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 statements (IDS) were submitted on 04/19/2024, 07/15/2025/ 08/07/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description:
#400 in Figure 4.
#500 in Figure 5.
#600-626 (all reference characters) in Figure 6.
#700, #710 in Figure 7.
#800, #810, #820 in Figure 8.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, requires the specification to be written in “full, clear, concise, and exact terms.” The specification is replete with terms which are not clear, concise and exact. The specification should be revised carefully in order to comply with 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112. Examples of some unclear, inexact or verbose terms used in the specification are:
Repeated sections, such as a first “Summary” section on page 1 and a second “Summary” section on page 13.
Pages 4 and 5 are duplicates.
Clauses from the PCT application are included in pages 32-35.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 7, and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2, lines 2 and 5, “point could sequence” appears to be a typo. Examiner suggests “point cloud sequence”.
Claim 7, line 3, “point could sequence” appears to be a typo. Examiner suggests “point cloud sequence”.
Claim 15, line 2, “head box” appears to be a typo. Examiner suggests “header box”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Positive Note Regarding - 35 USC § 101
The Examiner’s 35 U.S.C. §101 analysis recognizes that the claimed subject matter is directed to a practical application of a technical solution. The claimed elements, taken as a combination, improve the functioning of 3D point cloud encoding by improving the coding quality and efficiency, see ¶0066. Because the claims recite specific, claimed steps and structural elements that produce a tangible technical result, they are not directed to an abstract idea absent additional inventive concept limitations. Accordingly, the record supports a positive 101 determination for the present claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-4, 6-9, and 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh (US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0029187) in view of Hannuksela et al. (US Patent No. 12,113,974) (hereafter, “Hannuksela”).
Regarding claim 1, Oh discloses a method for point cloud coding (¶0110, The point cloud video encoder 10002 according to the embodiments encodes the acquired point cloud video data), comprising: performing a conversion between a point cloud sequence and a bitstream of the point cloud sequence (¶0110, The point cloud video encoder 10002 may output a bitstream containing the encoded point cloud video data) based on a plurality of sets of sequence level parameters (SLPs) for coding the point cloud sequence (Fig. 21; ¶0525, A bitstream of point cloud data as shown in FIG. 21 is made into a G-PCC bitstream including a sequence of Type-Length-Value (TLV) structures. Each TLV structure includes one of a sequence parameter set, a geometry parameter set, an attribute parameter set, a geometry slice, and an attribute slice according to type information. Examiner interprets sequence parameter sets, geometry parameter sets, etc. as “sets of SLPs” as described in the spec of the instant application), wherein the plurality of sets of SLPs are indicated in the bitstream (¶0538, Referring to FIG. 43, in one embodiment, the tlv_type field equal to 0 indicates that data contained in the payload of the TLV encapsulation structure is a sequence parameter set. The tlv_type field equal to 1 indicates that the data is a geometry parameter set. The tiv_type field equal to 2 indicates that the data is a geometry slice. The tlv_type field equal to 3 indicates that the data is an attribute parameter set) and comprise a plurality of parameter sets for coding the point cloud sequence (¶0514, As described above, a bitstream of point cloud data output from the transmission processor 14005 may include an SPS, a GPS, one or more APSs), [and a parameter set for coding a data unit of a point cloud sample in the point cloud sequence is obtained from the plurality of parameter sets by an activation function].
However, Oh fails to disclose a parameter set for coding a data unit of a point cloud sample in the point cloud sequence is obtained from the plurality of parameter sets by an activation function.
Hannuksela teaches a parameter set for coding a data unit of a point cloud sample in the point cloud sequence is obtained from the plurality of parameter sets by an activation function (Col. 28, lines 66-67 – Col. 29, lines 1-4. Consequently, the transmission of picture and sequence parameter sets does not have to be accurately synchronized with the transmission of slices. Instead, it is sufficient that the active sequence and picture parameter sets are received at any moment before they are referenced; Col. 32, lines 23-26, For example, a parameter set that is referenced by the (de)coding of a coded video slice may be identified by providing the identifier value of the parameter set in a header of the coded video slice. Examiner interprets the retrieval of a separately transmitted parameter set based on an index to be the “activation function”).
