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 Amendment
This action is in response to the remark entered on 12/22/2025.
Claims 1-20 are pending in the instant application.
Claims 5-20 are cancelled.
Claims 13-15 & 19 are amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's remarks filed 12/22/2025, page 23, regarding the obviousness double patenting rejection of claims 1-20, have been fully considered, and are acknowledged.
Applicant's remarks filed 12/22/2025, page 23-24, regarding the rejection of claims 13-15 under 35 USC 101 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection is withdrawn.
Applicant's remarks filed 12/22/2025, page 24, regarding the rejection of claims 19-20 under 35 USC 102(a)(2) have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts that Abe does not disclose each and every claim element in claims 19-20.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Claim 19 is directed to a non-transitory computer readable medium (CRM) that stores a bitstream. The bitstream when decoded by a decoding device uses the bitstream to generate a video. After the storing, the CRM is no longer involved with the functions performed by the decoder. 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 19 is directed to a non-transitory medium readable medium storing a bitstream comprising information about a geometric merge mode in addition to other elements that appear to describe how the bitstream is generated. These elements or steps 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 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 and is anticipated by Abe recites a storage medium storing a bitstream in Paragraph [0303]-[0312], [0350] & [0479], and supported in pgs. 36-41 & 66 of 62/662,500.
Therefore the rejection of claims 19-20 under 35 USC 102(a)(2) is maintained.
Double Patenting
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 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); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Patent US 12,143,625 B2
Claims 1-5 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3 of Patent US 12,143,625 B2 in view of Abe et al. (US 2019/0335181 A1, with provisional benefit of 62/662,500) (hereinafter Abe).
Instant – 18/906,764
US 12,143,625 B2
1. A method of video encoding implemented by an encoding apparatus, wherein the method comprises:
1. A method for inter prediction of a first geometric partition and a second geometric partition of a coding block, wherein the method comprising:
performing, for a coding block that is enabled for a geometric partition merge mode and that is partitioned into a first geometric partition and a second geometric partition, an inter prediction process for the coding block by:
A method for inter prediction of a first geometric partition and a second geometric partition of a coding block, wherein the method comprising
generating a merge candidate list for the coding block, wherein the merge candidate list comprises one or more uni-prediction motion vectors (MVs) and one or more bi-prediction MVs, wherein the one or more bi-prediction MVs comprise a first bi-prediction MV, each of the one or more bi-prediction MVs having a first MV corresponding to a first reference picture list (REF_PIC_LIST0) and a second MV corresponding to a second reference picture list (REF_PIC_LIST1);
generating, for the coding block enabled for a geometric partition merge mode, a single merge candidate list for the coding block, wherein the single merge candidate list is generated by: deriving one or more spatial merge candidates from neighboring coding units;
after deriving the one or more spatial merge candidates, directly or immediately deriving one or more temporal motion vector predictions (MVPs), wherein at least one of the one or more spatial merge candidates or the one or more temporal MVPs comprise bi-prediction motion vectors (MVs); and
adding the one or more spatial merge candidates and the one or more temporal MVPs to the single merge candidate list;
selecting a single first merge candidate for the first geometric partition from the single merge candidate list based on a first merge index, wherein the single first merge candidate is a selected first bi-prediction MV having a first MV corresponding to a first reference picture list (REF_PIC_LIST0) and a second MV corresponding to a second reference picture list (REF_PIC_LIST1);
selecting, for the first geometric partition, a first merge candidate from the merge candidate list;
selecting a single first merge candidate for the first geometric partition from the single merge candidate list based on a first merge index,
wherein if the selected first merge candidate is the first bi-prediction MV having a first MV corresponding to a first reference picture list (REF_PIC_LIST0) and a second MV corresponding to a second reference picture list (REF_PIC_LIST1), an uni-prediction candidate derivation process is invoked, an input to the uni-prediction candidate derivation process is the first bi-prediction motion vector, an output to the uni-prediction candidate derivation process is a first uni-prediction MV excluding from the one or more uni-prediction MVs, and the first uni-prediction MV is of the first geometric partition;
selecting a single first merge candidate for the first geometric partition from the single merge candidate list based on a first merge index, wherein the single first merge candidate is a selected first bi-prediction MV having a first MV corresponding to a first reference picture list (REF_PIC_LIST0) and a second MV corresponding to a second reference picture list (REF_PIC_LIST1); deriving a derived first uni-prediction motion vector (MV) as a motion vector of the first geometric partition from the selected first bi-prediction MV based on a uni-prediction MV selection rule that uses the first MV or the second MV of the selected first bi-prediction MV as the derived first uni-prediction MV for the geometric partition merge mode; wherein the single merge candidate list includes one or more uni-prediction MVs and one or more bi-prediction MVs and excludes the derived first uni-prediction MV and the derived second uni-prediction MV,
selecting, for the second geometric partition, a second merge candidate from the merge candidate list;
selecting a single second merge candidate for the second geometric partition from the single merge candidate list based on a second merge index,
wherein if the selected second merge candidate is the second bi-prediction MV having a first MV corresponding to a first reference picture list (REF_PIC_LIST0) and a second MV corresponding to a second reference picture list (REF_PIC_LIST1), the uni-prediction candidate derivation process is invoked, an input to the uni-prediction candidate derivation process is the second bi-prediction MV, an output to the uni-prediction candidate derivation process is a second uni-prediction MV excluding from the one or more uni-prediction MVs, and the second uni-prediction MV is of the second geometric partition;
wherein the single second merge candidate is a selected second bi-prediction MV having a first MV corresponding to a first reference picture list (REF_PIC_LIST0) and a second MV corresponding to a second reference picture list (REF_PIC_LIST1); deriving a derived second uni-prediction motion vector (MV) as a motion vector of the second geometric partition from the selected second bi-prediction MV based on the uni-prediction MV selection rule that uses the first MV or the second MV of the selected second bi-prediction MV as the derived second uni-prediction MV for the geometric partition merge mode; wherein the single merge candidate list includes one or more uni-prediction MVs and one or more bi-prediction MVs and excludes the derived first uni-prediction MV and the derived second uni-prediction MV,
performing inter prediction for the first geometric partition based on the first uni-prediction MV to obtain a first predicted value of the first geometric partition; and
performing prediction of the first geometric partition based on the derived first uni-prediction MV to obtain a predicted value of the first geometric partition;
performing inter prediction for the second geometric partition based on the second uni-prediction MV to obtain a second predicted value of the second geometric partition;
performing prediction of the second geometric partition based on the derived second uni-prediction MV to obtain a predicted value of the second geometric partition;
performing a transform process and a quantization process on a residual block to obtain residual information, wherein the residual block is based on the coding block and a prediction block that is of a current block and that has the first predicted value and the second predicted value; and
performing entropy encoding on information for use in decoding to obtain an encoded bitstream, wherein the information comprises the residual information, information about the geometric partition merge mode of the coding block, a first merge index indicating the first merge candidate, and a second merge index indicating the second merge candidate.
