of every enhancement layer can be arbitrarily
truncated, providing flexible bit rate scalability, but how to control the
drifting errors is still under study. In contrast, the combined key picture of
claim 1 combines key pictures across layers. As a result, the enhanced layer
3
Appeal2015-004841
Application 13/005,665
key picture cannot be dropped according to bit stream rules, which means
there is no drift that propagates, but, a disadvantage is reducing bit rate
adaptation (see Spec. 14:1-18). Thus, the step of"forming a combined key
picture" recited in claim 1 produces the opposite result of providing flexible
bit rate scalability while propagating drift errors as taught by Wu. We find
Wu's use of two separate key pictures to predict a next picture does not
teach "forming a combined key picture," as recited in claim 1.
The Examiner also cites the up-sampled base layer picture of Li as
teaching "forming a combined key picture" as recited in claim 1. Ans. 12.
However, the up-sampled picture is not combined with another picture.
Here too, the up-sampled base layer picture is created by the decoder when
the enhancement layer picture is dropped. Li i-fi-121-22. The Examiner has
not persuasively explained how an up-sampled base layer teaches "forming a
combined key picture from a corresponding base layer key picture and a
corresponding enhanced layer key picture," as recited in claim 1.
We do not sustain the rejection of independent claim 1under35
U.S.C. § 103. Claims 2-6 either contain or depend from a claim containing
a limitation similar to that recited in claim 1 for which the rejection fails.
DECISION
The rejection of claims 1---6 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable
over Li and Wu is reversed.
REVERSED
4