Both Oh and Hannuksela are analogous to the claimed invention because Oh is in the field of point cloud encoding and Hannuksela is in the field of media bitstream encoding. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the activation function of Hannuksela into the point cloud encoding method of Oh. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to achieve more reliable data transmission, as suggested by Hannuksela at Col. 29, lines 4-6, allows transmission of parameter sets ‘out-of-band’ using a more reliable transmission mechanism compared to the protocols used for the slice data.
This method of improving Oh was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Hannuksela.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Oh with the teachings of Hannuksela to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, in which claim 1 is incorporated, Oh discloses wherein the plurality of sets of SLPs comprise parameters in a first syntax structure for coding the point could sequence (FIG. 24 shows an embodiment of a syntax structure of a sequence parameter set. Examiner considers the sequence parameter set syntax the “first syntax structure”), and at least one of the following is dependent on the parameters in the first syntax structure: information on whether to indicate parameters in a second syntax structure for coding the point could sequence in the bitstream (¶334, The attribute slice header may include an identifier (attr_parameter_set_id) of an active APS; ¶0335, In addition, the SPS lists available attributes, assigns an identifier to each of the attributes, and identifies a decoding method. The attribute slice is mapped to output attributes according to the identifier. The attribute slice has a dependency on the preceding (decoded) geometry slice and the APS. Examiner considers the mapping of attributes as “information on whether to indicate parameters”), a type of the second syntax structure being different from a type of the first syntax structure (¶0407, FIG. 28 shows an embodiment of a syntax structure of the attribute parameter set. Examiner considers the attribute parameter set or APS the “second syntax structure different from the first”), or information on how to indicate the parameters in the second syntax structure in the bitstream (¶0335, The attribute slice is mapped to output attributes according to the identifier. Examiner considers the specific mapping to be “how to indicate”).
Regarding claim 3, in which claim 2 is incorporated, Oh discloses wherein the first syntax structure comprises a sequence parameter set (SPS) (¶0335, In addition, the SPS lists available attributes, assigns an identifier to each of the attributes, and identifies a decoding method. The attribute slice is mapped to output attributes according to the identifier. Since the SPS provides mapping information, Examiner considers it the “first syntax structure”), or the second syntax structure comprises a geometry parameter set (GPS) or an attribute parameter set (APS) (¶0335, The attribute slice has a dependency on the preceding (decoded) geometry slice and the APS; ¶0514, As described above, a bitstream of point cloud data output from the transmission processor 14005 may include an SPS, a GPS, one or more APSs. Since the attribute that is what is being mapped, Examiner considers the APS the “second syntax structure”).
Regarding claim 4, in which claim 2 is incorporated, Oh discloses wherein the parameters in the first syntax structure are signaled before the parameters in the second syntax structure (¶0335, In addition, the SPS lists available attributes, assigns an identifier to each of the attributes, and identifies a decoding method. The attribute slice is mapped to output attributes according to the identifier. The attribute slice has a dependency on the preceding (decoded) geometry slice and the APS. As the SPS is used to perform the attribute mapping, Examiner interprets this to imply the SPS is signaled before the APS).
Regarding claim 6, in which claim 1 is incorporated, Oh discloses wherein the plurality of parameter sets comprises at least one of an SPS, a GPS, or an APS (¶0514, As described above, a bitstream of point cloud data output from the transmission processor 14005 may include an SPS, a GPS, one or more APSs).
Regarding claim 7, in which claim 1 is incorporated, Oh discloses wherein the data unit comprises at least one of the following: geometry data of the point cloud sample (¶0329, The geometry bitstream in each slice may be composed of a geometry slice header (geom_slice_header) and geometry slice data), or attribute data of the point could sample (¶0330, Each attribute bitstream in each slice may be composed of an attribute slice header (attr_slice_header) and attribute slice data).
Regarding claim 8, in which claim 1 is incorporated, Oh discloses wherein a plurality of parameter set indications referring to the plurality of parameter sets are indicated in the bitstream at a second level, the second level is lower than a sequence level (Fig. 21-23; ¶0334, the GPS may include an identifier (geom_parameter_set_id) for identifying the GPS and an identifier (seq_parameter_set_id) indicating an active SPS to which the GPS belongs. The APS may include an identifier (attr_parameter_set_id) for identifying the APS and an identifier (seq_parameter_set_id) indicating an active SPS to which the APS belongs. Examiner interprets the GPS and APS as the “second level lower than the sequence level”), [or wherein information on whether a plurality of parameter set indications referring to the plurality of parameter sets are indicated in the bitstream at a second level is dependent on the number of parameter sets at a sequence level, the second level is lower than the sequence level].
