DETAILED ACTION
1. This communication is being filed in response to the submission having a mailing date of (10/03/2024) in which a (3) month Shortened Statutory Period for Response has been set.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Acknowledgements
3. Upon entry, claims (1 -20) appear pending for examination, of which (1, 18, 19 and 20) being the four (4) parallel running independent claims on record.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) that was/were submitted on (10/03/2024) is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, being considered by the Examiner.
Specifications
4.1 The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Drawings
4.2. The submitted Drawings on date (10/03/2024) have been accepted and considered under the 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
Claim rejection section
Double Patent
5. 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 obviousness-type 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); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
5.1. 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
5.2. Individuals associated with the filing and prosecution of the instant patent application have a duty to disclose information within their knowledge as to other copending United States applications which are "material to patentability" of the application in question. See MPEP §2001.06(b) for more details.
5.3. Claims (1, 14) of instant Application 18/906,098, directed to an Apparatus, CRM and Method of the same, being provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obvious-type double patenting as being unpatentable over the analogous Claims of parent Application 18/907,218. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other, because the claims use similar scope of the invention, and/or similar variations of the same claim language.
Instant Appl. 18/906,098
Reference: 18/907,218
Claim 1. A method for video processing, comprising: performing a conversion between a current video block of a video and a bitstream of the video, wherein a first syntax element is comprised in the bitstream and indicates whether an adjusting process is applied on a plurality of samples of the current video block.
Claim 18. An apparatus for video processing comprising a processor and a non-transitory memory with instructions thereon, wherein the instructions upon execution by the processor, cause the processor to perform acts comprising: performing a conversion between a current video block of a video and a bitstream of the video, wherein a first syntax element is comprised in the bitstream and indicates whether an adjusting process is applied on a plurality of samples of the current video block.
Claim 19. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that cause a processor to perform acts comprising: performing a conversion between a current video block of a video and a bitstream of the video, wherein a first syntax element is comprised in the bitstream and indicates whether an adjusting process is applied on a plurality of samples of the current video block.
Claim 20. A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream of a video which is generated by a method performed by an apparatus for video processing, wherein the method comprises: performing a conversion between a current video block of the video and the bitstream, wherein a first syntax element is comprised in the bitstream and indicates whether an adjusting process is applied on a plurality of samples of the current video block.
Claim 1. A method for video processing, comprising: generating, for a conversion between a current video block of a video and a bitstream of the video, a motion candidate list for the current video block, an adjusting process being applied on a plurality of samples of the current video block; and performing the conversion based on the motion candidate list.
Claim 18. An apparatus for video processing comprising a processor and a non-transitory memory with instructions thereon, wherein the instructions upon execution by the processor, cause the processor to perform acts comprising: generating, for a conversion between a current video block of a video and a bitstream of the video, a motion candidate list for the current video block, an adjusting process being applied on a plurality of samples of the current video block; and performing the conversion based on the motion candidate list.
Claim 19. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that cause a processor to perform acts comprising: generating, for a conversion between a current video block of a video and a bitstream of the video, a motion candidate list for the current video block, an adjusting process being applied on a plurality of samples of the current video block; and performing the conversion based on the motion candidate list.
Claim 20. A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream of a video which is generated by a method performed by an apparatus for video processing, wherein the method comprises: generating a motion candidate list for a current video block of the video, an adjusting process being applied on a plurality of samples of the current video block; and generating the bitstream based on the motion candidate list.
5.4. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was made/filed, to combine the instant 18/932,589, with the above reference 18/207,134 (now US 12,166,981 B2), because although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other, the claim language uses similar scope of the invention, and/or a similar variation of the same claim language.
35 U.S.C. 101
6. The 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. 7.05.014 Rejection, 35 U.S.C. 101, Non-Statutory (Abstract Idea Implemented on a Generic Computer - Not Significantly More than the Abstract Idea Itself)
6.1. Independent Claim (20) is rejected under the 35 U.S.C. 101 doctrine, because the cited claims is/are interpreted as a method directed to data, carrying out a method/apparatus/CRM for processing data, with no body-instructions to execute, and simply characterizing the composition/parameters of data, represented the “target block”, using an optional adjustment of the block parameters.
6.2. Also, based on USPTO Policies, the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) is used according to MPEP 2111, thus this construction type, may embody data signal (i.e. transitory media.).
