DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgement is made of Applicant’s claim of priority from Foreign Application No. KR10-2022-0046826, filed April 15, 2022 and PCT Application No. PCT/KR2023/002103, filed February 14, 2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (“IDS”) filed on August 31, 2026 was reviewed and the listed references were noted.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-14 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see p. 9-10, filed August 11, 2026, with respect to the Title Objection have been fully considered and are persuasive. The amendment of the title has overcome the previous objection and it has been withdrawn.
With regards to the 35 USC § 103 rejection of claim 1, applicant argues the claims as amended are not taught by the immediate prior art and the claim should not be rejected under 35 USC § 103. Applicant’s remarks and amendments have been fully considered and are found convincing, however, upon further search and consideration, the newly discovered Xu prior art document, referenced in the updated rejection below, teaches the limitations as claimed. Please see below for full rejection. Accordingly, applicant’s amendments have necessitated the new grounds of rejection set forth and consequently, THIS ACTION IS FINAL.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-4, 7-11 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 11,889,100 B2) in view of Bae Keun Lee (US 11,711,520 B2) further in view of Xu et al. (US 2020/0036998 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Zhang teaches an image providing device, comprising:
at least one processor configured to implement (Zhang, Col. 7 line 57 – Col. 8 line 4, execute the instructions in hardware using one or more processors):
an image receiver configured to receive an image signal (Zhang, Col 5 lines 56-64, output interface comprises a wireless receiver configured to receive data such as the bitstream);
an image encoder configured to encode the image signal into a bitstream based on inter prediction information for a current block of the image signal (Zhang, Col. 10, liens 41-53, video encoder may generate a predictive block using intra prediction or inter prediction to generate a predictive block),
wherein the inter prediction information includes at least one of first motion prediction information comprising a first motion vector, and second motion prediction information comprising a second motion vector (Zhang, Col. 16 line 54 – Col. 17, line 10, when performing uni-directional inter prediction for the current block, the video coder uses a motion vector to determine a location in a reference picture. The video coder may then generate a predictive block for the current block (i.e., first motion prediction information). The predictive block may comprise a block of samples in the reference picture at the location indicated by the motion vector, or a block of samples interpolated from samples of the reference picture. When performing bi-directional inter prediction, the video coder may perform this process with a second reference picture and a second motion vector, thereby generating a second predictive block for the current block); and
an image provider configured to output the encoded bitstream to an image receiving device (Zhang, Col. 33, lines 10-28, video encoder may output a bitstream that includes entropy-encoded data generated by entropy encoding unit),
select a first reference picture for the current block (Zhang, Col. 35, lines 52-64, add to the affine MVP list, as a first motion vector predictor, a first motion vector of the first neighboring blocks having the associated reference picture that is the same as the target reference picture that occurs first in the first predetermined order),
wherein the image encoder is further configured to estimate the first motion vector based on the first reference picture (Zhang, Col. 35, lines 52-64, add to the affine MVP list, as a first motion vector predictor, a first motion vector of the first neighboring blocks having the associated reference picture that is the same as the target reference picture that occurs first in the first predetermined order).
Although Zhang teaches adding a second motion vector predictor of the second neighboring blocks to the affine MVP list (Zhang, Col. 36, lines 4-18), Zhang does not explicitly teach “obtain a second motion vector candidate list comprising a plurality of second motion vector candidates from at least one neighboring block of the current block”. However, in an analogous field of endeavor, Lee teaches a second merge candidate list (i.e., second motion vector candidate list) may include a merge candidate derived on the basis of the motion information of the second merge candidate block (Lee, Col. 27, lines 65-67). Examples of the second merge candidate block may include at least one of a block encode/decoded using inter prediction before current block, a block adjacent to the first merge candidate block, or a block positioned on the same line as the first merge candidate block (i.e., neighboring block of the current block) (Lee, Col. 26, lines 40-56). Any one of the merge candidates included in the selected merge candidate list may be selected, and motion information of the current block may be acquired from the selected merge candidate (Lee, Col. 29, lines 16-23).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the device of Zhang with the teachings of Lee by including obtaining a second motion vector candidate list (i.e., second merge candidate list) based on neighboring blocks. One having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine these references because doing so would allow for a video compression technique with ultra-high resolution, as recognized by Lee.
