DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the amendment filed on September 25, 2025. Claims 1-7, 10-18, 21-34, 37, 39-45 are pending and are examined.
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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendments made to original claims 1-6, 12-17, 28-34 and the cancellation of claims 8-9, 19-20, 35-36, and 38 have been fully considered.
In light of these amendments, the previous objections to claim 19 is withdrawn.
The previous rejections with respect to 35 U.S.C. 101 as to claims 28-37 are withdrawn.
Response to Argument
Applicant's arguments and amendments received September 25, 2025 have been fully considered.
With regard to 35 U.S.C. § 103, Applicant argues that the cited prior art fails to disclose applying a bidirectional optical flow process to a second subblock to determine a refined prediction subblock, wherein the second subblock comprises the two or more subblocks of the plurality of subblocks and doing so in response to the two or more subblocks having the same motion vector. This language corresponds to the newly amended language of claims 1, 12, and 28.
As such, these have been considered but they are directed to newly amended language, which is addressed below. See the rejection below for how the art on record in view of a newly added reference reads on the newly amended language as well as the examiner's interpretation of the cited art in view of the presented claim set.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the newly amended limitations “determining that two or more subblocks of the plurality of subblocks have the same motion vector; in response to the two or more subblocks having the same motion vector, applying a bi-directional optical flow process to a second subblock to determine a refined prediction subblock, wherein the second subblock comprise the two or more subblocks of the plurality of subblocks” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
Claim Interpretation
Applicant amended the independent claims to include the following limitations: “determining that two or more subblocks of the plurality of subblocks have the same motion vector; in response to the two or more subblocks having the same motion vector, applying a bi-directional optical flow process to a second subblock to determine a refined prediction subblock, wherein the second subblock comprise the two or more subblocks of the plurality of subblocks”. In order for a sub-block, e.g., sub-block A, to comprise multiple sub-blocks, e.g., sub-blocks B and C, sub-block A must be at least twice as large as sub-blocks B and C. For example, where sub-blocks B and C are adjacent 4x4 sub-blocks, sub-block A may be a 4x8 sub-block including both sub-blocks B and C. Accordingly, such claim limitations are interpreted to mean that the “second sub-block” may a larger sub-block encompassing two adjacent sub-blocks that have the same motion.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-7, 10-18, 21-34, 37, 39-45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. 2024/0323390, which corresponds to priority data filed Nov. 7, 2022 and Nov. 8, 2021 (“He”) in view of U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0239921 (“Chen”) and further in view of WIPO/PCT Patent Publication No. WO 2023/027564 (“Kim”).
With respect to claim 12, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed, including
A device for decoding encoded video data (see Figs. 1, 3, items 124, 300, ¶¶88-90, describing a device for decoding encoded data), the device comprising:
a memory configured to store video data (see Fig. 33, items 3320 and 3330, ¶¶9-18, 346-347, 359-360, 370-371, 373-374, describing that the decoder may be embodied by a non-transitory computer-readable medium for storing video data);
one or more processors implemented in circuitry (see Fig. 33, items 3310, ¶¶9-10, 89, describing one or more processors implemented in circuitry) and configured to:
determine that a current block of the video data is coded …, wherein the current block has a size of width (WCB) x height (HCB) (see Figs. 25, 27(a)-(d), 28, items currWidth, currHeight, ¶¶70, 94, 266, 295, describing that a current block has a size of width x height (cbWidth x cbHeight), e.g., 16x16);
predict each subblock of a plurality of subblocks using an affine motion model associated with the affine prediction mode to determine an initial prediction block for the current block, wherein each subblock of the plurality of subblocks has a size of width (WSB) x Height (HSB), wherein WSB is less than WCB and HSB is less than HCB (see Figs. 26(a), 27(a)-(d), 28, ¶¶141, 266, 295-307, 315, 319, 323-328, 331, describing predicting each sub-block of a coding block using an affine motion model associated with an affine prediction mode to determine an initial prediction block for the current block P0 and P1 and that each subblock of the current block has a sub-block of a sub-block size, e.g., 4x4, which is less than a coding block size, e.g., 16x16);
…
…, apply a bi-directional optical flow process to a second subblock to determine a refined prediction subblock, …(see citations and arguments with respect to element above and ¶¶303-305, 308, 315, 328-332, 340-341, describing applying a bi-directional optical flow process to particular sub-blocks to determine refined predictions of the boundary samples/sub-blocks);
determine a refined prediction block based on the refined subblock (see citations and arguments with respect to elements above and describing that the refined prediction, i.e., prediction block, may be determined based on refined optical flow for one or more sub-blocks, i.e., the refined sub-block); and
determine a decoded version of the current block based on the refined prediction block (see citations and arguments with respect to elements above and Abstract, ¶¶97, 265-266, , describing that this refinement prediction block is part of the decoding process to determine a decoded version of the current block).
