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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/14/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
See below the rejection.
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 § 2146 et seq. 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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-11 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US 12108076 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Claims 21-29 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US 12108076 B2 in view of ZHANG et al. (US 20210006819 A1).
ZHANG discloses transmitting a bitstream ([0079] An encoding algorithm producing an HEVC compliant bitstream would typically proceed as follows, motion compensation (MC) using the MV and mode decision data, which are transmitted as side information).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine claims of U.S. Patent No. US 12108076 B2 and the invention of ZHANG, to transmit the bitstream.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-11 and 21-29 would be allowed over prior art.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The instant invention is related to a method and an apparatus for video decoding.
Regarding claims 1, 12. ZHANG et al. (US 20210006819 A1) discloses A method for video encoding in a video encoder/A method of processing visual media data (abstract, Devices, systems and methods for encoding and decoding digital video), comprising:
processing a bitstream that includes the visual media data according to a format rule (abstract, Devices, systems and methods for encoding and decoding digital video, a conversion between a current video block and a bitstream representation of a video), wherein
the bitstream includes prediction information of a current block in a current picture ([0080] transmitted together with the prediction information), the prediction information indicating that (1) the current block is predicted with bi-prediction and (2) a bi-prediction coding unit (CU)-level weights (BCW) is enabled for the current block ([0106] bi-prediction is not supported for 4?8 and 8?4 blocks. In the QTBT of the JEM, these restrictions are removed; [0114] Bi-prediction is available for B-slices only; [0150] if( slice_type = = P | | slice_type = = B ) { if( ( weighted_pred_flag && slice_type = = P ) | |( weighted_bipred_flag && slice_type = = B ) ) …});
performing template matching (TM) on respective BCW candidate weights ([0191]; [0197] In DMVR, a bilateral template is generated as the weighted combination (i.e. average) of the two prediction blocks, from the initial MV0 of list0 and MV1 of list1, respectively, as shown in FIG. 24. The template matching operation consists of calculating cost measures between the generated template and the sample region (around the initial prediction block) in the reference picture) by
determining a respective TM cost corresponding to each of the respective BCW candidate weights, each TM cost being determined based at least on a portion or all of a current template of the current block and a respective bi-predictor template, the bi-predictor template being based on the respective BCW candidate weight, a portion or all of a first reference template in a first reference picture, and a portion or all of a second reference template in a second reference picture, the first reference template and the second reference template corresponding to the current template ([0195] cost0 is the SAD of list0 template matching, cost1 is the SAD of list1 template matching and costBi is the SAD of bi-prediction template matching; [0197] a bilateral template is generated as the weighted combination (i.e. average) of the two prediction blocks, from the initial MV0 of list0 and MV1 of list1, respectively, as shown in FIG. 24. The template matching operation consists of calculating cost measures between the generated template and the sample region (around the initial prediction block) in the reference picture); and
encoding the current block in a bitstream/the current block is processed ([0196] In a bi-prediction operation, for the prediction of one block region, two prediction blocks, formed using a motion vector (MV) of list0 and a MV of list1, respectively, are combined to form a single prediction signal. The bilateral template matching applied in the decoder to perform a distortion-based search between a bilateral template and the reconstruction samples in the reference pictures).
ZHANG et al. (US 20220239899 A1) also discloses the weight coefficient w may be determined according to a Bi-prediction with CU-level weight (BCW) index associated with the candidate ([0212]). At least one of the first weight and the second weight is determined according to a Bi-prediction with CU-level weight (BCW) index associated with the candidate ([0265]).
ZHANG also discloses transmitting a bitstream ([0079] An encoding algorithm producing an HEVC compliant bitstream would typically proceed as follows, motion compensation (MC) using the MV and mode decision data, which are transmitted as side information).
However, none of the above prior art discloses
reordering the BCW candidate weights based on the respectively determined TM costs; and
encoding the current block in a bitstream/the current block is processed based on the reordered BCW candidate weights.
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 XIAOLAN XU whose telephone number is (571)270-7580. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. to Fri. 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, SATH V. PERUNGAVOOR can be reached at (571) 272-7455. 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.
/XIAOLAN XU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488