Although Zhang in view of Lee teaches selecting a candidate from a candidate list (Lee, Col. 29, lines 16-23), the references do not explicitly teach to “determine a plurality of difference values between the first motion vector and the plurality of second motion vector candidates”, “determine a highest difference value from among the plurality of difference values” and “select a second motion vector candidate corresponding to the highest difference value as the second motion vector”. However, in an analogous field of endeavor, Xu teaches the step of selecting the second motion vector predictor (i.e., second motion vector) further includes, selecting, as the second motion vector predictor, a motion vector predictor of the entry in the history buffer (i.e., second motion vector candidates) with a previously decoded block having the largest determined difference in y coordinates with the current block (i.e., highest difference value) (Xu, Para. [0182]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the device of Zhang in view of Lee with the teachings of Xu by including determining the difference values between previous motion vectors and the current motion vector and selecting the motion vector with the highest difference value as the second motion vector. One having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine these references because doing so would allow for video coding and decoding using inter-picture prediction with motion compensation, as recognized by Xu. Thus, the claimed invention would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Regarding claim 2, Zhang in view of Lee further in view of teaches the image providing device of claim 1, wherein the image encoder is further configured to select the second motion vector candidate as the second motion vector based on determining that the first reference picture is a reference picture of the second motion vector candidate (Zhang, Col. 18 line 59 – Col. 19 line 5, for each group, the potential candidate in a neighboring block referring to the same reference picture as that indicated by the signaled reference index has the highest priority to be chosen to form a final candidate of the group).
Regarding claim 3, Zhang in view of Lee further in view of Xu teaches the image providing device of claim 2, wherein the first motion prediction information further comprises a first reference picture identifier and the first motion vector, and wherein the second motion prediction information further comprises the first reference picture identifier and the second motion vector (Zhang, Col. 16 line 54 – Col. 17, line 10, when performing uni-directional inter prediction for the current block, the video coder uses a motion vector to determine a location in a reference picture. The video coder may then generate a predictive block for the current block (i.e., first motion prediction information). The predictive block may comprise a block of samples in the reference picture at the location indicated by the motion vector, or a block of samples interpolated from samples of the reference picture. When performing bi-directional inter prediction, the video coder may perform this process with a second reference picture and a second motion vector, thereby generating a second predictive block for the current block).
Regarding claim 4, Zhang in view of Lee further in view of Xu teaches the image providing device of claim 1, wherein the at least one neighboring block comprises at least one of a spatial neighboring block of the current block and a temporal neighboring block of the current block (Zhang, Col. 17, lines 58-64, a merge candidate corresponds to a full set of motion information (e.g., prediction direction, reference index, and motion vector) while an AMVP candidate contains just one motion vector for a specifically signaled prediction direction and reference index. The candidates for both modes are derived similarly from the same spatial and temporal neighboring blocks).
Regarding claim 7, Zhang in view of Lee further in view of Xu teaches the image providing device of claim 1, further comprising a communication interface configured to transmit and receive data over a network (Zhang, Col. 6, lines 10-32, a communication medium to enable source device 12 to transmit encoded video data directly to destination device 14 in real-time. The encoded video data may be modulated according to a communication standard, such as a wireless communication protocol, and transmitted to destination device 14. The communication medium may comprise any wireless or wired communication medium, such as a radio frequency (RF) spectrum or one or more physical transmission lines. The communication medium may form part of a packet-based network, such as a local area network, a wide-area network, or a global network such as the Internet. The communication medium may include routers, switches, base stations, or any other equipment that may be useful to facilitate communication from source device 12 to destination device 14),
wherein the image provider is further configured to transmit the encoded bitstream to the image receiving device using the communication interface (Zhang, Col. 6, lines 10-32, a communication medium to enable source device 12 to transmit encoded video data directly to destination device 14 in real-time).
Claims 8-11 recite methods with steps corresponding to the elements of the system recited in Claims 14, respectively. Therefore, the recited steps of these claims are mapped to the proposed combination in the same manner as the corresponding elements in their corresponding system claims. Additionally, the rationale and motivation to combine the Zhang, Lee and Xu references, presented in rejection of Claim 1, apply to these claims.
