CTNF 18/654,044 CTNF 95848 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 12-151 AIA 26-51 12-51 Status of Claims Claims 1-10 are pending. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/3/24 and 8/28/24 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. Specification 06-14 AIA Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure. A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art. If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives. Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps. Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts. The summary should be separate and distinct from the abstract and directed toward the invention rather than the disclosure as a whole (see section (h) below). Content of Specification (a) TITLE OF THE INVENTION : See 37 CFR 1.72(a) and MPEP § 606. The title of the invention should be placed at the top of the first page of the specification unless the title is provided in an application data sheet. The title of the invention should be brief but technically accurate and descriptive, preferably from two to seven words. It may not contain more than 500 characters. (b) CROSS-REFERENCES TO RELATED APPLICATIONS : See 37 CFR 1.78 and MPEP § 211 et seq. (c) STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT : See MPEP § 310. (d) THE NAMES OF THE PARTIES TO A JOINT RESEARCH AGREEMENT . See 37 CFR 1.71(g). (e) INCORPORATION-BY-REFERENCE OF MATERIAL SUBMITTED ON A READ-ONLY OPTICAL DISC, AS A TEXT FILE OR AN XML FILE VIA THE PATENT ELECTRONIC SYSTEM : The specification is required to include an incorporation-by-reference of electronic documents that are to become part of the permanent United States Patent and Trademark Office records in the file of a patent application. See 37 CFR 1.77(b)(5) and MPEP § 608.05. See also the Legal Framework for Patent Electronic System posted on the USPTO website (https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2019LegalFrameworkPES.pdf) and MPEP § 502.05 (f) STATEMENT REGARDING PRIOR DISCLOSURES BY THE INVENTOR OR A JOINT INVENTOR . See 35 U.S.C. 102(b) and 37 CFR 1.77. (g) BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION : See MPEP § 608.01(c). The specification should set forth the Background of the Invention in two parts: (1) Field of the Invention: A statement of the field of art to which the invention pertains. This statement may include a paraphrasing of the applicable U.S. patent classification definitions of the subject matter of the claimed invention. This item may also be titled “Technical Field.” (2) Description of the Related Art including information disclosed under 37 CFR 1.97 and 37 CFR 1.98: A description of the related art known to the applicant and including, if applicable, references to specific related art and problems involved in the prior art which are solved by the applicant’s invention. This item may also be titled “Background Art.” (h) BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION : See MPEP § 608.01(d). A brief summary or general statement of the invention as set forth in 37 CFR 1.73. The summary is separate and distinct from the abstract and is directed toward the invention rather than the disclosure as a whole. The summary may point out the advantages of the invention or how it solves problems previously existent in the prior art (and preferably indicated in the Background of the Invention). In chemical cases it should point out in general terms the utility of the invention. If possible, the nature and gist of the invention or the inventive concept should be set forth. Objects of the invention should be treated briefly and only to the extent that they contribute to an understanding of the invention. (i) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWING(S) : See MPEP § 608.01(f). A reference to and brief description of the drawing(s) as set forth in 37 CFR 1.74. (j) DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION: See MPEP § 608.01(g). A description of the preferred embodiment(s) of the invention as required in 37 CFR 1.71. The description should be as short and specific as is necessary to describe the invention adequately and accurately. Where elements or groups of elements, compounds, and processes, which are conventional and generally widely known in the field of the invention described, and their exact nature or type is not necessary for an understanding and use of the invention by a person skilled in the art, they should not be described in detail. However, where particularly complicated subject matter is involved or where the elements, compounds, or processes may not be commonly or widely known in the field, the specification should refer to another patent or readily available publication which adequately describes the subject matter. (k) CLAIM OR CLAIMS : See 37 CFR 1.75 and MPEP § 608.01(m). The claim or claims must commence on a separate sheet or electronic page (37 CFR 1.52(b)(3)). Where a claim sets forth a plurality of elements or steps, each element or step of the claim should be separated by a line indentation. There may be plural indentations to further segregate subcombinations or related steps. See 37 CFR 1.75 and MPEP 608.01(i) - (p). (l) ABSTRACT OF THE DISCLOSURE : See 37 CFR 1.72 (b) and MPEP § 608.01(b). The