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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Moon et al. (US 2025/0133201) (Joo Hee Moon).
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.
Claims 16-17 are directed to a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing and transmitting bitstream, the bitstream generated by a method. While the elements or steps of the method may be performed by an intended computer, the method is not stored on the non-transitory computer-readable medium. Rather, the non-transitory computer readable recording medium, as claimed, includes only a bitstream. 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 steps/elements that describe the generation of the bitstream and intended computer system. Therefore, those claim elements are not given patentable weight. Thus the claim scope is just a storage medium storing data. This is anticipated by Zhang, which recites a storage medium storing a bitstream (e.g., pars. 26-37, 192 and 373 and Fig. 28: describing that encoded data is stored in a computer readable storage medium, wherein encoded data is the equivalent of the bitstream).
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 byt he manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-2 and 5-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon et al. (US 2025/0133201) (Joo Hee Moon) in view of Zhang et al. (US 2022/0094915) Li (Zhang).
Regarding Claim 1, Moon discloses an image decoding method performed by an image decoding apparatus, the image decoding method comprising: determining prediction modes respectively applied to prediction directions of a current block, the prediction modes including an advanced motion vector prediction (AMVP) mode and a merge mode [See Paragraph 27-3 and 133-148]; generating prediction blocks for the prediction directions, based on at least one reference picture set, at least one AMVP candidate and at least one merge candidate [See Paragraphs 27-28 and 145-158], and deriving a prediction block of the current block based on the prediction blocks [See Paragraphs 201-226],
Moon doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein among the prediction directions, a prediction mode of a certain prediction direction is determined to be the AMVP mode and a prediction mode of the other prediction direction is determined to be the merge mode
However, Zhang discloses wherein among the prediction directions, a prediction mode of a certain prediction direction is determined to be the AMVP mode and a prediction mode of the other prediction direction is determined to be the merge mode [See Paragraphs 114-117 and 116-195].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Moon to add the teachings in Zhang as above, to provide a method that enables adding the candidate at a position such that addition of remaining candidates is subjected to a redundancy check which ensures the candidates with same motion information are excluded from a list, thus improving coding efficiency [See Zhang Paragraph93].
Regarding Claim 2, Moon doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the reference picture set is constructed based on picture order counts (POCs) of reference pictures of a current slice including the current block being smaller or larger than a POC of a current picture including the current block.
However, Zhang discloses wherein the reference picture set is constructed based on picture order counts (POCs) of reference pictures of a current slice including the current block being smaller or larger than a POC of a current picture including the current block [See Paragraphs 96-104].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Moon to add the teachings in Zhang as above, to provide a method that enables adding the candidate at a position such that addition of remaining candidates is subjected to a redundancy check which ensures the candidates with same motion information are excluded from a list, thus improving coding efficiency [See Zhang Paragraph93].
Regarding Claim 5, Moon discloses wherein the reference picture set includes a default reference picture, based on at least one of whether the reference picture of the certain prediction direction and the reference picture of the other prediction direction are available or whether a predetermined second condition is satisfied [See Paragraphs 115-141].
Regarding Claim 6, Moon doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the predetermined second condition includes at least one of whether a POC difference between the current picture and the reference picture of the certain prediction direction is minimum or whether a POC difference between the current picture and the reference picture of the other prediction direction is minimum.
However, Zhang discloses wherein the predetermined second condition includes at least one of whether a POC difference between the current picture and the reference picture of the certain prediction direction is minimum or whether a POC difference between the current picture and the reference picture of the other prediction direction is minimum [See Paragraphs 96-104, 138-141 and 244-281].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Moon to add the teachings in Zhang as above, to provide a method that enables adding the candidate at a position such that addition of remaining candidates is subjected to a redundancy check which ensures the candidates with same motion information are excluded from a list, thus improving coding efficiency [See Zhang Paragraph93].
Regarding Claim 7, Moon doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the predetermined second condition includes whether a first difference which is a POC difference between the current picture and the reference picture of the certain prediction direction and a second difference which is a POC difference between the current picture and the reference picture of the other prediction direction are the same.
However, Zhang discloses wherein the predetermined second condition includes whether a first difference which is a POC difference between the current picture and the reference picture of the certain prediction direction and a second difference which is a POC difference between the current picture and the reference picture of the other prediction direction are the same minimum [See Paragraphs 96-104, 138-141 and 244-281].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Moon to add the teachings in Zhang as above, to provide a method that enables adding the candidate at a position such that addition of remaining candidates is subjected to a redundancy check which ensures the candidates with same motion information are excluded from a list, thus improving coding efficiency [See Zhang Paragraph93].
Regarding Claim 8, Moon doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the merge candidate is scaled using the default reference picture, and wherein the prediction block of the other prediction direction is derived based on the scaled merge candidate.
However, Zhang discloses wherein the merge candidate is scaled using the default reference picture, and wherein the prediction block of the other prediction direction is derived based on the scaled merge candidate [See Paragraphs 96-104, 138-141 and 244-281].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Moon to add the teachings in Zhang as above, to provide a method that enables adding the candidate at a position such that addition of remaining candidates is subjected to a redundancy check which ensures the candidates with same motion information are excluded from a list, thus improving coding efficiency [See Zhang Paragraph93].
