DETAILED ACTION
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 (Korean Applications KR 10-2022-0099353 filed August 9th, 2022 and KR 10-2023-0089974 filed July 11th, 2023).
Response to Arguments
Applicant amended claims 1 – 2, 5 – 8, 10 – 12, and 18 beyond formalities and 112 Rejections.
Applicant canceled claims 3 – 4 and 13 – 17.
The pending claims are 1 – 2, 5 – 12, and 18 [Page 8 lines 1 – 6].
Applicant comments on Examiner’s indications of Allowable Subject Matter [Page 8 lines 7 – 11].
Applicant amended Figure 1 to address Examiner’s Drawing Objection [Page 8 lines 12 – 17].
Applicant amended and cancelled the claims to address Examiner’s 112(b) Rejections [Page 8 line 18 – Page 9 line 6]. The Examiner reconsiders the Rejections in view of the amended claims.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 18 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
First, the Applicant amends claim 18 and argues the amended claim overcome Examiner’s 102 Rejection against Wang [Page 9 lines 7 – 26]. Examiner reconsiders the 102 Rejection in view of the amended claims.
Second, the Applicant recites the references against the claims in the Examiner’s 103 Rejection [Page 9 line 27 – Page 10 line 6].
Third, the Applicant contends the references do not render obvious the “relocating” feature claimed [Page 10 lines 7 – 12], provides their summary of Wang contending Wang does not render obvious features of amended independent claim 1 [Page 10 lines 13 – 22]. However, the “flip” cited by the Applicant in arguing against Wang would be within the scope of the claimed “relocating” in the currently disputed limitation and further Wang Paragraphs 356 – 358 render obvious relocation techniques (e.g. flipping). The Examiner in the sole interest to expedite prosecution cites an additional reference against the amended claims.
Fourth, the Applicant provides their summary and contends Lim does not render obvious the relocation feature in the amended independent claims [Page 10 lines 23 – 29]. The Examiner disagrees for at least the reasons given for Wang in the Third point and in view of the amended independent claims a new reference is cited against the claims.
Fifth, the Applicant provides their summary of Zhao and contends Zhao does not render obvious features of amended independent claim 1 [Page 11 lines 1 – 11]. The Examiner disagrees for at least the reasons given for Wang in the Third point and in view of the amended independent claims a new reference is cited against the claims.
Sixth, the Applicant contends the last limitation in amended independent claim 1 is not taught by the references [Page 11 lines 12 – 16] and provides their summary of Wang contending Wang does not render obvious the relocation of the samples and those used for prediction [Page 11 line 17 – Page 12 line 10]. The Examiner notes Wang Paragraphs 356 – 369 and 571 and Figures 44 – 46 render obvious the features claimed; however, the Examiner in the sole interest to expedite prosecution cites an additional reference against the claims.
Seventh, the Applicant provides their summary and contends Lim does not render obvious the relocation feature in the amended independent claims [Page 12 lines 11 – 18]. The Examiner disagrees for at least the reasons given for Wang in the Sixth point and in view of the amended independent claims a new reference is cited against the claims.
Eighth, the Applicant provides their summary of Zhao and contends Zhao does not render obvious features of amended independent claim 1 [Page 12 lines 19 – 26]. The Examiner disagrees for at least the reasons given for Wang in the Third point and in view of the amended independent claims a new reference is cited against the claims.
Ninth, the Applicant concludes amended independent claims 12 and 18 as well as the dependent claims are similarly allowable [Page 12 line 27 – Page 13 line 7]. The Examiner disagrees for at least the reasons given above.
While the Applicant’s points may possibly be understood, the Examiner respectfully disagrees and thus may maintain the Rejection; however, in the sole interest to expedite prosecution in view of the amended claims an additional reference is cited against the claims.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on April 24th, 2026 was filed before the mailing date of the Final Rejection (this Office Action). The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on January 23rd, 2025 was filed before the mailing date of the First Action on the Merits (mailed April 9th, 2026). The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 – 2, 5 – 12, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1, the claimed “relocated” is NOT disclosed nor defined in the Specification and thus presents new matter. While the Applicant cited a large swatch of the Specification for alleged support, none of the description discusses “relocating” nor any associated syntax elements nor a useful figure to understand the features claimed. Additionally, the last limitation of claim 1 is not fairly nor reasonably taught in the Specification and thus is new matter as the Figures and Specification do not teach “collocated” blocks at all (the Specification is silent regarding the feature)
Regarding claim 12, see claim 1 which is the encoding method generating the data and block arrangement for the decoder of claim 1 and thus is similarly Rejected.
