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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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 applications the case maybe, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 13-14, 16-18, 25-26 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WENJIE ZOU ET AL: "[V-DMC][EE4.9-related] On improving the base mesh generation by using the geodesic distance", 142. MPEG MEETING; 20230424 - 20230428; ANTALYA; (MOTION PICTURE EXPERT GROUP OR ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11), no. m63146 19 April 2023 (2023-04-19), XP030310192, Retrieved from the Internet: URL:https://dms.mpeg.expert/doc_end_user/documents/142_Antalya/ wg11/m63146-v1-m63146.zip m63146 [V-DMC][EE4.9 related] On improving base mesh generation by using the geodesic distance.docx [retrieved on 2023-04-19].
Regarding Claim 1, Wenjie discloses a method of encoding or decoding mesh data, the method comprising: for a current vertex of mesh vertices of the mesh data [See Section 2, page 1], determining a motion vector predictor based on respective weighted averages of respective motion vectors in a candidate list for the current vertex data [See Section 2, pages 1-2 and Figs.1-2 e.g. current vertex on the reference base mesh, the MVs of the adjacent matched vertices can be used to correct the position of the current vertex. A weighted average operation on the MVs of the adjacent matched vertices is performed to find the initial MV of the current vertex. The weight is related to the distance between the current vertex and the adjacent vertex.], and encoding or decoding the current vertex based on the motion vector predictor data [See abstract and Section 2, page 1].
Regarding Claims 2, 14 and 26, Wenjie discloses wherein the current vertex is in a current mesh, and wherein at least one of the motion vectors in the candidate list for the current vertex is based on a motion vector of a reference vertex in the current mesh data [See Section 2, pages 1-2 e.g. MVs of adjacent matched vertices].
Regarding Claims 4, 16 and 28, Wenjie discloses wherein the reference vertex is identified based on index remapping or based on nearest vertex position in reference mesh to position of current vertex in current mesh in a condition where a topology of the current mesh and the reference mesh is different [See Section 2, pages 1-3 and Fig. 1 used a nearest neighbor search between the reference base mesh frame and the current mesh frame to generate base mesh frame].
Regarding Claims 5 and 17, Wenjie discloses determining the respective weighted averages based on a respective distance between the current vertex and respective vertex position corresponding to each of the motion vectors [See Section 2, pages 1-3 e.g. tempWi/distance (i, D)].
Regarding Claims 6 and 18, Wenjie discloses wherein the respective distance is determined based on at least one of a Euclidean distance, Manhattan distance, maximum difference between position components, or a combination thereof [See Section 2, pages 1-3 e.g. distance, geodesic distance].
Regarding Claim 13, the limitations claimed are substantially similar to claim 1 above, therefore the ground for rejecting claim l also applies here.
Regarding Claim 25, the limitations claimed are substantially similar to claim 1 above, therefore the ground for rejecting claim l also applies here.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 3, 7-12, 15, 19-24 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WENJIE ZOU ET AL: "[V-DMC][EE4.9-related] On improving the base mesh generation by using the geodesic distance", 142. MPEG MEETING; 20230424 - 20230428; ANTALYA; (MOTION PICTURE EXPERT GROUP OR ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11), no. m63146 19 April 2023 (2023-04-19), XP030310192, Retrieved from the Internet: URL:https://dms.mpeg.expert/doc_end_user/documents/142_Antalya/ wg11/m63146-v1-m63146.zip m63146 [V-DMC][EE4.9 related] On improving base mesh generation by using the geodesic distance.docx [retrieved on 2023-04-19] in view of Xu et al. (US 2010/0172567).
Regarding Claims 3, 15 and 27, Wenjie doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein an index identifying the reference vertex is same as an index identifying the current vertex in a condition where a topology of the current mesh and the reference mesh being the same.
However, Xu discloses wherein an index identifying the reference vertex is same as an index identifying the current vertex in a condition where a topology of the current mesh and the reference mesh being the same [See paragraphs 148-165 and Figs. 13-14].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Wenjie to add the teachings in Xu as above, to provide a method that improves mesh encoding efficiency [See Xu paragraphs 6-7].