6.3. Further, to be given patentable weight, the recording medium and the datastream (i.e. descriptive material) in the claims, must have a functional relationship. A functional relationship can be found where the descriptive material performs some function with respect to the recording medium to which it is associated. See MPEP 2111.05(I)(A). When a claimed “computer-readable medium merely serves as a support for information or data, no functional relationship exists”. MPEP §2111.05(III). The storage medium storing the claimed datastream in claim 12 merely services as a support for the storage of the datastream and provides no functional relationship between the stored bitstream and storage medium. Therefor the structure datastream, which scope is implied by the method steps, is non-functional descriptive material and given no patentable weight. MPEP §2111.05(III). Thus, the claim scope is just a storage medium storing data.
6.4. Examiner suggests that Applicants rewrite the cited above claim (20) in a correct independent form, in accordance with the MPEP 2111.05.
35 USC 112 (b)
7. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112:
(B) The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
7.1. Claims (8 -10) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as per the claims recites the feature of (“an adjusting process in which samples of a video block are adjusted”), however there is insufficient antecedent basis for the origination and characteristics of this specific data type in the claims/specs. Proper correction is required.
7.2. In case the “new adjustment” step is different from the same/similar step implemented in Claim 1 above, proper clarification is required moving forward.
35 USC 102.
8. 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 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.
8.1. 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.
8.2. Claims (1 -4) is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by the standard papers of the Versatile video coding, ITU-T H.266; -edition 1.0; hereafter “VVC”)
Claim 1. VVC discloses the invention substantially as claimed - A method for video processing, comprising: (e.g. encoding/decoding video data, in accordance with the VVC codec) performing a conversion between a current video block of a video and a bitstream of the video, (e.g. a codec methodology of the same [Summary]) wherein a first syntax element is comprised in the bitstream (e.g. see “CU syntax” and “Syntax semantics” descriptions in [Chap. 7.3 and 7.4]);
and indicates whether an adjusting process is applied on a plurality of samples of the current video block; (e.g. see block adjustment of the same, signaled/indicated in the bitstream via constrain information and semantics [Chap. 7.3 and 7.4]).
Claim 2. VCC discloses - The method of claim 1, wherein the adjusting process comprises at least one of the following: reordering the plurality of samples, flipping the plurality of samples, shifting the plurality of samples, rotating the plurality of samples, or transforming the plurality of samples; (e.g. see DPB construction, where digital operations (ordering, shifting, transform, etc) for block samples, are similarly implemented; [Chap. 7.3]).
Claim 3. VCC discloses - The method of claim 1, wherein the current video block is coded with a prediction scheme; (e.g. see coding tree semantics [7.4.] and the associated prediction scheme in at least [Chap. 7.4.].)
Claim 4. VCC discloses - The method of claim 3, wherein the prediction scheme comprises one of the following: intra template matching, intra block copy (IBC) advanced motion vector prediction (AMVP), or IBC merge; (see at least IBC mode in [Chap. 7.4; page 43], and IBC merge mode, also signaled syntax of the same in at least [Chap. 7.4; page 112].).
35 USC 103
8.3. Claims (5 -20) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Versatile video coding, ITU-T H.266; - edition 1.0”; hereafter “VVC”), in view of Chen; et al. (Intra Block Copy Mirror Mode for Screen Content Coding in Versatile Video Coding; hereafter “Chen”).
Claim 5. VCC discloses - The method of claim 1, wherein a first indication is comprised in the bitstream and indicates that the current video block is coded with intra template matching, or wherein a second indication is comprised in the bitstream and indicates that the current video block is coded with IBC AMVP, or wherein a third indication is comprised in the bitstream and indicates that the current video block is coded with IBC merge; (e.g. see at least IBC mode in [Chap. 7.4; page 43], and IBC merge mode, also signaled syntax of the same in at least [Chap. 7.4; page 112].).
It is note however, the lack of details for IBC AMVP in the edition of the standard. For the purpose of additional clarification and in the same field of endeavor Chen in details teaches IBC, IBC merge and IBC-AMVP for VVC codec, as described in at least [Chen; page 1; sect 5].)
Chen specifically teaches - IBC AMVP mode, using the legacy and new addition to the standard; [page 1].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the papers of VVC, with the IBC AMVP mode of Chen, in order to lower complexity and improve coding efficiency in the process; [Chen; page 1].)
