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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/29/2024 and 7/15/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
1 The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed.Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321 (c) or 1.321 (d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321 (b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-l.jsp.
2 Claims 1-3, 6-8, and 17-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5, 8, 10-13 and 17-20 of the co-pending patent 18/627,287. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
3 The table below displays specific claim languages of both patents in regards to the rejection, with underlined text being unique to their respective patent (in regards to the current comparison and not if the limitation is found in another claim).
Serial 18/622,827 (Current)
Serial 18/627,287 (Co-Pending)
Claim 1:
A method for point cloud coding, comprising: determining, during a conversion between a current point cloud (PC) sample of a point cloud sequence and a bitstream of the point cloud sequence, one or multiple reference PC samples for the current PC sample; and performing the conversion based on the one or multiple reference PC samples.
Claim 1:
A method for point cloud coding, comprising: determining, during a conversion between a current point cloud (PC) sample of a point cloud sequence and a bitstream of the point cloud sequence, one or multiple reference PC samples for the current PC sample, wherein at least one reference frame comprising the one or multiple reference PC samples and a current frame comprising the current PC sample are in a group of frames (GOF); and performing the conversion based on the one or multiple reference PC samples.
Claim 2:
The method of claim 1, wherein performing the conversion based on the one or more reference PC samples comprises: performing inter prediction for the current PC sample by using the one or multiple reference PC samples.
Claim 5:
The method of claim 1, wherein performing the conversion based on the one or more reference PC samples comprises: performing inter prediction for the current PC sample by using the one or multiple reference PC samples…
(Rest of Claim 5 of the co-pending application is unique to the co-pending application)
Claim 3:
The method of claim 1, wherein the one or multiple reference PC samples comprise a first reference PC sample in a reference frame with a later time stamp than the current frame comprising the current PC sample, or wherein the one or multiple reference PC samples comprise a second reference PC sample with an earlier time stamp than the current frame comprising the current PC sample, or wherein the one or multiple reference PC samples comprise a third reference PC sample with the same time stamp as the current frame comprising the current PC sample, or wherein an indication indicating whether a sample with a later time stamp than the current frame is allowed to be used as a reference PC sample is indicated in the bitstream.
Claim 8:
The method of claim 1, wherein the one or multiple reference PC samples comprise a first reference PC sample in a reference frame with a later time stamp than the current frame comprising the current PC sample.
Claim 10:
The method of claim 1, wherein the one or multiple reference PC samples comprise a second reference PC sample with an earlier time stamp than the current frame comprising the current PC sample, or wherein the one or multiple reference PC samples comprise a third reference PC sample with the same time stamp as the current frame comprising the current PC sample, or wherein an indication indicating whether a sample with a later time stamp than the current frame is allowed to be used as a reference PC sample is indicated in the bitstream.
Claim 6:
The method of claim 1, wherein the current PC sample and the one or multiple reference PC samples are coded in different orders and/or with different coding accuracies.
Claim 11:
The method of claim 1, wherein the current PC sample and the one or multiple reference PC samples are coded in different orders and/or with different coding accuracies, or wherein PC samples in the point cloud sequence have different coding priorities.
Claim 7:
The method of claim 6, wherein PC samples in the point cloud sequence have different coding priorities, or wherein coding accuracies of PC samples in the point cloud sequence are controlled by a Quantization Parameter (QP) value or a quantization step in the point cloud sequence coding.
Claim 11:
The method of claim 1, wherein the current PC sample and the one or multiple reference PC samples are coded in different orders and/or with different coding accuracies, or wherein PC samples in the point cloud sequence have different coding priorities.
Claim 13:
The method of claim 12, wherein coding priorities of the one or multiple reference PC samples are higher than the current PC sample, or wherein coding accuracy of a first PC sample in the point cloud sequence with a higher coding priority is higher than a second PC sample in the point cloud sequence with a lower coding priority, or wherein coding accuracies of PC samples in the point cloud sequence are controlled by a Quantization Parameter (QP) value or a quantization step in the point cloud sequence coding.
Claim 8:
The method of claim 7, wherein the method further comprises: applying hierarchical coding accuracies to the PC samples based on the coding priorities of the PC samples, or wherein coding priorities of the one or multiple reference PC samples are higher than the current PC sample, or wherein coding accuracy of a first PC sample in the point cloud sequence with a higher coding priority is higher than a second PC sample in the point cloud sequence with a lower coding priority.
Claim 12:
The method of claim 11, further comprising: applying hierarchical coding accuracies to the PC samples based on the coding priorities of the PC samples.
