DETAILED ACTION
[1] Remarks
I. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
II. Claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined, where claims 1-20 is/are rejected. Explanations will be provided below.
III. Inventor and/or assignee search were performed and determined no double patenting rejection(s) is/are necessary.
IV. Patent eligibility (updated in 2019) shown by the following: Claims 1-20 pass patent eligibility test because there is/are no limitation or a combination of limitations amounting to an abstract idea. Also, the following limitation or the combinations of the limitations: “classifying, during a conversion between a current frame of a point cloud sequence and a bitstream of the point cloud sequence, points in the point cloud sequence based on a plurality types of process units for global motion estimation of the current frame” effects a transformation or a reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing / adds a specific limitation(s) other than what is well-understood, routine and conventional in the field, or adding unconventional steps that confine the claim to a particular useful application and providing improvements to the technical field of point cloud compression, which recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and amounting significant more.
V. The PCT application, PCTCN2021119488, is considered and the examiner determined no reference prior art are relevant to the claims of the current application.
[2] Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Use of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is invoked is rebutted when the function is recited with sufficient structure, material, or acts within the claim itself to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is not invoked is rebutted when the claim element recites function but fails to recite sufficiently definite structure, material or acts to perform that function.
Claim elements in this application that use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Similarly, claim elements that do not use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed not to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim(s) 19 is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA U.S.C. 112 6th paragraph because of the following reason(s): limitations are modified by sufficient structure or material for performing the claimed function.
Claim(s) 1-18 and 20 does not require 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA U.S.C. 112 6th paragraph interpretation because they are method claims and / or they are CRM claims.
Upon examination of the specification and claims, the examiner has determined, under the best understanding of the scope of the claim(s), rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(a)/(b) is not necessitated because of the following reasons: sufficient support are provided in the written description / drawings of the invention.
[3] Grounds of Rejection
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) person shall be entitled to a patent unless—
(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; or
(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
or
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claims 1-7 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Mammou (US 20190313110).
Regarding claim 1, Mammou discloses a method for point cloud coding, comprising:
classifying, during a conversion between a current frame of a point cloud sequence and a bitstream of the point cloud sequence (see figures 13S-13W, each cloud point are either classified as object cloud point or background, cloud point or non-cloud point and see figure 5D, where the encoder encode the cloud point to bitstream and the decoder decode bitstream to cloud point), points in the point cloud sequence based on a plurality types of process units for global motion estimation of the current frame (see paragraph 148, a video encoding motion estimation process may be guided by providing a motion vector map to the video encoder indicating for each block of the image frame); and
performing the conversion based on the classification (see paragraph 631, a non-point cloud character may traverse a landscape represented by point clouds, as one example, 1504, the point cloud data may be compressed and at 1506 the compressed point cloud data and non-point cloud data may be packetized and transmitted via a network 1508, the compression is read as the conversion, where the point and non-point cloud is read as the classification, the packing module packs, converts, differently depending on the non-point and point cloud point).
Regarding claim 2, Mammou discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the plurality types of process units comprises at least one of the following: a cubic block, or a planar region being three-dimensional and having a height equal to a height of a bounding box of the current frame (see figure 3T, illustrates an example patch bounding box of an occupancy map, wherein the patch has been shifted, according to some embodiments):
PNG
media_image1.png
202
427
media_image1.png
Greyscale
.
Regarding claim 3, Mammou discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the global motion estimation of the current frame is performed based on a plurality of reference frames, and classifying the points comprises: classifying points in the plurality of reference frames based on one of the plurality types of process units (see paragraph 631, a non-point cloud character may traverse a landscape represented by point clouds, as one example, 1504, the point cloud data may be compressed and at 1506 the compressed point cloud data and non-point cloud data may be packetized and transmitted via a network 1508, where the non-point cloud and point cloud).
Regarding claim 4, Mammou discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the global motion estimation of the current frame is performed based at least on a first reference frame and a second reference frame, the plurality types of process units comprise a first type of process unit and a second type of process unit, and classifying the points comprises:
classifying points in the first reference frame based on the first type of process unit (see figures 13S-13W, each cloud point are either classified as object cloud point or background, cloud point or non-cloud point); and
classifying points in the second reference frame based on the second type of process unit (see paragraph 290, the positions, attributes and texture information may be temporally predicted by taking the difference between the value at current resampled frame minus a corresponding value, e.g. motion compensated value, from the reference frame, the prediction is read as classifications).
