DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA 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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 27 March 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 119 and 136 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 Objections
Claim 119 and 136 objected to because of the following informalities: claims 119 and 136 both disclose “the client device further being configured to” and “the method further comprising”, respectively, followed by a listing of additional limitations without the correct punctuation denoting a listing of the additional limitations. Namely, the claims configured to or comprising the additional limitations are not followed by a colon (:) to clearly present that a list of additional limitations follow the respective “further being configured to” and “further comprising” as claimed. to address this, “the client device further being configured to” of claim 119 should be amended to “the client device further being configured to:” and “the method further comprising” of claim 136 should be amended to “the method further comprising:”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
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 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 present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 119,136 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCarthy; Sean T. et al. (US 20160301957 A1) in view of HA; SangYoo et al. (US 20170244951 A1) in view of KATO; Yumiko et al. (US 20130235169 A1)
Regarding claim 119, McCarthy teaches,
A client device (¶52, and Fig. 2, “SMES 200”) for streaming, from a server, (¶52,49, and Fig. 2, SMES system 200 analyzes input “video data 102” from particular “IP multicast address” source to provide encoded video program streams as output from “data over cable service interface specification (DOCSIS)” DOCSIS PIPE 202 depicted in Fig. 2) media content (¶52, and Fig. 2, “SMES 200” including an “encoder pool 104” which ingests “one or more video program streams” 102 and a “statmux controller 108” depicted in Fig. 2) pertaining to a video using tiled streaming, (¶52, “ingesting one or more video program streams” to be encoded “at any point in time for a particular video quality”) the client device configured to:
obtain a media presentation description from the server, (¶52,46, Fig. 1 and 2, “statmux controller 108” maintaining video quality over time based on allocations of a “total bandwidth available for transmission” BWT 112 input to statmux controller 108 as depicted in fig. 1)
select media segments (¶52, “statmux controller 108” allocates total bandwidth to encoded videos by “encoder 106” of encoder pool 104 analyzed video data 102 “to determine how compressible the video data 102 would be to encode at any point in time for a particular target video quality”) out of a plurality of media segments (¶52 and Fig. 1-2, “one or more video program streams D1-DN 102” input to the encoders 106 of “encoder pool 104” depicted in Fig. 1 of a statistical multiplexing encoding system “SMES 200” depicted in Fig. 2) available on a server (¶52 and fig. 1, “encoder pool 104”) using the media presentation description, (¶52 and Fig. 1-2, “total statmux encoder pool 104 bandwidth” corresponds to “total bandwidth available for transmission” BWT 112 depicted in fig. 1)
retrieve the selected media segments (¶52, participating “encoded video program streams d1-dN 114”) from the server (¶52 and fig. 1, “input video data stream 102” ingested and turned into “encoded video program streams d1-dN 114” as depicted in Fig. 1) by sending to the server media request messages (¶52 and fig. 1, “compressibility metadata” that is compared by statmux controller 108 depicted in Fig. 1) requesting the selected media segments, (¶52, “allocates a portion of the total statmux encoder pool 104 bandwidth” to each of the encoded video program streams d1-dN 114”)
wherein the client device (¶52 and Fig. 2, “SMES 200” including a “statmux controller 108” as depicted in Fig. 2) is configured to perform the selection (¶52 and Fig. 2, “statmux controller 108” compares and allocates portions of “total statmux encoder pool 104 bandwidth BT” to encoded video program stream) so that the selected media segments: (¶52 and Fig. 2, statmux 108 allocates bandwidth to “encoded video program stream” 114 depicted in Fig. 2)
have a first portion (¶52, “a portion of the total statmux encoder pool 104 bandwidth” allocated to encoding video program stream 114) of the video encoded (¶52, statmux controller 108 “allocates a portion of the total statmux encoder pool 104 bandwidth” to the encoded video program stream) thereinto at a quality (¶52, “compressibility metadata” of the video encoder stream) increased compared to a spatial neighborhood of the first portion (¶52 and Fig. 2, statmux controller 108 “compares all of the compressibility metadata for all of the video program streams D1-DN 102” presented as adjacently piped data depicted in Fig. 2) or in a manner so that the spatial neighborhood of the first portion is not encoded into the selected media segments,
the client device further configured to (¶90-91,48, fig. 12 and 1, analysis tool 1200, depicted in fig. 12, in combination with “communicated data messages” and “metadata messages” used by the statmux controller 108 of the SMES 100 depicted in fig. 1)
send-out log messages, (¶91, “metadata messages” conveying information used by “encoders 106 or the statmux controller 108 in the encoding process”) the log messages (¶91, “metadata messages” conveying information used)
But does not explicitly teach,
spherical video using tiled streaming,
have a first portion of the spherical video encoded so that the first portion of the spherical video tracks a view section out of the spherical video,
present the view section to the user by means of decoding the selected media segments to obtain a decoded content and projecting the decoded content onto the view section to obtain view section content,
detect situations of a movement of the view section, liable to cause the view section to reach out of the first portion,
during the situations detected, perform a momentaneous measurement measuring a quality of the view section content to obtain a measurement metric,
send-out log messages, in addition to the media request messages, responsive to the situation being detected, the log messages indicating the measurement metric to an evaluation device.