abstract is a brief narrative of the disclosure as a whole, as concise as the disclosure permits, in a single paragraph preferably not exceeding 150 words, commencing on a separate sheet following the claims. In an international application which has entered the national stage (37 CFR 1.491(b)), the applicant need not submit an abstract commencing on a separate sheet if an abstract was published with the international application under PCT Article 21. The abstract that appears on the cover page of the pamphlet published by the International Bureau (IB) of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is the abstract that will be used by the USPTO. See MPEP § 1893.03(e). (m) SEQUENCE LISTING : See 37 CFR 1.821 - 1.825 and MPEP §§ 2421 - 2431. The requirement for a sequence listing applies to all sequences disclosed in a given application, whether the sequences are claimed or not. See MPEP § 2422.01. 07-29 AIA The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: “[0010]” should be bolded for consistency. In Para. 0044, lines 3-4 “step 304” should read –step S304–. In Para. 0044, line 7, “step 305” should read –step S305–. In Para. 0045, line 1, “step 304” should read –step S304–. In Para. 0046, line 1, “step 304” should read –step S304–. In Para. 0046, line 4, “step 305” should read –step S305–. In Para. 0046, line 6, “step 303 and step 304” should read –step S303 and step S304–. In Para. 0071, lines 3 and 4, “step 608” should read –step S608 –. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 6, “the encoding processing” should read –encoding processing –. Appropriate correction is required. 07-29-01 AIA Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 5, “the encoding processing” should read –encoding processing –. Appropriate correction is required. 07-29-01 AIA Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 2, “following processes” should read –the following processes–. In line 6, “the encoding processing” should read –encoding processing –. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 07-34-01 Claims 3 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 3 recites the limitation "the magnitude of the motion vector" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 2, not claim 1 recites a motion vector. None of the previous claims recite a “magnitude” of the motion vector. Claim 6 recites the limitation "the entire point cloud" in line 2. It is unclear and indefinite if this is the same as the point cloud previously recited in claim 1. Claim 7 depends on claim 6 and is therefore also rejected under 112(b). 07-34-05 AIA Claim 8 recites the limitation " the encoding processing in the first encoding unit " in line 5 . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-2, 5, and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou et al. (US 2017/0347120 A1, hereinafter “Chou”) in view of Sasaki (US 2021/0248756 A1) . Regarding claim 1 , Chou teaches, an encoding system comprising (Abstract: “embodiments of innovations in the area of point cloud encoding and decoding”; Fig. 17: computing system 1700; Para. 0032-0033; Fig. 19b: encoder 1902) : at least one processor or circuit configured to function as (Fig. 17: central processing unit 1710 and graphics of co-processing unit 1715; Para. 0033) : a first encoding unit configured to encode an image ; and a second encoding unit configured to encode a point cloud (Fig. 19a: point cloud data 1905 is input into encoder 1901; Para. 0058: “the encoder (1901) receives point cloud data (1905) from the input buffer (1910) and produces encoded data (1995); Fig. 19b: point cloud data 1905 is input into encoder 1902; Note: the Examiner interprets encoder 1902, for example, as the second encoding unit) , wherein the second encoding unit performs encoding processing based on information [ motion vector ] that has been used for the encoding processing in the first encoding unit (As shown in Fig. 19b, motion data 1978 is provided to the motion compensator 1970 and motion compensated prediction values 1976 are encoded/transmitted to elements 1940, 1950, and 1990 through the inter-frame compression process; Para. 0066: motion data 1978 includes motion vector data, the motion data 1978 is provided to the motion compensator 1970, and the motion compensator 1970 produces motion-compensated prediction values 1976; Paras. 0067-0068) . Chou does not expressly disclose the following limitations: a first encoding unit configured to encode an image; information that has been used for the encoding processing in the first encoding unit. However, Sasaki teaches, a first encoding unit configured to encode an image (Para. 0072: the image encoding portion 4d encodes an image input; Paras. 0075-0080; As shown in Fig. 4, an image is input, the image is encoded by the encoding control portion 401, and the image is input into the motion vectors detecting portion 410) ; information that has been used for the encoding processing in the first encoding unit (Paras. 0075-0080; As shown in Fig. 4, an image is input, the image is encoded by the encoding control portion 401, and the image is input into the motion vectors detecting portion 410; Note: the Examiner interprets motion vectors as the information used for the encoding processing) . It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art, to combine the motion vector detected from the image in Sasaki with the encoding of the motion vector by the encoding unit in Chou in order to improve detection accuracy of a motion vector (Sasaki, Para. 0061). