DETAILED ACTION
1. This is a first office action in response to application no. 18/855,313 filed on June 30th , 2025 in which claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
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 interpretation
2. Patentable weight is given to data stored on a computer-readable medium when there exists a functional relationship between the data and its associated substrate. MPEP 2111.05 III. For example, if a claim is drawn to a computer-readable medium containing programming, a functional relationship exists if the programming “performs some function with respect to the computer with which it is associated.” Id. However, if the claim recites that the computer-readable medium merely serves as a support for information or data, no functional relationship exists and the information or data is not given patentable weight. Id.
Claim 15 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, the bitstream for image decoding. These elements or contents are not performed by an intended computer, and the bitstream is not a form of programming that causes functions to be performed by an intended computer. This shows that the computer-readable medium merely serves as support for the bitstream and provides no functional relationship between the contents/elements that describe the generation of the bitstream and intended computer system. Therefore, those claim contents/elements are not given patentable weight. Thus, the claim scope is just a storage medium storing data and is anticipated by Nakamura et al. (See Nakamura [0430]) recites a storage medium storing a bitstream See Nakamura ([0441]) ).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
4. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
5. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakamura et al. (US Patent Application Publication no. 2014/0153647).
Regarding claim 15, Nakamura discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium for storing a bitstream for image decoding, wherein: the bitstream comprises encoded coding information, coding information is generated by performing decoding on the encoded coding information, and prediction information to be used for decoding of a target block is determined (See Nakamura [0430] and [0441]).
6. Claims 1-2, 8-9, 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakamura et al. (US Patent Application no. 2014/0376638).
As per claim 1, Nakamura discloses an image encoding method (See Nakamura’s Abstract, [0017]-[0018]), comprising: determining prediction information to be used for encoding of a target block (See Nakamura Fig. 1, unit 104, [0018]); generating encoded encoding information by performing encoding on coding information (See Nakamura [0017], ; and generating a bitstream including the encoded coding information (See Nakamura [0020], [0029]).
A per claim 8, Nakamura discloses image decoding method (See Nakamura [0017], [0031]), comprising: acquiring a bitstream including encoded coding information (See Nakamura Fig. 2, decoder 212, and [0031]); generating coding information by performing decoding on the encoded coding information (See [0017], [0024]); and determining prediction information to be used for decoding of a target block (See Nakamura [0018]).
Regarding claim 15, Nakamura discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium for storing a bitstream for image decoding (See Nakamura [0306], [0393]), wherein: the bitstream comprises encoded coding information (See Nakamura [0017], [0018]), coding information is generated by performing decoding on the encoded coding information (See Nakamura [0031]), and prediction information to be used for decoding of a target block is determined (See Nakamura [0018]).
As per claims 2, 9 and 16, Nakamura further discloses wherein the prediction information includes a motion information candidate list and final motion information (See Nakamura [0018]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
8. 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.
9. Claims 3-7, 10-14 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura et al. (US Patent Application Publication no. 2014/0153647) in view of Deng et al. (US Patent Application Publication no. 2024/0163459).
As per claims 3, 10 and 17, most of the limitations of these claims have been noted in the above rejection of claims 1, 8 and 15.
It is noted that Nakamura is silent about wherein performing prediction for the target block using inter-prediction, intra block copy or intra template matching prediction.
However, Deng teaches wherein performing prediction for the target block using inter-prediction, intra block copy or intra template matching prediction (See Deng [0700]-[0701] and [0826]).
Therefore, it is considered obvious that one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would recognize the advantage of modifying Nakamura by incorporate Deng’s teachings wherein performing prediction for the target block using inter-prediction, intra block copy or intra template matching prediction. The motivation for performing such a modification in Nakamura is to improve the coding efficiency and performance.
As per claims 4 and 11, most of the limitations of these claims have been noted in the above rejection of claims 3 and 10. In addition, the combination of Nakamura and Deng further teaches wherein: a motion vector search method for the prediction is used, and the motion vector search method is template matching (See Deng [0472]-[0474]).
As per claims 5 and 12, the combination of Nakamura and Deng further teaches wherein: the inter-prediction is bidirectional prediction, and a motion vector is fixed for one of two directions in the bidirectional prediction (See Deng [0072], [0685] and [0798]).
As per claims 6 and 13, the combination of Nakamura and Deng further teaches wherein a motion search is performed for a remaining one of the two directions (See Deng [0071], [0153] and [0685]).
As per claims 7 and 14, the combination of Nakamura and Deng further teaches wherein a motion vector search method for the inter-prediction is used, and the motion vector search method is bilateral matching (See Deng [0071], [0275]).
As per claim 18, the combination of Nakamura and Deng further teaches wherein a motion vector search method for the prediction is used, and the motion vector search method is template matching (See Deng [0472]-[0474]).
As per claim 19, the combination of Nakamura and Deng further teaches wherein: the inter-prediction is bidirectional prediction, and a motion vector is fixed for one of two directions of the bidirectional prediction (See Deng [0072], [0685] and [0798]).
As per claim 20, the combination of Nakamura and Deng further teaches wherein a motion search is performed for a remaining one of the two directions (See Deng [0071], [0153] and [0685]).
10. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
See the Notice of References Cited (PTO-892).
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GIMS S PHILIPPE whose telephone number is (571)272-7336. The examiner can normally be reached Maxi Flex.
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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at 571-272-3982. 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.
/GIMS S PHILIPPE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424
Prosecution Insights