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 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 steps outlined in the claim. These steps are not actively 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.
Claims 3, 4, 6, 7, and 15 are 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.
Claims 3, 6, and 15 recite language which claim either performing an action or not performing that same action. Thus, any course of action is covered by the recited language and the claims fail to further limit the scope of the invention. Claims 4 and 7 depend from claims 3 and 6, respectively, and fail to remedy the deficiencies of claims 3 and 6.
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, 2, 5, 8, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Li et al. (US 20230075788 A1).
Re claim 1, Li discloses a method for video processing, comprising:
generating, based on a neighboring block of a first block of a video for a first conversion between the first block and a bitstream of the video, a motion candidate list for an intra block copy template matching merge (IBC-TM-MERGE) mode for coding the first block, the neighboring block being coded with a reconstruction-reordered intra block copy (RRIBC) mode (Li: paragraph [0169]); and
performing the first conversion based on the motion candidate list (Li: paragraph [0022], video encoding/decoding).
Re claim 2, Li discloses
wherein an adjustment is applied on reconstruction samples of the neighboring block in the RRIBC mode (Li: paragraph [0135]), and
the adjustment comprises at least one of the following: reordering the reconstruction samples, flipping the reconstruction samples, shifting the reconstruction samples (Li: paragraph [0135]), rotating the reconstruction samples, or transforming the reconstruction samples.
Re claim 5, Li discloses the motion information of the neighboring block is adjusted by adding a motion shift (Li: paragraph [0135]).
Re claim 8, Li discloses
wherein a further motion candidate list is generated for the IBC-TM-MERGE mode for coding a further block of the video different from the first block (Li: paragraph [0022], list generated for current block; Fig. 9, blocks scanned sequentially), and
a motion candidate in the further motion candidate list is not allowed to be determined based on a neighboring block of the further block (Li: paragraph [0125]).
Re claim 16, Li discloses that the first conversion includes encoding the first block into the bitstream (Li: paragraph [0022], video encoding).
Re claim 17, Li discloses that the first conversion includes decoding the first block from the bitstream (Li: paragraph [0022], video decoding).
Claim 18 recites the corresponding apparatus for implementing the method of claim 1. Therefore, arguments analogous to those presented for claim 1 are applicable to claim 18. Li additionally discloses a processor and memory containing instructions (Li: paragraph [0224]). 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. Li additionally discloses a processor and memory containing instructions (Li: paragraph [0224]). Accordingly, claim 19 has been analyzed and rejected with respect to claim 1 above.
Re claim 20, Li discloses storing of compressed video on digital media including CD, DVD, memory stick and the like, and so on (Li: paragraph [0055]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-14 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