DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This office action is a response to an application filed on 12/09/2025, in which claims 1-3, 5-19, and 21 are pending and ready for examination.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1 and 18-19 are currently amended. Claims 4 and 20 are cancelled. Claim 21 is newly added.
Response to Argument
Applicant's arguments filed12/09/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to claims rejected under 35 USC 102, 103, the Applicant argues, see Pg. 7, that cited portion of Wang does not teach the limitation “the one or more parameters of the BVD for coding the adaptive BVD pixel resolution comprise a magnitude of the BVD” by asserting that teaching of BVD in Wang is related to IBC merge, which is not mode descried in Xiu where the BVD resolution is switchable.
Examiner cannot concur. The fact that Xiu teaches an adaptive/switchable BVD resolution does not prevent Wang’s teaching on the recited claim limitation in question. In cited Para. [1123-1128], Wang teaches determining one or more parameters, e.g. magnitude, for determining adaptive BVD pixel resolution, wherein the final resolution is at least related to the resolution of BVD. In addition, the amended feature raises an issue of not having sufficient support from the original filed disclosure as outlined below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1, 18, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The limitation “the one or more parameters of the BVD for coding the adaptive BVD pixel resolution comprise a magnitude of the BVD” includes scope that is not supported in the original filed disclosure.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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, 5-11, 18-19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US Pub. 20220159295 A1) in view of Wang (US Pub. 20250142087 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Xiu discloses a method of video decoding performed at a computing system having memory and one or more processors, the method comprising (Xiu; Fig. 2, Para. [0047-49]. A video coding system/method, including a processing circuitry and memory, is used to perform video decoding.):
receiving a video bitstream comprising a plurality of blocks, including a current block (Xiu; Fig. 2, Para. [0047-49]. A video bitstream is received, including different blocks including a current block.);
determining that the current block is intra coded based on a prediction block for the current block and a block vector (BV) (Xiu; Fig. 4, 5, Para. [0055]. A current block is determined to be intra-coded using a block vector and a prediction block.);
when a block vector difference (BVD) is coded with an adaptive BVD pixel resolution (Xiu; Para. [0055]. A block vector difference is coded with an adaptive BVD resolution.):
identifying one or more parameters of the BVD (Xiu; Para. [0055]. At least one parameter of a BVD is determined.); and
deriving the BVD based on the one or more BVD parameters (Xiu; Para. [0055]. A BVD is determined in accordance with at least one BVD parameter.);
identifying the prediction block using the BV and the BVD (Xiu; Para. [0055-56]. A prediction block for IBC is determined using a BV and BVD.); and
reconstructing the current block using the prediction block (Xiu; Para. [0055-56]. A current block is reconstructed in IBC using a prediction block.).
But Xiu does not specifically disclose wherein the one or more parameters of the BVD for coding the adaptive BVD pixel resolution comprise a magnitude of the BVD.
However, Wang teaches wherein the one or more parameters of the BVD for coding the adaptive BVD pixel resolution comprise a magnitude of the BVD (Wang; Para. [01123-1128]. At least one parameter of a BVD is identified using a signaled index from a bitstream.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the pertinent before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the video coding system of Xiu to adapt a BVD signaling and derivation, by incorporating Wang’s teaching wherein BVD information of index and direction are determined to specify the magnitude of BVD, for the motivation to derive prediction by combing IBC predicted signal and intra predicted signal (Wang; Abstract).
Regarding claim 2, Xiu discloses identifying one or more parameters of the BVD (Xiu; See remarks regarding claim 1 above.).
But Xiu does not specifically disclose wherein the one or more parameters of the BVD are identified using a signaled index from the video bitstream.
However, Wang teaches wherein the one or more parameters of the BVD are identified using a signaled index from the video bitstream (Wang; Para. [01123-1128]. At least one parameter of a BVD is identified using a signaled index from a bitstream.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the pertinent before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the video coding system of Xiu to adapt a BVD signaling and derivation, by incorporating Wang’s teaching wherein BVD information of index and direction are determined, for the motivation to derive prediction by combing IBC predicted signal and intra predicted signal (Wang; Abstract).
Regarding claim 3, modified Xiu further teaches wherein the one or more parameters of the BVD are derived at a decoding component (Wang; Para. [01123-1128]. At least one parameter of a BVD is determined at a decoding component.).
Regarding claim 5, modified Xiu further teaches wherein deriving the BVD based on the one or more BVD parameters comprises determining a pixel precision of the BVD (Xiu; Para. [0055, 62]. A pixel precision/resolution is determined for deriving BVD in accordance with BVD parameters.).
Regarding claim 6, modified Xiu further teaches wherein the one or more parameters of the BVD comprise a magnitude of the BVD, and wherein the pixel precision of the BVD is inversely proportional to the magnitude of the BVD (Xiu; Para. [01126, 1130]. At least on BVD parameter include a magnitude of a BVD, precision of a BVD is inversely proportional to a magnitude.).
Regarding claim 7, modified Xiu further teaches wherein deriving the BVD based on the one or more BVD parameters comprises selecting the BVD from a plurality of predefined values (Wang; Para. [01123-1128]. A BVD is determined in accordance with at least one BVD parameters for determining a BVD from different predefined values.).