Although He details that its optical flow process is an affine-process, He does not explicitly disclose that its process is only applied to affine-coded CUs, determine that a current block of the video data is coded in an affine prediction mode.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Chen discloses that it was known for such boundary prediction refinement with optical flow processes to be applied to affine-coded blocks/CUs and to determine that the current block is affine-coded, i.e.:
determine that a current block of the video data is coded in an affine prediction mode (see ¶¶185, 201, describing that the boundary prediction refinement optical flow process is applied to affine-coded CUs and that a syntax element may be signaled to indicate that a CU is affine coded).
As detailed above, He discloses the use of an optical flow process using affine models for sub-blocks of a current block (see citations above). At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill would have been familiar with optical flow processes for prediction of sub-blocks using affine models and have understood the types of CUs/blocks that may be coded effectively using such a process, including, as evidenced by Chen, affine-coded blocks/CUs. Accordingly, to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, determining that a current block/CU is coded in affine prediction mode in the coding process of He would have represented nothing more than the combination of prior art elements according to predictable results and/or the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to include a mechanism for determining that a current block/CU is coded in affine prediction mode in the optical flow coding process of He as taught by Chen.
He/Chen does not explicitly disclose determine that two or more subblocks of the plurality of subblocks have a same motion vector; in response to the two or more subblocks having the same motion vector, apply a bi-directional optical flow process to a second subblock to determine a refined prediction subblock, wherein the second subblock comprises the two or more subblocks of the plurality of subblocks.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Kim discloses that it was known to refine adjacent sub-blocks with the same motion vector using BDOF, i.e.:
determine that two or more subblocks of the plurality of subblocks have a same motion vector (see ¶247, describing that it was known for a system to determine whether motion is the same between adjacent sub-blocks, i.e., determine that two or more subblocks of the plurality of subblocks have a same motion vector);
in response to the two or more subblocks having the same motion vector, apply a bi-directional optical flow process to a second subblock to determine a refined prediction subblock, wherein the second subblock comprises the two or more subblocks of the plurality of subblocks (see citations and arguments with respect to element above, describing that where motion information is the same between two adjacent sub-blocks, the system may apply BDOF to a merged sub-block made up on the two adjacent sub-blocks with the same motion, i.e., in response to the two or more subblocks having the same motion vector, apply a bi-directional optical flow process to a second (merged) sub-block to determine a refined prediction subblock, wherein the second (merged) sub-block comprises the two or more subblocks of the plurality of sub-blocks);
As detailed above, He/Chen discloses the refinement of particular sub-blocks of a current block using a BDOF process (see citations above). At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill would have been familiar such refinement process and with the types of blocks that may be helpful to refine. Kim discloses that one such type is sub-blocks with the same motion. Accordingly, to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, determining whether 2 subblocks have the same motion and, if so, merging them and refining them using BDOF would have represented nothing more than the combination of prior art elements according to predictable results and/or the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to include a mechanism for determining whether two or more subblocks have the same motion vector and, if so, merge the sub-blocks and apply BDOF to the merged subblock to determine a refined prediction subblock in the optical flow coding process of He/Chen as taught by Kim.