However, Ha teaches additionally,
A client device for streaming, (¶37-39 and Fig. 3A, “VR video streaming system 100” depicted in fig. 3A) from a server, (¶37-39 and Fig. 3A, VR video streaming system 100 reading source video data from “VR content server 750” depicted in fig. 3A) media content (¶37-39 and Fig. 3A, VR video streaming system 100 reading “source video data”) pertaining to spherical video using tiled streaming, (¶37-39 and Fig. 3A, source video data that includes “multiple spherical image frame data”)
have a first portion (¶39 and Fig. 3B, “portion 302” corresponding to current FOV depicted in fig. 3B) of the spherical video encoded (¶39 and Fig. 3B, portion 302 of the “spherical frame image 301” depicted in fig. 3B) so that the first portion of the spherical video tracks a view section out of the spherical video, (¶39 and Fig. 3B, portion 302 of the spherical frame image 301 “corresponds to current FOV” depicted in fig. 3B)
decoding the selected media segments (¶48 and fig. 4, GPU of a video server may “parse and decode a source video” as depicted in fig. 4A) to obtain a decoded content (¶48 and fig. 4, parse and decode a source video as depicted in fig. 4A “to generate first spherical image frame data”)
send-out log messages (¶50 and Fig. 4, step 440 depicted in fig. 4 “first processor receives from the client device a first FOV change input V1 (512)”), in addition to the media request messages, (¶50 and fig. 5B, first processor receives “from a client device” a first FOV change input V1 (512) inserted “before post-processing frame #N (513)” as depicted in fig. 5B) responsive to a situation being detected, (¶50,46, and Fig. 4, step 440 depicted in fig. 4 “FOV change input” including “angle data indicating azimuth angles and pitch angles” that can reflect FOV change used in “converting the spherical image frame data”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the analytic management of McCarthy with the spherical image data of Ha which streams spherical image data that has a particular field of view. This allows for virtual reality streaming that can effectively utilize parallel computing.
Kato teaches additionally,
present the view section to the user by means of decoding the selected media segments (¶76,97, and fig. 7, “image processing unit 70” performs image processing on a 3D video image “transmitted from the image storage” to be displayed as an output of image processing unit 70 to “the display 80”) and projecting the decoded content onto the view section to obtain view section content, (¶77 and fig. 7, perform image processing for “displaying, on the display 80, one of the images for the right and left eyes as an image for the both right and left eyes”)
detect situations of a movement of the view section, (¶74-77 and fig. 5-7, “position gap detecting unit 60” detects, as a position gap, a difference between” position of the eye of the viewer with respect to the display 80 and the standard position of the viewer “exceeds a predetermined value”) liable to cause the view section to reach out of the first portion, (¶74,95, and fig. 9, position gap detecting unit 60 detects “calculates a gap between the standard position of the inner corner of the eye stored in the standard position storage unit 50 and the position of the inner corner of the eye detected by the inner corner detecting unit 30 (S150)” as part of s150 depicted in fig. 9)
during the situations detected, (¶95-96 and fig. 9, position gap detecting unit 60 detects whether or not the “position gap calculated in S150”, between the standard position and the position of the inner corner of the eye detected, is a position gap that exceeds a predetermined acceptable range (S160)” as part of s160 depicted in fig. 9) perform a momentaneous measurement measuring a quality of the view section content to obtain a measurement metric, (¶96 and fig. 9, “detects whether or not the position gap calculated in S150 is a position gap that exceeds a predetermined acceptable range (S160)” as part of s160 depicted in fig. 9)
send-out log messages, (¶96-97 and fig. 9, processing performed by the head-mounted display moving communicating to image processing unit 70 after position gap detection unit 60 detects “position gap exceeds the acceptable range (Yes in S160)”) responsive to the situation being detected, (¶97 and fig. 9 , “when there is a gap between the standard position of the inner corner of the eye and the position of the inner corner of the eye captured by the camera 10”) the log messages indicating the measurement metric (¶95-97 and fig. , position gap detecting unit 60 “calculates a gap between the standard postion” and the “position of the eye detected by the inner corner detection unit 30” communicated to image processing unit 70 and used for image processing as disclosed in fig. 9) to an evaluation device. (¶76,93-100, and fig. 5, “image processing unit 70” receiving “position gap” detection as depicted in fig. 5)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the analytic management of McCarthy with the spherical image data of Ha with the image processing of Kato which detects when the viewer’s range exceeds a threshold. This allows for higher accuracy in detection of a relative position gap, resulting in more accurate compensation for a gap in the image transformation processing.
