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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 3 in the reply filed on 3/2/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 2-4 and 10-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species 1-2 and 4, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 20 relates to a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a bitstream a generated by a particular encoding method. Since the claims relate to a bitstream which is stored on a computer readable medium after all coding functions have been performed the bitstream no longer has any functional relationship with a processor or other machine, but instead relates to e.g. a video stored on a hard drive. The purpose of the stored bitstream is only to convey meaning to a human viewer of the coded bitstream and is thus non-functional descriptive material. Non-functional descriptive material used only to convey messages or meaning is given little patentable weight (See MPEP 2111.05). For the purposes of examination the examiner will interpret the claim as relating only to a computer readable medium storing data.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 8 requires coding the magnitude and direction of block vector difference (BVD) information ‘in a same way’ as they are coded for a merge mode with motion vector difference (MMVD). The phrase ‘in a same way’ renders the claim indefinite as it is unclear which limitations from MMVD coding are required for coding the BVD. See MPEP 2173.05.
Further claim 12 is incomplete for omitting essential steps, such omission amounting to a gap between the steps. See MPEP § 2172.01. Particularly the claim attempts to incorporate MMVD coding steps into the claim without positively reciting the MMVD coding method.
For the purposes of examination the examiner will interpret the MMVD coding steps as the process detailed in claim 5.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim et al (2022/0166998).
In regard to claim 1 Lim discloses a method for video processing, comprising:
determining, for a conversion between a current video block of a video and a bitstream of the video (Lim Figs. 1 and 2 and generally pars 132-172 for encoding and decoding that converts between a current block and a bitstream), that a first prediction mode and a second prediction mode is applied to the current video block (Lim pars 270-271 note multi-hypothesis intra block copy mode which predicts a current block using a weighted combination of two reference blocks determined according to two prediction modes);
deriving, in the first prediction mode and the other mode, a block vector for the current video block based (Lim pars 270-271 note block vector used in in conjunction with the first of the two reference blocks generated by the first prediction mode); and
performing the conversion based on the block vector (Lim Figs. 1-2 and pars 132-172 also note par. 252 for use of the block vector in conversion of the block).
Lim further discloses a plurality of prediction modes including an intra block copy (IBC) merge mode which uses a block vector selected from a motion candidate list and an IBC AMVP mode which uses a block vector from a motion candidate list and a block vector difference (Lim par. 252). Lim further discloses using each of the disclosed IBC modes in coding the current block including a multi-hypothesis IBC mode (Lim pars 265-271). It is noted that Lim does not explicitly indicate which prediction modes used as the first and second IBC prediction modes in the multi-hypothesis IBC mode.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would have found it obvious to try using an IBC AVMP mode and an IBC merge mode as the multi-hypothesis IBC prediction modes of Lim because:
Lim clearly recognizes a desire to utilize multiple predictions for a current block by introduction of the multi-hypothesis IBC mode
Lim presents in pars 265-269 a finite of IBC prediction modes consisting of IBC skip, IBC merge, IBC AMVP, and IBC AMVR modes providing a small number of predictable mode combinations.
Lim indicates, by presenting the multi-hypothesis IBC mode along with the enumerated IBC prediction modes, that one of ordinary skill in the art would have no difficulty in implementing any combination of IBC modes.
Further, the high volume of blocks encoded in a typical video would suggest the use of the
IBC AVMP and IBC merge mode as an optimum combination of predictions in the multi-hypothesis IBC mode for at least some current blocks.
In regard to claims 16-17 refer to the statements made in the rejection of claim 1 above. Lim further discloses encoding and decoding to convert between a current block and a video stream (Lim Figs. 1 and 2 and pars 132-172)
Claims 18-19 describe an apparatus including a processor and memory and non-transitory computer readable medium for causing a computing device to implement steps corresponding to the method of claim 1 above. Refer to the statements made in regard to claim 1 for the rejection of claims 18-19 which will not be repeated here for brevity. In particular regard to claims 18-19 Lim further discloses an apparatus comprising a processor and a memory (Lim par. 952) and a non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions (Lim par. 980).
In regard to claim 20 Lim further discloses a computer readable medium storing a generated bitstream (Lim par. 135).