With respect to claim 13, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As described above, He in view of Chen and Kim discloses all the elements of independent claim 12. He/Chen/Kim additionally discloses:
wherein to predict each subblock of the first plurality of subblocks using the affine motion model associated with the affine prediction mode to determine the initial prediction block for the current block, the one or more processors are further configured to:
receive two or more control point motion vectors;
derive an initial motion vector for each subblock of the plurality of subblocks; and
locate an initial prediction block for each subblock of the plurality of subblocks using the initial motion vector (see citations and arguments with respect to claim 12 above and He ¶¶143-151, 167-172, 295-297, 324-325, describing the receipt of 2 or more CPMVs, deriving an initial motion vector for the sub-blocks and the location of an initial prediction block for each sub-block using the initial motion vector).
The reasons for combining the cited prior art with respect to claim 12 also apply to claim 13.
With respect to claim 14, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As described above, He in view of Chen and Kim discloses all the elements of dependent claim 13. He/Chen/Kim additionally discloses:
wherein to apply the bi-directional optical flow process to the second subblock to determine the first refined prediction subblock, the one or more processors are further configured to:
determine an updated motion vector for the two or more subblocks of the plurality of subblocks (see citations and arguments with respect to claim 12 above, including He ¶¶268, 330-332, describing that in refining the prediction subblocks, an updated optical flow/motion vector may be determined).
The reasons for combining the cited prior art with respect to claim 12 also apply to claim 14.
With respect to claim 15, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As described above, He in view of Chen and Kim discloses all the elements of dependent claim 14. He/Chen/Kim additionally discloses:
wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:
store the updated motion vector for the second subblock; and
use the updated motion vector to predict a subsequent block of video data (see citations and arguments with respect to claims 12-14 above and He ¶¶96, 197, 208, 233, describing that it was known to store updated/refined MVs for use in future spatial and temporal MV prediction).
The reasons for combining the cited prior art with respect to claim 12 also apply to claim 15.
With respect to claim 16, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As described above, He in view of Chen and Kim discloses all the elements of dependent claim 15. He/Chen/Kim additionally discloses:
wherein to determine the refined prediction block based on the refined subblock, the one or more processors are further configured to:
apply a per-pixel bi-directional optical flow process to the refined prediction subblock (see citations and arguments with respect to claim 12 above, describing that the bi-directional optical flow process applied to the refined prediction sub-block may be a sample-based process, i.e., per pixel).
The reasons for combining the cited prior art with respect to claim 12 also apply to claim 16.
With respect to claim 17, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As described above, He in view of Chen and Kim discloses all the elements of independent claim 12. He/Chen/Kim additionally discloses:
wherein to determine the refined prediction block based on the refined subblock, the one or more processors are further configured to:
apply a second bi-directional optical flow process to the refined prediction subblock (see citations and arguments with respect to claim 12 above and He ¶¶330-332, describing the application of a second bi-directional optical flow process to the refined prediction subblocks).
The reasons for combining the cited prior art with respect to claim 12 also apply to claim 17.
With respect to claim 18, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As described above, He in view of Chen and Kim discloses all the elements of independent claim 12. He/Chen/Kim additionally discloses:
wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:
receive a syntax element, wherein a value of the syntax element indicates that the bi-directional optical flow process is enabled for the current block (see citations and arguments with respect to claim 12 above and Chen ¶484, describing that it was known to send/receive syntax elements indicating enablement of the bi-directional optical flow process).
As detailed above, He discloses the use of an optical flow process using affine models for sub-blocks of a current block (see citations above). At the time of filing, one of ordinary skill would have been familiar with optical flow processes for prediction of sub-blocks using affine models and have understood ways to signal the use of such a process, including, as evidenced by Chen, syntax elements. Accordingly, to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, using syntax to indicate that such a coding process is enabled in the coding process of He would have represented nothing more than the combination of prior art elements according to predictable results and/or the simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to include a mechanism for signaling syntax elements indicating that the bi-directional optical flow process is enabled for the current block in the optical flow coding process of He as taught by Chen.
With respect to claim 21, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As described above, He in view of Chen and Kim discloses all the elements of independent claim 12. He/Chen/Kim additionally discloses:
wherein the current block comprises a bi-predicted block (see He ¶¶266, 324, 329-330, describing that the current block is bi-predicted).