Regarding claim 136, it is the method claim similar to the device claim 119,
McCarthy teaches additionally,
retrieving the selected media segments (¶52, participating “encoded video program streams d1-dN 114”) from the server, (¶52 and fig. 1, “input video data stream 102” ingested and turned into “encoded video program streams d1-dN 114” as depicted in Fig. 1) wherein the selection is performed (¶52, allocation of portions of the total bandwidth to each participating “encoded video program streams”) so that the selected media segments (¶52, participating “encoded video program streams d1-dN 114”) have a first portion of the video (¶52, participating “encoded video program streams d1-dN 114” allocated bandwidth)
Ha teaches additionally,
spherical video (¶37-39 and Fig. 3A, source video data that includes “multiple spherical image frame data”)
Refer to teaching of claim 119 to teach the additional limitations of claim 136.
Claim(s) 137-138 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCarthy; Sean T. et al. (US 20160301957 A1) in view of HA; SangYoo et al. (US 20170244951 A1) in view of KATO; Yumiko et al. (US 20130235169 A1) in view of Andrews; Carlton et al. (US 20130067524 A1)
Regarding claim 137, McCarthy with Ha with Kato teaches the limitations of claim 119,
McCarthy teaches additionally,
perform the momentaneous measurement measuring (¶45-47, each encoder 106A-106N “determine a measure of the bit rate required to produce an encoded video stream”) the quality of the video (¶45-47 and 52, “scene complexity or temporal variation” of a “temporal portion of the input video data stream” used as compressibility metadata of each “input video data stream 102” sent to “statmux controller 108”) as far as encoded (¶45-47,52, and Fig. 1, video data stream input to “encoders 106A-106N” depicted in Fig. 1, which encode portions of the “video data streams” at any point in time for a “particular target video quality”) into the selected media segments (¶45-47 and 52, encoders encode portions of the “video data streams” for output that is allocated portion of the “total statmux encoder pool 104 bandwidth” used to encode each “video program streams” 114)
Ha teaches additionally,
measuring the quality of the spherical video (¶44 and Fig. 4A, processor receives parsed “information relating to a first field of view (FOV)” for a “spherical image frame data representing a first spherical image frame of the video” depicted in Fig. 4A) as far as encoded into the selected media segments (¶44 and Fig. 4A, received parsed and decoded “source video” used to generate “first spherical image frame data”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the analytic management of McCarthy with the spherical image data of Ha with the image processing of Kato which streams spherical image data that has a particular field of view. This allows for virtual reality streaming that can effectively utilize parallel computing.
But does not explicitly teach,
measuring the quality of the video as far as visible in the view section during the movement of the view section.
However, Andrews teaches additionally,
measuring the quality of the video (¶39, selected area 814 “enhanced area input” around the recognized face 806a “displayed at a higher quality than the rest of the video image 804”) as far as visible in the view section (¶39, “video image 804 may be displayed on the IHS 304 with the face 806a” of the person 806 displayed at “higher quality than the rest of the video image 804”) during the movement of the view section. (¶39, facial recognition engine operable to “detect and/or track the face 806a such that the selected area 814 may move (e.g., in a direction A) on the video image 804” to continue to display “the face 806a of the person 806 at a higher quality than the rest of the video image 804”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the analytic management of McCarthy with the spherical image data of Ha with the image processing of Kato with the motion detection tracking of Andrews which can follow an area in a video image. This allows for increasing an image areas proportional resolution to increase while utilizing the same or less bandwidth.