Regarding claim 18, see claims 1 and 18 as the encoder is the bitstream generating method performed in the method of claim 18 and thus claim 18 is similarly Rejected.
Regarding claims 2 and 5 – 11, the dependent claims do not cure the deficiencies independent claim 1 and thus are similarly Rejected.
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 1 – 2, 5 – 12, and 18 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.
Regarding claim 1, the claimed “relocated” while not defined in the Specification has Indefinite metes and bounds as arguments are just made to be contrary to any reasonable interpretation of the feature further showing Indefinite metes and bounds.
Regarding claim 12, see claim 1 which is the encoding method generating the data and block arrangement for the decoder of claim 1 and thus is similarly Rejected.
Regarding claim 18, see claims 1 and 18 as the encoder is the bitstream generating method performed in the method of claim 18 and thus claim 18 is similarly Rejected.
Regarding claims 2 and 5 – 11, the dependent claims do not cure the deficiencies independent claim 1 and thus are similarly Rejected.
Regarding claim 2, the claim recites “a reorder flag”, however, the claim has Indefinite metes and bounds as there are no other mentions of “reorder” claimed as the term appears to be distinguished from the claimed “relocated”.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 – 2, 5 – 12, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang, et al. (US PG PUB 2025/0287017 A1 referred to as “Wang” throughout), and further in view of Lim, et al. (US PG PUB 2026/0006187 A1 referred to as “Lim” throughout), Zhao, et al. (CA-3-225-288 A1 referred to as “Zhao” throughout) [Previously cited in the Office Action mailed April 9th, 2026], and Zhang (US PG PUB 2024/0205394 A1 referred to as “Zhang” throughout).
Regarding claim 1, see claim 12 which is the encoder performing the steps of the decoder where the decoder performs reciprocal steps of an encoder as obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art [Wang Paragraph 104].
Regarding claim 18, see claim 12 which is the method claimed and in view of Wang Paragraphs 571 – 576 and 610 – 611 as the non-transitory medium storing a program to perform a method to generate a bitstream.
Regarding claim 2, Wang teaches reordering blocks / partitions during intra block copy (IBC or IntraBC) processing and other features / enhancements to the intra block copy process. Lim teaches using tree / partitioning information with the intra block copy and using the predictor block partition information for the current block as well as additional techniques to enhance intra block copy. Zhao teaches alternative syntax and techniques in signaling ratio / tree partition information for the intra block copy processing. Zhang teaches additional reordering / relocating considerations for moving subblocks during partitioning when using IntraBC / IBC techniques.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the intra block copy processing of Wang with additional reordering / relocating options as taught by Zhang and to include the signaling of partition information techniques of Lim and other considerations / embodiments for intra block copy and the syntax / ratio signaling techniques of Zhao for intra block copy. The combination teaches
the information includes a reorder flag that indicates whether the subblocks are to be relocated [Wang Figures 6 – 8 as well as Paragraphs 356 – 360 (signaling use of RR IBC mode to flip predictors or not (e.g. false obvious variant to one of ordinary skill in the art) then regular / other IBC mode is signaled 571 – 576 (enable / disabling RR IBC for forming the predicted block / manipulating block); Lim Figures 69 – 70 as well as Paragraphs 2583 – 2589 (RR IBC signaling the flip based on MV and split of the block) to combine with Zhao Figures 2 – 5 and 23 – 25 as well as Paragraphs 90 – 91 (predictor receive partitioning information) and 115 – 117 (see at least the “SPLIT_TT_HOR” or “SPLIT_BT_HOR” syntax element rendering obvious horizontal split); Zhang Paragraphs 142 – 145 (shift and rotation reordering / relocations as well and signaling syntax elements suggested / taught in Paragraphs 156 – 160, 163 – 172, and 181)].
See claim 1 for the motivation to combine Wang, Lim, Zhao, and Zhang.