Claim 6. VCC/Chen discloses - The method of claim 1, wherein a second syntax element indicating how to adjust the plurality of samples is comprised in the bitstream, or wherein a single syntax element indicating a type of the adjusting process is comprised in the bitstream, or wherein if a first indication indicates that the current video block is coded with intra template matching, a single syntax element indicating a type of the adjusting process is comprised in the bitstream, or wherein if a second indication indicates that the current video block is coded with IBC AMVP, a single syntax element indicating a type of the adjusting process is comprised in the bitstream, or wherein if a third indication indicates that the current video block is coded with IBC merge, a single syntax element indicating a type of the adjusting process is comprised in the bitstream, or wherein the first syntax element further indicates how to adjust the plurality of samples, or wherein a first value of the first syntax element indicates that the adjusting process is not applied on the plurality of samples, a second value of the first syntax element indicates that a first type of adjusting process is applied on the plurality of samples, and a third value of the first syntax element indicates that a second type of adjusting process is applied on the plurality of samples, or wherein at least one syntax element associated with the adjusting process is context coded; (e.g. the same rationale and motivation apply as given to Claims (1 and 6), where at least one of the claimed constrains is/are meet the claim requirements.)
Claim 7. VCC/Chen discloses - The method of claim 6, wherein a context used for coding the at least one syntax element is dependent on coding information of at least one neighboring block or at least one neighboring sample of the current video block. (e.g. see analogous syntax in VVC [Chap. 8.5.2.10]. In addition, see Fig. 8; where neighbor blocks used for prediction; [Chen; sect. 2]; same motivation applies herein.)
Claim 8. VCC/Chen discloses - The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining, based on at least one video block of the video, information regarding an adjusting process in which samples of a video block are adjusted, the at least one video block being coded before the current video block; and performing the conversion based on the information. (The same rationale and motivation apply as given to Claims (1 and 5) above).
Claim 9. VCC/Chen discloses - The method of claim 8, wherein the information comprises at least one of the following:
whether the adjusting process is applied on a plurality of samples of the current video block, or how to adjust the plurality of samples, or wherein if the adjusting process is applied on samples of the at least one video block, the adjusting process is applied on the plurality of samples of the current video block, or if the adjusting process is applied on samples of the at least one video block, the adjusting process is applied on the plurality of samples of the current video block, and the plurality of samples of the current video block are adjusted in the same way as the samples of the at least one video block, (The same rationale and motivation apply as given to Claims (1 and 5) above);
or wherein the at least one video block comprises at least one of the following: a neighboring video block adjacent to the current video block, or a neighboring video block non-adjacent to the current video block; (e.g. see similar in at least VVC [Chap. 7 and 8.5.2.10]. In addition, see Fig.8 where neighbor blocks used for prediction; [Chen; sect. 2]; same motivation applies herein.)
Claim 10. VCC/Chen discloses - The method of claim 8, wherein the at least one video block is comprised in a history-based motion table for the current video block; (e.g. see history-based motion table in [VVC; 8.5.2.], and similar in [Chen; sect. 4]; the same motivation applies herein.)
Claim 11. VCC/Chen discloses - The method of claim 10, wherein the history-based motion table is a history-based motion vector prediction (HMVP) table; (e.g. see history-based motion table in [VVC; 8.5.2.], and similar in [Chen; sect. 4]; the same motivation applies herein.)
Claim 12. VCC/Chen discloses - The method of claim 8, wherein the at least one video block is a temporal motion candidate for the current video block, or wherein the at least one video block is comprised in an IBC merge candidate list or an IBC AMVP candidate list for the current video block, or wherein the at least one video block is comprised in a motion candidate list generated for the current video block, or wherein the current video block is coded with one of the following: intra template matching, IBC AMVP, or IBC merge. (The same rationale/motivation apply as given to Claims (1 and 5) above.)
Claim 13. VCC/Chen discloses - The method of claim 1, wherein coding information of the current video block is stored for determining a context of a syntax element associated with the adjusting process. (The same rationale/motivation apply as given to Claims (1 and 5) above. See syntax flag signaled [Chap. 7.3-7.4]).