Regarding Claim 9, Moon doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the at least one merge candidate is ordered based on POCs of reference pictures of a current slice including the current block being smaller or larger than a POC of a current picture including the current block.
However, Zhang discloses wherein the at least one merge candidate is ordered based on POCs of reference pictures of a current slice including the current block being smaller or larger than a POC of a current picture including the current block [See Paragraphs 96-104, 138-141 and 244-281].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Moon to add the teachings in Zhang as above, to provide a method that enables adding the candidate at a position such that addition of remaining candidates is subjected to a redundancy check which ensures the candidates with same motion information are excluded from a list, thus improving coding efficiency [See Zhang Paragraph93].
Regarding Claim 10, Moon discloses wherein the at least one merge candidate is ordered based on any one of template matching error or bi-lateral matching error based on whether a predetermined third condition is satisfied [See Paragraphs 113 and 114-161].
Regarding Claim 11, Moon discloses wherein the predetermined third condition includes whether a reference picture of the merge candidate and a reference picture of the AMVP candidate have different prediction directions [See Paragraphs xx].
Regarding Claim 12, Moon doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the predetermined third condition further includes whether a POC difference between the reference picture of the merge candidate and the current picture and a POC difference between the reference picture of the AMVP candidate and the current picture have the same absolute value.
However, Zhang discloses wherein the predetermined third condition further includes whether a POC difference between the reference picture of the merge candidate and the current picture and a POC difference between the reference picture of the AMVP candidate and the current picture have the same absolute value [See Paragraphs 96-104, 138-141 and 244-281].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Moon to add the teachings in Zhang as above, to provide a method that enables adding the candidate at a position such that addition of remaining candidates is subjected to a redundancy check which ensures the candidates with same motion information are excluded from a list, thus improving coding efficiency [See Zhang Paragraph93].
Regarding Claim 13, Moon discloses wherein the AMVP candidate and the merge candidate are refined based on any one of template matching error or bi-lateral matching error based on whether a predetermined fourth condition is satisfied, and wherein the fourth condition includes a reference picture of the merge candidate and a reference picture of the AMVP candidate have different prediction directions [See Paragraphs 113 and 114-161].
Regarding Claim 14, Moon doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the predetermined fourth condition further includes whether a POC difference between the reference picture of the merge candidate and the current picture and a POC difference between the reference picture of the AMVP candidate and the current picture have the same absolute value.
However, Zhang discloses wherein the predetermined fourth condition further includes whether a POC difference between the reference picture of the merge candidate and the current picture and a POC difference between the reference picture of the AMVP candidate and the current picture have the same absolute value [See Paragraphs 96-104, 138-141 and 244-281].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Moon to add the teachings in Zhang as above, to provide a method that enables adding the candidate at a position such that addition of remaining candidates is subjected to a redundancy check which ensures the candidates with same motion information are excluded from a list, thus improving coding efficiency [See Zhang Paragraph93].
Regarding Claim 15, the limitations claimed are substantially similar to claim 1 above, therefore the ground for rejecting claim l also applies here.
Regarding Claim 16, the limitations claimed are substantially similar to claim 1 above, therefore the ground for rejecting claim l also applies here.
Regarding Claim 17, the limitations claimed are substantially similar to claim 1 above, therefore the ground for rejecting claim l also applies here.
Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moon et al. (US 2025/0133201) (Joo Hee Moon) in view of Zhang et al. (US 2022/0094915) Li (Zhang), and further in view of Moon et al. (US 2023/0239496) (Joo Hee Moon)
Regarding Claim 3, Moon and Zhang don’t explicitly disclose the image decoding method of wherein the reference picture set is further constructed based on a predetermined first condition being satisfied, and wherein the predetermined first condition includes at least one of whether a decoder side motion vector derivation (DMVD) is applied to the current block or status information of the reference pictures.
However, Moon discloses the image decoding method of wherein the reference picture set is further constructed based on a predetermined first condition being satisfied, and wherein the predetermined first condition includes at least one of whether a decoder side motion vector derivation (DMVD) is applied to the current block or status information of the reference pictures [See Paragraphs 36-39, 238-243, 292 and 385-401].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Moon and Zhang to add the teachings in Moon as above, to provide a method that enables for predicting a current block using prediction blocks generated based on prediction information with improved compression efficiency [See Moon Paragraphs 62-66]
Regarding Claim 4, Moon doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the reference picture set is further constructed based on whether the reference picture of the certain prediction direction and the reference picture of the other prediction direction are the same or whether a POC difference between the reference picture of the certain prediction direction and the reference picture of the other prediction direction is equal to or greater than a threshold.
However, Zhang discloses wherein the reference picture set is further constructed based on whether the reference picture of the certain prediction direction and the reference picture of the other prediction direction are the same or whether a POC difference between the reference picture of the certain prediction direction and the reference picture of the other prediction direction is equal to or greater than a threshold [See Paragraphs 96-104 and 244-281].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Moon and Zhang to add the teachings in Moon as above, to provide a method that enables for predicting a current block using prediction blocks generated based on prediction information with improved compression efficiency [See Moon Paragraphs 62-66].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TSION B OWENS whose telephone number is (571)272-3934. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:00.
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.
/TSION B OWENS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
Prosecution Insights