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 .
Claims 1-8, 11 and 20 canceled.
Response to Arguments
Response to applicant argues on pages 8-9 Xu in view of Bordes fails to disclose “two intra predictions of two partitions are weighted blended” [See applicant's argument: pages 8-9]; while the applicant points are understood the examiner respectfully disagrees. As Examiner cited in previous office action, pages, 5-6. Bordes discloses predictions of the sample values the two partitions are adjusted using a blending processing. In addition, Borders teaches sub-block two blending maps which contains for each sample (x) the blending weights w0(x) and w1(x) associated to the first predictor block P0 and the second predictor block P1[See Paragraphs 76-105].
Regarding dependent claims, in response to applicant's arguments, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See in re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071,5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR international Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Xu in combination with Bordes meet all rejected limitations of the instant application.
Applicant is reminded that although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
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 byt he manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 9-10, 12-19 and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al. (US 2023/0188711) (Weiwei Xu) in view of Bordes et al. (US 2023/0164314) (Philippe Bordes).
Regarding Claim 9, Xu discloses a method of video processing, comprising: generating, during a conversion between a target block of a video and a bitstream of the video, a multiple hypothesis prediction block of the target block based on a plurality of intra predictions [See abstract and Paragraphs 151-185]; and performing the conversion based on the multiple hypothesis prediction block [See Paragraphs 214-245 and 249-256].
Xu doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein two intra predictions of two partitions are weighted blended [See Paragraphs 151-185, 214-245 and 249-256].
However, Bordes discloses wherein two intra predictions of two partitions are weighted blended [See Paragraphs 76-105].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Xu to add the teachings in Bordes as above, to provide a method that signaling is used without transmitting to simply allow the decoder to know and select the particular parameter [See abstract].
Regarding Claim 10, Xu discloses wherein a plurality of hypothesizes of the multiple hypothesis prediction block is intra predicted, or wherein the multiple hypothesis prediction block is a multi-hypothesis prediction (MHP) block, and the MHP block comprises a plurality of intra coded hypothesizes, or wherein the multiple hypothesis prediction block is a combined inter and intra prediction (CIIP) block, and the CIIP block comprises at least two intra predictions, or wherein the multiple hypothesis prediction block is a geometric partitioning mode (GPM) block, and both partitions of the GPM block are intra mode coded, or wherein the multiple hypothesis prediction block is a GPM block, and intra modes of two partitions of the GPM block are not allowed to be the same, or wherein the multiple hypothesis prediction block is a GPM block, and a first intra mode of a first partition of the GPM block is indicated in the bitstream, or wherein the multiple hypothesis prediction block is a GPM block, and intra modes of two partitions of the GPM block are indicated in the bitstream, or wherein the multiple hypothesis prediction block is a GPM block, and intra modes of two partitions of the GPM block are implicitly derived, or wherein the multiple hypothesis prediction block is split by at least one oblique partition line, or wherein the multiple hypothesis prediction block is split by at least one straight partition line, or wherein at least one syntax element indicating whether an intra prediction of a GPM partition is derived at the decoder side is indicated, or wherein if only L0 reference list is available, the multiple hypothesis prediction block is allowed for P slice or picture, and wherein if both L0 reference list and L1 reference list, the multiple hypothesis prediction block is allowed for B slice or picture, or wherein a GPM candidate list is constructed based on regular merge candidates of which have a specific prediction direction, or wherein a first GPM candidate list for P slice is constructed in a difference way from a second GPM candidate list for B slice, or wherein if IBC is involved in one of: GPM, CIIP or MHP, information for the IBC is indicated, or wherein if palette is involved in one of: GPM, CIIP or MHP, information for the palette is indicated, or wherein an indication of whether to and/or how to generate the multiple hypothesis prediction block is indicated at one of the followings: sequence level, group of pictures level, picture level, slice level, or tile group level, or wherein an indication of whether to and/or how to generate the multiple hypothesis prediction block is indicated in one of the following: a sequence header, a picture header, a sequence parameter set (SPS), a video parameter set (VPS), a dependency parameter set (DPS), a decoding capability information (DCI), a picture parameter set (PPS), an adaptation parameter sets (APS), a slice header, or a tile group header, or wherein an indication of whether to and/or how to generate the multiple hypothesis prediction block is included in one of the following: a prediction block (PB), a transform block (TB), a coding block (CB), a prediction unit (PU), a transform unit (TU), a coding unit (CU), a virtual pipeline data unit (VPDU), a coding tree unit (CTU), a CTU row, a slice, a tile, a sub-picture, or a region containing more than one sample or pixel, or wherein the method further comprises: determining, based on coded information of the target block, whether to and/or how to generate the multiple hypothesis prediction block, the coded information including at least one of: a block size, a colour format, a single and/or dual tree partitioning, a colour component, a slice type, or a picture type, or wherein the conversion includes encoding the target block into the bitstream, or wherein the conversion includes decoding the target block from the bitstream [See Paragraphs 151-185, 214-245 and 249-256].