Regarding claim 5, Wang teaches reordering blocks / partitions during intra block copy (IBC or IntraBC) processing and other features / enhancements to the intra block copy process. Lim teaches using tree / partitioning information with the intra block copy and using the predictor block partition information for the current block as well as additional techniques to enhance intra block copy. Zhao teaches alternative syntax and techniques in signaling ratio / tree partition information for the intra block copy processing. Zhang teaches additional reordering / relocating considerations for moving subblocks during partitioning when using IntraBC / IBC techniques.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the intra block copy processing of Wang with additional reordering / relocating options as taught by Zhang and to include the signaling of partition information techniques of Lim and other considerations / embodiments for intra block copy and the syntax / ratio signaling techniques of Zhao for intra block copy. The combination teaches
the information includes a flag that indicates whether a splitting direction is a horizontal split or a vertical split [Lim Figures 3 – 5 as well as Paragraphs 348 – 350 (horizontal or vertical direction for splits with suggested ratios), 430 – 440 (see at least the “split_flag” where the binary tree split is for a horizontal or vertical split), and 2296 – 2302 (IntraSubPartitionSplitType and related flags for signaling horizontal or vertical partitions) to combine with Zhao Figures 2 – 5 and 23 – 25 as well as Paragraphs 90 – 91 (predictor receive partitioning information), 115 – 119 (see at least the “SPLIT_TT_HOR” or “SPLIT_BT_HOR” syntax element rendering obvious horizontal split) or 128 – 130 (e.g. “MPT_split_type”)]; and
wherein the current block is split to the subblocks according to the splitting direction indicated by the flag [Wang Figures 34 – 35 and 66 – 70 as well as Paragraphs 322 – 325 and 563 – 566 (tree type part of IBC considerations); Lim Figures 3 – 5 as well as Paragraphs 348 – 350 (horizontal or vertical direction for splits with suggested ratios); Zhao Figures 2 – 5 and 23 – 25 as well as Paragraphs 90 – 91 (predictor receive partitioning information), 115 – 119 (see at least the “SPLIT_TT_HOR” or “SPLIT_BT_HOR” syntax element rendering obvious horizontal split), 128 – 135 (e.g. “MPT_split_type” and partitioning blocks using flags in Paragraphs 115 – 117 and 160), 196 – 200 (signaling partition information)].
See claim 1 for the motivation to combine Wang, Lim, Zhao, and Zhang.
Regarding claim 6, Wang teaches reordering blocks / partitions during intra block copy (IBC or IntraBC) processing and other features / enhancements to the intra block copy process. Lim teaches using tree / partitioning information with the intra block copy and using the predictor block partition information for the current block as well as additional techniques to enhance intra block copy. Zhao teaches alternative syntax and techniques in signaling ratio / tree partition information for the intra block copy processing. Zhang teaches additional reordering / relocating considerations for moving subblocks during partitioning when using IntraBC / IBC techniques.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the intra block copy processing of Wang with additional reordering / relocating options as taught by Zhang and to include the signaling of partition information techniques of Lim and other considerations / embodiments for intra block copy and the syntax / ratio signaling techniques of Zhao for intra block copy. The combination teaches
wherein the current block is split to the subblocks according to a splitting direction implicitly determined based on a size of the current block [Wang Figures 33 – 35 and 69 – 70 as well as Paragraphs 324 – 333 (splitting based on transform types / transform partitioning), 356 – 358 and 571 – 576 (RR IBC usage implies split direction based on flipping and zero component block vector used for the predictor); Zhao Figures 4 – 6 as well as Paragraphs 115 – 118 (flags / syntax for partition directions) and 120 – 128 (implicitly signaled tree / partition information based on block size and partition sizes used and 129 – 135 (e.g. MPT_split_type))].
See claim 1 for the motivation to combine Wang, Lim, Zhao, and Zhang.