Regarding claim 14, Zhang in view of Lee further in view of Xu teaches the image providing method of claim 8, further comprising transmitting and receiving data over a network (Zhang, Col. 6, lines 10-32, a communication medium to enable source device 12 to transmit encoded video data directly to destination device 14 in real-time. The encoded video data may be modulated according to a communication standard, such as a wireless communication protocol, and transmitted to destination device 14. The communication medium may comprise any wireless or wired communication medium, such as a radio frequency (RF) spectrum or one or more physical transmission lines. The communication medium may form part of a packet-based network, such as a local area network, a wide-area network, or a global network such as the Internet. The communication medium may include routers, switches, base stations, or any other equipment that may be useful to facilitate communication from source device 12 to destination device 14);
wherein the outputting of the encoded bitstream comprises transmitting the encoded bitstream to the image receiving device through the network (Zhang, Col. 6, lines 10-32, a communication medium to enable source device 12 to transmit encoded video data directly to destination device 14 in real-time).
Claims 5-6 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al. (US 11,889,100 B2) in view of Bae Keun Lee (US 11,711,520 B2) further in view of Xu et al. (US 2020/0036998 A1), as applied to claims 1-4, 7-11 and 14 above, and further in view of Park et al. (US 2022/0124344 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Zhang in view of Lee further in view of Xu teaches the image providing device of claim 4,
wherein the spatial neighboring block is at a position including at least one of a left side of the current block, an upper side of the current block, a lower left corner of the current block, an upper left corner of the current block, and an upper right corner of the current block (Zhang, Col. 18, lines 50-58, spatial MV candidates are derived from the neighboring blocks. In merge mode, up to four spatial MV candidates can be derived with the order shown in FIG. 3A with numbers, and the order is the following: left (0), above (1), above-right (2), below-left (3), and above-left (4)).
Although Zhang in view of Lee further in view of Xu teaches a temporal neighboring block may mean a co-located block included in a co-located picture (Lee, Col. 18 lines 58-67), the references do not explicitly teach “wherein the temporal neighboring block is included in a collocated picture that is different from a current picture comprising the current block and is decoded before the current block temporally”. However, in an analogous field of endeavor, Park teaches in the case of inter prediction, the neighboring block may include a spatial neighboring block present in the current picture and a temporal neighboring block present in the reference picture. The reference picture including the reference block and the reference picture including the temporal neighboring block may be the same or different. The temporal neighboring block may be called a collocated reference block, a co-located CU (colCU), and the like, and the reference picture including the temporal neighboring block may be called a collocated picture (colPic) (Park, Para. [0067]). L0 and L1 may include reference pictures that are previously encoded/decoded prior to the current picture. For example, L0 may include reference pictures before and/or after the current picture in POC order, and L1 may include reference pictures after and/or before the current picture in POC order (Park, Para. [0142]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the device of Zhang in view of Lee further in view of Xu with the teachings of Park by including the temporal block is included in a reference picture that is a collocated picture and that the reference picture was encoded/decoded prior to the current picture. One having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine these references because doing so would allow for a highly efficient image/video compression technology, as recognized by Park. Thus, the claimed invention would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date.
Regarding claim 6, Zhang in view of Lee further in view of Xu teaches the image providing device of claim 1, as described above.
Although Zhang in view of Lee further in view of Xu teaches transmitting encoded video data in real-time (Zhang, Col. 6, lines 10-32), they references do not explicitly teach “wherein the image signal comprises a real-time encoded image including at least one of a screen mirroring image, a video conference image, and a game image”. However, in an analogous field of endeavor, Park teaches the predictor may be based on an intra block copy (IBC) prediction mode or a palette mode for prediction of a block. The IBC prediction mode or palette mode may be used for content image/video coding of a game or the like, for example, screen content coding (SCC) (Park, Para. [0068]).
The proposed combination as well as the motivation for combining the Zhang, Lee, Xu and Park references presented in the rejection of Claim 5, apply to Claim 6 and are incorporated herein by reference. Thus, the device recited in Claim 6 is met by Zhang in view of Lee further in view of Xu and Park.
Claim 12-13 recite methods with steps corresponding to the elements of the system recited in Claims 5-6, respectively. Therefore, the recited steps of these claims are mapped to the proposed combination in the same manner as the corresponding elements in their corresponding system claims. Additionally, the rationale and motivation to combine the Zhang, Lee, Xu and Park references, presented in rejection of Claim 5, apply to these claims.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Emma Rose Goebel whose telephone number is (703)756-5582. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30-5.
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, Amandeep Saini can be reached at (571) 272-3382. 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.
/Emma Rose Goebel/Examiner, Art Unit 2662
/AMANDEEP SAINI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2662
