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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on April 1st, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
This action is in response to the remarks entered on 04/01/2026.
Claims 1-2 are pending in the instant application.
Claims 1-2 are amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's remarks filed 03/02/2025, pages 4-5, regarding the rejection of claim 1, and similarly claims 2 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered, and are moot upon further consideration and a new ground(s) of rejection made under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (WO 2019/147628 A1) (hereinafter Zhang) as outlined below.
In response to Applicant’s remark that Examiner’s previously-cited references do not show the Applicant’s newly-recited claim limitations, the Examiner directs Applicant’s attention to the rejection of claims 1-2 below, wherein Applicant’s newly-recited limitations are addressed by Zhang for the reasons as outlined below.
Furthermore, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “performing correction on a "partial block" basis in which the unit of correction (second size) differs from the unit of similarity evaluation (first size)”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhang et al. (WO 2019/147628 A1) (hereinafter Zhang).
Regarding claim 1, Zhang discloses an image decoding device for decoding a block-based target image from encoded data [Paragraphs [0024], [0032], [0079], Figs. 2, 6 & 11, block-based video decoder], the image decoding device comprising:
a predictor circuitry configured to generate a block of prediction image corresponding to a block of the target image by performing bi-directional prediction [Paragraphs [0024]-[0034], Fig. 2 & 6, motion compensated prediction with GBi generalized bi-prediction module 662, as predictor circuitry, performing bi-directional motion compensated prediction using reference pictures shown in Fig. 3];
an evaluator circuitry configured to calculate an evaluation value indicating a degree of similarity between a plurality of reference images each having a first size [Paragraphs [0024]-[0034] & [0097]-[0100], Fig. 2-3 & 6, GBi generalized bi-prediction module 662 as evaluator circuitry, wherein similarity level is determined between the first reference block and the second reference block, with Fig. 3 showing reference pictures L0/L1 each being a first size];
an acquisition circuitry configured to decode the encoded data to acquire prediction residuals [Paragraphs [0024]-[0042], Fig. 2 & 6, Entropy decoding unit 208 & 608 as acquisition circuitry that receives and decodes video bitstream 202 comprising residual transform coefficients as prediction residuals];
a combiner circuitry configured to combine the acquired prediction residuals with the block of the prediction image to reconstruct the block of the target image [Paragraphs [0024]-[0042], Fig. 2 & 6, Prediction block and residual block are added together at 226 or 626, as combiner circuitry, before being filtered and sent out for display]; and
a controller configured to, based on the evaluation value, correct a combining target of the combiner circuitry in a unit of a partial block having a second size different from the first size smaller than the size of the block and consisting of multiple pixels [Paragraphs [0024]-[0034], [0060]-[0064], [0097]-[0106] & [0118], Fig. 2-3 & 6, computer processing performed by a controller, wherein a number of available bi-prediction weights is determined based at least in part on the similarity level between reference blocks, utilized in correcting motion vector searches at fractional pels for partitions of a quad-tree and binary tree, as partial blocks being a second size smaller than the current block within reference picture of a first size].
Regarding claim 2, method claim 2 corresponds to device claim 1, and therefore is also rejected for the same rationale as listed above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL CHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-5707. The examiner can normally be reached M-Sa, 12PM - 10 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, David Czekaj can be reached at 571-272-7327. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANIEL CHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
Prosecution Insights