Regarding claim 9, in which claim 8 is incorporated, Oh discloses wherein the plurality of parameter set indications comprise an index indicating a parameter set used for the second level (¶0334, The geometry slice header may include an identifier (geom_parameter_set_id) of an active GPS to be referred to by a corresponding geometry slice… The attribute slice header may include an identifier (attr_parameter_set_id) of an active APS to be referred to by a corresponding attribute slice).
Regarding claim 11, in which claim 8 is incorporated, Oh discloses wherein one of the plurality of parameter set indications is indicated in a header box of the second level (¶0334, The geometry slice header may include an identifier (geom_parameter_set_id) of an active GPS to be referred to by a corresponding geometry slice… The attribute slice header may include an identifier (attr_parameter_set_id) of an active APS to be referred to by a corresponding attribute slice. Examiner considers the geometry and attribute slices the “second level”).
Regarding claim 12, in which claim 8 is incorporated, Oh discloses wherein one of the plurality of parameter set indications is indicated in a configuration box (Fig. 41; ¶0538, the tlv_type field equal to 0 indicates that data contained in the payload of the TLV encapsulation structure is a sequence parameter set. The tlv_type field equal to 1 indicates that the data is a geometry parameter set ... The tlv_type field equal to 3 indicates that the data is an attribute parameter set. Examiner considers the non-data payload parameters in the TLV encapsulation in Fig. 41 as a “configuration box”) in an information unit for the point cloud sample (Fig. 41. Examiner considers the TLV encapsulation as an “information unit”).
Regarding claim 13, in which claim 1 is incorporated, Oh discloses wherein the data unit is associated with a second level lower than a sequence level (Fig. 22; ¶0335, the geometry slice refers to the GPS, and the GPS refers the SPS. Examiner considers the geometry slice as the “data unit” and to be a “second level lower than the sequence level” as the GPS refers to the SPS).
Regarding claim 14, in which claim 13 is incorporated, Oh discloses wherein the second level is assigned with at least one of the plurality of parameter sets (Fig. 22; ¶0335, the geometry slice refers to the GPS).
Regarding claim 15, in which claim 13 is incorporated, Oh discloses wherein an indication referring to a parameter set for the second level is indicated in a head box of the second level (¶0334, The geometry slice header may include an identifier (geom_parameter_set_id) of an active GPS to be referred to by a corresponding geometry slice… The attribute slice header may include an identifier (attr_parameter_set_id) of an active APS to be referred to by a corresponding attribute slice. Examiner considers both the geometry slice and attribute slice to be “the second level”), [and the indication is used by the activation function to obtain the parameter set].
However, Oh fails to disclose the indication is used by the activation function to obtain the parameter set.
Hannuksela teaches indication is used by the activation function to obtain the parameter set (Col. 28, lines 66-67 – Col. 29, lines 1-4. Consequently, the transmission of picture and sequence parameter sets does not have to be accurately synchronized with the transmission of slices. Instead, it is sufficient that the active sequence and picture parameter sets are received at any moment before they are referenced; Col. 32, lines 23-26, For example, a parameter set that is referenced by the (de)coding of a coded video slice may be identified by providing the identifier value of the parameter set in a header of the coded video slice. Examiner interprets the retrieval of a separately transmitted parameter set based on an index to be the “activation function”).
Both Oh and Hannuksela are analogous to the claimed invention because Oh is in the field of point cloud encoding and Hannuksela is in the field of media bitstream encoding. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the activation function of Hannuksela into the point cloud encoding method of Oh. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to achieve more reliable data transmission, as suggested by Hannuksela at Col. 29, lines 4-6, allows transmission of parameter sets ‘out-of-band’ using a more reliable transmission mechanism compared to the protocols used for the slice data.
This method of improving Oh was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Hannuksela.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Oh with the teachings of Hannuksela to obtain the invention as specified in claim 15.