Regarding claim 7, Wang teaches reordering blocks / partitions during intra block copy (IBC or IntraBC) processing and other features / enhancements to the intra block copy process. Lim teaches using tree / partitioning information with the intra block copy and using the predictor block partition information for the current block as well as additional techniques to enhance intra block copy. Zhao teaches alternative syntax and techniques in signaling ratio / tree partition information for the intra block copy processing. Zhang teaches additional reordering / relocating considerations for moving subblocks during partitioning when using IntraBC / IBC techniques.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the intra block copy processing of Wang with additional reordering / relocating options as taught by Zhang and to include the signaling of partition information techniques of Lim and other considerations / embodiments for intra block copy and the syntax / ratio signaling techniques of Zhao for intra block copy. The combination teaches
wherein the information includes a split index that indicates a split type of multiple split types in which the current block is split to the subblocks [Wang Figures 34 – 35 and 66 – 70 as well as Paragraph 322 to be modified by Lim Figure 3 (exemplary partitioning with ratio considerations) as well as Paragraphs 348 – 350 (horizontal and vertical ratios for partitioning), 1208 – 1212 (tree type information to signal such as single or dual tree usage), and 2680 – 2685 (block size for the predictor of the current block); Zhao Figures 2 – 5 and 23 – 25 as well as Paragraphs 90 – 91 (predictor receive partitioning information), 115 – 119 (see at least the “SPLIT_TT_HOR” or “SPLIT_BT_HOR” syntax element rendering obvious horizontal split), and 128 – 135 (e.g. “MPT_split_type” and partitioning blocks using flags in Paragraphs 115 – 117 and 160)].
See claim 1 for the motivation to combine Wang, Lim, Zhao, and Zhang.
Regarding claim 8, Wang teaches reordering blocks / partitions during intra block copy (IBC or IntraBC) processing and other features / enhancements to the intra block copy process. Lim teaches using tree / partitioning information with the intra block copy and using the predictor block partition information for the current block as well as additional techniques to enhance intra block copy. Zhao teaches alternative syntax and techniques in signaling ratio / tree partition information for the intra block copy processing. Zhang teaches additional reordering / relocating considerations for moving subblocks during partitioning when using IntraBC / IBC techniques.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the intra block copy processing of Wang with additional reordering / relocating options as taught by Zhang and to include the signaling of partition information techniques of Lim and other considerations / embodiments for intra block copy and the syntax / ratio signaling techniques of Zhao for intra block copy. The combination teaches
wherein the current block is split to the subblocks according to a split type implicitly determined based on an aspect ratio of the current block [Wang Figures 33 – 35 and 69 – 70 as well as Paragraphs 324 – 333 (splitting based on transform types / transform partitioning), 356 – 358 and 571 – 576 (RR IBC usage implies split direction / obvious variant of the ratio (e.g. horizontal / vertical split of block)); Zhao Figures 4 – 6 as well as Paragraphs 115 – 119 (flags / syntax for partition directions and tree partitioning which includes the ratio of the partitions (e.g. the 1:2:1 ratio in triple tree partitioning)), 123 – 128 (implicitly signaled tree / partition information (obvious variant of the claimed ratio to one of ordinary skill in the art) based on block size and partition sizes used) and 129 – 135 (e.g. “MPT_split_type” and partitioning blocks using flags in Paragraphs 115 – 117 and 160)].
See claim 1 for the motivation to combine Wang, Lim, Zhao, and Zhang.
Regarding claim 9, Wang teaches reordering blocks / partitions during intra block copy (IBC or IntraBC) processing and other features / enhancements to the intra block copy process. Lim teaches using tree / partitioning information with the intra block copy and using the predictor block partition information for the current block as well as additional techniques to enhance intra block copy. Zhao teaches alternative syntax and techniques in signaling ratio / tree partition information for the intra block copy processing. Zhang teaches additional reordering / relocating considerations for moving subblocks during partitioning when using IntraBC / IBC techniques.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the intra block copy processing of Wang with additional reordering / relocating options as taught by Zhang and to include the signaling of partition information techniques of Lim and other considerations / embodiments for intra block copy and the syntax / ratio signaling techniques of Zhao for intra block copy. The combination teaches
generating a block vector of the current block based on an IBC merge mode or an IBC advanced motion vector predictor (AMVP) mode [Wang Figures 6 – 8 as well as Paragraphs 126 – 135 (block vector derivation in IBC merge or IBC AMVP mode)]; and
generating, by using the block vector, the initial prediction block from a reconstructed region in a current frame [Wang Figures 6 – 8, 40 – 41 and 45 as well as Paragraphs 126 – 135 (IBC merge or IBC AMVP for predictor determination), 350 – 355 and 359 – 370 (reference area used and searching for predictor for IBC from an initial guess / location in searching for merge / BV candidates), and 384 – 393 (determine BV predictor from IBC merge and IBC AMVP), and 551 – 557 (BV determination in IBC merge or IBC AMVP)].