Regarding claim 138, McCarthy with Ha with Kato teaches the limitations of claim 119,
McCarthy teaches additionally,
receive, from a measuring device, (¶45-47, each encoder 106A-106N) the momentaneous measurement measuring (¶45-47, each encoder 106A-106N “determine a measure of the bit rate required to produce an encoded video stream”) the quality of the video (¶45-47 and 52, “scene complexity or temporal variation” of a “temporal portion of the input video data stream” used as compressibility metadata of each “input video data stream 102” sent to “statmux controller 108”) as far as encoded (¶45-47,52, and Fig. 1, video data stream input to “encoders 106A-106N” depicted in Fig. 1, which encode portions of the “video data streams” at any point in time for a “particular target video quality”) into the selected media segments (¶45-47 and 52, encoders encode portions of the “video data streams” for output that is allocated portion of the “total statmux encoder pool 104 bandwidth” used to encode each “video program streams” 114) a
Ha teaches additionally,
measuring the quality of the spherical video (¶44 and Fig. 4A, processor receives parsed “information relating to a first field of view (FOV)” for a “spherical image frame data representing a first spherical image frame of the video” depicted in Fig. 4A) as far as encoded into the selected media segments (¶44 and Fig. 4A, received parsed and decoded “source video” used to generate “first spherical image frame data”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the analytic management of McCarthy with the spherical image data of Ha with the image processing of Kato which streams spherical image data that has a particular field of view. This allows for virtual reality streaming that can effectively utilize parallel computing.
But does not explicitly teach,
measuring the quality of the video as far as visible in the view section during the movement of the view section.
However, Andrews teaches additionally,
measuring the quality of the video (¶39, selected area 814 “enhanced area input” around the recognized face 806a “displayed at a higher quality than the rest of the video image 804”) as far as visible in the view section (¶39, “video image 804 may be displayed on the IHS 304 with the face 806a” of the person 806 displayed at “higher quality than the rest of the video image 804”) during the movement of the view section. (¶39, facial recognition engine operable to “detect and/or track the face 806a such that the selected area 814 may move (e.g., in a direction A) on the video image 804” to continue to display “the face 806a of the person 806 at a higher quality than the rest of the video image 804”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the analytic management of McCarthy with the spherical image data of Ha with the image processing of Kato with the motion detection tracking of Andrews which can follow an area in a video image. This allows for increasing an image areas proportional resolution to increase while utilizing the same or less bandwidth.
Claim(s) 122 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCarthy; Sean T. et al. (US 20160301957 A1) in view of HA; SangYoo et al. (US 20170244951 A1) in view of KATO; Yumiko et al. (US 20130235169 A1) in view of Wang; Ye-Kui et al. (US 20140193139 A1)
Regarding claim 122, McCarthy with Ha with Kato teaches the limitations of claim 119,
McCarthy teaches additionally,
send-out log messages (¶91, “metadata messages” conveying information used by “encoders 106 or the statmux controller 108 in the encoding process”) logging the momentaneous measurement (¶91,45-47, and 52, “metadata messages” indicating a measure of “complexity or temporal variation” of video data stream as a measure of “complexity or compressibility” conveyed as metadata used by statmux controller 108 indicating “complexity or compressibility”) measuring a quality of the video (¶45-47 and 52, “scene complexity or temporal variation” of a “temporal portion of the input video data stream” used as compressibility metadata of each “input video data stream 102” sent to “statmux controller 108”) as far as encoded (¶45-47,52, and Fig. 1, video data stream input to “encoders 106A-106N” depicted in Fig. 1, which encode portions of the “video data streams” at any point in time for a “particular target video quality”) into the selected media segments (¶45-47 and 52, encoders encode portions of the “video data streams” for output that is allocated portion of the “total statmux encoder pool 104 bandwidth” used to encode each “video program streams” 114)
Ha teaches additionally,
spherical video (¶37-39 and Fig. 3A, source video data that includes “multiple spherical image frame data”)
but does not explicitly teach,
a quality of the video as far as encoded into the selected media segments and as far as visible in the view section as a measure measuring a mean density of pixels falling into the view section at which the spherical video is encoded into the selected media segments.