Regarding claim 16, in which claim 13 is incorporated, Oh discloses wherein the data unit is a geometry data unit (¶0329, The geometry bitstream in each slice may be composed of a geometry slice header (geom_slice_header) and geometry slice data), and an SPS [obtained by the activation function] for the geometry data unit is used for other data units (Fig. 19; ¶0299, FIGS. 19(b) and 19(c) illustrate an example in which the bounding box of FIG. 19(a) is partitioned into tile 1 # and tile 2 #, and tile 2 # is partitioned again into slice 1 # and slice 2 #; ¶0334, the GPS may include an identifier (geom_parameter_set_id) for identifying the GPS and an identifier (seq_parameter_set_id) indicating an active SPS to which the GPS belongs; ¶0386, in all slices that refer to the current GPS. Examiner considers slices as “data units”. Since multiple slices refer to the same GPS, they would also refer to the same SPS by extension. Therefore, Examiner considers the SPS acquired for one data unit to be “used for other data units”).
However, Oh fails to disclose obtained by the activation function.
Hannuksela teaches obtained by the activation function (Col. 28, lines 66-67 – Col. 29, lines 1-4. Consequently, the transmission of picture and sequence parameter sets does not have to be accurately synchronized with the transmission of slices. Instead, it is sufficient that the active sequence and picture parameter sets are received at any moment before they are referenced; Col. 32, lines 23-26, For example, a parameter set that is referenced by the (de)coding of a coded video slice may be identified by providing the identifier value of the parameter set in a header of the coded video slice. Examiner interprets the retrieval of a separately transmitted parameter set based on an index to be the “activation function”).
Both Oh and Hannuksela are analogous to the claimed invention because Oh is in the field of point cloud encoding and Hannuksela is in the field of media bitstream encoding. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the activation function of Hannuksela into the point cloud encoding method of Oh. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to achieve more reliable data transmission, as suggested by Hannuksela at Col. 29, lines 4-6, allows transmission of parameter sets ‘out-of-band’ using a more reliable transmission mechanism compared to the protocols used for the slice data.
This method of improving Oh was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Hannuksela.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Oh with the teachings of Hannuksela to obtain the invention as specified in claim 16.
Regarding claim 17, in which claim 1 is incorporated, Oh discloses wherein the conversion includes encoding the point cloud sequence into the bitstream (¶0110, The point cloud video encoder 10002 according to the embodiments encodes the acquired point cloud video data), or wherein the conversion includes decoding the point cloud sequence from the bitstream (¶0114, The point cloud video decoder 10006 decodes the bitstream containing the point cloud video data).
Regarding claim 18, Oh discloses an apparatus for processing point cloud data comprising a processor and a non-transitory memory with instructions thereon (¶0159, implemented by hardware including one or more processors… include a non-volatile memory), wherein the instructions upon execution by the processor, cause the processor to perform acts comprising: performing a conversion between a point cloud sequence and a bitstream of the point cloud sequence (¶0110, The point cloud video encoder 10002 may output a bitstream containing the encoded point cloud video data) based on a plurality of sets of sequence level parameters (SLPs) for coding the point cloud sequence (Fig. 21; ¶0525, A bitstream of point cloud data as shown in FIG. 21 is made into a G-PCC bitstream including a sequence of Type-Length-Value (TLV) structures. Each TLV structure includes one of a sequence parameter set, a geometry parameter set, an attribute parameter set, a geometry slice, and an attribute slice according to type information. Examiner interprets sequence parameter sets, geometry parameter sets, etc. as “sets of SLPs” as described in the spec of the instant application), wherein the plurality of sets of SLPs are indicated in the bitstream (¶0538, Referring to FIG. 43, in one embodiment, the tlv_type field equal to 0 indicates that data contained in the payload of the TLV encapsulation structure is a sequence parameter set. The tlv_type field equal to 1 indicates that the data is a geometry parameter set. The tiv_type field equal to 2 indicates that the data is a geometry slice. The tlv_type field equal to 3 indicates that the data is an attribute parameter set) and comprise a plurality of parameter sets for coding the point cloud sequence (¶0514, As described above, a bitstream of point cloud data output from the transmission processor 14005 may include an SPS, a GPS, one or more APSs), [and a parameter set for coding a data unit of a point cloud sample in the point cloud sequence is obtained from the plurality of parameter sets by an activation function].
However, Oh fails to disclose a parameter set for coding a data unit of a point cloud sample in the point cloud sequence is obtained from the plurality of parameter sets by an activation function.
