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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is sent in response to Applicant’s Communication received 31 October 2024 for application number 18/933,995. The Office hereby acknowledges receipt of the following and placed of record in file: Specification, Drawings, Abstract, Oath/Declaration, Claims.
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on the following dates are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and are being considered by the Examiner: 2/12/25.
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 § 2146 et seq. 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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,177,474. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Regarding claim 1, ‘474 discloses a method of video encoding in an encoder, the method comprising: determining a corresponding block of a current block in a current picture based on an offset vector, the offset vector indicating an offset between the current block and the corresponding block in the current picture, the current block including a plurality of subblocks to be encoded in a subblock-based frame-rate up conversion (FRUC) mode; determining a temporal motion vector predictor (TMVP) of a first subblock in the corresponding block based on a subblock in a forward reference picture of the current picture and a subblock in a backward reference picture of the current picture, the subblock in the forward reference picture and the subblock in the backward reference picture being matched using the subblock-based FRUC mode; determining, based on the TMVP of the first subblock in the corresponding block, a TMVP of a subblock in the plurality of subblocks in the current block; encoding, in a video bitstream, the subblock in the plurality of subblocks in the current block based on the TMVP of the subblock in the current block; and encoding, in the video bitstream, a syntax element indicating that the current block including the plurality of subblocks is encoded in the subblock-based FRUC mode (claim 1). The encoding/decoding and signaling/parsing differences are routine functional counterparts and do not render the pending claims patentably distinct.
Regarding claim 2, see teachings of claim 1. ‘474 further discloses wherein the determining the TMVP of the subblock in the plurality of subblocks in the current block comprises: determining the TMVP of the subblock in the plurality of subblocks in the current block as the TMVP of the first subblock in the corresponding block (claim 2).
Regarding claim 3, see teachings of claim 1. ‘474 further discloses wherein the determining the TMVP of the subblock in the plurality of subblocks in the current block comprises: determining a motion vector (MV) of the TMVP of the subblock in the plurality of subblocks in the current block as a vector sum of the offset vector and a respective MV of the TMVP of the first subblock in the corresponding block (claim 3).
Regarding claim 4, see teachings of claim 1. ‘474 further discloses wherein the offset vector is zero (claim 4).
Regarding claim 5, see teachings of claim 1. ‘474 further discloses further comprising: encoding, in the video bitstream, an index that indicates the offset vector in a predefined offset vector list (claim 5).
Regarding claim 6, see teachings of claim 1. ‘474 further discloses further comprising: encoding the offset vector in the video bitstream (claim 6).
Regarding claim 7, see teachings of claim 1. ‘474 further discloses further comprising: determining a TMVP of a second subblock in the corresponding block based on the TMVP of the first subblock in the corresponding block when the TMVP of the second subblock is not determined by the subblock-based FRUC mode, the second subblock neighboring the first subblock (claim 7).
Regarding claim 8, see teachings of claim 1. ‘474 further discloses wherein the determining the TMVP of the first subblock in the corresponding block comprises: determining the TMVP of the first subblock in the corresponding block based on a motion vector between the subblock in the forward reference picture and the subblock in the backward reference picture, the motion vector passing through one of: a center position, a top-left position, a top-right position, a bottom-left position, or a bottom-right position in the first subblock in the corresponding block (claim 8).
Regarding claim 9, see teachings of claim 1. ‘474 further discloses wherein a picture order count (POC) of the forward reference picture is less than a POC of the current picture and a POC of the backward reference picture is larger than the POC of the current picture (claim 9).
Regarding claim 10, see teachings of claim 1. ‘474 further discloses wherein a subblock merge candidate list includes a subblock-based temporal motion vector prediction (SbTMVP) candidate and a FRUC-based subblock merge candidate that indicates a TMVP of each subblock in the current block; and the method includes: encoding, in the video bitstream, the current block based on the FRUC-based subblock merge candidate; and encoding, in the video bitstream, a subblock merge index indicating the FRUC-based subblock merge candidate (claim 10).
Regarding claim 11, see teachings of claim 1. ‘474 further discloses wherein a subblock merge candidate list includes a FRUC-based subblock merge candidate that indicates a TMVP of each subblock in the plurality of subblocks in the current block, the subblock merge candidate list not including a subblock-based temporal motion vector prediction (SbTMVP) candidate; and the method includes: encoding the current block based on the FRUC-based subblock merge candidate; and encoding a subblock merge index indicating the FRUC-based subblock merge candidate (claim 11).
