DETAILED ACTION
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Examiner Comments
Important difference between claim 1& 8 is that, in claim 1, the third candidate is added until a number of the plurality of candidates in the candidate list reaches a maximum number.
In claim 7 it was indicated the second collocated picture is the first collocated picture.
Following prior arts are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20120320984 A1 (hereinafter Zhou)
US 20120207221 A1 (hereinafter Aono)
US 20160105681A1 (hereinafter Lee)
Response to Remarks/Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to other prior art rejection have been fully considered but are not persuasive for following reason.
Applicant argued in substance that the prior art does not teach “an index value for each of the one or more first candidates is smaller than an index value for the second candidate and smaller than an index value for each third candidate”
Examiner respectfully disagrees and argues that Zhou teaches the virtual/third candidates are entered at last after entering all native candidates (Fig. 9B)]. The native candidates are spatial (claimed first) candidates (Fig.3 left arrow 1 and top arrow 2) and collocated/temporal (claimed second) candidates. The spatial candidates entered in the list, before temporal candidate (Fig.3 spatial candidates are 1 & 2, temporal candidates #3, also see para 40-42)
Therefore, applicant’s arguments are not persuasive
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating
Claims 1, 3-6, 8-10 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Zhou
Regarding Claim 1: Lee teaches A moving picture coding method for generating a bitstream, the moving picture coding method comprising:
generating a candidate list that includes a plurality of candidates and a plurality of motion vector predictor indexes, each of the plurality of candidates corresponding to one of the pluralities of motion vector predictor indexes and being a candidate for a motion vector predictor to be used when coding a motion vector of a current block in a current picture; and
generating an index, from among the plurality of motion vector predictor indexes, identifying a motion vector from the candidate list, the index being embedded in the bitstream [(“obtaining index information indicating single motion information from among the ‘n’ pieces of candidate motion information from a bitstream” para 27)] , wherein the generating of the candidate list includes:
adding, when a motion vector used for coding a first block spatially adjacent to the current block is useable for coding the current block, one or more first candidates to the candidate list, the one or more first candidates being derived based on the motion vector used for coding the first block [(para 257; spatially collocated motion candidate, generated by 1510 of Fig.15)] ;
adding a second candidate to the candidate list, the second candidate being derived based on a motion vector used for coding a second block within a first collocated picture different from the current picture [(“motion information of temporal prediction units that are temporally collocated to the current prediction unit” para 257, generated by 1520 of Fig.15)] ;
and adding a third candidate to the candidate list until a number of the plurality of candidates in the candidate list reaches a maximum number, the third candidate being derived based on a motion vector used for coding a third block within a second collocated picture different from the current picture the third block being different from the second block, each third candidate is newly added to the candidate list and has a value different from each other candidate in the candidate list [(para 258; motion information “temporal prediction units”; i.e. this temporal unit can be separate from the second candidate; these are additional candidate generated by 1540)] ,
While Lee teaches the third candidates are added so that the total number reaches n, it may be argued that it is not clear whether two candidates are added and an index value for each of the one or more first candidates is smaller than an index value for the second candidate and smaller than an index value for each third candidate
However, in the same/related field of endeavor, Zhou teaches adding multiple/two third candidates to make the number of candidates to predetermined value [(para 103, 105; also see para 56})] an index value for each of the one or more first candidates is smaller than an index value for the second candidate and smaller than an index value for each third candidate [(Fig.3 and para 40-42; spatial candidates are entered into the candidate list, then to collocated or temporal motion vector candidates; finally virtual candidate is entered at the last {Fig.9B}, therefore spatial candidates have the smallest index)]
Therefore, in light of above discussion it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to combine the teaching of the prior arts because such combination would provide predictable result with no change of their respective functionalities [(Both of the prior arts are adding additional candidates to make the total candidate number = a predetermined number)] .
Lee in view of Zhou additionally teaches, with respect to claim 3. The moving picture coding method according to claim 1, wherein the second block or the third block is adjacent to a collocated block, the collocated block being collocated with the current block [(Zhou Fig.3; Lee Fig.19)] .
Lee in view of Zhou additionally teaches, with respect to claim 4. The moving picture coding method according to claim 1, wherein the second block is located in a certain area of the first collocated picture or the third block is located in a certain area of the second collocated picture [(Zhou Fig.3; Lee Fig.19)].
Lee in view of Zhou additionally teaches, with respect to claim 5. The moving picture coding method according to claim 1, wherein the second block or the third block is adjacent to a collocated block, the collocated block being collocated with the current block. [(Zhou Fig.3; Lee Fig.19)]
Lee in view of Zhou additionally teaches, with respect to claim 6. The moving picture coding method according to claim 1, wherein the second block is located in a certain area of the first collocated picture or the third block is located in a certain area of the second collocated picture. [(Zhou Fig.3; Lee Fig.19)]
Regarding Claim 8: See analysis of claim 1
Lee additionally teaches, with respect to claims 9 and 10: The moving picture coding method according to Claim 1, wherein the second candidate is derived by scaling the motion vector used for coding the second block, based on a first temporal distance to a first reference picture used for coding the second block [(unit 1520 “The scaling of the temporal prediction motion vector may be performed based on a temporal distance between an L0R0 picture 1920 and a reference picture L1R0”; para 211 and Fig.19)] , and
the third candidate is derived by scaling the motion vector used for coding the third block, based on a second temporal distance to a second reference picture used for coding the third block [(Para 224-unit 1520 generate the temporal candidate based on the first previous picture. “the additional candidate motion information generating unit 1540 may scale motion information of a prediction unit of a previous picture having motion information from among prediction units of the remaining previous picture except for a first previous picture having available motion information and may add the scaled motion information to additional candidate motion information.”; Therefore this scaling is based on a different reference picture. Also this is based on temporal candidate { see 1540 fed by 1520}, which in turns will depends on temporal distance of another reference picture)]
Claims 1, 3-6, 8 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Zhou in view of Aono.