Claim 14. VCC/Chen discloses - The method of claim 13, wherein a coding information of a video block comprises at least one of the following: information regarding whether the adjusting process is applied on samples of the video block, information regarding how to adjust the samples of the video block, a block availability, a prediction mode for the video block, information regarding whether the video block is merge coded, or information regarding whether the video block is IBC coded. (The same rationale and motivation apply as given to Claims (1 and 5) above.)
Claim 15. VCC/Chen discloses - The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of samples comprises one of the following: reconstruction samples of the current video block, original samples of the current video block, or prediction samples of the current video block. (The same rationale and motivation apply as given to Claims (1 and 5) above, where one of the cited elements comprised in the sample.)
Claim 16. VCC/Chen discloses - The method of claim 1, wherein the conversion includes encoding the current video block into the bitstream. (The same rationale and motivation apply as given to Claim 1 above. See encoder/decoder methodology for VVC codec)
Claim 17. VCC/Chen discloses - The method of claim 1, wherein the conversion includes decoding the current video block from the bitstream. (The same rationale and motivation apply as given to Claim 1 above.)
Claim 18. VCC/Chen discloses - An apparatus for video processing comprising a processor and a non-transitory memory with instructions thereon, wherein the instructions upon execution by the processor, cause the processor to perform acts comprising: performing a conversion between a current video block of a video and a bitstream of the video, wherein a first syntax element is comprised in the bitstream and indicates whether an adjusting process is applied on a plurality of samples of the current video block. (Current lists all the same elements as recites in Claim 1 above, but in “Apparatus form” instead, and is/are therefore on the same premise.)
Claim 19. VCC/Chen discloses - A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that cause a processor to perform acts comprising: performing a conversion between a current video block of a video and a bitstream of the video, wherein a first syntax element is comprised in the bitstream and indicates whether an adjusting process is applied on a plurality of samples of the current video block. (Current lists all the same elements as recites in Claim 1 above, but in “CRM form” instead, and is/are therefore on the same premise. See also analogous storage medium implemented by the standard in at least [Chap. 7.4.2.1.].)
Claim 20. VCC/Chen discloses - A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream of a video which is generated by a method performed by an apparatus for video processing, wherein the method comprises: performing a conversion between a current video block of the video and the bitstream, wherein a first syntax element is comprised in the bitstream and indicates whether an adjusting process is applied on a plurality of samples of the current video block. (Current lists all the same elements as recites in Claim 1 above, but in “CRM form” instead, and is/are therefore on the same premise. See analogous storage medium implemented by the standard in at least [Chap. 7.4.2.1.].)
Prior Art Citations
9. The following List of prior art, made of record and not relied upon, is/are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
9.1. Patent documentation:
US 11,882,274 B2 Zhang; Li et al. H04N19/46; H04N19/159; H04N19/11;
US 11,895,318 B2 Zhang; Li et al. H04N19/70; H04N19/159; H04N19/184;
US 11,758,142 B2 Koo; Moonmo et al. H04N19/11; H04N19/12; H04N19/159;
US 11,902,530 B2 Koo; Moonmo et al. H04N19/132; H04N19/593; H04N19/105;
US 11,418,777 B2 Xu; Xiaozhong et al. H04N19/105; H04N19/11; H04N19/159;
US 12,069,282 B2 Xu; Jizheng et al. H04N19/593; H04N19/176; H04N19/96;
US 12,212,756 B2 Koo; Moonmo et al. H04N19/132; H04N19/157; H04N19/70;
US 12,101,509 B2 Koo; Moonmo et al. H04N19/159; H04N19/11; H04N19/12;
US 12,439,044 B2 Deng; Zhipin et al. H04N19/60; H04N19/186; H04N19/107;
US 12,244,811 B2 Zhu; Weijia et al. H04N19/105; H04N19/186; H04N19/174;
9.2. Non-Patent documentation:
_ Intra Block Copy Mirror Mode for Screen Content Coding in VVC; Chen – 2021.
_ T-REC-H.266 Versatile Video coding - ver-1 – 2020.
CONCLUSIONS
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from Examiner should be directed to LUIS PEREZ-FUENTES (luis.perez-fuentes@uspto.gov) whose telephone number is (571) 270 -1168. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8am-5pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, WILLIAM VAUGHN can be reached on (571) 272-3922. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 272 -1168. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, please call (800)786-9199 (USA/CANADA) or (571)272 -1000.
/LUIS PEREZ-FUENTES/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2481.