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 02/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to Applicant’s argument in the Remarks, Kim in Figs.4, 6-7, [55]-[56] teaches in order to be encoded, an original (e.g. input) polygonal mesh is divided into a plurality of subdivided meshes M(i) with displacement vector for thereof vertices, such as subdivided mesh 603 and other three straight lines for the original mesh, that must not go beyond the original polygonal mesh.
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 (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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 9-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2007146102 A2 Pace, and further in view of WO 2023172509 A1 KIM JUNGSUN et al. (hereafter Kim).
Regarding claim 1, Pace discloses A method of encoding performed by at least one processor (Fig.6), the method comprising: receiving a polygon mesh that includes a plurality of vertices (Figs7-8, P.20 line 24-P.21 line 6, P.22 line 24th-P.23 line 14, polygon mesh with a plurality of vertices is provided to normalization process); generating a set of candidate predictors (P.26 line 23-P.27 line 8, predictive motion vectors of neighboring points are the candidate predictors), each candidate predictor in the set of candidate predictors corresponding to a respective displacement vector between a vertex from the plurality of vertices to a vertex to be coded (P.13 lines 12-22, P.14 lines 28-32, each prediction for motion vector or for frame is generated through deformation modeling and motion estimation based on a vertex displacement, and the vertex displacement as the displacement vector corresponds to neighboring vertices ).
Pace fails to disclose a respective displacement vector between a vertex from the plurality of vertices to a vertex to be coded within the polygon mesh; selecting a candidate predictor from the set of candidate predictors; and generating a bitstream that includes at least a candidate predictor index corresponding to the selected candidate predictor.
However, Kim teaches a respective displacement vector between a vertex from the plurality of vertices to a vertex to be coded within the polygon mesh (Figs.4, 6-7, [55]-[56], to be encoded, an original (e.g. input) polygonal mesh is divided into a plurality of subdivided meshes M(i) with displacement vector for thereof vertices, such as subdivided mesh 603 and other three straight lines for the original mesh, that must not go beyond the original polygonal mesh); selecting a candidate predictor from the set of candidate predictors ([143], [145], those available prediction from neighboring positions are the candidate predictors to be chosen); and generating a bitstream that includes at least a candidate predictor index corresponding to the selected candidate predictor ([145], index of the chosen predictor is entropy encoded into bitstream).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of encoding performed by at least one processor disclosed by Pace to include the teaching in the same field of endeavor of Kim, in order to provide decoding techniques for video based dynamic mesh codecs (v-mesh) as an extension of V3C and Video-Based Point Cloud Compression, as identified by Kim.
Regarding claims 2, 16, Kim teaches The method according to claim 1, wherein at least one candidate predictor in the set of candidate predictors is computed using a weight sum of one or more displacement vectors of vertices neighboring the at least one candidate predictor ([99], [151]-[152]).
Regarding claim 9, Kim teaches The method according to claim 1, wherein the selected candidate predictor is associated with a plurality of faces in the polygon mesh ([86]).
Regarding claim 10, Kim teaches The method according to claim 9, wherein the plurality of faces are consecutive faces in an encoding order ([105]).
Regarding claim 11, Pace discloses The method according to claim 9, wherein the plurality of faces are weight in accordance with a size of a face, wherein larger faces have a higher weight (P.26 lines 5-11).
Regarding claim 12, Pace discloses A method of decoding performed by at least one processor, the method comprising: receiving a bitstream that includes an encoded polygon mesh (Fig.6, P.22 lines 17-23); generating a set of candidate predictors associated with the encoded polygon mesh (P.37 lines 3-23).
Pace fails to disclose selecting a candidate predictor from the set of candidate predictors; and decoding one or more vertices of the encoded polygon mesh using the selected candidate predictor.
However, Kim teaches selecting a candidate predictor from the set of candidate predictors ([143], [145]) ; and decoding one or more vertices of the encoded polygon mesh using the selected candidate predictor ([72], [143]).
Regarding claim 13. Kim teaches The method according to claim 12, further comprising: parsing the bitstream to extract an index corresponding to the selected candidate predictor ([144]-[145]).