Claim 13:
The method of claim 12, wherein coding priorities of the one or multiple reference PC samples are higher than the current PC sample, or wherein coding accuracy of a first PC sample in the point cloud sequence with a higher coding priority is higher than a second PC sample in the point cloud sequence with a lower coding priority, or wherein coding accuracies of PC samples in the point cloud sequence are controlled by a Quantization Parameter (QP) value or a quantization step in the point cloud sequence coding.
Claim 17:
The method of claim 1, wherein the conversion includes encoding the current PC sample into the bitstream, or wherein the conversion includes decoding the current PC sample from the bitstream.
Claim 17:
The method of claim 1, wherein the conversion includes encoding the current PC sample into the bitstream, or wherein the conversion includes decoding the current PC sample from the bitstream.
Claim 18:
An apparatus for processing point cloud data comprising a processor and a non-transitory memory with instructions thereon, wherein the instructions upon execution by the processor, cause the processor to perform acts comprising: determining, during a conversion between a current point cloud (PC) sample of a point cloud sequence and a bitstream of the point cloud sequence, one or multiple reference PC samples for the current PC sample; and performing the conversion based on the one or multiple reference PC samples.
Claim 18:
An apparatus for processing point cloud data comprising a processor and a non-transitory memory with instructions thereon, wherein the instructions upon execution by the processor, cause the processor to perform acts comprising: determining, during a conversion between a current point cloud (PC) sample of a point cloud sequence and a bitstream of the point cloud sequence, one or multiple reference PC samples for the current PC sample, wherein at least one reference frame comprising the one or multiple reference PC samples and a current frame comprising the current PC sample are in a group of frames (GOF); and performing the conversion based on the one or multiple reference PC samples.
Claim 19:
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that cause a processor to perform acts comprising: determining, during a conversion between a current point cloud (PC) sample of a point cloud sequence and a bitstream of the point cloud sequence, one or multiple reference PC samples for the current PC sample; and performing the conversion based on the one or multiple reference PC samples.
Claim 19:
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that cause a processor to perform acts comprising: determining, during a conversion between a current point cloud (PC) sample of a point cloud sequence and a bitstream of the point cloud sequence, one or multiple reference PC samples for the current PC sample, wherein at least one reference frame comprising the one or multiple reference PC samples and a current frame comprising the current PC sample are in a group of frames (GOF); and performing the conversion based on the one or multiple reference PC samples.
Claim 20:
A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream of a point cloud sequence which is generated by a method performed by a point cloud processing apparatus, wherein the method comprises: determining one or multiple reference point cloud (PC) samples for a current PC sample of the point cloud sequence; and generating the bitstream based on the one or multiple reference PC samples.
Claim 20:
A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream of a point cloud sequence which is generated by a method performed by a point cloud processing apparatus, wherein the method comprises: determining one or multiple reference point cloud (PC) samples for a current PC sample of the point cloud sequence, wherein at least one reference frame comprising the one or multiple reference PC samples and a current frame comprising the current PC sample are in a group of frames (GOF); and generating the bitstream based on the one or multiple reference PC samples.
4 Regarding claim 1 of the current application, 18/622,827, the claim language for the claim in the current application anticipates the limitations (or a trivial variation) recited of claim 1 of co-pending Patent 18/627,287, since all of the limitations of the current application appear in the limitations of the co-pending patent. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the locations of the specific PC samples, which the current application broadly states their existence. The same rationale can be applied for claims 18-20 of 18/622,827 for claims 18-20 of co-pending 18/627,287, respectively.
5 Regarding claim 2 of the current application, 18/622,827, the claim language for the claim in the current application anticipates the limitations (or a trivial variation) recited of claim 5 of co-pending Patent 18/627,287, since all of the limitations of the current application appear in the limitations of the co-pending patent. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include the functions of the PC samples and how to use them, wherein the current application broadly states that it can use the PC samples for a singular function.
6 Regarding claim 3 of the current application, 18/622,827, the claim language for the claim in the current application is anticipated by the limitations (or a trivial variation) recited of the combination of elements from claims 8 and 10 of co-pending Patent 18/627,287. All limitations from claims 8 and 10 of the co-pending application make up the entirety of claim 3 from the current application without any additional or lack of unique limitations, making the claim from the current application anticipate the claims from the co-pending application further.
7 Regarding claim 6 of the current application, 18/622,827, the claim language for the claim in the current application is anticipated by the limitations (or a trivial variation) recited of claim 11 of co-pending Patent 18/627,287, since all of the limitations of the current application appear in the limitations of the co-pending patent. The unique limitations in claim 11 from the co-pending application are actually similar if not identical to a different claim from the current application, which is claim 7.