Regarding Claim 13, Xu discloses wherein the multiple hypothesis prediction block is allowed for I slice or picture.
Regarding Claim 18, Xu discloses wherein the multiple hypothesis prediction block is a MHP block, and the MHP block is allowed for I slice or picture [See Paragraphs 151-185, 214-245 and 249-256].
Regarding Claim 12, Xu doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the multiple hypothesis prediction block is a GPM block, and two intra predictions of the GPM block are weighted blended, or wherein all samples within in a partition of the two partitions have a same weighting factor, or wherein different samples have different weighting factors, or wherein a weighting factor depends on a splitting method of the GPM block, or wherein a weighting factor depends on at least one intra-prediction mode of the multiple hypothesis prediction block.
However, Bordes discloses wherein the multiple hypothesis prediction block is a GPM block, and two intra predictions of the GPM block are weighted blended, or wherein all samples within in a partition of the two partitions have a same weighting factor, or wherein different samples have different weighting factors, or wherein a weighting factor depends on a splitting method of the GPM block, or wherein a weighting factor depends on at least one intra-prediction mode of the multiple hypothesis prediction block [See Paragraphs 76-105].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Xu to add the teachings in Bordes as above, to provide a method that signaling is used without transmitting to simply allow the decoder to know and select the particular parameter [See abstract].
Regarding Claim 14, Xu doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the multiple hypothesis prediction block is a GPM block, and the GPM block is allowed for I slice or picture.
However, Bordes discloses wherein the multiple hypothesis prediction block is a GPM block, and the GPM block is allowed for I slice or picture [See Paragraphs 76-105].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Xu to add the teachings in Bordes as above, to provide a method that signaling is used without transmitting to simply allow the decoder to know and select the particular parameter [See abstract].
Regarding Claim 15, Xu doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the GPM block comprises two non-inter predictions, or wherein different intra modes are used for two partitions of the GPM block, or wherein a sample based weighting factor is sued to blend two partitions of the GPM block.
However, Bordes discloses wherein the GPM block comprises two non-inter predictions, or wherein different intra modes are used for two partitions of the GPM block, or wherein a sample based weighting factor is sued to blend two partitions of the GPM block [See Paragraphs 76-105].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Xu to add the teachings in Bordes as above, to provide a method that signaling is used without transmitting to simply allow the decoder to know and select the particular parameter [See abstract].
Regarding Claim 16, Xu doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the multiple hypothesis prediction block is a CIIP block, and the CIIP block is allowed for I slice or picture.
However, Bordes discloses wherein the multiple hypothesis prediction block is a CIIP block, and the CIIP block is allowed for I slice or picture [See Paragraphs 72-74 and 108-126].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Xu to add the teachings in Bordes as above, to provide a method that signaling is used without transmitting to simply allow the decoder to know and select the particular parameter [See abstract].
Regarding Claim 17, Xu discloses wherein the CIIP block comprises an intra prediction and a non-inter prediction, or wherein different intra modes are used for two predictions of the CIIP block, or wherein a block-based weighting factor is used to blend two predictions of the CIIP block.
However, Bordes discloses wherein the CIIP block comprises an intra prediction and a non-inter prediction, or wherein different intra modes are used for two predictions of the CIIP block, or wherein a block-based weighting factor is used to blend two predictions of the CIIP block [See Paragraphs 72-74 and 108-126].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Xu to add the teachings in Bordes as above, to provide a method that signaling is used without transmitting to simply allow the decoder to know and select the particular parameter [See abstract].
Regarding Claim 19, Xu doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the MHP block comprises multiple non-inter predictions, or wherein the multiple non-inter prediction comprise one of: an intra prediction, an intra block copy, or a palette prediction, or wherein different intra modes are used for multiple hypotheses of the MHP block, or wherein a block-based weighting factor is used to blend multiple hypotheses of the MHP block.
However, Bordes discloses wherein the MHP block comprises multiple non-inter predictions, or wherein the multiple non-inter prediction comprise one of: an intra prediction, an intra block copy, or a palette prediction, or wherein different intra modes are used for multiple hypotheses of the MHP block, or wherein a block-based weighting factor is used to blend multiple hypotheses of the MHP block [See Paragraphs 74-77].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Xu to add the teachings in Bordes as above, to provide a method that signaling is used without transmitting to simply allow the decoder to know and select the particular parameter [See abstract].
Regarding Claim 21, Xu discloses wherein the conversion includes encoding the target block into the bitstream, or wherein the conversion includes decoding the target block from the bitstream [See Fig. 9-10].
Regarding Claim 22, the limitations claimed are substantially similar to claim 1 above, therefore the ground for rejecting claim l also applies here.
Regarding Claim 23, the limitations claimed are substantially similar to claim 1 above, therefore the ground for rejecting claim l also applies here.
Regarding Claim 24, the limitations claimed are substantially similar to claim 1 above, therefore the ground for rejecting claim l also applies here.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a}.
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a} will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TSION B OWENS whose telephone number is (571)272-3934. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:00.
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.
/TSION B OWENS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487