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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 06/05/26. 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 (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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vasa et al. “Efficient encoding of texture coordinates guided by mesh geometry” (Vasa) (provided in IDS) in view of Hemmer et al. (US 20200098137 A1) (Hemmer) (provided in IDS).
Regarding claim 1, Vasa discloses an encoding method, comprising:
reconstructing, on an encoder side, geometry information and connectivity information for a target three-dimensional mesh based on an encoding result of the geometry information and connectivity information of the target three-dimensional mesh (See pg. 26 left col. Para. 3 and right col. Para. 3);
determining, on the encoder side based on the reconstructed geometry information and connectivity information, N predicted texture coordinates of each vertex in the target three- dimensional mesh (See pg. 29 right col. Para. 2) by means of predicting vertices from multiple encoded triangles (See pg. 29 last para.; the prediction described in section 4 and Fig. 4; uses three encoded triangles: the texture triangle VbVlVr and the geometry triangles VbVlVr and VlVrVo), wherein N is a positive integer greater than 1 (two coordinates UV of each vertex are determined, N=2); and
encoding, on the encoder side, a texture coordinate residual of each vertex (See pg. 26 right col. Para. 3); wherein the texture coordinate residual of the vertex is determined based on the N predicted texture coordinates of the vertex (See Fig. 4, residual).
Vasa discloses the residual based on N predicted texture coordinates of the vertex as discussed above (See Fig. 4). To further clarify predicting from multiple triangles, Hemmer discloses texture coordinate system that extends the triangle-based prediction to a plurality of triangles (See para. 30).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the texture coordinate system of Hemmer with the texture coding system as disclosed by Vasa in order to improve efficiency of the system by a smaller size mesh and less use of computing resources (See Hemmer para. 0017).
Regarding claim 2, The method according to claim 1, wherein the determining, based on the reconstructed geometry information and connectivity information, N predicted texture coordinates of each vertex in the target three-dimensional mesh by means of predicting vertices from multiple encoded triangles comprises:
selecting, on the encoder side, a first edge from an edge set, and determining a target triangle based on a triangle corresponding to the first edge; wherein vertices in the target triangle other than the to-be-encoded vertex are encoded vertices and an opposite vertex of the first edge in the triangle corresponding to the first edge is the to-be-encoded vertex (See Vasa Fig. 4); and
obtaining, on the encoder side, predicted texture coordinates of the to-be-encoded vertex in the target triangle (See Vasa Fig. 4; pg. 29 last para.).
Regarding claim 3, The method according to claim 2, wherein the obtaining predicted texture coordinates of the to-be-encoded vertex in the target triangle comprises:
obtaining, on the encoder side, texture coordinates of a projection point of the to- be-encoded vertex on the first edge based on geometry coordinates of vertices of the target triangle (See Vasa Fig. 4; Hemmer Fig. 3; para. 30; repeating the process from one triangle into multiple triangles); and
obtaining, on the encoder side, the predicted texture coordinates of the to-be- encoded vertex based on the texture coordinates of the projection point (See Vasa Fig. 4; pg. 29 last para.; Hemmer Fig. 3; para. 30; repeating the process from one triangle into multiple triangles).
Please see the motivation stated in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 4, The method according to claim 3, wherein the obtaining texture coordinates of a projection point of the to-be-encoded vertex on the first edge based on geometry coordinates of vertices of the target triangle comprises:
obtaining, on the encoder side, the texture coordinates of the projection point of the to-be-encoded vertex on the first edge based on a sum of NXuv and Nuv, or obtaining the texture coordinates of the projection point of the to-be-encoded vertex on the first edge based on a difference between Nuv and XNuv (See Vasa Fig. 4; Hemmer Fig. 3; para. 30; repeating the prediction process from one triangle into multiple triangles); wherein
Nuv represents texture coordinates of a vertex N on the first edge of the target triangle, NXuv represents a vector from the vertex N on the first edge of the target triangle to texture coordinates of a projection point X of the to-be-encoded vertex on the first edge, and XNuv represents a vector from the projection point X on the first edge to the texture coordinates of the vertex N on the first edge of the target triangle (See Vasa Fig. 4; Hemmer Fig. 3; para. 30; repeating the prediction process from one triangle into multiple triangles).
Please see the motivation stated in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 5, The method according to claim 3, wherein the obtaining predicted texture coordinates of the to-be-encoded vertex based on the texture coordinates of the projection point comprises:
in a case that a first vertex 0 corresponding to the first edge is an encoded vertex and a first triangle is not a degenerate triangle, obtaining, on the encoder side, texture coordinates of the to-be-encoded vertex based on Xuy and XCuv; wherein the first triangle and the target triangle share the first edge, and an opposite vertex of the first edge in the first triangle is the first vertex 0 (See Vasa Fig. 4; Hemmer Fig. 3; paras. 26-30; repeating the prediction process from one triangle into multiple triangles using known texture coordinate to predict unknown texture coordinates); where
Xuv represents texture coordinates of a projection point X of the to-be-encoded vertex on the first edge, and XCuv represents a vector from the projection point X of the to-be- encoded vertex on the first edge to the texture coordinates Cuv of the to-be-encoded vertex (See Vasa Fig. 4; Hemmer Fig. 3; paras. 26-30; repeating the prediction process from one triangle into multiple triangles using known texture coordinate to predict unknown texture coordinates).