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. It is for at least the aforementioned that the Examiner has reached a conclusion of obviousness with respect to claim 1. Regarding claim 2 , the combination of Chou and Sasaki teaches the limitations as explained above in claim 1. The combination of Chou and Sasaki further teaches, the encoding system according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 above) , wherein the second encoding unit determines a reference point of an encoding target point based on a motion vector that has been output from the first encoding unit (Chou: As shown in Fig. 19b, motion data 1978 is provided to reference frame buffer 1974; Chou, Para. 0065: current point cloud frame can be coded using inter-frame compression and the reference frame buffer buffers one or more reconstructed coded point cloud frames for use as reference frames; Chou, Para. 0066: motion data 1978 includes motion vector data and reference frame selection data, and the motion compensator 1970 applies motion vectors for a block to the reconstructed reference frames from the reference buffer. For the block, the motion compensator 1970 produces a motion compensation prediction, which is a region of attributes in the reference frame used to generate motion-compensated prediction values 1976 for the block; Sasaki: Paras. 0075-0080; Sasaki: As shown in Fig. 4, an image is input, the image is encoded by the encoding control portion 401, and the image is input into the motion vectors detecting portion 410; Note: As shown in Para. 0079 of Sasaki, the motion vector detecting portion detects a motion vector using the input image. Additionally, since Sasaki outputs motion vectors and the encoder in Chou encodes motion vectors, it shows that motion vector output can be encoded) . The proposed combination as well as well as the motivation for combining the Chou and Sasaki references presented in the rejection of claim 1 apply to claim 2 and are incorporated herein by reference. Thus, the system recited in claim 2 is met by Chou and Sasaki. Regarding claim 5 , the combination of Chou and Sasaki teaches the limitations as explained above in claim 2. The combination of Chou and Sasaki further teaches, the encoding system according to Claim 2 (see claim 2 above) , wherein the second encoding unit selects one of interframe prediction and intra-frame prediction based on a difference in R value between a pixel at the encoding target point and a pixel at the reference point (Chou, Para. 0125: blocks of voxels; Chou, Para. 0067: the intra/inter switch 1938 selects whether a given block is compressed using intra-frame compression or inter-frame compression; Chou: As shown in Fig. 19b, switch 1938 determines whether a block is compressed using inter-frame or intra-frame compression; Chou: Para. 0068: “When inter-frame compression is used for a block, the encoder (1902) can determine whether or not to encode and transmit the differences (if any) between prediction values (1976) and corresponding original attributes (1914). The differences (if any) between the prediction values (1976) and corresponding original attributes (1914) provide values of the residual”; Chou, Para. 0068-0069; Chou: As shown in Para. 0075, a residual is associated with a point; Note: the Examiner interprets, for example, a residual value as an R value, and original attributes as reference points. Voxels are 3D pixels) . Regarding claim 8 , Chou teaches, a point cloud encoding device comprising (Fig. 17: computing system 1700; As shown in Fig. 19b, point cloud data 1905 is input into the encoder 1902; Paras. 0033; Para. 0050) : at least one processor or circuit configured to function as (Fig. 17: central processing unit 1710 and graphics of co-processing unit 1715; Para. 0033) : a first acquisition unit configured to acquire point cloud information (Para. 0036: “For point cloud data, the input device(s) (1750) may be a set of depth cameras or similar devices that capture video input used to derive point cloud data”; Para. 0046; As shown in Fig. 19b, input buffer 1910 receives point cloud data 1905) ; a second acquisition unit configured to acquire first information [ motion vector ] that has been used for the encoding processing in the first encoding unit (As shown in Fig. 19b, motion estimator 1972 produces motion data 1978 which is provided to motion compensator 1970 to produce motion-compensated prediction values 1976; Paras. 0066-0068) ; and a second encoding unit configured to perform encoding processing on the point cloud information based on the first information [ motion vector ] (As shown in Fig. 19b, motion data 1978 is provided to the motion compensator 1970 and motion compensated prediction values 1976 are encoded/transmitted to elements 1940, 1950, and 1990 through the inter-frame compression process; Para. 0066: motion data 1978 includes motion vector data, the motion data 1978 is provided to the motion compensator 1970, and the motion compensator 1970 produces motion-compensated prediction values 1976; Paras. 