Regarding Claims 7 and 19, Wenjie doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the motion vector predictor is a first motion vector predictor, wherein the respective weighted averages comprise first respective weighted averages, the method further comprising: for the current vertex of the mesh vertices of the mesh data, determining a second motion vector predictor based on second respective weighted averages of respective motion vectors in the candidate list for the current vertex, wherein encoding or decoding the current vertex comprises encoding or decoding the current vertex based on the first motion vector predictor and the second motion vector predictor.
However, Xu discloses wherein the motion vector predictor is a first motion vector predictor, wherein the respective weighted averages comprise first respective weighted averages, the method further comprising: for the current vertex of the mesh vertices of the mesh data, determining a second motion vector predictor based on second respective weighted averages of respective motion vectors in the candidate list for the current vertex, wherein encoding or decoding the current vertex comprises encoding or decoding the current vertex based on the first motion vector predictor and the second motion vector predictor [See paragraphs 93-107, 146-158 and 163-164].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Wenjie to add the teachings in Xu as above, to provide a method that improves mesh encoding efficiency [See Xu paragraphs 6-7].
Regarding Claims 8 and 20, Wenjie doesn’t explicitly disclose determining an additional motion vector predictor based on at least one of: zero motion vector, simple average without rounding, simple average with rounding, distance-weighted average without rounding, or distance-weighted average with rounding, wherein encoding or decoding the current vertex comprises encoding or decoding the current vertex based additionally on the additional motion vector predictor.
However, Xu discloses determining an additional motion vector predictor based on at least one of: zero motion vector, simple average without rounding, simple average with rounding, distance-weighted average without rounding, or distance-weighted average with rounding, wherein encoding or decoding the current vertex comprises encoding or decoding the current vertex based additionally on the additional motion vector predictor [See paragraphs 118-125, 145-165, 326, 334-335 and Figs. 10-12].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Wenjie to add the teachings in Xu as above, to provide a method that improves mesh encoding efficiency [See Xu paragraphs 6-7].
Regarding Claims 9 and 21, Wenjie doesn’t explicitly disclose constructing the candidate list for the current vertex, wherein constructing the candidate list comprises at least one of: adding motion vectors of vertices in a current mesh that includes the current vertex, adding motion vectors of vertices in a reference mesh that was previously encoded or decoded, or addition motion vectors of vertices in the current mesh and motion vectors of vertices in the reference mesh.
However, Xu discloses constructing the candidate list for the current vertex, wherein constructing the candidate list comprises at least one of: adding motion vectors of vertices in a current mesh that includes the current vertex, adding motion vectors of vertices in a reference mesh that was previously encoded or decoded, or addition motion vectors of vertices in the current mesh and motion vectors of vertices in the reference mesh [See paragraphs 95-117 and 197-205].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Wenjie to add the teachings in Xu as above, to provide a method that improves mesh encoding efficiency [See Xu paragraphs 6-7].
Regarding Claims 10 and 22, Wenjie doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein constructing the candidate list comprises, in a condition where the candidate list is full: determining a distance value between a first position corresponding to a candidate motion vector; comparing the distance value to respective distance values of motion vectors in the candidate list; and based on the comparison, removing a motion vector from the candidate list, and adding the candidate motion vector.
However, Xu discloses wherein constructing the candidate list comprises, in a condition where the candidate list is full: determining a distance value between a first position corresponding to a candidate motion vector; comparing the distance value to respective distance values of motion vectors in the candidate list; and based on the comparison, removing a motion vector from the candidate list, and adding the candidate motion vector [See paragraphs 118-135].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Wenjie to add the teachings in Xu as above, to provide a method that improves mesh encoding efficiency [See Xu paragraphs 6-7].
Regarding Claims 11 and 23, Wenjie doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the removed motion vector has the largest distance in the candidate list.
However, Xu discloses wherein the removed motion vector has the largest distance in the candidate list [See paragraphs 100-116 and 128-135].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Wenjie to add the teachings in Xu as above, to provide a method that improves mesh encoding efficiency [See Xu paragraphs 6-7].
Regarding Claims 12 and 24, Wenjie doesn’t explicitly disclose generating the mesh data.
However, Xu discloses generating the mesh data [See Figs. 1-6].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Wenjie to add the teachings in Xu as above, to provide a method that improves mesh encoding efficiency [See Xu paragraphs 6-7].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TSION B OWENS whose telephone number is (571)272-3934. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:00.
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.
/TSION B OWENS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487