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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 3/27/2026 has been entered.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 12 relates to computer-readable medium storing a bitstream a generated by a particular encoding method. Since the claims relate to a bitstream which is stored on a computer readable medium after all coding functions have been performed the bitstream no longer has any functional relationship with a processor or other machine, but instead relates to e.g. a video stored on a hard drive. The purpose of the stored bitstream is only to convey meaning to a human viewer of the coded bitstream and is thus non-functional descriptive material. Non-functional descriptive material used only to convey messages or meaning is given little patentable weight (See MPEP 2111.05). For the purposes of examination the examiner will interpret the claim as relating only to a computer readable medium storing data.
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 (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 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)(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.
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Liu et al (20210235110).
In regard to claim 12 Liu discloses a computer readable medium storing a bitstream (Liu par. 484 note the generated bitstream may be stored, further note par. 586 for examples of storage).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 10-11 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Independent claims 1 and 11 describe coding methods for determining a motion vector of a current block coded in a merge inter mode including a first motion vector in a first direction and a second motion vector in a second direction, the first motion vector being derived based on a first inter prediction mode and the second motion vector being derived based on a second inter prediction mode, the first inter prediction mode is an AMVP mode which combines a motion vector and motion vector difference and the second inter prediction mode is a merge mode which uses a motion vector, generating a prediction block for the current block based on first and second prediction blocks determined using the first and second motion vectors, where an index is used for adaptive motion vector resolution to modify the resolution of the of the first motion vector and the motion vector difference and the second motion vector is also modified based on the motion vector resolution indicated by the index.
The closest arts are Liu and Park. Liu discloses coding a current block in a Multi-Hypothesis prediction mode using first and second motion vectors, in different directions, that are predicted using first and second inter mode. Liu discloses that AMVP and merge modes may be used for the first and second modes and that each motion vector is used to determine a prediction block which are used to generate a predictor for the current block. Liu also discloses that the AMVP mode uses a motion vector and a motion vector difference where a merge mode uses only a motion vector. Park discloses adaptive motion vector resolution in which an index is used to indicate the motion vector resolution of the motion vector difference. However neither Liu nor Park disclose determining a first motion vector of a current block using an AMVP mode and a second motion vector with a merge mode where a single index for adaptive motion vector resolution is used to modify the resolution of all of the AMVP motion vector, the AMVP motion vector difference and the merge mode motion vector as required by the independent claims.
Claim 10 depends form claim 1 and is allowed for the same reasons.
Conclusion
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEREMIAH CHARLES HALLENBECK-HUBER whose telephone number is (571)272-5248. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 9 A.M. to 5 P.M.
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, William Vaughn can be reached at (571)272-3922. 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.
/JEREMIAH C HALLENBECK-HUBER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2481
Prosecution Insights