8 Regarding claim 7 of the current application, 18/622,827, the claim language for the claim in the current application is rejected based on the limitations (or a trivial variation) recited of the combination of claims 11 and 13 of co-pending Patent 18/627,287. Some of the limitations from claims 11 and 13 of the co-pending application make up the entirety of claim 7 from the current application, making the claim from the current application anticipate the claims from the co-pending application further. The unique limitations in claim 11 and 13 from the co-pending application are actually similar if not identical to a different claim from the current application, which are claims 6 and 8 respectfully.
9 Regarding claim 8 of the current application, 18/622,827, the claim language for the claim in the current application is rejected based on the limitations (or a trivial variation) recited of the combination of claims 12 and 13 of co-pending Patent 18/627,287. Some of the limitations from claims 12 and 13 of the co-pending application make up the entirety of claim 8 from the current application, making the claim from the current application anticipate the claims from the co-pending application further. The unique limitations in claim 13 from the co-pending application are actually similar if not identical to a different claim from the current application, which is claim 7.
10 Regarding claim 17 of the current application, 18/622,827, the claim language for the claim in the current application is rejected based on the limitations (or a trivial variation) recited of claim 17 of co-pending Patent 18/627,287. Both claims are identical to each other, making the claim from the current application anticipate the claim from the co-pending application further.
11 It is obvious that the above grouping of claim elements supports a nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection as the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) as the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). In addition, some of the claim language from the co-pending application appear in more than one claim(s) from the current application.
Specification
12 The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
13 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.
(a)(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.
14 Claim(s) 1, 4-5, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Schwarz, S., Preda, M., Baroncini, V., Budagavi, M., Cesar, P., Chou, P. A., ... & Zakharchenko, V. (2018). Emerging MPEG standards for point cloud compression. IEEE Journal on Emerging and Selected Topics in Circuits and Systems, 9(1), 133-148 (hereinafter Schwarz).
15 Regarding claim 1, Schwarz teaches a method for point cloud coding, comprising: determining, during a conversion between a current point cloud (PC) sample of a point cloud sequence and a bitstream of the point cloud sequence ([Section VII] reciting “This is essentially achieved by converting the point cloud into a set of different video sequences. In particular, two video sequences, one that captures the geometry information and another that captures the texture information of the point cloud data, are generated and compressed using existing video codecs, such as MPEG-4 AVC, HEVC, AV1 etc…The video generated bitstreams and the metadata are then multiplexed together so as to generate the final point cloud V-PCC bitstream.”), one or multiple reference PC samples for the current PC sample; and performing the conversion based on the one or multiple reference PC samples (See Fig. 12).
PNG
media_image1.png
429
955
media_image1.png
Greyscale
16 Regarding claim 4, Schwarz teaches the method of claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above), wherein performing the conversion based on the one or multiple reference PC samples comprises: performing the conversion based on a reference relationship between the one or multiple reference PC samples and the current PC sample, the reference relationship excluding a time stamp order of the one or multiple reference PC samples and the current PC sample ([Section VII] reciting “The main philosophy behind V-PCC is to leverage existing video codecs for compressing the geometry and texture information of a dynamic point cloud. This is essentially achieved by converting the point cloud into a set of different video sequences. In particular, two video sequences, one that captures the geometry information and another that captures the texture information of the point cloud data, are generated and compressed using existing video codecs, such as MPEG-4 AVC, HEVC, AV1 etc. ”).
17 Regarding claim 5, Schwarz teaches the method of claim 4 (see claims 1 and 4 rejections above), wherein the one or multiple reference PC samples are encoded before the current PC sample, or wherein the one or multiple reference PC samples are decoded before the current PC sample ([Section V. C] reciting “The re-ordering process is deterministic and operates on the quantized positions ordered according to the octree decoding process. It is applied at both the encoder and the decoder side. This process first marks all the points as non-visited, and the set of visited points, denoted as V , is set as empty. L-PCC proceeds iteratively.”).
18 Regarding claim 17, Schwarz teaches the method of claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above), wherein the conversion includes encoding the current PC sample into the bitstream, or wherein the conversion includes decoding the current PC sample from the bitstream ([Section VII] reciting “The main philosophy behind V-PCC is to leverage existing video codecs for compressing the geometry and texture information of a dynamic point cloud. This is essentially achieved by converting the point cloud into a set of different video sequences…The video generated bitstreams and the metadata are then multiplexed together so as to generate the final point cloud V-PCC bitstream.”; [Fig 11.] reciting “Overview of the V-PCC encoding process.”; [Fig 12.] reciting “Overview of the V-PCC decoding process.”).
PNG
media_image2.png
384
959
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image1.png
429
955
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
19 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.
20 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.