Claim(s) 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim in view of Nein et al (2023/0217013 note corresponding portions of attached provisional application 62/266402, particularly Fig. 3.11 on pg. 8 and Section 3.2 on pgs. 11-15).
In regard to claim 5 refer to the statements made in the rejection of claim 1 above. Lim discloses an IBC merge mode and an IBC AVMP mode both of which use a block vector from a motion candidate list, the IBC AMVP mode further including a block vector difference (Lim par. 252). It is noted that Lim does not disclose further details of the block vector difference. However, Nein discloses a block vector difference comprising:
a second index specifying direction information, the direction information indicating a direction of a block vector difference (BVD) relative to a starting point of the base block vector (BV) (Nein pars 86-87 note block vector differences including a magnitude and direction, particularly note par. 87 four directional combinations including (+,+), (+, -), (-,+), and (-,-) the selected direction indicated by the index bvd_sign_flag[compIdx]),
wherein the starting point of the base BV is determined based on a base candidate selected from at least one motion candidate (Nein Fig. 5 and pars 84-85 note block vector predictor 510 as the base BV)
wherein the BVD information further comprises a first index specifying displacement magnitude, the displacement magnitude information indicating a pre-defined offset from the starting point of the base BV Nein par. 88 note magnitude index indicating magnitude information of the BVD), and deriving a final BV based on the starting point of the base BV and the direction information comprises:
deriving the final BV based on the starting point of the base BV, the direction information and the displacement magnitude information (Nein Fig. 5 and pars 84-88 note par. 87 determining the magnitude and direction of the BVD, further note Fig. 5 and par. 84 adding the BVD to the base BV 510 to generate a final BV) ,
wherein deriving the final BV based on the starting point of the base BV, the direction information and the displacement magnitude information comprises:
determining an offset BV based on the direction information and the displacement magnitude information (Nein par 87 note computing the BVD from the magnitude and direction information); and
deriving the final BV based on the starting point of the base BV and the offset BV (Nein par. 84 and Fig. 5 note combining the BVD with the base BV 510), or
wherein the second index indicates M BVD directions, and M is an integer greater than 0, wherein the M BVD directions comprise: 4 horizontal/vertical directions, 4 diagonal directions or 4 horizontal/vertical directions plus 4 diagonal directions (Nein par. 87 and Fig. 5 note 4 diagonal directions indicated by the direction information, further note par. 89 four horizontal/vertical directions may be indicated when a magnitude in the x or y direction is zero).
It is therefore considered obvious that one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention would recognize the advantage of including BVD signaling as taught by Nein in the invention of Lim in order to allow for block vector difference information to be arranged in order of ascending template matching costs as suggested by Nein (Nein pars. 96-99).
In regard to claims 6 and 7 refer to the statements made in the rejection of claim 5 above. Nein further discloses that the second index may indicate any of eight values corresponding to BVD directions of 0 degrees, [(offset, 00)], 45 degrees [(offset, offset)], 90 degrees [(0, offset)], 135 degrees [(-offset, offset)], 180 degrees [(-offset, 0)], 225 degrees [(-offset, -offset)], 270 degrees [(0. -offset0] and 315 degrees [(offset, -offset)] (Nein par. 87 note 8 possible angle values when Ni is equal to 4).
In regard to claim 8 refer to the statements made in the rejection of claims 1 and 5 above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 9, in addition to the limitations of claim 1 from which it depends, requires a third index specifying both displacement magnitude indicating a predefined offset from a starting point of a BV and direction information indicating a direction of a BVD relative to a starting point of a base BV, the third index being coded using one of several coding modes.
The closest arts are Lim and Nein. Lim discloses multi-hypothesis IBC coding using IBC merge and IBC AVMP modes. Nein discloses coding a BVD using direction and magnitude information. However Nein specifically indicates using separate magnitude and direction indices and thus does not disclose a single index indicating both the direction and magnitude of the BVD as required by claim 9.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20210360284 A1 LAI; Chen-Yen et al.
US 20200404253 A1 Chen; Chun-Chi et al.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEREMIAH CHARLES HALLENBECK-HUBER whose telephone number is (571)272-5248. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 9 A.M. to 5 P.M.
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, William Vaughn can be reached at (571)272-3922. 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.
/JEREMIAH C HALLENBECK-HUBER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2481