Hannuksela teaches a parameter set for coding a data unit of a point cloud sample in the point cloud sequence is obtained from the plurality of parameter sets by an activation function (Col. 28, lines 66-67 – Col. 29, lines 1-4. Consequently, the transmission of picture and sequence parameter sets does not have to be accurately synchronized with the transmission of slices. Instead, it is sufficient that the active sequence and picture parameter sets are received at any moment before they are referenced; Col. 32, lines 23-26, For example, a parameter set that is referenced by the (de)coding of a coded video slice may be identified by providing the identifier value of the parameter set in a header of the coded video slice. Examiner interprets the retrieval of a separately transmitted parameter set based on an index to be the “activation function”).
Both Oh and Hannuksela are analogous to the claimed invention because Oh is in the field of point cloud encoding and Hannuksela is in the field of media bitstream encoding. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the activation function of Hannuksela into the point cloud encoding method of Oh. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to achieve more reliable data transmission, as suggested by Hannuksela at Col. 29, lines 4-6, allows transmission of parameter sets ‘out-of-band’ using a more reliable transmission mechanism compared to the protocols used for the slice data.
This method of improving Oh was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Hannuksela.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Oh with the teachings of Hannuksela to obtain the invention as specified in claim 18.
Regarding claim 19, Oh discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that cause a processor (¶0159, implemented by hardware including one or more processors… include a non-volatile memory) to perform acts comprising: performing a conversion between a point cloud sequence and a bitstream of the point cloud sequence (¶0110, The point cloud video encoder 10002 may output a bitstream containing the encoded point cloud video data) based on a plurality of sets of sequence level parameters (SLPs) for coding the point cloud sequence (Fig. 21; ¶0525, A bitstream of point cloud data as shown in FIG. 21 is made into a G-PCC bitstream including a sequence of Type-Length-Value (TLV) structures. Each TLV structure includes one of a sequence parameter set, a geometry parameter set, an attribute parameter set, a geometry slice, and an attribute slice according to type information. Examiner interprets sequence parameter sets, geometry parameter sets, etc. as “sets of SLPs” as described in the spec of the instant application), wherein the plurality of sets of SLPs are indicated in the bitstream (¶0538, Referring to FIG. 43, in one embodiment, the tlv_type field equal to 0 indicates that data contained in the payload of the TLV encapsulation structure is a sequence parameter set. The tlv_type field equal to 1 indicates that the data is a geometry parameter set. The tiv_type field equal to 2 indicates that the data is a geometry slice. The tlv_type field equal to 3 indicates that the data is an attribute parameter set) and comprise a plurality of parameter sets for coding the point cloud sequence (¶0514, As described above, a bitstream of point cloud data output from the transmission processor 14005 may include an SPS, a GPS, one or more APSs), [and a parameter set for coding a data unit of a point cloud sample in the point cloud sequence is obtained from the plurality of parameter sets by an activation function].
However, Oh fails to disclose a parameter set for coding a data unit of a point cloud sample in the point cloud sequence is obtained from the plurality of parameter sets by an activation function.
Hannuksela teaches a parameter set for coding a data unit of a point cloud sample in the point cloud sequence is obtained from the plurality of parameter sets by an activation function (Col. 28, lines 66-67 – Col. 29, lines 1-4. Consequently, the transmission of picture and sequence parameter sets does not have to be accurately synchronized with the transmission of slices. Instead, it is sufficient that the active sequence and picture parameter sets are received at any moment before they are referenced; Col. 32, lines 23-26, For example, a parameter set that is referenced by the (de)coding of a coded video slice may be identified by providing the identifier value of the parameter set in a header of the coded video slice. Examiner interprets the retrieval of a separately transmitted parameter set based on an index to be the “activation function”).
Both Oh and Hannuksela are analogous to the claimed invention because Oh is in the field of point cloud encoding and Hannuksela is in the field of media bitstream encoding. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the activation function of Hannuksela into the point cloud encoding method of Oh. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to achieve more reliable data transmission, as suggested by Hannuksela at Col. 29, lines 4-6, allows transmission of parameter sets ‘out-of-band’ using a more reliable transmission mechanism compared to the protocols used for the slice data.
This method of improving Oh was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Hannuksela.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Oh with the teachings of Hannuksela to obtain the invention as specified in claim 19.