See claim 1 for the motivation to combine Wang, Lim, Zhao, and Zhang.
Regarding claim 10, Wang teaches reordering blocks / partitions during intra block copy (IBC or IntraBC) processing and other features / enhancements to the intra block copy process. Lim teaches using tree / partitioning information with the intra block copy and using the predictor block partition information for the current block as well as additional techniques to enhance intra block copy. Zhao teaches alternative syntax and techniques in signaling ratio / tree partition information for the intra block copy processing. Zhang teaches additional reordering / relocating considerations for moving subblocks during partitioning when using IntraBC / IBC techniques.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the intra block copy processing of Wang with additional reordering / relocating options as taught by Zhang and to include the signaling of partition information techniques of Lim and other considerations / embodiments for intra block copy and the syntax / ratio signaling techniques of Zhao for intra block copy. The combination teaches
splitting the initial prediction block into the subblocks [Wang Figures 34 – 35 and 66 – 70 as well as Paragraphs 322 – 325 and 563 – 566 (tree type part of IBC considerations); Zhao Figures 2 – 5 and 23 – 25 as well as Paragraphs 90 – 91 (predictor receive partitioning information), 115 – 117 (see at least the “SPLIT_TT_VER” and “SPLIT_TT_HOR” syntax elements (or BT or QT elements as well) rendering obvious horizontal / vertical splits), 132 – 135 (partitioning blocks using flags in Paragraphs 115 – 117 and 160), 196 – 200 (signaling partition information)];
generating an immediate prediction block of the current block by relocating the subblocks [Wang Figures 43 – 44 (reordering / flipping to refine prediction block / predictor vector to the predictor block) as well as Paragraphs 356 – 358 (RR IBC (reordered IBC) flipping / manipulating the subblocks / predictors to combine with Zhang Paragraphs 140 – 150 (shifting is a reordering / relocating)), 550 – 556 and 568 – 571 (reordering predictor list and using RR IBC); Lim Figures 62 – 65 and 68 – 72 as well as Paragraphs 1043 (using intermediate results for prediction determinations), 2576 – 2583, 2584 – 2592 (suggested syntax for flipping in RR IBC to reorder subblocks) and 2604 – 2605 (RR IBC and reordering candidates)]; and
generating a final prediction block of the current block by applying a filter to samples adjacent to a boundary between the relocated subblocks [Wang Figure 4 (see at least the deblocking filter) as well as Paragraph 114 (filter types to apply) to combine with Lim Figures 2 (see at least reference character 260 as well as Paragraphs 290 (rendering obvious various modifications to filtering including known / preset filters) and 1170 – 1176 (deblocking boundaries); Zhao Figures 18 – 19 (filtering after prediction) as well as Paragraphs 149 – 156 (post filtering on predicted samples)].
See claim 1 for the motivation to combine Wang, Lim, Zhao, and Zhang.
Regarding claim 12, Wang teaches reordering blocks / partitions during intra block copy (IBC or IntraBC) processing and other features / enhancements to the intra block copy process. Lim teaches using tree / partitioning information with the intra block copy and using the predictor block partition information for the current block as well as additional techniques to enhance intra block copy. Zhao teaches alternative syntax and techniques in signaling ratio / tree partition information for the intra block copy processing. Zhang teaches additional reordering / relocating considerations for moving subblocks during partitioning when using IntraBC / IBC techniques.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the intra block copy processing of Wang with additional reordering / relocating options as taught by Zhang and to include the signaling of partition information techniques of Lim and other considerations / embodiments for intra block copy and the syntax / ratio signaling techniques of Zhao for intra block copy. The combination teaches
determining that the current block is predicted in an intra block copy (IBC) mode [Wang Figures 40 – 45 as well as Paragraphs 356 – 362 (determination of IBC mode using with block reordering too) and additional signaling using IBC in Paragraphs 461 – 470 and 571 – 575 (signaling use of IBC with reordering / relocating or not)];
encoding, into a bitstream, information related to relocating samples in the current block in the unit of subblocks each of which includes multiple samples [Wang Figures 2 (see at least reference character 214) and 42 – 45 as well as Paragraphs 81 and 90 - 101 (encoding inter/ intra/ IBC prediction information in the entropy coder) and 356 – 359 (RR IBC signaled and based on selected predictor block from candidates and signaled from encoder to decoder); Zhang Paragraphs 142 – 145 (reordering / shifting samples to use in IBC with syntax suggested), 188 – 192 and 210 – 223 (encoding into the bitstream associated information and reordering / relocation information of blocks)];
