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 .
Claim Interpretation
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 20 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a bitstream generated by steps outlined in the claim. These 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.
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 13 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 13 recites, “wherein if an HMVP candidate is not used for the current video block, the HMVP candidate is not allowed to be used for the current video block.” This claim language appears to paradoxically claim the disuse of the HMVP candidate as a criterion for the disuse of the HMVP candidate. Appropriate correction is required.
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 (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 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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 8-10, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Xu et al. (US 20220182650 A1).
Re claim 1, Xu 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, whether to adjust a reconstructed reordered intra block copy (RRIBC) coded history-based motion vector prediction (HMVP) candidate of the current video block (Xu: paragraph [0113], block based compensation from reconstructed area within the same picture is referred to as intra picture block compensation, current picture referencing (CPR), or intra block copy (IBC); paragraph [0153], HMVP; paragraph [0155], redundancy check facilitates reordering of candidates; paragraph [0130], when the BV (mvL) has a fractional resolution, such as 1/16-pel resolution, the x component mvL[0] and the y component mvL[1] are shifted to have an integer resolution, as indicated by mvL[0]>>4 and mvL[1]>>4, respectively); and
performing the conversion based on the determining (Xu: Figs. 5, 6, 7, and 8).
Re claim 2, Xu discloses that determining whether to adjust the RRIBC coded HMVP candidate comprises: determining whether a motion adjustment is to be applied to the RRIBC coded HMVP candidate based on a predefined condition for candidate adjustment (Xu: paragraph [0130], when the BV (mvL) has a fractional resolution, such as 1/16-pel resolution, the x component mvL[0] and the y component mvL[1] are shifted to have an integer resolution, as indicated by mvL[0]>>4 and mvL[1]>>4, respectively).
Re claim 3, Xu discloses
wherein if the RRIBC coded HMVP candidate satisfies the predefined condition for candidate adjustment, the RRIBC coded HMVP candidate is adjusted by the motion adjustment, the conversion being performed based on the adjusted RRIBC coded HMVP candidate (Xu: paragraph [0130], when the BV (mvL) has a fractional resolution, such as 1/16-pel resolution, the x component mvL[0] and the y component mvL[1] are shifted to have an integer resolution, as indicated by mvL[0]>>4 and mvL[1]>>4, respectively), and/or
wherein if the RRIBC coded HMVP candidate does not satisfy the predefined condition for candidate adjustment, the conversion is performed based on the RRIBC coded HMVP candidate without adjusting the RRIBC coded HMVP candidate.
Re claim 4, Xu discloses that performing the conversion based on the determining comprises:
adjusting the RRIBC coded HMVP candidate based on the determining (Xu: paragraph [0130], when the BV (mvL) has a fractional resolution, such as 1/16-pel resolution, the x component mvL[0] and the y component mvL[1] are shifted to have an integer resolution, as indicated by mvL[0]>>4 and mvL[1]>>4, respectively); and
performing the conversion based on the adjusted RRIBC coded HMVP candidate (Xu: Figs. 5, 6, 7, and 8),
wherein the RRIBC coded HMVP candidate is in an HMVP table (Xu: paragraph [0153]),
wherein the RRIBC coded HMVP candidate is adjusted by a motion adjustment (Xu: paragraph [0130], when the BV (mvL) has a fractional resolution, such as 1/16-pel resolution, the x component mvL[0] and the y component mvL[1] are shifted to have an integer resolution, as indicated by mvL[0]>>4 and mvL[1]>>4, respectively), or wherein a motion adjustment is not applied to the RRIBC coded HMVP candidate.
Re claim 5, Xu discloses that performing the conversion based on the determining comprises: performing the conversion based on the RRIBC coded HMVP candidate without adjusting the RRIBC coded HMVP candidate (Xu: paragraph [0130], if the BV is already integer resolution, there is no need to adjust the resolution).
Re claim 8, Xu discloses that adjusting the RRIBC coded HMVP candidate comprises: adding a motion shift to the RRIBC coded HMVP candidate (Xu: paragraph [0130], when the BV (mvL) has a fractional resolution, such as 1/16-pel resolution, the x component mvL[0] and the y component mvL[1] are shifted to have an integer resolution, as indicated by mvL[0]>>4 and mvL[1]>>4, respectively).
Re claim 9, Xu discloses that the RRIBC coded HMVP candidate is adjusted based on at least one of: a block dimension of the current video block, or a location of the current video block, wherein the location of the current video block comprises at least one of: a position of a center sample of the current video block, or a position of a top-left sample of the current video block (Xu: paragraph [0130], a derivation process for reference block availability is invoked with a position (xCurr, yCurr) of a top left sample of the current block set to be (xCb, yCb) and a position (xCb+(mvL[0]>>4), yCb+(mvL[1]>>4)) of the top left sample of the reference block as inputs).
Re claim 10, Xu discloses that the RRIBC coded HMVP candidate is adjusted based on at least one of: a block dimension of a neighbor video block, the RRIBC coded HMVP candidate being determined based on the neighbor video block, or a location of the neighbor video block, wherein the location of the neighbor video block comprises at least one of: a position of a center sample of the neighbor video block, or a position of a top-left sample of the neighbor video block (Xu: paragraph [0130], a derivation process for reference block availability is invoked with a position (xCurr, yCurr) of a top left sample of the current block set to be (xCb, yCb) and a position (xCb+(mvL[0]>>4), yCb+(mvL[1]>>4)) of the top left sample of the reference block as inputs; paragraph [0130], when the BV (mvL) has a fractional resolution, such as 1/16-pel resolution, the x component mvL[0] and the y component mvL[1] are shifted to have an integer resolution, as indicated by mvL[0]>>4 and mvL[1]>>4, respectively).
Re claim 17, Wang discloses that the conversion includes encoding the current video block into the bitstream (Xu: paragraph [0022]), or wherein the conversion includes decoding the current video block from the bitstream (Xu: paragraph [0022]).
Claim 18 recites the corresponding apparatus to implement the method of claim 1. Therefore, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 1 are applicable to claim 18. Xu additionally states that aspects of the disclosure also provide a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions which when executed by a computer for video encoding/decoding cause the computer to perform any of the methods for video encoding/decoding (Xu: paragraph [0029]). Accordingly, claim 18 has been analyzed and rejected with respect to claim 1 above.
Claim 19 recites the corresponding non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that cause a processor to implement the method of claim 1. Therefore, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 1 are applicable to claim 19. Xu additionally states that aspects of the disclosure also provide a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions which when executed by a computer for video encoding/decoding cause the computer to perform any of the methods for video encoding/decoding (Xu: paragraph [0029]). Accordingly, claim 19 has been analyzed and rejected with respect to claim 1 above.
Re claim 20, Xu discloses that encoded video data or encoded video bitstreams may be stored on a streaming server (Xu: paragraph [0057]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-7, 11-12, and 14-16 are 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.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER G FINDLEY whose telephone number is (571)270-1199. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-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, Chris Kelley can be reached at (571)272-7331. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER G FINDLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2482