Regarding claim 20, Oh discloses a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream of a point cloud sequence (¶0252, The transmission device may encapsulate the generated audio bitstream and video bitstream into a file and/or a segment. Examiner interprets encapsulating the bitstream into a file to imply storage on a non-transitory computer-readable medium) which is generated by a method performed by a point cloud processing apparatus, wherein the method comprises: generating the bitstream (¶0110, The point cloud video encoder 10002 may output a bitstream containing the encoded point cloud video data) based on a plurality of sets of sequence level parameters (SLPs) for coding the point cloud sequence (Fig. 21; ¶0525, A bitstream of point cloud data as shown in FIG. 21 is made into a G-PCC bitstream including a sequence of Type-Length-Value (TLV) structures. Each TLV structure includes one of a sequence parameter set, a geometry parameter set, an attribute parameter set, a geometry slice, and an attribute slice according to type information. Examiner interprets sequence parameter sets, geometry parameter sets, etc. as “sets of SLPs” as described in the spec of the instant application), wherein the plurality of sets of SLPs are indicated in the bitstream (¶0538, Referring to FIG. 43, in one embodiment, the tlv_type field equal to 0 indicates that data contained in the payload of the TLV encapsulation structure is a sequence parameter set. The tlv_type field equal to 1 indicates that the data is a geometry parameter set. The tiv_type field equal to 2 indicates that the data is a geometry slice. The tlv_type field equal to 3 indicates that the data is an attribute parameter set) and comprise a plurality of parameter sets for coding the point cloud sequence (¶0514, As described above, a bitstream of point cloud data output from the transmission processor 14005 may include an SPS, a GPS, one or more APSs), [and a parameter set for coding a data unit of a point cloud sample in the point cloud sequence is obtained from the plurality of parameter sets by an activation function].
However, Oh fails to disclose a parameter set for coding a data unit of a point cloud sample in the point cloud sequence is obtained from the plurality of parameter sets by an activation function.
Hannuksela teaches a parameter set for coding a data unit of a point cloud sample in the point cloud sequence is obtained from the plurality of parameter sets by an activation function (Col. 28, lines 66-67 – Col. 29, lines 1-4. Consequently, the transmission of picture and sequence parameter sets does not have to be accurately synchronized with the transmission of slices. Instead, it is sufficient that the active sequence and picture parameter sets are received at any moment before they are referenced; Col. 32, lines 23-26, For example, a parameter set that is referenced by the (de)coding of a coded video slice may be identified by providing the identifier value of the parameter set in a header of the coded video slice. Examiner interprets the retrieval of a separately transmitted parameter set based on an index to be the “activation function”).
Both Oh and Hannuksela are analogous to the claimed invention because Oh is in the field of point cloud encoding and Hannuksela is in the field of media bitstream encoding. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the activation function of Hannuksela into the point cloud encoding method of Oh. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to achieve more reliable data transmission, as suggested by Hannuksela at Col. 29, lines 4-6, allows transmission of parameter sets ‘out-of-band’ using a more reliable transmission mechanism compared to the protocols used for the slice data.
This method of improving Oh was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Hannuksela.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Oh with the teachings of Hannuksela to obtain the invention as specified in claim 20.
Claims 5 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oh (US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0029187) in view of Hannuksela et al. (US Patent No. 12,113,974) (hereafter, “Hannuksela (974)”) as applied to claims 1-4, 6-9, and 11-20 above, and further in view of Hannuksela (US Patent No. 9,912,966) (hereafter, “Hannuksela (966)”).
Regarding claim 5, in which claim 2 is incorporated, Oh discloses [wherein the parameters in the second syntax structure are absent from the bitstream, and the parameters in the first syntax structure are used for the second syntax structure, or wherein the parameters in the second syntax structure are indicated in the bitstream in a predictive way, or wherein the parameters in the second syntax structure are determined based on the parameters in the first syntax structure], or wherein the first syntax structure is an SPS, and the plurality of sets of SLPs further comprise parameters in a GPS and parameters in an APS (¶0514, As described above, a bitstream of point cloud data output from the transmission processor 14005 may include an SPS, a GPS, one or more APSs), or wherein the parameters in the first syntax structure are coded before the parameters in the second syntax structure (¶0335, In addition, the SPS lists available attributes, assigns an identifier to each of the attributes, and identifies a decoding method. The attribute slice is mapped to output attributes according to the identifier. The attribute slice has a dependency on the preceding (decoded) geometry slice and the APS. As the SPS is used to perform the attribute mapping, Examiner interprets this to imply the SPS is coded before the APS).