The reasons for combining the cited prior art with respect to claim 12 also apply to claim 21.
With respect to claim 22, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As described above, He in view of Chen and Kim discloses all the elements of independent claim 12. He/Chen/Kim additionally discloses:
further comprising a display configured to display a picture of decoded video data that includes the decoded version of the current block (see He Fig. 1, item 122, ¶¶63, 96, 484, describing that the device may include a display to display the coded video data).
The reasons for combining the cited prior art with respect to claim 12 also apply to claim 22.
With respect to claim 23, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As described above, He in view of Chen and Kim discloses all the elements of independent claim 12. He/Chen/Kim additionally discloses:
wherein the device comprises one or more of a camera, a computer, a mobile device, a broadcast receiver device, or a set-top box (see He ¶¶476-479, describing that the encoder/decoder may be embodied in may include a camera, computer, mobile phone/device, broadcast receiver device, or set-top box).
The reasons for combining the cited prior art with respect to claim 12 also apply to claim 23.
With respect to claim 24, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As described above, He in view of Chen and Kim discloses all the elements of independent claim 12. He/Chen/Kim additionally discloses:
wherein the device comprises a wireless communication device, further comprising a receiver configured to receive the encoded video data (see citations and arguments with respect to claim 24 above and He ¶¶483-484, describing that the device may be a wireless communication device, e.g., mobile phone, tablet, etc. and may include a receiver to receive the encoded video data).
The reasons for combining the cited prior art with respect to claim 12 also apply to claim 24.
With respect to claim 25, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As described above, He in view of Chen and Kim discloses all the elements of dependent claim 24. He/Chen/Kim additionally discloses:
wherein the wireless communication device comprises a telephone handset and wherein the receiver is configured to demodulate, according to a wireless communication standard, a signal comprising the encoded video data (see citations and arguments with respect to claims 12 and 24 above and He ¶¶3, 64, 98-99, describing that the wireless communication device may comprise a mobile phone, i.e., telephone handset, and that the receiver may demodulate the video signal according to a wireless communication standard).
The reasons for combining the cited prior art with respect to claim 12 also apply to claim 25.
With respect to claim 26, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As described above, He in view of Chen and Kim discloses all the elements of independent claim 12. He/Chen/Kim additionally discloses:
wherein the device comprises a video decoder (see citations and arguments with respect to claim 12 above, describing that the video coding device may be a decoder).
The reasons for combining the cited prior art with respect to claim 12 also apply to claim 26.
With respect to claim 27, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As described above, He in view of Chen and Kim discloses all the elements of independent claim 12. He/Chen/Kim additionally discloses:
wherein the device comprises a video encoder (see He Figs. 1-2, ¶¶65-66, describing that the video coding device may be used to implement the techniques of the disclosure).
The reasons for combining the cited prior art with respect to claim 12 also apply to claim 27.
With respect to claim 1, claim 1 recites the elements of claim 12 in method form rather than apparatus form. Accordingly, the disclosure recited with respect to claim 12 also applies to claim 1.
With respect to claim 2, claim 2 recites the elements of claim 13 in method form rather than apparatus form. Accordingly, the disclosure recited with respect to claim 13 also applies to claim 2.
With respect to claim 3, claim 3 recites the elements of claim 14 in method form rather than apparatus form. Accordingly, the disclosure recited with respect to claim 14 also applies to claim 3.
With respect to claim 4, claim 4 recites the elements of claim 15 in method form rather than apparatus form. Accordingly, the disclosure recited with respect to claim 15 also applies to claim 4.
With respect to claim 5, claim 5 recites the elements of claim 16 in method form rather than apparatus form. Accordingly, the disclosure recited with respect to claim 16 also applies to claim 5.
With respect to claim 6, claim 6 recites the elements of claim 17 in method form rather than apparatus form. Accordingly, the disclosure recited with respect to claim 17 also applies to claim 6.
With respect to claim 7, claim 7 recites the elements of claim 18 in method form rather than apparatus form. Accordingly, the disclosure recited with respect to claim 18 also applies to claim 7.