Regarding claim 20, see the rejection for claim 1. Kim further teaches generating a bitstream for a polygon mesh that includes a plurality of vertices (Fig.4, [53], [117]).
Claim(s) 3, 4, 14, 17, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pace, in view of Kim, and further in view of JP 2020030449 A YOKOSE.
Regarding claims 3, 17, YOKOSE teaches The method according to claim 1, wherein a first candidate predictor in the set of candidate predictor is provided a higher priority than a second candidate predictor in the set of candidate predictors based on one or more characteristics of the polygon mesh (P.2 para.2nd-3rd, P.3 para.3rd-5th).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention having all the references Pace, Kim and YOKOSE before him/her, to modify the method of encoding performed by at least one processor disclosed by Pace to include the teaching in the same field of endeavor of Kim and YOKOSE, in order to provide decoding techniques for video based dynamic mesh codecs (v-mesh) as an extension of V3C and Video-Based Point Cloud Compression, as identified by Kim, and improve encoding efficiency, as identified by YOKOSE.
Regarding claims 4, 18, YOKOSE teaches The method according to claim 3, wherein the one or more characteristics include a curvature of the polygon mesh, a size of faces of the polygon mesh, or distance between vertices (P.8 para.1st ).
Regarding claim 14, YOKOSE teaches The method according to claim 12, wherein an index corresponding to the selected candidate predictor is inferred based on one or more characteristics of the polygon mesh (P.2 para.2nd-3rd, P.3 para.3rd-5th, P.8 para.1st).
Claim(s) 5-7, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pace, in view of Kim, and further in view of WO 2010051846 A1 ZHANG CIXUN et al. (Hereafter Zhang).
Regarding claims 5, 19, Zhang teaches The method according to claim 1, wherein the candidate predictor selected from the set of candidate predictors is the candidate predictor that minimizes a cost function (P.2 line 21-P.3 line 15).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention having all the references Pace, Kim and Zhang before him/her, to modify the method of encoding performed by at least one processor disclosed by Pace to include the teaching in the same field of endeavor of Kim and Zhang, in order to provide decoding techniques for video based dynamic mesh codecs (v-mesh) as an extension of V3C and Video-Based Point Cloud Compression, as identified by Kim, enhance encoding efficiency and signal fidelity for a video codec, as identified by Zhang.
Regarding claim 6, Zhang teaches The method according to claim 5, wherein the cost function is in accordance with a distortion associated with a reconstructed displacement after prediction with a candidate predictor (P.2 line 21-P.3 line 15).
Regarding claim 7, Zhang teaches The method according to claim 5, wherein the cost function is in accordance with a rate associated with signaling information associated with the bitstream (P.27 lines 19-21).
Claim(s) 8, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pace, in view of Kim, and further in view of WO 2024063544 A1 YOON, Yeojin et al. (hereafter Yoon).
Regarding claim 8, Yoon teaches The method according to claim 1, further comprising: determining a residual displacement corresponding to a difference between a displacement to be predicted and the selected candidate predictor, wherein the bitstream includes the residual displacement (P.53 para.2nd, P.49 para.2nd).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention having all the references Pace, Kim and Yoon before him/her, to modify the method of encoding performed by at least one processor disclosed by Pace to include the teaching in the same field of endeavor of Kim and Yoon, in order to provide decoding techniques for video based dynamic mesh codecs (v-mesh) as an extension of V3C and Video-Based Point Cloud Compression, as identified by Kim, and an apparatus and method for solving the latency and encoding/decoding complexity of mesh data, as identified by Yoon.
Regarding claim 15, Yoon teaches The method according to claim 12, further comprising: parsing the bitstream to extract a residual displacement; determining a reconstructed displacement using the extracted residual displacement and the selected candidate predictor (P.53 para.2nd, P.49 para.2nd).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 TRACY Y. LI whose telephone number is (571)270-3671. The examiner can normally be reached Monday Friday (8:30 AM- 4:30 PM) EST.
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.
/TRACY Y. LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487