generating an initial prediction block of the current block according to the (IBC) mode [Wang Figures 42 and 49 (IBC) as well as Paragraphs 372 – 394 (merge candidates for IBC determines as initial prediction block), 430 – 443 (block location / depth / partition part of prediction block consideration) and 545 – 555 (merge candidates identified for IBC)];
reconstructing the current block based on the initial prediction block and the information [Wang Figures 6 - 8, 40 - 41 and 45 as well as Paragraphs 126 - 135 (IBC merge or IBC AMVP for predictor determination), 350 - 355 and 359 - 370 (reference area used and searching for predictor for IBC from an initial guess/ location in searching for merge/ BV candidates), and 384 – 393 (determine BV predictor from IBC merge and IBC AMVP), and 551 – 557 (BV determination in IBC merge or IBC AMVP); Lim Paragraphs 2575 – 2590 (reordered IBC used and signaling such a mode) in combination also with Zhao Figure 12; Zhang Paragraphs 142 – 145 (reordering / shifting samples to use in IBC with syntax suggested), 188 – 192 and 210 – 223 (encoding into the bitstream associated information and reordering / relocation information of blocks)],
wherein samples in a subblock in the current block are reconstructed not using predicted samples in a collocated subblock in the initial prediction block but using predicted samples in another subblock in the initial prediction block, the another subblock being determined based on the information [Wang Figures 18 (subfigures included) and 40 – 47 (blocks used are within the same block and may be within the prediction area which are not collocated as in Figure 18 (subfigures included)) as well as Paragraphs 353 – 366 (prediction within same region / sub-region including reordering considerations combinable with Zhang Paragraphs 138 – 151 (various within block / region reordering / relocating)), 539 – 549 (regions / subregions when using the IBC) and 569 – 577 (regions in IBC using reordering / relocation); Lim Figures 54 – 58, 60 – 64 (available bocks in IBC), and 69 – 72 (reference region within prediction area) as well as Paragraphs 2594 – 2605 (region may be in area to be predicted), 2608 – 2616 (within regions for predictors), 2673 – 2677 (samples within regions for IBC), and 2575 – 2590 (reordered IBC used and signaling such a mode)].
The motivation to combine Lim with Wang is to combine features in the same / related field of invention of video coding using block vectors [Lim Paragraphs 9 – 15] in order to improve coding efficiency in inter prediction / data used for prediction [Lim Paragraphs 5 – 8, 35 – 36, and 595 – 598 and 660 – 661 where the Examiner observes at least KSR Rationales (D) or (F) are also applicable].
The motivation to combine Zhao with Lim and Wang is to combine features in the same / related field of invention of video encoding / decoding [Zhao Paragraphs 1 – 4] in order to improve performance of the codec including minimizing error / mismatched in performing inter prediction [Zhao Paragraphs 1 – 4 and 89 – 91 where the Examiner observes at least KSR Rationales (D) or (F) are also applicable].
The motivation to combine Zhang with Wang, Lim, and Zhao is to combine features in the same / related field of invention of video coding including reordering techniques [Zhang Paragraphs 2 and 4 – 5] in order to improve the efficiency of the codec (encoding / decoding) [Zhang Paragraph 5 and 8 – 11 where the Examiner observes at least KSR Rationales (D) or (F) are also applicable].
This is the motivation to combine Wang, Lim, Zhao, and Zhang which will be used throughout the Rejection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, and 35 USC 112(a) or 35 USC 112 (pre-AIA ), 1st Paragraph, as set forth in this Office action and to include 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: Regarding claim 11, while the filter strength as a function of the boundary (boundary strength) is typically known in the art, the prior art does not fairly teach all the features of claim 11 in regarding to boundary strength determination for reordered blocks (an active reordered step is claimed) unlike the prior art cited.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tyler W Sullivan whose telephone number is (571)270-5684. The examiner can normally be reached IFP.
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, David Czekaj can be reached at (571)-272-7327. 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.
/TYLER W. SULLIVAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
