DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This office action is a response to an application filed on 01/13/2025, in which claims 1-15 are pending and ready for examination.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted was filed before the mailing date of the Office Action on the merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 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.
Claims 1-3, 7-10, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Li (WO 2016160608 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Li discloses, in a first embodiment, an image decoding method performed by an image decoding apparatus. the image decoding method comprising (Li; Para. [0187]. An image coding method includes image decoding component.):
deriving motion information of a current block (Li; Para. [0188]. Motion information is derived for a current block.), but refining the motion information based on an enabled predetermined refinement tool: and generating a prediction block of the current block based on the refined motion information, wherein the refinement tool includes a template matching-based tool and a bilateral matching-based tool, and wherein whether the bilateral matching-based tool is enabled is determined regardless of whether the template matching-based tool is enabled.
However, Li teaches, in a second embodiment, refining the motion information based on an enabled predetermined refinement tool (Li; Para. [0188]. Motion information is derived/refined in accordance with a refinement tool (bilateral matching or template matching) being enabled.): and
generating a prediction block of the current block based on the refined motion information (Li; Para. [0188]. A prediction block of a current block is determined in accordance with refined/derived motion information.),
wherein the refinement tool includes a template matching-based tool and a bilateral matching-based tool (Li; Para. [0188]. Refinement tool includes bilateral matching and template matching.), and
wherein whether the bilateral matching-based tool is enabled is determined regardless of whether the template matching-based tool is enabled (Li; Para. [0188]. A flag is additionally used to indicate whether bilateral matching is used or not.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the pertinent before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the video coding system of Lin in a first embodiment to adapt an image processing approach, by incorporating Lin’s teaching in a second embodiment wherein a motion refinement/derivation is employed, for the motivation to determine candidate vectors for deriving motion information (Li; Abstract.).
Regarding claim 2, modified Li further teaches wherein whether the template matching-based tool is enabled is determined based on first flag information and whether the bilateral matching-based tool is enabled is determined based on second flag information (Li; Para. [0188]. Whether template matching is enabled is based on one flag, and whether bilateral matching is enabled is based on another flag.), and
wherein the second flag information is signaled regardless of a value of the first flag information (Li; Para. [0188]. Another flag is additionally signaled regardless of a first one flag.).
Regarding claim 3, modified Li further teaches, in another embodiment, the first flag information and the second flag information are signaled at a sequence level, a picture level, a slice level or a video level (Li; Para. [0192]. Flags for motion information derivation are signaled in an SPS, PPS, and slice level.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the pertinent before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the video coding system of Lin in a first embodiment to adapt an image processing approach, by incorporating Li’s teaching in another embodiment wherein different flags are signaled for motion information derivation, for the motivation to determine candidate vectors for deriving motion information (Li; Abstract.).
Claim 7 is an image decoding apparatus comprising a memory and at least one processor, wherein the at least one processor is configured to perform a sequence of processing steps corresponding to the same as claimed in claim 1, and is non-patentable over the prior art for the same reason as previously indicated.
Claims 8-10 are directed to an image encoding method performed by an image encoding apparatus. the image encoding method comprising a sequence of processing steps that are in reverse/symmetric manner with the processing steps corresponding to the same as claimed in claims 1-3, and are non-patentable over the prior art for the same reason as previously indicated.
Claim 14 is a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium for storing a bitstream generated by the image encoding method of claim 8, comprising a sequence of processing steps corresponding to the same as claimed in claim 8, and is non-patentable over the prior art for the same reason as previously indicated.
Claim 15 is directed to a method of transmitting a bitstream generated by an image encoding method, the image encoding method comprising a sequence of processing steps that are in reverse/symmetric manner with the processing steps corresponding to the same as claimed in claim 1, and is non-patentable over the prior art for the same reason as previously indicated.
Claims 4-6 and 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (WO 2016160608 A1) in view of Kim (WO 2023055146 A1).
Regarding claim 4, modified Li teaches bilateral matching-based tool being enabled (Li; See remarks regarding claim 1 above.), but based on the bilateral matching-based tool being enabled and whether a picture order count (POC) difference between a current picture including the current block and a reference picture of the current block is the same for all prediction directions of the current block, the motion information of the current block is refined based on the bilateral matching-based tool.
However, Kim teaches based on the bilateral matching-based tool being enabled and whether a picture order count (POC) difference between a current picture including the current block and a reference picture of the current block is the same for all prediction directions of the current block, the motion information of the current block is refined based on the bilateral matching-based tool (Kim; Pg. 124, 3rd Para. Bilateral matching is used for a POC difference between a current picture and a reference picture being the same for all direction and the bilateral matching being enabled.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person with ordinary skill in the pertinent before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the video coding system of modified Lin in a first embodiment to adapt an image processing approach, by incorporating Kim’s teaching wherein different motion derivation/refinement approaches are used depending on the POC information, for the motivation to perform decoder-side motion information derivation (Kim; Abstract.).
Regarding claim 5, modified Li further teaches based on the bilateral matching-based tool being enabled and whether a picture order count (POC) difference between a current picture including the current block and a reference picture of the current block is different for all prediction directions of the current block, the motion information of the current block is refined based on the template matching-based tool, based on the template matching-based tool being enabled (Kim; Pg. 124, 3rd Para. Template matching is used for a POC difference between a current picture and a reference picture being the different for all direction and the bilateral matching being enabled.).
Regarding claim 6, modified Li further teaches based on the bilateral matching-based tool being disabled and the template matching-based tool being enabled, the motion information of the current block is refined based on the template matching-based tool (Li; Para. [0188]. Motion information is derived/refined using template matching for template matching being enabled and bilateral matching being disabled.).
Claims 11-13 are directed to an image encoding method performed by an image encoding apparatus. the image encoding method comprising a sequence of processing steps corresponding to the same as claimed in claims 4-6, and are non-patentable over the prior art for the same reason as previously indicated.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Li (US Pub. 20160286232 A1) teaches deriving motion information for sub-blocks, relevant to the motion refinement process.
Lin (US Pub. 20260012611 A1) teaches motion vector predictor derivation, which is used in motion refinement process.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALBERT KIR whose telephone number is (571)272-6245. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30am - 5:00pm.
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, Jay Patel can be reached at (571) 272-2988. 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.
/ALBERT KIR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2485
Prosecution Insights