0067-0068) . Chou does not expressly disclose the following limitations: information that has been used for the encoding processing in the first encoding unit. However, Sasaki teaches, information that has been used for the encoding processing in the first encoding unit (Paras. 0075-0080; As shown in Fig. 4, an image is input, the image is encoded by the encoding control portion 401, and the image is input into the motion vectors detecting portion 410; Note: the Examiner interprets motion vectors as the information used for the encoding processing) . It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art, to combine the motion vector detected from the image in Sasaki with the encoding of the motion vector by the encoding unit in Chou in order to improve detection accuracy of a motion vector (Sasaki, Para. 0061). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. It is for at least the aforementioned that the Examiner has reached a conclusion of obviousness with respect to claim 8. Regarding claim 9 , Chou teaches, an encoding method comprising (Abstract: “embodiments of innovations in the area of point cloud encoding and decoding”; Para. 0006: “The innovations can be implemented as part of a method, as part of a computing device adapted to perform the method or as part of a tangible computer-readable media storing computer-executable instructions for causing a computing device to perform the method”; Fig. 17: computing system 1700; Para. 0032-0033; Fig. 19b: encoder 1902) : a first encoding in which an image is encoded ; and a second encoding in which a point cloud is encoded (Fig. 19a: point cloud data 1905 is input into encoder 1901; Para. 0058: “the encoder (1901) receives point cloud data (1905) from the input buffer (1910) and produces encoded data (1995); Fig. 19b: point cloud data 1905 is input into encoder 1902; Note: the Examiner interprets encoder 1902, for example, as the second encoding unit) , wherein, in the second encoding, encoding processing on the point cloud is performed based on information [ motion vector ] that has been used for the encoding processing in the first encoding (As shown in Fig. 19b, motion data 1978 is provided to the motion compensator 1970 and motion compensated prediction values 1976 are encoded/transmitted to elements 1940, 1950, and 1990 through the inter-frame compression process; Para. 0066: motion data 1978 includes motion vector data, the motion data 1978 is provided to the motion compensator 1970, and the motion compensator 1970 produces motion-compensated prediction values 1976; Paras. 0067-0068) . Chou does not expressly disclose the following limitations: a first encoding in which an image is encoded; information that has been used for the encoding processing in the first encoding. However, Sasaki teaches, a first encoding in which an image is encoded (Para. 0072: the image encoding portion 4d encodes an image input; Paras. 0075-0080; As shown in Fig. 4, an image is input, the image is encoded by the encoding control portion 401, and the image is input into the motion vectors detecting portion 410) ; information that has been used for the encoding processing in the first encoding (Paras. 0075-0080; As shown in Fig. 4, an image is input, the image is encoded by the encoding control portion 401, and the image is input into the motion vectors detecting portion 410; Note: the Examiner interprets motion vectors as the information used for the encoding processing) . It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art, to combine the motion vector detected from the image in Sasaki with the encoding of the motion vector by the encoding unit in Chou in order to improve detection accuracy of a motion vector (Sasaki, Para. 0061). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. It is for at least the aforementioned that the Examiner has reached a conclusion of obviousness with respect to claim 9. Regarding claim 10 , Chou teaches, a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium configured to store a computer program comprising instructions for executing following processes (As shown in Fig. 17, there is memory 1720, memory 1725, and storage 1740. Software 1780 implements one or more innovations, such as for motion-compensated point cloud compression; Para. 0033: the processing units (1710, 1715) execute computer-readable instructions and the memory (1720, 1725) stores software (1780) implementing one or more of the disclosed innovations) : a first encoding in which an image is encoded ; and a second encoding in which a point cloud is encoded (Fig. 19a: point cloud data 1905 is input into encoder 1901; Para. 0058: “the encoder (1901) receives point cloud data (1905) from the input buffer (1910) and produces encoded data (1995); Fig. 19b: point cloud data 1905 is input into encoder 1902; Note: the Examiner interprets encoder 1902, for example, as the second encoding unit) , wherein, in the second encoding, encoding processing on the point cloud is performed based on information [ motion vector ] that has been used for the encoding processing in the first encoding (As shown in Fig. 19b, motion data 1978 is provided to the motion compensator 1970 and motion compensated prediction values 1976 are encoded/transmitted to elements 1940, 1950, and 1990 through the inter-frame compression process; Para. 0066: motion data 1978 includes motion vector data, the motion data 1978 is provided to the motion compensator 1970, and the motion compensator 1970 produces motion-compensated prediction values 1976; Paras. 