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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 8 objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 8 recites “a least a portion”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4 – 6, 9, 20, 21, and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Morbee M. et al, “A Distributed Coding-Based Extension of A MonoView to a Multi-view Video System”, 2007 3DTV Conference, Kos, Greece, 2007, pp. 1-4 (hereafter Morbee) .
As per claim 1, Morbee discloses a device comprising:
a memory configured to store video data; and
one or more processors implemented in circuitry and coupled to the memory, the one or more processors configured to:
encode a first picture of the video data to generate first encoded video data (Section 2.1; Figure 2; In a practical WZ coder, ... Each first frame of the GOP is a WZ Intra(I)-frame, the other g − 1 frames are the WZ Predicted(P)-frames. The WZ I-frames Wi are encoded with a conventional intraframe encoder);
transmit the first encoded video data to a receiving device (Section 2.1; The SW coding is implemented with efficient channel codes that yield the parity bits of the bit planes bi+j,k, which are transmitted);
receive, from the receiving device, encoding selection data for a second picture of the video data, wherein:
the encoding selection data for the second picture indicate encoding selections used to encode an estimate of the second picture, and the second picture follows the first picture in decoding order (Section 2.2; Figure 3; The examiner points to the side information as an indication of the encoding selection data) ;
encode the second picture based on the encoding selection data for the second picture to generate second encoded video data; and transmit the second encoded video data to the receiving device (Section 2).
As per claim 2, Morbee discloses the device of claim 1, wherein: the encoding selection data received for the second picture include motion parameters for blocks of the second picture, the one or more processors are configured to, as part of encoding the second picture, perform motion compensation based on the motion parameters for the blocks of the second picture to generate predictive blocks, and the second encoded video data includes encoded video data based on the predictive blocks (Section 2; 2.2; Step 2, Step 3, and Step 4).
As per claim 4, Morebee discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the second encoded video data does not include the encoding selection data (Section 2; 2.2; The WZ I-frames Wi are decoded using a conventional intra-frame decoder, e.g. JPEG-2000).
As per claim 5, Morebee discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to entropy decode the encoding selection data for the second picture prior (Section 2; Step 2.4).
As per claim 6, Morbee discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: generate first error correction data based on the first encoded video data; and transmit the first encoded video data and the first error correction data to the receiving device (Section 2; 2.1; The SW coding is implemented with efficient channel codes that yield the parity bits of the bit planes bi+j,k, which are transmitted. The number of parity bits is determined by rate allocation through a feedback channel).
As per claim 9, Morbee discloses the device of claim 1, wherein: the device is an extended reality (XR) headset and comprises a display system, and the one or more processors are further configured to: receive virtual element data from the receiving device; and the display system is configured to display one or more virtual elements in an XR scene based on the virtual element data (Abstract; This 3D information can be useful for many emerging applications, e.g. 3D TV or virtual reality).
Regarding claim 20, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 1 are applicable for claim 20.
Regarding claim 21, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 2 are applicable for claim 21.
Regarding claim 23, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 6 are applicable for claim 23.
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-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 either status.
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) 3 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Morbee in view of Morbee M. et al “Rate Allocation Algorithm for Pixel-Domain Distributed Video Coding without Feedback Channel”, 2007 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing, Piscataway, NJ, USA, 15 April 2007, pp. I-521-I-524, XP031462913, hereafter Morbee1).
As per claim 3, Morbee the device of claim 1.
However, Morbee does not explicitly teach wherein: the encoding selection data for the second picture include intra prediction parameters for blocks of the second picture, the one or more processors are configured to, as part of encoding the second picture, perform intra prediction based on the intra prediction parameters for the blocks of the second picture to generate predictive blocks, and the second encoded video data includes encoded video data based on the predictive blocks.
In the same field of endeavor, Morbee1 teaches wherein: the encoding selection data for the second picture include intra prediction parameters for blocks of the second picture, the one or more processors are configured to, as part of encoding the second picture, perform intra prediction based on the intra prediction parameters for the blocks of the second picture to generate predictive blocks, and the second encoded video data includes encoded video data based on the predictive blocks (Section 2; The WZ-frames are coded using the Wyner-Ziv paradigm, i.e., they are intra-frame encoded, but they are conditionally decoded using side information (Figure 1)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the invention of Morbee in view of Morbee1. The advantage is an improved distributed video coding system.
Regarding claim 22, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 3 are applicable for claim 22.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 7, 8, and 24 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHIKAODILI E ANYIKIRE whose telephone number is (571)270-1445. The examiner can normally be reached 8 am - 4:30 pm.
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, David Czekaj can be reached at 571-272-7327. 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.
/CHIKAODILI E ANYIKIRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487