21 Claim(s) 2, 6-16, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwarz, S., Preda, M., Baroncini, V., Budagavi, M., Cesar, P., Chou, P. A., ... & Zakharchenko, V. (2018). Emerging MPEG standards for point cloud compression. IEEE Journal on Emerging and Selected Topics in Circuits and Systems, 9(1), 133-148 (hereinafter Schwarz) as of claim 1, in view of Zhang et al. (US 20220156980 A1).
22 Regarding claim 2, Schwarz teaches the method of claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above), but does not explicitly teach wherein performing the conversion based on the one or more reference PC samples comprises: performing inter prediction for the current PC sample by using the one or multiple reference PC samples.
23 Zhang teaches wherein performing the conversion based on the one or more reference PC samples comprises: performing inter prediction for the current PC sample by using the one or multiple reference PC samples ([0087] reciting “A predictive picture (P picture) may be one that may be coded and decoded using intra prediction or inter prediction using at most one motion vector and reference index to predict the sample values of each block.”; [0092] reciting “In some embodiments, a bi-prediction technique can be used in the inter-picture prediction. According to the bi-prediction technique, two reference pictures, such as a first reference picture and a second reference picture that are both prior in decoding order to the current picture in the video (but may be in the past and future, respectively, in display order) are used. A block in the current picture can be coded by a first motion vector that points to a first reference block in the first reference picture, and a second motion vector that points to a second reference block in the second reference picture.”).
24 It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method (taught by Schwarz) to incorporate the teachings of Zhang to provide a type of inter prediction module utilizing at least one of the point cloud sample types taught by Schwarz. Doing so would allow the usage of a merge mode technique to be used in the inter-picture prediction to improve coding efficiency as stated by Zhang ([0092] recited).
25 Regarding claim 6, Schwarz teaches the method of claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above), but does not explicitly teach wherein the current PC sample and the one or multiple reference PC samples are coded in different orders and/or with different coding accuracies.
26 Zhang teaches wherein the current PC sample and the one or multiple reference PC samples are coded in different orders and/or with different coding accuracies ([0086] reciting “An Intra Picture (I picture) may be one that may be coded and decoded without using any other picture in the sequence as a source of prediction. Some video codecs allow for different types of intra pictures, including, for example Independent Decoder Refresh (“IDR”) Pictures. A person skilled in the art is aware of those variants of I pictures and their respective applications and features.”; [0097] reciting “The attributes after the transfer operations are provided to the attribute prediction module (750). The LOD generation module (740) is configured to operate on the re-ordered points output from the octree encoding module (730), and re-organize the points into different LODs. LOD information is supplied to the attribute prediction module (750).”).
27 It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method (taught by Schwarz) to incorporate the teachings of Zhang to provide a method that can allow the example point cloud samples that are taught by Schwarz to be coded in a different order(s). Doing so would allow the support for prediction as stated by Zhang ([0086] recitied).
28 Regarding claim 7, Schwarz in view of Zhang teaches the method of claim 6 (see claims 1 and 6 rejections above), wherein PC samples in the point cloud sequence have different coding priorities (Zhang; [0063] reciting “The video decoder (510) may include a parser (520) to reconstruct symbols (521) from compressed images, such as the coded video sequence. Categories of those symbols include information used to manage operation of the video decoder (510). The parser (520) may parse/entropy-decode the coded video sequence that is received.”; [0065] reciting “Reconstruction of the symbols (521) can involve multiple different units depending on the type of the coded video picture or parts thereof (such as: inter and intra picture, inter and intra block), and other factors.”), or wherein coding accuracies of PC samples in the point cloud sequence are controlled by a Quantization Parameter (QP) value or a quantization step in the point cloud sequence coding (Schwarz; [Section V. A] reciting “Finally, an interpolation-based prediction module that is used to further improve the coding efficiency of the attribute values by exploiting spatial correlations as well as the quantization and dequantization steps that are applied”).
29 Regarding claim 8, Schwarz in view of Zhang teaches the method of claim 7 (see claims 1 and 6-7 rejections above) wherein the method further comprises: applying hierarchical coding accuracies to the PC samples based on the coding priorities of the PC samples (Schwarz; [Section V. D] reciting “The experimental evaluation of the proposed hierarchical prediction scheme shows that the optimal choice of the number of nearest neighbors k and the distances (dl)l=1…L is content dependent and may be computationally expensive.”), or wherein coding priorities of the one or multiple reference PC samples are higher than the current PC sample, or wherein coding accuracy of a first PC sample in the point cloud sequence with a higher coding priority is higher than a second PC sample in the point cloud sequence with a lower coding priority (Zhang; [0034] reciting “The point clouds (202), depicted as a bold line to emphasize a high data volume when compared to compressed point clouds (204) (a bitstream of compressed point clouds).”; [0108] reciting “The geometry information of the point cloud, which includes the 3D coordinates of the points in the point cloud, can be coded by an octree partition with occupancy information of the partitions. The attributes can be compressed based on a reconstructed geometry using, for example, prediction, lifting and region adaptive hierarchical transform techniques.”).