With respect to claim 10, claim 10 recites the elements of claim 21 in method form rather than apparatus form. Accordingly, the disclosure recited with respect to claim 21 also applies to claim 10.
With respect to claim 11, claim 11 recites the elements of claim 27 in method form rather than apparatus form. Accordingly, the disclosure recited with respect to claim 27 also applies to claim 11.
With respect to claim 28, claim 28 recites the elements of claim 12 in computer-readable storage medium form rather than apparatus form. He discloses that its methods may be embodied by a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions for execution by a processor (see citations and arguments with respect to memory and processor elements of claim 12 above). Accordingly, the disclosure recited with respect to claim 12 also applies to claim 28.
With respect to claim 29, claim 29 recites the elements of claim 13 in computer-readable storage medium form rather than apparatus form. He discloses that its methods may be embodied by a computer-readable storage medium storing instructions for execution by a processor (see citations and arguments with respect to memory and processor elements of claim 12 above). Accordingly, the disclosure recited with respect to claim 13 also applies to claim 29.
With respect to claim 30, claim 30 recites the elements of claim 14 in computer-readable storage medium form rather than apparatus form. He discloses that its methods may be embodied by a computer-readable storage medium storing instructions for execution by a processor (see citations and arguments with respect to memory and processor elements of claim 12 above). Accordingly, the disclosure recited with respect to claim 14 also applies to claim 30.
With respect to claim 31, claim 31 recites the elements of claim 15 in computer-readable storage medium form rather than apparatus form. He discloses that its methods may be embodied by a computer-readable storage medium storing instructions for execution by a processor (see citations and arguments with respect to memory and processor elements of claim 12 above). Accordingly, the disclosure recited with respect to claim 15 also applies to claim 31.
With respect to claim 32, claim 32 recites the elements of claim 16 in computer-readable storage medium form rather than apparatus form. He discloses that its methods may be embodied by a computer-readable storage medium storing instructions for execution by a processor (see citations and arguments with respect to memory and processor elements of claim 12 above). Accordingly, the disclosure recited with respect to claim 16 also applies to claim 32.
With respect to claim 33, claim 33 recites the elements of claim 17 in computer-readable storage medium form rather than apparatus form. He discloses that its methods may be embodied by a computer-readable storage medium storing instructions for execution by a processor (see citations and arguments with respect to memory and processor elements of claim 12 above). Accordingly, the disclosure recited with respect to claim 17 also applies to claim 33.
With respect to claim 34, claim 34 recites the elements of claim 18 in computer-readable storage medium form rather than apparatus form. He discloses that its methods may be embodied by a computer-readable storage medium storing instructions for execution by a processor (see citations and arguments with respect to memory and processor elements of claim 12 above). Accordingly, the disclosure recited with respect to claim 18 also applies to claim 34.
With respect to claim 37, claim 37 recites the elements of claim 21 in computer-readable storage medium form rather than apparatus form. He discloses that its methods may be embodied by a computer-readable storage medium storing instructions for execution by a processor (see citations and arguments with respect to memory and processor elements of claim 12 above). Accordingly, the disclosure recited with respect to claim 21 also applies to claim 37.