Regarding Claim 1: Zhou teaches A moving picture coding method for generating a bitstream, the moving picture coding method comprising: generating a candidate list that includes a plurality of candidates, and a plurality of motion vector predictor indexes, each of the plurality of candidates corresponding to one of the plurality of motion vector predictor indexes and being a candidate for a motion vector predictor to be used when coding a motion vector of a current block in a current picture [(The Abstract, para 46, 39, AMVP/advance motion vector prediction candidate list {para 46})] : and generating an index, from among the plurality of motion vector predictor indexes identifying a motion vector from the candidate list, the index being embedded in the bitstream [(“inter-prediction information for the PU in the bit stream such as an index (or indices) into the AMVP candidate list(s) for the MVP candidate(s) selected” {para 45}. Also see para 45-46)] , wherein the generating of the candidate list includes: adding, when a motion vector used for coding a first block spatially adjacent to the current block is useable for coding the current block, one or more first candidates to the candidate list, the one or more first candidates being derived based on the motion vector used for coding the first block [(para 40-41, Fig.3 SMD candidate)] : adding a second candidate to the candidate list, the second candidate being derived based on a motion vector used for coding a second block within a first collocated picture different from the current picture [(TMD positions {para 40 & Fig.3})] : and adding a third candidate to the candidate list until a number of the plurality of candidates in the candidate list reaches a maximum number, the third candidate being derived based on a motion vector used for coding a third block within a second collocated picture different from the current picture, the third block being different from the second block, wherein, in the adding of the third candidate, each third candidate is newly added to the candidate list and has a value different from each other candidate in the candidate list, and the third candidate is added to the candidate list at least twice in the adding of the third candidate. [(virtual candidate=>third candidate {para 103, 56})]
an index value for each of the one or more first candidates is smaller than an index value for the second candidate and smaller than an index value for each third candidate [(Fig.3 and para 40-42; special candidates are entered into the candidate list, then to collocated or temporal motion vector candidates; finally virtual candidate is entered at the last {Fig.9B}, therefore have the largest index)]
Zhou does not explicitly show adding multiple third candidates the third candidate being derived based on a motion vector used for coding a third block within a second collocated picture different from the current picture
In other word difference between Zhou and claimed invention is the specifics of third candidates. The claimed invention third candidate is taken from collocated block taken from a different collocated block (i.e. concept of motion vector candidate from two different collocated blocks is required for the claim as a whole). Zhou’s third candidate is virtual candidate {para 103, 105}. A virtual candidate could be any of known candidates {para 104, 115} , multiple/two virtual candidates are added {103, 105}
However, in the same/related field of endeavor, Aono teaches adding multiple third candidates the third candidate being derived based on a motion vector used for coding a third block within a second collocated picture different from the current picture [(Fig.10; in additional to spatial candidates/first type and temporal candidate/second type generate a third type i.e. spatio-temporal-direction prediction vector {para 135, 137; #193b1 & #193b2})]
Therefore, in light of above discussion it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to combine the teaching of the prior arts because such combination would provide predictable result with no change of their respective functionalities [(Zhou is showing one collocated block position for candidate motion vector. If Zhou was showing that a second collocated block position for candidate motion vector then it would completely teach the claimed invention.
Aono is in fact showing using multiple temporal collocated blocks for motion vector candidate is known in the art, therefore would have been a known candidates to pick as virtual candidate (in Zhou). Therefore, the combination teaches the claimed limitation.
Zhou is teaching any meaningful candidate can be used for third type/virtual candidate, whereas Aono teaching meaningful candidates can come from other/multiple collocated blocks {#193; shifted candidate motion vectors {para 135}, in addition to collocated vectors #192 )] .
Zhou in view of Aono additionally teaches, with respect to claim 3. The moving picture coding method according to claim 1, wherein the second block or the third block is adjacent to a collocated block, the collocated block being collocated with the current block [(Zhou Fig.3; Aono para 135)] .
Zhou in view of Aono additionally teaches, with respect to claim 4. The moving picture coding method according to claim 1, wherein the second block is located in a certain area of the first collocated picture or the third block is located in a certain area of the second collocated picture [(Zhou Fig.3; Aono para 135)].
Zhou in view of Aono additionally teaches, with respect to claim 5. The moving picture coding method according to claim 1, wherein the second block or the third block is adjacent to a collocated block, the collocated block being collocated with the current block. [(Zhou Fig.3; Aono para 135)]
Zhou in view of Aono additionally teaches, with respect to claim 6. The moving picture coding method according to claim 1, wherein the second block is located in a certain area of the first collocated picture or the third block is located in a certain area of the second collocated picture. [(Zhou Fig.3; Aono para 135)]
Regarding Claim 8: See analysis of claim 1 and note Zhou is teaching first candidates and second candidates and Aono is teaching the third candidates in addition to the first candidates. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made, to combine the teaching of the prior arts because such combination would provide predictable result with no change of their respective functionalities.[[( Zhou is teaching any meaningful candidate can be used for third type/virtual candidate, whereas Aono teaching meaningful candidates can come from other/multiple collocated blocks {#193; shifted candidate motion vectors {para 135}, in addition to collocated vectors #192)]
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 Shahan Rahaman whose telephone number is (571)270-1438. The examiner can normally be reached on 7am - 3:30pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nasser Goodarzi can be reached at telephone number (571) 272-4195. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/SHAHAN UR RAHAMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426