30 Regarding claim 9, Schwarz teaches the method of claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above), and although Schwarz may teach wherein if octree geometry coding is used, occupancy information of multiple reference nodes is used to perform the inter prediction for a current node ([Section VI. B] reciting “The set of occupied blocks is encoded with an octree, in which the leaves of the octree represent the occupied blocks. If the octree has height ℓ=level , then the blocks at the leaves have blockwidth W=2(depth−ℓ) voxels on a side. The parameter level is placed in the bitstream header. An octree can be represented by one byte for each internal (non-leaf) node of the tree, where the bits indicate the occupied children of the node. These are known as occupancy bytes. Currently, the occupancy bytes are entropy-coded.”), the limitation can be further taught by Zhang.
31 Zhang teaches wherein if octree geometry coding is used, occupancy information of multiple reference nodes is used to perform the inter prediction for a current node ([0087] reciting “A predictive picture (P picture) may be one that may be coded and decoded using intra prediction or inter prediction using at most one motion vector and reference index to predict the sample values of each block.”; [0108] reciting “The geometry information of the point cloud, which includes the 3D coordinates of the points in the point cloud, can be coded by an octree partition with occupancy information of the partitions. The attributes can be compressed based on a reconstructed geometry using, for example, prediction, lifting and region adaptive hierarchical transform techniques”).
32 It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method (taught by Schwarz) to incorporate the teachings of Zhang to provide a clearer method that utilizes occupancy information for octree coding (which is loosely taught by Schwarz) for the predictions for specific nodes. Doing so would allow associated attributes of a point cloud to be separately compressed as stated by Zhang ([0108] recited).
33 Regarding claim 10, Schwarz in view of Zhang teaches the method of claim 9 (see claims 1 and 9 rejections above), wherein geometry information of a PC sample in the point cloud sequence is represented by an octree structure and occupancy information of octree nodes when using octree geometry coding, or wherein there are multiple reference frames for the current frame (Zhang; [Abstract] reciting “The processing circuitry determines that a current node in an octree structure is eligible for an isolated mode. The octree structure corresponds to three dimensional (3D) partitions of a space of the point cloud. Then the processing circuitry determines, based on information of one or more other nodes, a single isolated point flag for the current node that indicates whether the current node is coded with a single isolated point.”; [0065] reciting “Reconstruction of the symbols (521) can involve multiple different units depending on the type of the coded video picture or parts thereof (such as: inter and intra picture, inter and intra block), and other factors.; [0096] reciting “The octree encoding module (730) is configured to receive filtered positions from the duplicated points removal module (712), and perform an octree-based encoding process to generate a sequence of occupancy codes that describe a 3D grid of voxels. The occupancy codes are provided to the arithmetic coding module (770).”).
34 Regarding claim 11, Schwarz in view of Zhang teaches the method of claim 10 (see claims 1 and 9-10 rejections above), wherein an indication indicating whether to use multiple reference frames is indicated in the bitstream (Zhang; [Abstract] reciting “Then the processing circuitry determines, based on information of one or more other nodes, a single isolated point flag for the current node that indicates whether the current node is coded with a single isolated point.”), or wherein there is at least one reference node for the current node in each reference frame, wherein a reference occupancy code is selected for the current node from at least one of the following candidate values: a candidate value derived by occupancy information of one or multiple reference nodes, or a candidate value derived as a function of occupancy information of the one or multiple reference nodes (Zhang; [0101] reciting “The arithmetic coding module (770) is configured to receive the occupancy codes, the candidate indices (if used), the quantized residuals (if generated), and other information, and perform entropy encoding to further compress the received values or information. As a result, a compressed bitstream (702) carrying the compressed information can be generated. The bitstream (702) may be transmitted, or otherwise provided, to a decoder that decodes the compressed bitstream, or may be stored in a storage device.”).