0067-0068) . Chou does not expressly disclose the following limitations: a first encoding in which an image is encoded; information that has been used for the encoding processing in the first encoding. However, Sasaki teaches, a first encoding in which an image is encoded (Para. 0072: the image encoding portion 4d encodes an image input; Paras. 0075-0080; As shown in Fig. 4, an image is input, the image is encoded by the encoding control portion 401, and the image is input into the motion vectors detecting portion 410) ; information that has been used for the encoding processing in the first encoding (Paras. 0075-0080; As shown in Fig. 4, an image is input, the image is encoded by the encoding control portion 401, and the image is input into the motion vectors detecting portion 410; Note: the Examiner interprets motion vectors as the information used for the encoding processing) . It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art, to combine the motion vector detected from the image in Sasaki with the encoding of the motion vector by the encoding unit in Chou in order to improve detection accuracy of a motion vector (Sasaki, Para. 0061). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. It is for at least the aforementioned that the Examiner has reached a conclusion of obviousness with respect to claim 10 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou et al. (US 2017/0347120 A1, hereinafter “Chou”) in view of Sasaki (US 2021/0248756 A1) and further in view of Nakamura et al. (JP 2003158661A, see provided machine translation; hereinafter “Nakamura”) . Regarding claim 3 , the combination of Chou and Sasaki teaches the limitations as explained above in claim 1. The combination of Chou and Sasaki further teaches, the encoding system according to Claim 1 (see claim 1 above) , wherein the second encoding unit selects one of interframe prediction and intra-frame prediction based on the magnitude of the motion vector that has been output from the first encoding unit (Chou, Para. 0067: the intra/inter switch 1938 selects whether a given block is compressed using intra-frame compression or inter-frame compression; Chou, Para. 0124: “If interframe compression is selected, the relevant motion vectors 422 can be encoded as part of the output”; Chou: As shown in Fig. 19b, motion data 1978 (i.e., motion vector) is provided to the motion compensator 1970 which produces motion-compensated prediction values 1976 and switch 1938 determines whether a block is compressed using inter-frame or intra-frame compression; Chou: Paras. 0066-0068; Sasaki: Paras. 0075-0080; Sasaki: As shown in Fig. 4, an image is input, the image is encoded by the encoding control portion 401, and the image is input into the motion vectors detecting portion 410; Note: As shown in Para. 0079 of Sasaki, the motion vector detecting portion detects a motion vector using the input image. Additionally, since Sasaki outputs motion vectors and the encoder in Chou encodes motion vectors, it shows that motion vector output can be encoded) . The proposed combination as well as well as the motivation for combining the Chou and Sasaki references presented in the rejection of claim 1 apply to claim 3 and are incorporated herein by reference. The combination of Chou and Sasaki does not expressly disclose the following limitation: based on the magnitude of the motion vector. However, Nakamura teaches, based on the magnitude of the motion vector (Para. 0005: “22 denotes a coding mode determination unit that determines a coding mode based on the magnitude of the motion vector output from the motion search unit 21 and the error between the macroblock indicated by the motion vector and the macroblock to be coded, and selects either intracoding, which is intra-frame coding, or inter-coding, which is inter-frame predictive coding”) . It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art, to combine selecting interframe prediction and intraframe prediction based on the magnitude of the motion vector as taught by Nakamura with the combined encoding system of Chou and Sasaki in order to improve the image quality of a video camera (Nakamura, Para. 0001). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be capable to have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately. It is for at least the aforementioned that the Examiner has reached a conclusion of obviousness with respect to claim 3 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou et al. (US 2017/0347120 A1, hereinafter “Chou”) in view of Sasaki (US 2021/0248756 A1) and further in view of Faryar et al. (US 6,625,215 B1, hereinafter “Faryar”) . Regarding claim 4 , the combination of Chou and Sasaki teaches the limitations as explained above in claim 2. The combination of Chou and Sasaki does not expressly disclose the following limitation: wherein the second encoding unit selects one of interframe prediction and intra-frame prediction based on a difference between intensity values of the encoding