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 .
Status of Claims
Currently, claims 1, 2, and 4-8 are pending in the application. Claims 1, 2, 6, and 7 are amended. Claims 3 and 9 are cancelled.
Response to Arguments / Amendments
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are rendered moot in view of the new ground of rejection necessitated by amendments initiated by the applicant.
Claim Interpretations - 35 USC § 112 ¶ (f)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35
U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as "configured to" or "so that"; and
the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: region detection module, region extractor module, region packing module in Claims 1& 2; unpacking module and frame reconstruction module in claims 6 & 8.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-2, 4 and 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyce et al. (US 20230067541, hereinafter Boyce) in view of Wang et al. (US 20190253719, hereinafter Wang).
Regarding Claim 1, Boyce discloses a video encoder for compression using region packing (FIG. 2) comprising:
a region detection module receiving a video frame for encoding, identifying at least one region of interest in the video frame based on target machine video task parameters, and generating a bounding box for each identified region of interest ([0031], FIG. 1, ROI detector and extractor 111 of patch-based encoder 100, receives video 102 and detects and extracts patches or regions of interest detected to include a face such that machine learning system 120; [0042] FIG. 3, detect and extract regions of interest 301, 302, 303, 304 inclusive of indicating a bounding box around each of regions of interest 301, 302, 303, 304);
PNG
media_image1.png
196
598
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a region packing module arranging the bounding boxes in a packed frame, the packed frame substantially omitting data in the frame outside the identified regions of interest ([0046], FIG. 5, For frame 501 (for time or time stamp t), a corresponding atlas 511 is formed including regions of interest 301, 302, 303 as patches therein. Metadata 521 is generated for atlas 511 to provide a mapping of regions of interest 301, 302, 303 in atlas 511; [0047] In a subsequent frame 502 (for time or time stamp t+x), region of interest 304 is detected for the first time. For frame 502, a corresponding atlas 512 is formed including regions of interest 301, 302, 303, 304 as patches therein such that formation of atlas 512 includes a resize operation 523 to change one or both of a height and width of the atlas
PNG
media_image2.png
320
490
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a video encoder receiving the packed frame and generating an encoded bitstream for a machine task therefrom ([0034] FIG. 2, Atlas constructor 212 outputs features for encoding using feature encoder 213 of patch-based encoder 200 and outputs metadata describing the features and the atlases, which is encoded by metadata encoder 214 of patch-based encoder 200. The outputs (e.g., bitstreams) of the video encoder and metadata encoder are multiplexed together via multiplexer 215 of patch-based encoder 200 into one or more bitstream(s) 205),the bitstream being configured to form an reconstructed frame when decoded, the bitstream including a header associated with the packed frame, the header including a number parameter indicating the number of regions of interest in the packed frame ([0037] metadata (header) encoded and decoded includes information about the number of patches (e.g., regions of interest), and
for each region of interest in the packed frame, a third parameter indicating a width of the region of interest in the reconstructed frame, and a fourth parameter indicating a height of the region of interest in the reconstructed frame ([0037], metadata provides correspondence, for a patch (e.g., region of interest), between the location (and size) of the patch in the input video and the location (and size) of the patch in one of any number of atlases. For each patch, the information may include the following: original image patch position and size (top, left, width, height) and atlas patch position and size (top, left, width, height)).
Boyce does not explicitly disclose a first parameter indicating a horizontal coordinate for the region of interest in the reconstructed frame, a second parameter indicating a vertical coordinate of the region of interest in the reconstructed frame.
Wang teaches a first parameter indicating a horizontal coordinate for the region of interest in the reconstructed frame, a second parameter indicating a vertical coordinate of the region of interest in the reconstructed frame ([0006] coordinates of the center, the number of layers N of the circumferences, and the radii of respective layers of the circumferences are written into the sequence header of the code stream. The center of the ROIs is the center C of the circumferences on the panoramic spherical surface, coordinates of which center may be expressed by longitude-latitude (C.x C.y); a size of an ROI is expressed by a radius size R of a corresponding circumference on the panoramic spherical surface)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of header of the encoded bitstream for parameters of the bounding box as taught by Wang ([0121]) into the encoding & decoding system of Boyce in order to provide writing the information comprising the center part, the number of layers, and the size of each layer of the region of interest into the sequence header of the bit stream after the sizes of the layers of the region of interest are obtained to greatly reduce a bit rate required for encoding and transmission while ensuring high image quality in a region of interest (Wang, [0033]).
Regarding Claim 2, Boyce in view of Wang discloses the encoder of claim 1, Boyce discloses wherein the bounding box is a rectangle ([0040] In the example syntax, the information is signaled for a rectangular bounding box around a patch. However, in some embodiments, patches may overlap in an atlas if a patch does not occupy all sample position of the rectangular bounding box. As shown in Table 1, in some embodiments, for each patch (e.g., region of interest), a top left position in the atlas (patch_source_pos_x, patch_source_pos_y), a size in the atlas (patch_source_pos_width, patch_source_pos_height), and a top left position in the frame (patch_cur_pic_pos_x, patch_cur_pic_pos_y) are provided. Furthermore scaling information to size the patch (e.g., region of interest) is provided first with a flag to indicate whether scaling is employed (patch_scale_flag).
Regarding Claim 4, Boyce in view of Wang discloses the encoder of claim 1, Boyce discloses wherein the region detector includes at least one object detector ([0031], FIG. 1, ROI detector and extractor 111 of patch-based encoder 100, receives video 102 and detects and extracts patches or regions of interest detected to include a face such that machine learning system 120; [0042] FIG. 3, detect and extract regions of interest 301, 302, 303, 304 inclusive of indicating a bounding box around each of regions of interest 301, 302, 303, 304);
Regarding Claims 6-8, video decoder claims 6-9 of using the corresponding video encoder claimed in claims 1-2 & 4, and the rejections of which are incorporated herein for the same reasons as used above.
Claims 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boyce et al. (US 20230067541, hereinafter Boyce) in view of Eilat et al. (US 20110228846, hereinafter Eilat).
Regarding Claim 5, Boyce discloses the encoder of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the region can comprise a region of color.
Eilat teaches the region can comprise a region of color ([0015], the identifier calculates a color probability distribution that takes into account the probability of a pixel having the same color as a color found in the region of interest. The color probability distribution is a probability density function that represents the probability that a color appears in the region of interest).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of region of color as taught by Eilat ([0015]) into the encoding & decoding of Boyce in order to provide systems for effectively tracking and compressing the region of interest throughout the video sequence in a simple and cost effective manner a higher quality (Eilat, [0008]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action.
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 Samuel D Fereja whose telephone number is (469)295-9243. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-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.
/SAMUEL D FEREJA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
Prosecution Insights