35 Regarding claim 12, Schwarz in view of Zhang teaches the method of claim 11 (see claims 1 and 9-11 rejections above), wherein the candidate values comprise at least one of the following: exclusive OR (XOR) of occupancy information of the one or multiple reference nodes, occupancy information of the one or multiple reference nodes (Zhang; [0108] reciting “The geometry information of the point cloud, which includes the 3D coordinates of the points in the point cloud, can be coded by an octree partition with occupancy information of the partitions.”), or occupancy information of a reference node in the one or multiple reference nodes, wherein the selection of the reference occupancy code is based on a rate optimization method, a distortion optimization method, or a Rate Distortion Optimization (RDO) method (Schwarz; [Section V. D] reciting “For instance, the optimal number of nearest neighbors k could be chosen based on a Rate-Distortion Optimization (RDO) process.”; Zhang; [0076] reciting “Parameters set by the controller (650) can include rate control related parameters (picture skip, quantizer, lambda value of rate-distortion optimization techniques, . . . ), picture size, group of pictures (GOP) layout, maximum motion vector search range, and so forth.”), or wherein the selection of the reference occupancy code is derived at a decoder of the bitstream (Zhang; [0056] reciting “The occupancy map decompression module (438) can decode the compressed occupancy maps according to a suitable standard (e.g., HEVC, VVC, etc.) and output decompressed occupancy maps.”), or wherein an indication of the selection of the reference occupancy code is indicated in the bitstream, or wherein the reference occupancy code is used as predicted occupancy information (Zhang; [0108] reciting “The geometry information of the point cloud, which includes the 3D coordinates of the points in the point cloud, can be coded by an octree partition with occupancy information of the partitions. The attributes can be compressed based on a reconstructed geometry using, for example, prediction, lifting and region adaptive hierarchical transform techniques.”).
36 Regarding claim 13, Schwarz teaches the method of claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above), and although Schwarz may teach wherein if octree geometry coding is used, selections of reference occupancy information for child nodes are derived based on a current node and reference nodes of the current node ([Section VI. B] reciting “The set of occupied blocks is encoded with an octree, in which the leaves of the octree represent the occupied blocks. If the octree has height ℓ=level , then the blocks at the leaves have blockwidth W=2(depth−ℓ) voxels on a side. The parameter level is placed in the bitstream header. An octree can be represented by one byte for each internal (non-leaf) node of the tree, where the bits indicate the occupied children of the node. These are known as occupancy bytes. Currently, the occupancy bytes are entropy-coded.”), the limitation can be further taught by Zhang.
37 Zhang teaches wherein if octree geometry coding is used, selections of reference occupancy information for child nodes are derived based on a current node and reference nodes of the current node ([0096] reciting “The octree encoding module (730) is configured to receive filtered positions from the duplicated points removal module (712), and perform an octree-based encoding process to generate a sequence of occupancy codes that describe a 3D grid of voxels. The occupancy codes are provided to the arithmetic coding module (770).”; [0103] reciting “The octree decoding module (830) is configured to determine reconstructed positions of points in the point cloud according to the occupancy codes.”; [0118] reciting “The occupancy code can be denoted as S which is an 8-bit integer, and each bit in S indicates an occupancy status of a child node of the current node. In an embodiment, the occupancy code is encoded using a bit wise encoding. In another embodiment, the occupancy code is encoded using a byte wise encoding.”; [0119] reciting “Each bin in S is encoded by referring to the occupancy status of neighboring nodes of the current code and/or child nodes of the neighboring nodes.”).
38 It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method (taught by Schwarz) to incorporate the teachings of Zhang to provide a clearer method to utilize various octree methods (like the ones taught by Schwarz) to incorporate child nodes of the various required nodes. Doing so would allow the occupancy codes to be updated during the coding process as stated by Zhang ([0118] recited).
39 Regarding claim 14, Schwarz in view of Zhang teaches the method of claim 13 (see claims 1 and 13 rejections above), wherein geometry information of a PC sample in the point cloud sequence is represented by an octree structure and occupancy information of octree nodes when using octree geometry coding (Zhang; [0108] reciting “The geometry information of the point cloud, which includes the 3D coordinates of the points in the point cloud, can be coded by an octree partition with occupancy information of the partitions. The attributes can be compressed based on a reconstructed geometry using, for example, prediction, lifting and region adaptive hierarchical transform techniques.”).
40 Regarding claim 15, Schwarz teaches the method of claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above), but does not explicitly teach wherein reference points are selected from different reference PC samples for a current PC point of the current PC sample to perform attribute inter prediction.