Regarding claim 5, Mammou discloses the method of claim 4, wherein the first type of process unit is a type of process unit minimizing an error metric between the current frame and the first reference frame with motion compensation (see paragraph 312, information may be used in the closed loop/luma adjustment method so as to ensure a minimized texture distortion for the entire point cloud. That is, the distortion impact to the entire point cloud of a sample Pr at position (x,y,z) in the reconstructed point cloud can be computed).
Regarding claim 6, Mammou discloses the method of claim 4, wherein the error metric comprises one of the following: mean square error, mean absolute error, or root mean square error (see equation below paragraph 312):
PNG
media_image2.png
160
829
media_image2.png
Greyscale
.
Regarding claim 7, Mammou discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the conversion includes encoding the current frame into the bitstream, or wherein the conversion includes decoding the current frame from the bitstream (see paragraph 95, intra-frame encode is where each frame is encoded independent to other frames).
Regarding claims 19 and 20, see the rationale and rejection for claim 1. See paragraphs 84-85 which includes a processor(s) requiring instructions / memory modules.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
1. 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.
2. Claims 8-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mammou (US 20190313110) in view of Medioni (US 9235928).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Mammou and Medioni as a whole discloses all the limitations of claim 1, but is silent in disclosing the method of claim 1, further comprising: obtaining a compensated reference frame of the current frame by performing motion compensation on a reference frame of the current frame based on a set of rotation matrixes comprising at least one fixed rotation matrix or a plurality of rotation matrixes.
Medioni discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: obtaining a compensated reference frame of the current frame by performing motion compensation on a reference frame of the current frame based on a set of rotation matrixes comprising at least one fixed rotation matrix or a plurality of rotation matrixes (see column 4, lines 27-35, R is read as the rotational matrix which incorporates information from reference frame, i, and future frame, i+1):
PNG
media_image3.png
285
547
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include obtaining a compensated reference frame of the current frame by performing motion compensation on a reference frame of the current frame based on a set of rotation matrixes because to allows a video encoder to account for complex local motion like camera rotation, zoom, and panning while predicting motion enabling the system to warp a reference frame to better match the current frame's perspective.
With regards to claim 9, Medioni discloses the method of claim 8, wherein at least one of the set of rotation matrixes is predefined (see column 4, lines 27-35, R is read as the rotational matrix), or at least one of the set of rotation matrixes is indicated in the bitstream, or at least one of the set of rotation matrixes is determined on-the-fly (see column 4, lines 27-35, R is read as the rotational matrix, see figure 1B, the 3D sensor captures images of the individual and rotational matrix is generated), or wherein one of the set of rotation matrixes is used for performing motion compensation on a further reference frame of the current frame (see column 4, lines 27-35, R is read as the rotational matrix, where D(i,n) is read as the compensation matrix, which requires D(i+1,n) being the reference), or wherein one of the set of rotation matrixes is used for performing motion compensation on all of reference frames of the current frame (see column 4, lines 27-35, R is read as the rotational matrix, where D(i,n) is read as the compensation matrix, which requires D(i+1,n) being the reference), or wherein one of the set of rotation matrixes is fixed as an identity matrix, or wherein at least one syntax element is indicated in the bitstream, the at least one syntax element indicating whether one of the set of rotation matrixes is used for performing motion compensation on a further reference frame of the current frame, or wherein at least one syntax element is indicated in the bitstream, the at least one syntax element indicating whether one of the set of rotation matrixes is used for performing motion compensation on all of reference frames of the current frame, or wherein at least one syntax element is indicated in the bitstream, the at least one syntax element indicating whether a fixed rotation matrix is used for the reference frame, or wherein at least one of the set of rotation matrixes is determined based on a predictive coding method. See the motivation for claim 8.
