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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 19-20 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 enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Claims, 1, 19-20 discloses wherein whether to store separate affine model parameters for different color components of the current block depends on color format. The specification is not enabling because the specification does not disclose any detail on storing parameters being dependent on color formats. In fact, the specification makes no mention of a particular type of color format. Therefore, there would be undue experimentation required to enable the full scope of the claims.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7-8, 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20180270500 A1-Li et al (Hereinafter referred to as Li”), in view of US 6608702 B1-Ursawa.
Regarding claim 1, Li discloses a method of processing video data (Fig. 14-15), comprising:
checking, during a conversion between a current block and a bitstream of the current block ([0146], at the encoder), neighboring blocks of the current block in order to select a set of affine model parameters ([00106-0107], [0118] wherein neighboring blocks are being checked)
selecting, during a current affine calculation step in the conversion ([0158]), one or more parameters of the set of affine model parameters [0155], wherein set of affine parameters can be selected)
storing the one or more parameters for the current block ([0187], storing
acquiring motion information of the current block, wherein the motion information of the current block is based on at least one affine model parameter of a neighboring block of the current block ([0117], wherein affine parameters describes the motion vectors); and
performing, based on the one or more parameters and the motion information, the conversion between the current block and the bitstream of the current block ([0021], wherein encoding is interpreted as a conversion between the current block and the bitstream of the current block).
Li fails to explicitly disclose in detail wherein whether to store separate affine model parameters for different color components of the current block depends on color format.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Ursawa discloses whether to store separate affine model parameters for different color components of the current block depends on color format (column 9, lines 30-50, wherein a parameter storing section stores parameters required for affine transformation for every color component).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Li to disclose wherein whether to store separate affine model parameters for different color components of the current block depends on color format as taught by Ursawa, to improve overall coding quality (Ursawa).
Regarding claim 7, Li discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the selecting of the one or more parameters depends on at least one of: affine modes, inter or merge mode, block size, picture type ([0155], selected as affine model).
Regarding claim 8, Li disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the current block comprises a luma component and a chroma component ([0074]), wherein affine model parameters stored for the luma component are also stored for the chroma component of the current block ([0008], storing video data; [0187], storing), and wherein during the conversion on the chroma component, affine model parameters for the chroma component are inherited or derived from the affine model parameters stored for the luma component ([0008], deriving affine parameters).
Regarding claim 10, Li discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the set of affine model parameters for the current block is predicted or inherited from one or more collocated blocks in one or multiple pictures ([0135], wherein he affine template can include reconstructed pixels in one or more reference pictures of the current block (e.g., the collocated picture used for temporal MV prediction; the initial motion vector points to the reference affine template 1112, and thus can be used to identify which reference picture, and where in that reference picture (corresponding to the reference affine template 1112), to search for the information needed to derive the affine motion parameters for the current block 1102. The search for the affine motion parameters in the reference block 1110 of the reference picture is performed around the pixel referenced by the initial motion vector).
Regarding clam 11, Li discloses the method of claim 10, wherein the set of affine model parameters are associated with one temporal neighboring block of a plurality of temporal neighboring blocks ([0174]).
Regarding claim 12, Li discloses the method of claim 11, wherein the one temporal neighboring block is identified based on neighboring motion information ([0104, temporal neighboring blocks)].
Regarding claim 13, Li disclose the method of claim 11, wherein the one temporal neighboring block is from a collocated picture ([0135], the collocated picture used for temporal MV prediction.
Regarding claim 14, Li discloses the method of claim 13, wherein temporal motion vector prediction (TMVP) ([0135]) or alternative temporal motion vector prediction (ATMVP) for the current block is based on the collocated picture ([0104]).
Regarding claim 15, Li discloses the method of claim 13, wherein the collocated picture is signaled in a video parameter set (VPS), a sequence parameter set (SPS), a picture parameter set (PPS), a slice header or a tile group header ([0167]).
Regarding claim 16, Li discloses the method of claim 10, wherein affine model parameters associated with the one or more collocated blocks in one or multiple pictures are used to predict the set of affine model parameters of the current block, or used to predict control point motion vectors (CPMVs) for the current block ([0169], wherein affine parameters are used to predict control point motion vectors).
Regarding claim 17, Li discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the conversion comprises encoding the current block into the bitstream ([0024], encoding).
Regarding claim 18, Li discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the conversion comprises decoding the current block from the bitstream ([0024], decoding).
Regarding claim 19, arguments are analogous to those presented for claim 1 and are applicable for claim 19.
Regarding claim 20, analyses are analogous to those presented for claim 1 and are applicable for claim 20.
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20180270500 A1-Li et al (Hereinafter referred to as Li”), in view of US 6608702 B1-Ursawa, in further view of US 20190230361 A1-Zhang et al (Hereinafter referred to as “Zhang”).
Regarding claim 2, Li discloses the method of claim 1 (see claim 1),
Li fails to disclose wherein a width of the current block is noted as w and is equal to 2B and a height of the current block is noted as h and is equal to 2hb, where WB and HB are integers greater than one
However, in the same field of endeavor, Zhang discloses wherein a width of the current block is noted as w and is equal to 2B and a height of the current block is noted as h and is equal to 2hb, where WB and HB are integers greater than one ([0152]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Li to disclose wherein a width of the current block is noted as w and is equal to 2B and a height of the current block is noted as h and is equal to 2hb, where WB and HB are integers greater than one as taught by Zhang, to improve overall coding quality ([0237], Zhang).
.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6 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 LERON BECK whose telephone number is (571)270-1175. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-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.
LERON . BECK
Examiner
Art Unit 2487
/LERON BECK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
Prosecution Insights