41 Zhang teaches wherein reference points are selected from different reference PC samples for a current PC point of the current PC sample to perform attribute inter prediction ([0069] reciting “In other cases, the output samples of the scaler/inverse transform unit (551) can pertain to an inter coded, and potentially motion compensated block. In such a case, a motion compensation prediction unit (553) can access reference picture memory (557) to fetch samples used for prediction.”; [0087] reciting “A predictive picture (P picture) may be one that may be coded and decoded using intra prediction or inter prediction using at most one motion vector and reference index to predict the sample values of each block.”; [0097] reciting “The attribute transfer module (720) is configured to receive attributes of the input point cloud, and perform an attribute transfer process to determine an attribute value for each voxel when multiple attribute values are associated with the respective voxel. The attribute transfer process can be performed on the re-ordered points output from the octree encoding module (730). The attributes after the transfer operations are provided to the attribute prediction module (750). The LOD generation module (740) is configured to operate on the re-ordered points output from the octree encoding module (730), and re-organize the points into different LODs.”).
42 It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method (taught by Schwarz) to incorporate the teachings of Zhang to provide a method to utilize the point cloud points/samples provided by Schwarz to incorporate attribute inter prediction. Doing so would allow the methods to fetch samples to use for prediction in accordance with symbols pertaining to a block as stated by Zhang ([0069] recited).
43 Regarding claim 16, Schwarz in view of Zhang teaches the method of claim 15 (see claims 1 and 15 rejections above), wherein multiple reference points are used to perform attribute inter prediction for the current point (Zhang; [0069] reciting “In other cases, the output samples of the scaler/inverse transform unit (551) can pertain to an inter coded, and potentially motion compensated block. In such a case, a motion compensation prediction unit (553) can access reference picture memory (557) to fetch samples used for prediction.”; [0087] reciting “A predictive picture (P picture) may be one that may be coded and decoded using intra prediction or inter prediction using at most one motion vector and reference index to predict the sample values of each block.”; [0097] reciting “The attribute transfer module (720) is configured to receive attributes of the input point cloud, and perform an attribute transfer process to determine an attribute value for each voxel when multiple attribute values are associated with the respective voxel. The attribute transfer process can be performed on the re-ordered points output from the octree encoding module (730). The attributes after the transfer operations are provided to the attribute prediction module (750). The LOD generation module (740) is configured to operate on the re-ordered points output from the octree encoding module (730), and re-organize the points into different LODs.”), or wherein the reference points are selected from multiple reference PC samples based on geometry distances between the reference points and the current point (Schwarz; [Section V & Section V. D] reciting “The reconstructed geometry is then used to build a Level-Of-Detail (LoD) structure, which makes it possible to efficiently predict attributes and encode/transmit them in a scalable manner…The attributes associated with the point cloud are encoded/decoded in the order defined by the LOD generation process…The experimental evaluation of the proposed hierarchical prediction scheme shows that the optimal choice of the number of nearest neighbors k and the distances (dl)l=1…L is content dependent and may be computationally expensive.”, or wherein attribute information of the reference points is used to derive a predicted attribute value of the current point (Zhang; [0092] reciting “In some embodiments, a bi-prediction technique can be used in the inter-picture prediction. According to the bi-prediction technique, two reference pictures, such as a first reference picture and a second reference picture that are both prior in decoding order to the current picture in the video (but may be in the past and future, respectively, in display order) are used. A block in the current picture can be coded by a first motion vector that points to a first reference block in the first reference picture, and a second motion vector that points to a second reference block in the second reference picture.”).
44 Regarding claim 18, Schwarz teaches determining, during a conversion between a current point cloud (PC) sample of a point cloud sequence and a bitstream of the point cloud sequence, one or multiple reference PC samples for the current PC sample; and performing the conversion based on the one or multiple reference PC samples (see claim 1 rejection above as it has similar limitations).
45 Schwarz does not explicitly teach an apparatus for processing point cloud data comprising a processor and a non-transitory memory with instructions thereon, wherein the instructions upon execution by the processor, cause the processor to perform acts…
46 Zhang teaches an apparatus for processing point cloud data comprising a processor ([Abstract] reciting “Aspects of the disclosure provide methods and apparatuses for point cloud compression and decompression. In some examples, an apparatus for point cloud compression/decompression includes processing circuitry.”) and a non-transitory memory with instructions thereon, wherein the instructions upon execution by the processor, cause the processor to perform acts ([0010] reciting “Aspects of the disclosure also provide a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions which when executed by a computer for point cloud encoding/decoding cause the computer to perform any one or a combination of the methods for point cloud encoding/decoding”)…
47 It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method (taught by Schwarz) to incorporate the teachings of Zhang to provide an apparatus and a non-transitory medium for the teachings of Schwarz, which Zhang teaches similar point cloud methods. Doing so would allow the storage to be user accessible as stated by Zhang ([0158] recited).
48 Regarding claim 19, Schwarz teaches a determining, during a conversion between a current point cloud (PC) sample of a point cloud sequence and a bitstream of the point cloud sequence, one or multiple reference PC samples for the current PC sample; and performing the conversion based on the one or multiple reference PC samples (see claim 1 rejection above as it has similar limitations).