Regarding claim 10, Medioni discloses the method of claim 8, wherein obtaining the compensated reference frame comprises: determining a global motion matrix for the current frame based on the set of rotation matrixes and a set of translation vectors for the reference frame (see column 4, lines 36-45, where R and t are read as the rotational matrix and translational vector, respectively, and D’(i,n) is read as the global motion matrix); and
PNG
media_image4.png
279
662
media_image4.png
Greyscale
performing the motion compensation on the reference frame based on the global motion matrix to obtain the compensated reference frame (D(i,n) are read as the motion compensated).
See the motivation for claim 8. In addition, it allows the system to accurately align coordinate system of a previous frame to the current frame which improves decoding process.
Regarding claim 11, Medioni discloses the method of claim 10, wherein a translation vector in the set of translation vectors is determined based on samples of the current frame and reference samples of the reference frame (see equation in column 4, lines 36-45, t is read as the translational vector).
PNG
media_image5.png
106
481
media_image5.png
Greyscale
.
See the motivation for claim 9.
Regarding claim 12, Mammou discloses the method of claim 11, wherein the translation vector is a vector minimizing an error metric between the samples and the reference samples with motion compensation (see paragraph 312, information may be used in the closed loop/luma adjustment method so as to ensure a minimized texture distortion for the entire point cloud. That is, the distortion impact to the entire point cloud of a sample Pr at position (x,y,z) in the reconstructed point cloud can be computed).
Regarding claim 13, Mammou discloses the method of claim 12, wherein the error metric comprises one of the following: mean square error, mean absolute error, or root mean square error (see equation below paragraph 312):
PNG
media_image2.png
160
829
media_image2.png
Greyscale
.
Regarding claim 14, Mammou discloses the method of claim 10, wherein the global motion matrix is generated at an encoder (see figure 5C, 516 and paragraph 108, 3-D motion compensation), or wherein the global motion matrix is generated at a decoder (see figure 5D, decoder and paragraph 110, 3D motion compensation), or wherein the set of translation vectors comprises a plurality of translation vectors (see paragraph 108, delta vector prediction module 254), or
Regarding claim 15, Mammou discloses the method of claim 10, wherein at least one of the set of translation vectors is determined based on a predictive coding method (see paragraph 7, For example, the encoder may utilize a video encoder in accordance with the High Efficiency Video Coding (HEVC/H.265) standard or other suitable standards such as, the Advanced Video Coding (AVC/H.264) standard, the AOMedia Video 1 (AV1) video coding format produced by the Alliance for Open Media (AOM) are all predictive coding).
Regarding claim 16, Medioni discloses the method of claim 15, wherein a first element of a first translation vector of the set of translation vectors is determined based on a second element of the first translation vector, or wherein a first element of a first translation vector of the set of translation vectors is determined based on a second element of a second translation vector associated with a second reference frame of the current frame (see column 4, lines 38-42 illustration below, t is read as first element of a first translation vector):
PNG
media_image6.png
63
438
media_image6.png
Greyscale
.
See the motivation for claim 10.
Regarding claim 17, Mammou discloses the method of claim 8, wherein a piece of information for the convention is binarized based on a coding method, the piece of information being indicated in the bitstream (see figure 6B, the bit stream is made up of binary numbers, which are 1’s and 0’s).
Regarding claim 18, Mammou discloses the method of claim 17, wherein the coding method is one of the following: a fixed length coding method, an exponential Golomb coding method, a unary coding method, a truncated unary coding method, a signed unary coding method, or a signed truncated unary coding method, or wherein the coding method is an arithmetic coding method, or wherein the piece of information is indicated at one of the following: a sequence header, a picture header, a slice header, or a block (see figure 6B, stream header):
PNG
media_image7.png
93
604
media_image7.png
Greyscale
.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX LIEW (duty station is located in New York City) whose telephone number is (571)272-8623 (FAX 571-273-8623), cell (917)763-1192 or email alexa.liew@uspto.gov. Please note the examiner cannot reply through email unless an internet communication authorization is provided by the applicant. The examiner can be reached anytime.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, MISTRY ONEAL R, can be reached on (313)446-4912. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ALEX KOK S LIEW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2674 Telephone: 571-272-8623
Date: 4/18/26
Prosecution Insights