target point and the reference point (Chou, Para. 0067: the intra/inter switch 1938 selects whether a given block is compressed using intra-frame compression or inter-frame compression; Chou: As shown in Fig. 19b, switch 1938 determines whether a block is compressed using inter-frame or intra-frame compression; Chou: Para. 0067) . The combination of Chou and Sasaki does not expressly disclose the following limitation: based on a difference between intensity values of the encoding target point and the reference point. However, Faryar teaches, based on a difference between intensity values of the encoding target point and the reference point (Col. 2, lines 7-22: “In one aspect of the invention, a method of selecting a coding mode in a video processing system for processing a current portion of a video sequence includes identifying previously reconstructed samples associated with the current portion from a current frame and a reference frame of the video sequence. Then, a selection is made between interframe coding and intra-frame coding for processing the current portion based on comparisons associated with the previously reconstructed samples. The comparisons are dependent on the particular application employing the methodology of the invention. By way of example, the invention may be implemented in a pixel-based predictive coding system or a block transform-based coding system. In the former embodiment, the current portion is a pixel and intensity values associated with previously reconstructed samples are used in the comparison”; Col. 5, line 57-Col. 6, line 54; claim 7: “computing an intra-frame difference value from intensity values associated with the previously reconstructed samples from the current frame; computing an inter-frame difference value from intensity values associated with the previously reconstructed samples from the current frame and the reference frame; and comparing the intra-frame difference value and the interframe difference value”; Note: the examiner interprets the current frame as the target point and the reference frame as the reference point) . It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art, to combine selecting interframe prediction or intra-frame prediction based on a difference in intensity values of a target/current point and a reference point as taught by Faryar with the combined encoding system of Chou and Sasaki in order to address the issue of an encoder failing to find a good temporal prediction block when the real motion is out of the search range (Faryar, Col. 1 lines 37-52). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be capable to have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately. It is for at least the aforementioned that the Examiner has reached a conclusion of obviousness with respect to claim 4 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chou et al. (US 2017/0347120 A1, hereinafter “Chou”) in view of Sasaki (US 2021/0248756 A1) and further in view of “An Improved Coarse-to-Fine Motion Estimation Scheme for Lidar Point Cloud Geometry Compression” by Jin et al. (hereinafter “Jin”) . Regarding claim 6 , the combination of Chou and Sasaki teaches the limitations as explained above in claim 2. The combination of Chou and Sasaki further teaches, the encoding system according to Claim 2 (see claim 2 above) , wherein the second encoding unit calculates a moving amount of the entire point cloud between frames based on a correspondence relation of points between the frames (Chou, Para. 0125: blocks of voxels; Chou: As shown in Fig. 19b, motion data 1978 is provided to reference frame buffer 1974; Chou, Para. 0065: “When a block of the current point cloud frame is compressed using inter-frame compression, the motion estimator (1972) estimates the motion of attributes of the block with respect to one or more reference frames of point cloud data…for use as reference frame”; Chou, Para. 0066: motion data 1978 includes motion vector data and reference frame selection data, and the motion compensator 1970 applies motion vectors for a block to the reconstructed reference frames from the reference buffer. For the block, the motion compensator 1970 produces a motion compensation prediction, which is a region of attributes in the reference frame used to generate motion-compensated prediction values 1976 for the block; Note: the Examiner interprets, for example, estimating the motion of attributes of the block with respect to one or more reference frames of point cloud data as a correspondence) . The combination of Chou and Sasaki does not expressly disclose the following limitation: a moving amount of the entire point cloud. However, Jin teaches, a moving amount of the entire point cloud (Abstract: “First, in the global motion estimation process, an efficient scheme is introduced to segment ground level and object level from original point clouds. Then we use an ICP-based registration method for extracted object point cloud to estimate global motion transformation”; Pg. 2: “the regions with common global motion are registered to obtain corresponding global motion”; Pg. 2-3: sections 3.1-3.2; Note: the Examiner interprets global motion as a moving amount of the entire point cloud) . It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to one of ordinary skill in the art, to combine the moving amount being that of the entire point cloud as taught by Jin with the moving amount in Chou combined with Sasaki in order to fully reduce the spatial redundancy among LiDAR point clouds (Jin, Pg. 6). Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be capable to have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately. It is for at least the aforementioned that the Examiner has reached a conclusion of obviousness with respect to claim 6. Regarding claim 7 , the combination of Chou, Sasaki, and Jin teaches the limitations as explained above in claim 6. The combination of Chou, Sasaki, and Jin further teaches, the encoding system according to Claim 6 (see claim 6 above) , wherein the second encoding unit calculates the moving amount of the entire point cloud between frames in which a difference in distance between the encoding target point and the reference point is minimized (Jin, Abstract: “First, in the global motion estimation process, an efficient scheme is introduced to segment ground level and object level from original point clouds. Then we use an ICP-based registration method for extracted object point cloud to estimate global motion transformation”; Jin, Pg. 2: “the regions with common global motion are registered to obtain corresponding global motion”; Jin, Pg. 2-3: section 3.1; Jin, section 3.2 of Pg. 3: “b) For each point p i in P object , calculate the corresponding closest point q i in P c which composes Q, with the kd-tree used to accelerate this process. c) Calculate the rigid transformation that minimizes the average distance of P object and Q with the translation parameters t and rotation matrix R… A registered object point cloud P reg and a corresponding 4*4 optimal rigid transformation matrix L are obtained after the iteration. P reg will be used as a reference point cloud for subsequent inter prediction, while L is considered as the expression of cloud global motion”; Chou, Para. 0125: blocks of voxels; Chou: As shown in Fig. 19b, motion data 1978 is provided to reference frame buffer 1974; Chou, Para. 0065: “When a block of the current point cloud frame is compressed using inter-frame compression, the motion estimator (1972) estimates the motion of attributes of the block with respect to one or more reference frames of point cloud data…for use as reference frame”; Chou, Para. 0066: motion data 1978 includes motion vector data and reference frame selection data, and the motion compensator 1970 applies motion vectors for a block to the reconstructed reference frames from the reference buffer. For the block, the motion compensator 1970 produces a motion compensation prediction, which is a region of attributes in the reference frame used to generate motion-compensated prediction values 1976 for the block; Note: the Examiner interprets, for example, global motion as a moving amount of the entire point cloud, and minimizing the average distance of P object and Q as minimizing a difference in distance) . The proposed combination as well as well as the motivation for combining the Chou, Sasaki, and Jin references presented in the rejection of claim 6 apply to claim 7and are incorporated herein by reference. Thus, the system recited in claim 7 is met by Chou, Sasaki, and Jin . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Xiu et al. (US 2022/0070441 A1) Sugio et al. (US 2022/0303577 A1) Sullivan et al. (US 2023/0342944 A1) Zhang et al. (US 2021/0166436 A1) Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniella M. DiGuglielmo whose telephone number is (571)272-0183. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM - 4:00 PM. 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, Emily Terrell can be reached at (571)270-3717. 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. /Daniella M. DiGuglielmo/Examiner, Art Unit 2666 /EMILY C TERRELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 2 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 3 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 4 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 5 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 6 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 8 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 9 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 10 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 11 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 12 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 13 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 14 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 15 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 16 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 17 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 18 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 19 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 20 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 21 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 22 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 23 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 24 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 25 Art Unit: 2666 Application/Control Number: 18/654,044 Page 26 Art Unit: 2666
Prosecution Insights