However, Wang teaches additionally,
a quality of the video (¶198 and 202, process of video coding device to “determine a spatial resolution” the one or more depth views parsed of a parsed “3VC Depth Resolution box”) as far as encoded into the selected media segments (¶198 and 202, video coding device determine a spatial resolution of “a depth view included in multiview with depth media file” directly from a sample entry) and as far as visible in the view section (¶198 and 202, spatial resolution of “3VC Depth Resolution box” of the depth view) as a measure measuring a mean density (¶202, “spatial resolution”) of pixels falling into the view section (¶202 and 126, “spatial resolution” of a depth view in a newly defined “3VC Depth Resolution Box” sample entry) at which the video (¶202, 198, and 126, “depth view” included in multiview with depth media file 142 “containing multiview video content”) is encoded into the selected media segments. (¶198 and 202, video coding device determine a spatial resolution of “a depth view included in multiview with depth media file” directly from a sample entry as part of a “track of video data” containing one or more depth views)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the analytic management of McCarthy with the spherical image data of Ha with the image processing of Kato with the multiview depth processing of Wang which determines a measurement of a box within a depth view. This allows for directly sampling from the depth views, which can improve efficiency and flexibility of stored video streams containing multiple coded depth views.
Claim(s) 123,125,127 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCarthy; Sean T. et al. (US 20160301957 A1) in view of HA; SangYoo et al. (US 20170244951 A1) in view of KATO; Yumiko et al. (US 20130235169 A1) in view of Wang; Ye-Kui et al. (US 20140193139 A1) in view of Bruls; Wilhelmus Hendrikus Alfonsus (US 20140285623 A1)
Regarding claim 123, McCarthy with Ha with Kato with Wang teaches the limitations of claim 122,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 123,
However, Bruls teaches additionally,
the measure measures the mean density of pixels (¶51, “pixel values” averaged across section of the grid) by averaging the pixel density (¶51, pixel values are “averaged”) in a spatially uniform manner (¶51, “image is subdivided in a grid” and pixel values are “averaged across one section of the grid”) with respect to a pixel grid of pictures (¶51, “image is subdivided in a grid” by a “grid filter”) coded into the selected media segments. (¶51, “image is subdivided in a grid”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the analytic management of McCarthy with the spherical image data of Ha with the image processing of Kato with the multiview depth processing of Wang with the grid filtering of Bruls which subdivides an image in a grid. This allows for filtering of an image to reduce the amount of calculations.
Regarding claim 125, McCarthy with Ha with Kato with Wang teaches the limitations of claim 122,
Wang teaches additionally,
the send-out log messages (¶202, “3VC Depth Resolution Box 170” parsed by decapsulation module 29) indicate how the measure measures by (¶202, 3VC Depth Resolution Box used to “determine a spatial resolution”) the mean density of pixels (¶202 and 126, spatial resolution of a depth view in a newly defined “3VC Depth Resolution Box” sample entry)
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 125,
However, Bruls teaches additionally,
the send-out log messages (¶53-62, “combining function” outputting “second depth map Z2” which is a filtered depth map) indicate whether the measure (¶45,51, and 62, “filtered depth map” Z2 having had applied a “bilateral grid filter” to the image) measures the mean density of pixels (¶51 and 62, pixel values “averaged across one section of the grid” output from “filtered depth map” when combining function output is “second depth map” when “Z2 is lower than Z1”) by
averaging the pixel density in a spatially uniform manner (¶51, “image is subdivided in a grid” and pixel values are “averaged across one section of the grid”) with respect to a pixel grid of pictures (¶51, “image is subdivided in a grid” by a “grid filter”) coded into the selected media segments, (¶51, “image is subdivided in a grid”) or
averaging the pixel density in a spatially non-uniform manner with respect to a pixel grid of pictures coded into the selected media segments.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the analytic management of McCarthy with the spherical image data of Ha with the image processing of Kato with the multiview depth processing of Wang with the grid filtering of Bruls which subdivides an image in a grid. This allows for filtering of an image to reduce the amount of calculations.