Please see the motivation stated in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 6, The method according to claim 3, wherein the obtaining, on the encoder side, predicted texture coordinates of the to-be-encoded vertex based on the texture coordinates of the projection point comprises:
in a case that a first vertex 0 corresponding to the first edge is an uncoded vertex or a first triangle is a degenerate triangle, obtaining, on the encoder side, texture coordinates of the to-be-encoded vertex based on Xuy and XCuv, and encoding a target identifier of the to-be- encoded vertex; wherein the first triangle and the target triangle share the first edge, and an opposite vertex of the first edge in the first triangle is the first vertex 0 (See Vasa Fig. 4; Hemmer Fig. 3; paras. 26-30; repeating the prediction process from one triangle into multiple triangles using difference vectors to predict unknown texture coordinates); wherein
Xuv represents texture coordinates of a projection point X of the to-be-encoded vertex on the first edge, and XCuv represents a vector from the projection point X of the to-be- encoded vertex on the first edge to the texture coordinates Cuv of the to-be-encoded vertex (See Vasa Fig. 4; Hemmer Fig. 3; paras. 26-30; repeating the prediction process from one triangle into multiple triangles using difference vectors to predict unknown texture coordinates).
Please see the motivation stated in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 7, The method according to claim 2, wherein before the selecting a first edge from an edge set, the method further comprises:
selecting, on the encoder side, one initial triangle based on the reconstructed geometry information and connectivity information (See Vasa Fig. 4; Hemmer Fig. 3; paras. 26-30; repeating the prediction process from one triangle into multiple triangles); and
encoding, on the encoder side, texture coordinates of three vertices of the initial triangle, and storing three edges of the initial triangle into the edge set (See Vasa Fig. 4; Hemmer Figs. 3 and 6; paras. 26-30, 44; repeating the prediction process from one triangle into multiple triangles).
Please see the motivation stated in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 8, The method according to claim 2, wherein after the obtaining predicted texture coordinates of the to-be-encoded vertex in the target triangle, the method further comprises:
storing, on the encoder side, a second edge of the target triangle into the edge set and removing the first edge from the edge set, wherein the second edge is an edge of the target triangle not contained in the edge set (See Vasa Fig. 4; Hemmer Figs. 3 and 6; paras. 26-30, 44; repeating the prediction process from one triangle into multiple triangles using difference vectors to predict unknown texture coordinates).
Please see the motivation stated in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 9, The method according to claim 1, wherein the encoding a texture coordinate residual of each vertex comprises:
determining, on the encoder side, target values corresponding to the N predicted texture coordinates of any one vertex as target texture coordinates of the vertex (See Vasa Fig. 4; Hemmer Fig. 3; para. 30; repeating the process from one triangle into multiple triangles); and
encoding, on the encoder side, the texture coordinate residual of the vertex, wherein the residual is determined based on real texture coordinates of the vertex and the target texture coordinates of the vertex (See Vasa Fig. 4; Hemmer Fig. 3; para. 30; repeating the process from one triangle into multiple triangles).
Please see the motivation stated in claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 10, this claim is drawn to a decoding method (See Hemmer para. Fig.7; para. 0029 and 0046), that decodes the bitstream (See Hemmer Fig. 6 and 7; compressed data 462/562) from claim 1. Claim 10 contains the same limitations as claim 1 and is therefore rejected upon the same basis.
Regarding claim 11, this claim is drawn to a decoding method that decodes the bitstream from claim 1. Claim 11 contains the same limitations as claims 2 and 10 and is therefore rejected upon the same basis.
Regarding claim 12, this claim is drawn to a decoding method that decodes the bitstream from claim 1. Claim 12 contains the same limitations as claims 3 and 11 and is therefore rejected upon the same basis.
Regarding claim 13, this claim is drawn to a decoding method that decodes the bitstream from claim 1. Claim 13 contains the same limitations as claims 4 and 12 and is therefore rejected upon the same basis.
Regarding claim 14, this claim is drawn to a decoding method that decodes the bitstream from claim 1. Claim 14 contains the same limitations as claims 5 and 12 and is therefore rejected upon the same basis.
Regarding claim 15, this claim is drawn to a decoding method that decodes the bitstream from claim 1. Claim 15 contains the same limitations as claims 6 and 12 and is therefore rejected upon the same basis.
Regarding claim 16, this claim is drawn to a decoding method that decodes the bitstream from claim 1. Claim 16 contains the same limitations as claims 7 and 11 and is therefore rejected upon the same basis.
Regarding claim 17, this claim is drawn to a decoding method that decodes the bitstream from claim 1. Claim 17 contains the same limitations as claims 8 and 11 and is therefore rejected upon the same basis.
Regarding claim 18, this claim is drawn to a decoding method that decodes the bitstream from claim 1. Claim 18 contains the same limitations as claims 9 and 10 and is therefore rejected upon the same basis.
Regarding claim 19, Vasa in view of Hemmer discloses a terminal, comprising a processor and a memory, wherein a program or instructions capable of running on the processor are stored on the memory, and when the program or instructions are executed by the processor, the steps of the encoding method according to claim 1 are implemented (Please see the rejection of claim 1) (See Hemmer Figs. 6 and 7; para. 0051).
Regarding claim 20, this claim is drawn to a decoding terminal (See Hemmer para. Fig.7; para. 0029 and 0046), that decodes the bitstream (See Hemmer Fig. 6 and 7; compressed data 462/562) from claim 1. Claim 20 contains the same limitations as claim 10 and is therefore rejected upon the same basis. Furthermore, see Hemmer Figs. 6 and 7; para. 0051 for a terminal comprising a processor and memory storing a program.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please take a note of US 20180342083 A1, US 20180189982 A1, and US 20120313927 A1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joseph G Ustaris whose telephone number is (571)272-7383. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5pm M-Th.
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, Colleen A Fauz can be reached at 571-272-1667. 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.
/JOSEPH G USTARIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2483
Prosecution Insights