Regarding claim 8, modified Xiu further teaches wherein the plurality of predefined values correspond to multiple intervals, and wherein an interval size increases as the predefined values increase (Wang; Para. [01123-1128]. Different predefine values correspond to different intervals/ranges, wherein interval increase as predefined values increases.).
Regarding claim 9, modified Xiu further teaches wherein the plurality of predefined values are stored in a look-up table, and wherein an index to the look-up table is signaled in the video bitstream (Wang; Para. [01137-1141]. Different predefined values are recorded in a table, for which an index to a table is signaled in a bitstream.).
Regarding claim 10, modified Xiu further teaches wherein a difference in values of adjacent entries in the look-up table increases monotonically with an increase in the index of the look-up table (Wang; Para. [01133-1136]. A difference of adjacent entries in a table increases monotonically with index increasing.).
Regarding claim 11, modified Xiu further teaches determining whether the BVD is coded with the adaptive BVD pixel resolution based on an indicator in the video bitstream (Xiu; Para. [0054-56]. A BVD is determined to be coded with adaptive BVD resolution in accordance with at least an indicator in a bitstream.).
Claim 18 is directed to a computing system, comprising: control circuitry; memory; and one or more sets of instructions stored in the memory and configured for execution by the control circuitry, the one or more sets of instructions comprising instructions (Xiu; Para. [0120, 122]. A computing storage storing one or more instructions/program for causing a processor and memory for perform video coding steps.) for a sequence of processing steps corresponding to the same as claimed in claim 1, and is rejected for the same reason of anticipation as outlined above.
Claim 19 is directed to a computing system, comprising: control circuitry; memory; and one or more sets of instructions stored in the memory and configured for execution by the control circuitry, the one or more sets of instructions comprising instructions (Xiu; Para. [0120, 122]. A computing storage storing one or more instructions/program for causing a processor and memory for perform video coding steps.) for a sequence of processing steps corresponding to the same as claimed in claims 4-5, and are non-patentable over the prior art for the same reason as previously indicated.
Claim 21 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a video bitstream that is generated by a video encoding method, the video bitstream comprising: coded information for a plurality of blocks of video data, the plurality of blocks including a current block coded based on a prediction block and a block vector (BV); wherein the video encoding method comprises a sequence of processing steps corresponding to the same as claimed in claim 1, and is non-patentable over the prior art for the same reason as previously indicated.
Claims 12-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (US Pub. 20220159295 A1) in view of Wang (US Pub. 20250142087 A1), as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Wang’2 (US Pub. 20240089494 A1).
Regarding claim 12, modified Xiu further teaches the indicator indicates whether the BVD is coded with the adaptive BVD pixel resolution (Xiu; Para. [0055]. An indicator is used to indicate whether a BVD is coded with an adaptive BVD resolution.).
But it does not specifically teach the indicator indicates whether a NEARMV mode is applied, and whether a NEWMV mode is applied.
However, Wang’2 teaches the indicator indicates whether a NEARMV mode is applied, and whether a NEWMV mode is applied (Wang’2; Para. [0185-187]. An indicator is used to indicate whether a NEARMV mode is used and whether a NEWMV is used.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the pertinent before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the video coding system of modified Xiu to adapt a prediction mode signaling approach, by incorporating Wang’2’s teaching wherein inter prediction are used and signaled, for the motivation to perform inter-prediction based on a prediction vector candidate list (Wang’2; Abstract).
Regarding claim 13, modified Xiu further teaches the indicator is entropy coded using a context that is independent of coded information of the indicator (Wang’2; Para. [0052, 56]. An indicator is entropy-coded independent of coded information of an indicator.).
Regarding claim 14, modified Xiu further teaches the indicator is signaled in a high-level syntax of the video bitstream (Wang’2; Para. [0052]. An indicator is signaled in a high-level syntax of a bitstream.).
Regarding claim 15, modified Xiu further teaches a number of candidate block vectors in a block vector candidate list associated with the current block depends on whether the BVD is coded with the adaptive BVD pixel resolution (Xiu; Para. [0055, 57]. A number of candidate block vectors in a candidate list for a current block depends on whether a BVD is coded with an adaptive BVD resolution.).
Regarding claim 16, modified Xiu further teaches the block vector candidate list is shorter for the BVD coded with the adaptive BVD pixel resolution as compared to the BVD coded without the adaptive BVD pixel resolution (Xiu; Para. [0055, 57]. A block vector candidate list is short, i.e. 2 candidates, for a BVD coded with an adaptive BVD resolution as compared to a BVD coded without an adaptive BVD resolution.).
Regarding claim 17, modified Xiu further teaches the number of candidate block vectors in the block vector candidate list associated with the current block when the BVD is coded with the adaptive BVD pixel resolution is equal to 2 (Xiu; Para. [0055, 57]. A block vector candidate list is short, i.e. 2 candidates, for a BVD coded with an adaptive BVD resolution as compared to a BVD coded without an adaptive BVD resolution.).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Rufitskiy (US Pub. 20240137557 A1) teaches a video coding system that performs block vector difference coding.
Filippov (US Pub. 20240137555 A1) teaches a video coding system that performs block vector difference coding.
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 ALBERT KIR whose telephone number is (571)272-6245. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30am - 5:00pm.
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, Jay Patel can be reached at (571) 272-2988. 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.
/ALBERT KIR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2485
Prosecution Insights