Regarding claim 127, McCarthy with Ha with Kato with Wang teaches the limitations of claim 122,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 127,
However, Bruls teaches additionally,
the measure (¶45-47, generating “second depth map Z2 having second depth values” by filtering using a multi-dimensional filter) measures the mean density of pixels (¶45-47, ”value of the filtered image” filtered by a “two-dimensional spatial filter”) by averaging the pixel density (¶45-47, two-dimensional spatial filter exemplified by using “near pixels” to “average them together”) in a manner restricting the averaging (¶47, “filtered image at a given location” so that near pixels are likely to have similar values that it is “appropriate to average them together”) to a central subsection of the view section, (¶47, computes average of “pixel values in the neighborhood”) or applying a higher averaging weight, (¶47, “Gaussian low-pass filtering computes a weighted average of pixel values in the neighborhood, in which the weights decrease with distance from the neighborhood center”) to the central subsection (¶47, “neighborhood center”) compared to an edge portion (¶47, pixels with “distance from the neighborhood center”) of the view section, (¶47, “pixel values in the neighborhood”) surrounding the central subsection. (¶47, weighted average of “pixels in the neighborhood” where the weights “decrease with distance from the neighborhood center”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the analytic management of McCarthy with the spherical image data of Ha with the image processing of Kato with the multiview depth processing of Wang with the filtering of Bruls which weights averaging towards a neighborhood center. This filtering of an image reduces noise while preserving the signal.
Claim(s) 124 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCarthy; Sean T. et al. (US 20160301957 A1) in view of HA; SangYoo et al. (US 20170244951 A1) in view of KATO; Yumiko et al. (US 20130235169 A1) in view of Wang; Ye-Kui et al. (US 20140193139 A1) in view of Kim; Jin-Hun (US 5978031 A)
Regarding claim 124, McCarthy with Ha with Kato with Wang teaches the limitations of claim 122,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 124,
However, Kim teaches additionally,
the measure measures (4:48-67 and Fig. 1, “activity calculation circuits 73-1 to 73-M calculates”) the mean density of pixels (4:48-67 and Fig. 1, activity calculation circuit “calculates a mean activity values for the corresponding search grid” of the “pixels in the edge block”) by averaging the pixel density (4:48-67 and Fig. 1, mean activity values “which represents a mean value of the activity values of all the edge blocks within the corresponding search grid”) in a spatially non-uniform manner (4:48-67, 5:1-10, and Fig. 2, mean activity values for the “corresponding search grid” from activity calculation circuits 73-1 to 73-M of the detected “edge blocks 25” corresponding to “edge block information representing the locations of the edge blocks” of the “boundary 26 of the object” which is non-uniform in shape as depicted in Fig. 2) with respect to a pixel grid (4:48-67,3:66-67,4:1-13, and Fig. 2, “pixels in the edge block” representing “locations of the edge blocks” included in the “corresponding search grid” including portions of the “boundary 26 of the object” depicted in Fig. 2) of pictures coded (3:30-40 and Fig. 2, search grid covering a “frame 21” as depicted in Fig. 2) into the selected media segments. (3:30-40, search grid covering a frame 21 forming “search block 23” containing “M Pixels” as depicted in Fig. 2)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the analytic management of McCarthy with the spherical image data of Ha with the image processing of Kato with the multiview depth processing of Wang with the search grid of Kim that forms identical sized search blocks from a frame. This allows for optimizing a grid with a minimum number of edge blocks to improve coding efficiency.
Claim(s) 126 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCarthy; Sean T. et al. (US 20160301957 A1) in view of HA; SangYoo et al. (US 20170244951 A1) in view of KATO; Yumiko et al. (US 20130235169 A1) in view of Wang; Ye-Kui et al. (US 20140193139 A1) in view of Kim; Jin-Hun (US 5978031 A) in view of Najaf-Zadeh; Hossein et al. (US 20170161881 A1)
Regarding claim 126, McCarthy with Ha with Kato with Wang with Kim teaches the limitations of claim 124,
Kim teaches additionally,
averaging in pixel density (4:48-67 and Fig. 1, mean activity values “which represents a mean value of the activity values of all the edge blocks within the corresponding search grid”) in a spatially non-uniform manner (4:48-67, 5:1-10, and Fig. 2, mean activity values for the “corresponding search grid” from activity calculation circuits 73-1 to 73-M of the detected “edge blocks 25” corresponding to “edge block information representing the locations of the edge blocks” of the “boundary 26 of the object” which is non-uniform in shape as depicted in Fig. 2)
But does not explicitly teach,
averaging the pixel density corresponding to
averaging spatially uniformly with respect to a viewport plane which is perpendicular to a central view direction of the view section.