However, Oh fails to disclose wherein the parameters in the second syntax structure are absent from the bitstream, and the parameters in the first syntax structure are used for the second syntax structure, or wherein the parameters in the second syntax structure are indicated in the bitstream in a predictive way, or wherein the parameters in the second syntax structure are determined based on the parameters in the first syntax structure.
Hannuksela (966) teaches wherein the parameters in the second syntax structure are indicated in the bitstream in a predictive way (Col. 51, lines 59-62, The combination parameter set to be used may be inferred from this position information without carrying the combination parameter set index in the slice header. Examiner interprets inferring the index as a “predictive way”).
Oh, Hannuksela (974) and Hannuksela (966) are analogous to the claimed invention because Oh is in the field of point cloud encoding, Hannuksela (974) is in the field of media encoding, and Hannuksela (966) is in the field of video encoding. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the predicting of the parameter set of Hannuksela (966) into the activation function of Hannuksela (974) and the point cloud encoding of Oh. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been improved error resilience as suggested by Hannuksela (966) at Col. 69, line 37, error resilience may be improved.
This method of improving Oh was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Hannuksela (974) and Hannuksela (966).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Oh and the teachings of Hannuksela (974) with the teachings of Hannuksela (966) to obtain the invention as specified in claim 5.
Regarding claim 10, Oh in view of Hannuksela (974) discloses the method of claim 8.
However, Oh in view of Hannuksela (974) does not disclose wherein the plurality of parameter set indications are coded with one of the following: fixed-length coding, unary coding, or truncated unary coding, or wherein the plurality of parameter set indications are coded in a predictive way.
Hannuksela (966) teaches wherein the plurality of parameter set indications are coded with one of the following: fixed-length coding (Col. 47, lines 44-45, Fixed-length coding of the combination parameter set identifier), or wherein the plurality of parameter set indications are coded in a predictive way (Col. 51, lines 59-62, The combination parameter set to be used may be inferred from this position information without carrying the combination parameter set index in the slice header. Examiner interprets inferring the index as a “predictive way”).
Oh, Hannuksela (974) and Hannuksela (966) are analogous to the claimed invention because Oh is in the field of point cloud encoding, Hannuksela (974) is in the field of media encoding, and Hannuksela (966) is in the field of video encoding. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the predicting of the parameter set of Hannuksela (966) into the activation function of Hannuksela (974) and the point cloud encoding of Oh. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been improved error resilience as suggested by Hannuksela (966) at Col. 69, line 37, error resilience may be improved.
This method of improving Oh was within the ordinary ability of one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teachings of Hannuksela (974) and Hannuksela (966).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Oh and the teachings of Hannuksela (974) with the teachings of Hannuksela (966) to obtain the invention as specified in claim 10.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sim et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2025/0330598) teaches using a single SPS for many pictures (Claim 18, a sequence parameter set referred to by all of the pictures belonging to the sequence).
Ramasubramonian et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0407144) teaches determining and signaling an attribute parameter set (Claim 1, determining one or more attribute parameters of an attribute of a point in the point cloud of a frame, wherein the one or more attribute parameters define how to determine or use a value of the attribute and are applicable to a plurality of points in the point cloud; and signaling, in a bitstream indicative of the point cloud, the one or more attribute parameters in a syntax structure that is specific to the frame).
Iguchi et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0017612) teaches a point cloud encoding method with multiple levels (¶0730, the information indicating features may be included in additional information in a parameter set or a slice header, such as supplemental enhancement information (SEI), a sequence parameter set (SPS), a geometry parameter set (GPS), or an attributed parameter set (APS). As described above, the additional information has levels such as a sequence level, a frame level, and a slice level).
Wang et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0182649) teaches using an SPS to inform how to fill the parameters of a second syntax structure (¶0305, Wherein the value of the first syntax element is used to specify whether a decoded picture buffer, DPB, parameters syntax structure is present in the SPS… the presence of a DPB syntax element (for example, one of max_dec_pic_buffering_minus1[i], max_num_reorder_pics[i], and max_latency_increase_plus1[i] according to the detailed description above)).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XIAOMAO DING whose telephone number is (571)272-7237. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 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, Henok Shiferaw can be reached at (571) 272-4637. 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.
/X.D./ Examiner, Art Unit 2676
/Henok Shiferaw/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2676