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 .
Detailed Action
This office Action is in response to an application filed on 07/26/2024 claiming priority to 63/529,091 filed on 07/26/2023, in which claims 1-20 are pending and are being examined.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1, 8, 15 and similar dependent claims are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of Conflicting Patent PAT US 10,110,914 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the subject matter claimed in the instant application is anticipated by the Conflicting Patent and is covered by the Patent since the Patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, below is a list of limitations that perform the same function, however, different terminology may be used in both sets to describe the limitations, as follows, Claim 1 is used as an example to analyze the common subject matter:
Conflicting Patent No. US 10,110,914 B2
Instant Application:-18/785,699
1. An apparatus for decoding a current block of an encoded video frame, the encoded video frame included in an encoded bitstream, the apparatus comprising: a processor configured to execute instructions stored in a non-transitory storage medium to: determine projection samples for predicting a non-linear motion of pixels of the current block based on a warping model of a previously decoded neighbor block adjacent to the current block within the encoded video frame, the non-linear motion representing at least one of a scaling or a rotation of the pixels of the current block, the warping model of the previously decoded neighbor block representing a non-linear motion of pixels of the previously decoded neighbor block; determine parameters of a projection model for the current block by applying the projection samples to a parameterized projection model used to decode the previously decoded neighbor block; generate a prediction block by projecting pixels of the current block to a warped patch within a reference frame using the parameters of the projection model, the warped patch being a non-rectangular patch having a shape and a position in the reference frame indicated by the parameters of the projection model; reconstruct the current block using the prediction block; and output the reconstructed current block to an output video stream.
4. The apparatus of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to execute instructions stored in the non-transitory storage medium to determine the parameters of the projection model by: determining the parameters of the projection model based on the projection samples and one or more motion vectors of the current block by adding corresponding values of the one or more motion vectors of the current block to a set of motion vectors indicated by the projection samples.
1. A method comprising: generating reconstructed block data by decoding a current block of a current frame from an encoded bitstream, wherein decoding the current block includes: obtaining a refined prediction block for decoding the current block using bilateral matching, wherein obtaining the refined prediction block includes: obtaining a refinement model from available warped refinement models, wherein the available warped refinement models include a four-parameter scaling refinement model, a three-parameter scaling refinement model, and a four-parameter rotational refinement model; obtaining refined motion vectors using the warped refinement model and previously obtained reference frame data in the absence of data expressly indicating the refined motion vectors in the encoded bitstream, wherein obtaining the refined motion vectors includes using a dynamic range adjusted autocorrelation matrix; and generating refined prediction block data using the refined motion vectors; generating reconstructed block data using the refined prediction block data; including the reconstructed block data in reconstructed frame data for the current frame; and outputting the reconstructed frame data.
As demonstrated, the claim of US patent US 10,110,914 B2 anticipate the features of the claim of instant application 18/785,699.
A nonstatutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by amending the conflicting claims so they are no longer coextensive in scope or filing of a terminal disclaimer.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 2, 9 and 16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. The claims recite “wherein using the dynamic range adjusted autocorrelation matrix includes obtaining the dynamic range adjusted autocorrelation matrix” does not further limit the limitation “using a dynamic range adjusted autocorrelation matrix” because to use something, it needs to be obtained. The generic meaning of the term “obtained” is used for this analysis. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Examiner’s Note
Claims 1-7 refer to "A method”, Claims 8-14 refer to "A method”, and, Claims 15-20 refer to "A method”. Claims 8-20 are similarly rejected in light of rejection of claims 1-7, any obvious combination of the rejection of claims 1-7, or the differences are obvious to the ordinary skill in the art. It is well known in the art that encoding and decoding are reverse processes of video coding method/system.
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 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US 10,110,914 B1), hereinafter Chen, in view of Li et al. (US 20200099947 A1), hereinafter Li, further in view of Kim et al. (US 20240406410 A1), hereinafter Kim.
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses a method comprising (Abstract): generating reconstructed block data by decoding a current block of a current frame from an encoded bitstream (Fig. 5, Output video stream from compressed bitstream), wherein decoding the current block includes: obtaining a refined prediction block for decoding the current block, wherein obtaining the refined prediction block includes (Fig. 8): obtaining a refinement model from available warped refinement models (Fig. 8, warped motion, projection model), wherein the available warped refinement models include a four-parameter scaling refinement model, a three-parameter scaling refinement model, and a four-parameter rotational refinement model (Column 11, line 19 – Column 12, line 54, models with different parameters); obtaining refined motion vectors using the warped refinement model and previously obtained reference frame data in the absence of data expressly indicating the refined motion vectors in the encoded bitstream (Column 8, line 20-65),; and generating refined prediction block data using the refined motion vectors (Column 11, line 6-41); generating reconstructed block data using the refined prediction block data; including the reconstructed block data in reconstructed frame data for the current frame; and outputting the reconstructed frame data (Fig. 5).
Chen discloses all the elements of claim 1 but Chen does not appear to explicitly disclose in the cited section using bilateral matching.
However, Kim from the same or similar endeavor teaches using bilateral matching (Fig. 9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen to incorporate the teachings of Li to achieve higher compression ratio (Li, [0005]). Similar reasoning/motivation of modification can be applied/extended to the other related/dependent claims.
Chen in view of Li discloses all the elements of claim 1 but they do not appear to explicitly disclose in the cited section wherein obtaining the refined motion vectors includes using a dynamic range adjusted autocorrelation matrix.
However, Kim from the same or similar endeavor teaches wherein obtaining the refined motion vectors includes using a dynamic range adjusted autocorrelation matrix ([0195]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen in view of Li to incorporate the teachings of Kim to increase coding efficiency (Kim, [0004]). Similar reasoning/motivation of modification can be applied/extended to the other related/dependent claims.
Regarding claim 2, Chen in view of Li further in view of Kim discloses the method of claim 1, wherein using the dynamic range adjusted autocorrelation matrix includes obtaining the dynamic range adjusted autocorrelation matrix (Chen, Fig. 8, Li, Fig. 9, Kim, [0195]).
Regarding claim 3, Chen in view of Li further in view of Kim discloses the method of claim 2, wherein obtaining the dynamic range adjusted autocorrelation matrix includes: obtaining a right shift amount in accordance with a block height of the current block and a block width of the current block (Chen, Fig. 8, Li, Fig. 9, Kim, [0195]-[0197]).
Regarding claim 8-10, 15-17, See Examiner’s Note.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7, 11-14, and 18-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD J RAHMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7190. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM.
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.
/Mohammad J Rahman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487