However, Najaf-Zadeh teaches additionally,
averaging the pixel density corresponding (¶59 and Fig. 6, “tone mapping functions of each segment are averaged” and applied to portions of the image corresponding to “the viewport” 606) to
averaging spatially uniformly (¶59, “tone mapping functions of each segment are averaged and applied” to the “portion of the image corresponding to the viewport” 606 from the “multiple segments”) with respect to a viewport plane (¶59, “viewport 606” displayed to a user) which is perpendicular to a central view direction (¶59, viewpoint information indicated by “pitch and yaw” used to define a viewport 606) of the view section. (¶59,53, Fig. 6 and 4, “multiple segments” with portions corresponding to “the viewport” 606 from the image 400 such as depicted in fig. 4)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the analytic management of McCarthy with the spherical image data of Ha with the image processing of Kato with the multiview depth processing of Wang with the search grid of Kim with the viewport display of Najaf-Zadeh which uses an average of multiple segments to provide a viewport. This allows for a display reproduction which can reduce the computation and transmission needed for virtual reality images.
Claim(s) 128 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCarthy; Sean T. et al. (US 20160301957 A1) in view of HA; SangYoo et al. (US 20170244951 A1) in view of KATO; Yumiko et al. (US 20130235169 A1) in view of Wang; Ye-Kui et al. (US 20140193139 A1) in view of Cole; David et al. (US 20160360180 A1)
Regarding claim 128, McCarthy with Ha with Kato with Wang teaches the limitations of claim 122,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 128,
However, Cole teaches additionally,
measure measures the mean density of pixels (¶282, 284-285 and Fig. 31, “priorities 3102 determined for different row portions, calculations 3103 used in determining the row portion priorities, priorities 3104 determined for different column portions, and calculations 3105 used in determining the column portion priorities”) in a manner separately along a horizontal view section axis (¶285, “column portions CP1, CP2, CP3, and CP4” corresponding to “the environment include multiple columns of pixel values in the original captured images” where the “pixel values in multiple columns are averaged, e.g., in a horizontal direction and replaced with a single value for N original pixel values”) and a vertical view section axis, respectively. (¶284, “row portions RP1,RP2, RP3, RP4, and RP5 include multiple rows of pixel values in the original captured images” where the “pixel values in multiple rows are averaged, e.g., in a vertical direction and replaced with a single value for N original pixel values”)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the analytic management of McCarthy with the spherical image data of Ha with the image processing of Kato with the multiview depth processing of Wang with the content processing of Cole which calculates statistics for portions of the image of an environment captured in a frame. This allows for the efficient encoding of content corresponding to an event that preserves high priority portions of the environment for a variety of data rates.
Claim(s) 130 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCarthy; Sean T. et al. (US 20160301957 A1) in view of HA; SangYoo et al. (US 20170244951 A1) in view of KATO; Yumiko et al. (US 20130235169 A1) in view of Wang; Ye-Kui et al. (US 20140193139 A1) in view of McCoy; Charles et al. (US 20120209961 A1)
Regarding claim 130, McCarthy with Ha with Kato with Wang teaches the limitations of claim 122,
But does not explicitly teach the additional limitations of claim 130,
However, McCoy teaches additionally,
send-out the log messages (¶41 and 39, playback device determines to “request one or more subsequent index files”) at a rate controlled by the media presentation description. (¶41 and Fig. 2, determining made “periodically, based on a schedule, when specified in a current index file” in stand-by mode depicted in Fig. 2)
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the analytic management of McCarthy with the spherical image data of Ha with the image processing of Kato with the multiview depth processing of Wang with the index files of McCoy which specifies when to request for an index file. This allows for quick playback even if the system is in stand-by mode and is not actively playing.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIMMY S LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7322. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 10AM-8PM EST.
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.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joseph G. Ustaris can be reached at (571) 272-7383. The fax phone number for 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 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 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.
/JOSEPH G USTARIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2483
/JIMMY S LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2483
Prosecution Insights