49 Schwarz does not explicitly teach a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that cause a processor to perform acts…
50 Zhang teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that cause a processor to perform acts ([0010] reciting “Aspects of the disclosure also provide a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions which when executed by a computer for point cloud encoding/decoding cause the computer to perform any one or a combination of the methods for point cloud encoding/decoding”)…
51 It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method (taught by Schwarz) to incorporate the teachings of Zhang to provide a type of a non-transitory medium for the teachings of Schwarz, which Zhang teaches similar point cloud methods. Doing so would allow the storage to be user accessible as stated by Zhang ([0158] recited).
52 Regarding claim 20, Schwarz teaches a determining one or multiple reference point cloud (PC) samples for a current PC sample of the point cloud sequence; and generating the bitstream based on the one or multiple reference PC samples (see claim 1 rejection above as it has similar limitations).
53 Schwarz does not explicitly teach a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream of a point cloud sequence which is generated by a method performed by a point cloud processing apparatus…
54 Zhang teaches a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream of a point cloud sequence which is generated by a method performed by a point cloud processing apparatus ([Claim 15] reciting “A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions which when executed by a computer for point cloud coding cause the computer to perform: receiving a bitstream carrying compressed data for a point cloud”; [Abstract] reciting “In some examples, an apparatus for point cloud compression/decompression includes processing circuitry. In some examples, the processing circuitry receives a bitstream carrying compressed data for a point cloud.”)…
55 It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method (taught by Schwarz) to incorporate the teachings of Zhang to provide a type of a non-transitory medium for the bitstream taught by Schwarz, which the storage mediums Zhang teaches contains similar point cloud methods. Doing so would allow the storage to be user accessible as stated by Zhang ([0158] recited).
56 Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwarz, S., Preda, M., Baroncini, V., Budagavi, M., Cesar, P., Chou, P. A., ... & Zakharchenko, V. (2018). Emerging MPEG standards for point cloud compression. IEEE Journal on Emerging and Selected Topics in Circuits and Systems, 9(1), 133-148 (hereinafter Schwarz) in view of Zeng et al. (US 20210043002 A1).
57 Regarding claim 3, Schwarz teaches the method of claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above), but does not explicitly teach wherein the one or multiple reference PC samples comprise a first reference PC sample in a reference frame with a later time stamp than the current frame comprising the current PC sample, or wherein the one or multiple reference PC samples comprise a second reference PC sample with an earlier time stamp than the current frame comprising the current PC sample, or wherein the one or multiple reference PC samples comprise a third reference PC sample with the same time stamp as the current frame comprising the current PC sample, or wherein an indication indicating whether a sample with a later time stamp than the current frame is allowed to be used as a reference PC sample is indicated in the bitstream.
58 Zeng teaches wherein the one or multiple reference PC samples comprise a first reference PC sample in a reference frame with a later time stamp than the current frame comprising the current PC sample, or wherein the one or multiple reference PC samples comprise a second reference PC sample with an earlier time stamp than the current frame comprising the current PC sample, or wherein the one or multiple reference PC samples comprise a third reference PC sample with the same time stamp as the current frame comprising the current PC sample, or wherein an indication indicating whether a sample with a later time stamp than the current frame is allowed to be used as a reference PC sample is indicated in the bitstream ([0049] reciting “In another embodiment, the preset condition herein may be that the data timestamp of the reference point cloud data is earlier or later than the recording timestamp of the reference image, and a difference between the data timestamp of the reference point cloud data and the recording timestamp of the reference image is less than a preset difference. For example, the data timestamp of the reference point cloud data is later than the recording timestamp of the reference image, that is, the recording timestamp of the reference image is 8:45:45, a data timestamp of point cloud data A is 8:45:46, a data timestamp of point cloud data B is 8:45:48, a data timestamp of point cloud data C is 8:45:49, and a preset difference value is 10 s.”).
59 It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method (taught by Schwarz) to incorporate the teachings of Zeng to provide a method that can indicate a later recorded timestamp using the specific point cloud samples taught by Schwarz, which can include multiple different data. Doing so would improve the annotation efficiency, and reduce the cost of annotation as stated by Zeng ([0012] recited).
Conclusion
60 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHNNY TRAN LE whose telephone number is (571)272-5680. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu: 7:30am-5pm; First Fridays Off; Second Fridays: 7:30am-4pm.
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, Kent Chang can be reached at (571) 272-7667. 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.
/JOHNNY T LE/Examiner, Art Unit 2614
/KENT W CHANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2614
Prosecution Insights