Regarding claim 12, see teachings of claim 1. ‘474 further discloses wherein when a FRUC-based subblock merge candidate that indicates a TMVP of each subblock in the current block is available, a subblock merge candidate list includes the FRUC-based subblock merge candidate and does not include a subblock-based temporal motion vector prediction (SbTMVP) candidate; and when the FRUC-based subblock merge candidate is not available, the subblock merge candidate list includes the SbTMVP candidate (claim 12).
Regarding claim 13, see teachings of claim 1. ‘474 further discloses wherein a pre-defined subblock size is N×N luma samples; when a width W of the current block is smaller than N and a height H of the current block is greater than or equal to N, the method further includes partitioning the current block into subblocks having a subblock width of W and a subblock height of N; and when H is smaller than N and W is greater than or equal to N, the method further includes partitioning the current block into the subblocks having the subblock width of N and the subblock height of H (claim 13).
Regarding claim 14, see teachings of claim 1. ‘474 further discloses a method of video encoding in an encoder, the method comprising: determining an initial temporal motion vector predictor (TMVP) of a first subblock in a current block in a current picture based on a subblock in a forward reference picture of the current picture and a subblock in a backward reference picture of the current picture, the subblock in the forward reference picture and the subblock in the backward reference picture being matched based on a subblock-based frame-rate up conversion (FRUC) mode, the first subblock being one of a plurality of subblocks in the current block, the current block being encoded in the subblock-based FRUC mode; determining, based on the initial TMVP of the first subblock in the plurality of subblocks in the current block and a motion vector offset (MVO), a TMVP of the first subblock in the plurality of subblocks in the current block; encoding, in a video bitstream, the first subblock in the current block based on the TMVP of the first subblock in the current block; and encoding, in the video bitstream, a syntax element indicating that the current block is encoded in the subblock-based FRUC mode (claim 14). The encoding/decoding and signaling/parsing differences are routine functional counterparts and do not render the pending claims patentably distinct.
Regarding claim 15, see teachings of claim 14. ‘474 further discloses wherein the determining the TMVP of the first subblock in the plurality of subblocks in the current block comprises: determining a motion vector (MV) of the TMVP of the first subblock in the plurality of subblocks in the current block as a vector sum of the MVO and a respective MV of the TMVP of the first subblock in the plurality of subblocks in the current block (claim 15).
Regarding claim 16, see teachings of claim 14. ‘474 further discloses further comprising: encoding, in the video bitstream, an index that indicates the MVO from a predefined MVO list (claim 16).
Regarding claim 17, see teachings of claim 14. ‘474 further discloses further comprising: encoding the MVO in the video bitstream (claim 17).
Regarding claim 18, see teachings of claim 14. ‘474 further discloses further comprising: determining an initial TMVP of a second subblock in the plurality of subblocks in the current block based on the initial TMVP of the first subblock in the plurality of subblocks in the current block when the initial TMVP of the second subblock is not determined by the subblock-based FRUC mode, the second subblock neighboring the first subblock (claim 18).
Regarding claim 19, see teachings of claim 14. ‘474 further discloses wherein a subblock merge candidate list includes a subblock-based temporal motion vector prediction (SbTMVP) candidate and a FRUC-based subblock merge candidate that indicates a TMVP of each subblock in the plurality of subblocks in the current block; and the method includes: encoding the current block using the FRUC-based subblock merge candidate; and encoding a subblock merge index indicating the FRUC-based subblock merge candidate (claim 19).
Regarding claim 20, ‘474 further discloses a method of processing video data, comprising: processing a video bitstream of the video data according to a format rule, wherein the video bitstream includes a syntax element indicating that a current block in a current picture including a plurality of subblocks is coded in a subblock-based frame-rate up conversion (FRUC) mode; and the format rule specifies that a corresponding block of the current block is determined based on an offset vector, the offset vector indicating an offset between the current block and the corresponding block in the current picture; a temporal motion vector predictor (TMVP) of a first subblock in the corresponding block is determined based on a subblock in a forward reference picture of the current picture and a subblock in a backward reference picture of the current picture, the subblock in the forward reference picture and the subblock in the backward reference picture being matched using the subblock-based FRUC mode; and a TMVP of a subblock in the plurality of subblocks in the current block is determined based on the TMVP of the first subblock in the corresponding block (claim 1).
Prior Art not relied upon: Please refer to the references listed in attached PTO-892, which are not relied upon for the claim rejections, since these references are pertinent to the disclosure.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NGUYEN T TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)272-5262. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Fri, 6AM - 2PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JAMIE ATALA can be reached on 571-272-7384. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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, see 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, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NGUYEN T TRUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2486