With respect to claim 39, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As described above, He in view of Chen and Kim discloses all the elements of independent claim 12. He/Chen/Kim additionally discloses:
A device for encoding encoded video data (see Figs. 1-2, items 110, 114, 200, ¶¶60, 62, describing a device for encoding encoded data), the device comprising:
a memory configured to store video data (see citations and arguments with respect to corresponding element of claim 12 above);
one or more processors implemented in circuitry (see citations and arguments with respect to corresponding element of claim 12 above) and configured to:
determine that a current block of the video data is coded …, wherein the current block has a size of width (WCB) x height (HCB) (see citations and arguments with respect to corresponding element of claim 12 above);
predict each subblock of a plurality of subblocks using an affine motion model associated with the affine prediction mode to determine an initial prediction block for the current block, wherein each subblock of the plurality of subblocks has a size of width (WSB) x Height (HSB), wherein WSB is less than WCB and HSB is less than HCB (see citations and arguments with respect to corresponding element of claim 12 above);
determine that two or more subblocks of the plurality of subblocks have a same motion vector(see citations and arguments with respect to corresponding element of claim 12 above);
in response to the two or more subblocks having the same motion vector, apply a bi-directional optical flow process to a second subblock to determine a refined prediction subblock, wherein the second subblock comprises the two or more subblocks of the plurality of subblocks (see citations and arguments with respect to corresponding element of claim 12 above);
determine a refined prediction block based on the refined subblock (see citations and arguments with respect to corresponding element of claim 12 above); and
determine a decoded version of the current block based on the refined prediction block (see citations and arguments with respect to corresponding element of claim 12 above);
store a copy of the decoded version of the current block (see Fig. 2, item 213, ¶¶72, 85, describing a buffer for storing copies of decoded/reconstructed video blocks of the current block and using them as reference blocks for prediction of subsequent blocks); and
encode a subsequent block of the video data based on the copy of the decoded version of the current block (see citations with respect to element above and Fig. 2, item 213 (input into item 202), describing that reference frames stored in the buffer are used to predict/encode subsequent blocks).
The reasons for combining the cited prior art with respect to claim 12 also apply to claim 39.
With respect to claim 40, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As described above, He in view of Chen and Kim discloses all the elements of independent claim 39. He/Chen/Kim additionally discloses:
wherein to predict each subblock of the first plurality of subblocks using the affine motion model associated with the affine prediction mode to determine the initial prediction block for the current block, the one or more processors are further configured to:
receive two or more control point motion vectors;
derive an initial motion vector for each subblock of the plurality of subblocks; and
locate an initial prediction block for each subblock of the plurality of subblocks using the initial motion vector (see citations and arguments with respect to claim 13 above).
The reasons for combining the cited prior art with respect to claim 12 also apply to claim 40.
With respect to claim 41, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As described above, He in view of Chen and Kim discloses all the elements of dependent claim 40. He/Chen/Kim additionally discloses:
wherein to apply the bi-directional optical flow process to the second subblock to determine the first refined prediction subblock, the one or more processors are further configured to:
determine an updated motion vector for the two or more subblocks of the plurality of subblocks (see citations and arguments with respect to claim 13 above).
The reasons for combining the cited prior art with respect to claim 12 also apply to claim 41.
With respect to claim 42, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As described above, He in view of Chen and Kim discloses all the elements of independent claim 39. He/Chen/Kim additionally discloses:
wherein to determine the refined prediction block based on the refined subblock, the one or more processors are further configured to:
apply a per-pixel bi-directional optical flow process to the refined prediction subblock (see citations and arguments with respect to claim 16 above).
The reasons for combining the cited prior art with respect to claim 12 also apply to claim 42.
With respect to claim 43, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As described above, He in view of Chen and Kim discloses all the elements of independent claim 39. He/Chen/Kim additionally discloses:
wherein to determine the refined prediction block based on the refined subblock, the one or more processors are further configured to:
apply a second bi-directional optical flow process to the refined prediction subblock (see citations and arguments with respect to claim 17 above).
The reasons for combining the cited prior art with respect to claim 12 also apply to claim 43.
With respect to claim 44, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As described above, He in view of Chen and Kim discloses all the elements of independent claim 39. He/Chen/Kim additionally discloses:
wherein the one or more processors are further configured to:
receive a syntax element, wherein a value of the syntax element indicates that the bi-directional optical flow process is enabled for the current block (see citations and arguments with respect to claim 18 above).
The reasons for combining the cited prior art with respect to claim 12 also apply to claim 44.
With respect to claim 45, He discloses the invention substantially as claimed. As described above, He in view of Chen and Kim discloses all the elements of independent claim 39. He/Chen/Kim additionally discloses:
wherein the current block comprises a bi-predicted block (see citations and arguments with respect to claim 21 above).
The reasons for combining the cited prior art with respect to claim 12 also apply to claim 45.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any 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 LINDSAY JANE KILE UHL whose telephone number is (571)270-0337. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM-5:00 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, William Vaughn can be reached on (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.
LINDSAY J UHL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2481
/LINDSAY J UHL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2481
Prosecution Insights