Although the claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of the instant application differs from claim 1 of the patent in that the instant application includes the limitations of, A method of video encoding implemented by an encoding apparatus, comprising a coding block that is enabled for a geometric partition merge mode; performing a transform process and a quantization process on a residual block to obtain residual information, wherein the residual block is based on the coding block and a prediction block that is of a current block and that has the first predicted value and the second predicted value; and performing entropy encoding on information for use in decoding to obtain an encoded bitstream, wherein the information comprises the residual information, information about the geometric partition merge mode of the coding block, a first merge index indicating the first merge candidate, and a second merge index indicating the second merge candidate. However, these limitations are known in the art as evidenced by Abe, wherein Paragraph [0147]-[0179] & [0299]-[0326], and supported in pgs.10-19 & 33-39 in 62/662,500, wherein the entropy encoder enables FRUC/OBMC mode as geometric merge mode for a block to contain two partitions, with a first and second parameters for the first and second partitions, as first and second merge indexes, to be encoded into the bitstream after transformation, quantization, and entropy encoding. It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the instant invention to add the teachings of Abe as above, for adaptively determining information related to splitting based on characteristics of neighboring samples, while inhibiting an increase in the amount of processing as Abe states in Paragraph [0010].
Regarding claims (2-3), claims (2-3) in the instant application correspond to claims (1, 3), respectively, in US 12,143,625 B2.
Regarding claims 4-6, claims (4-6) are drawn to the method of video decoding having limitations similar and reciprocal to the method of video encoding as claimed in claims (1-3) treated in the above rejections. Therefore, method claims (4-6) correspond to method claims (1-3) and are rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Regarding claims 7-12, apparatus claims (7-12) are drawn to the apparatus using/performing the same method as claimed in claims (1-6). Therefore apparatus claims (7-12) corresponds to method claims (1-6), respectively, and are rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Regarding claims 13-18, non-transitory computer-readable medium computer storing instructions claims (13-18) correspond to the same method as claimed in claims (1-6), respectively, and therefore are also rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as listed above.
Regarding claims 19-20, non-transitory computer-readable medium claims (19-20) correspond to the same method as claimed in claims (4) and therefore are also rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as listed above.
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Abe et al. (US 2019/0335181 A1, with provisional benefit of 62/662,500) (hereinafter Abe).
Regarding claims 19-20, a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a bitstream… is a product by process claim limitation where the product is the bitstream and the process is the method steps to generate the bitstream. MPEP §2113 recites “Product-by-Process claims are not limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps.” Thus, the scope of the claim is the storage medium storing the bitstream (with the structure implied by the method steps). The structure includes the information and samples manipulated by the steps. “To be given patentable weight, the printed matter and associated product must be in a functional relationship. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated.” MPEP §2111.05(I)(A). When a claimed, “non-transitory computer-readable recording medium,” merely serves as a support for information or data, no functional relationship exists. MPEP §2111.05(III). The non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing the claimed bitstream in claim 19-20 merely services as a support for the storage of the bitstream and provides no functional relationship between the stored bitstream and storage medium. Therefore the bitstream, 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 and is anticipated by Abe which recites in Paragraph [0303]-[0312], [0350] & [0479], and supported in pgs. 36-41 & 66 of 62/662,500, Memory 262 may store bit strings and syntax corresponding to encoded videos, and further the server stores encoded/ compressed video received.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-18 would be allowable if the obviousness double patenting rejections are overcome. Claims 19-20 would be allowable if the obviousness double patenting rejections and rejections under 35 USC 102(a)(2) are overcome.
Claims 1-20 contain allowable subject matter.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The various claimed limitations mentioned in the claims are not taught or suggested by the prior art taken either singly or in combination, with emphasize that it is each claim, taken as a whole, including the interrelationships and interconnections between various claimed elements make them allowable over the prior art of record.
Conclusion
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 DANIEL CHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-5707. The examiner can normally be reached M-Sa, 12PM - 10 PM.
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.
/DANIEL CHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487