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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement’s (IDS) were submitted on 02/05/2025, 09/19/2025 & 04/09/2026. 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 title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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 10-11 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.
In regards to claim 10, claim 10 recites the limitation “further comprising at least one of: determining the number of co-located frames based on a characteristic of the current video block; or determining whether a reference frame is a co-located frame of the current frame based on a characteristic of the current video block, wherein the characteristic of the current video block comprises at least one of: a block size of the current video block, a quantization parameter of the current video block, or prediction information of the current video block, and/or wherein the prediction information indicates a uni-prediction or a bi-prediction of the current video block.” In regards to the bolding/italicized above, it is unclear why there is an and/or statement instead of an and statement. For example, the previous limitation(s) in the claim state “determining whether a reference frame is a co-located frame of the current frame based on a characteristic of the current video block, wherein the characteristic of the current video block comprises at least one of:….prediction information of the current video block”. If this limitation in part is selected, then the next limitation defining the prediction information should be included.
In regards to claim 11, claim 11 recites the limitation in part “a regular coding tool”. What defines a regular coding tool? For example, the term “regular” varies by individual. Please clarify as the examiner could not locate explicit support in the specification for defining “a regular coding tool”.
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.
Claims 1 and 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yu et al. (herein after will be referred to as Yu) (US 20190320196).
Regarding claim 1, Yu discloses a method for video processing, comprising:
determining, for a conversion between a current video block of a video and a bitstream of the video, [See Yu [Fig. 4 or 6] Video encoding/decoding.]
a set of co-located frames associated with the current video block, the current video block being in a current frame co-located with the set of co-located frames, a number of co-located frames in the set of co-located frames being based on coding information associated with the current video block; and [See Yu [0006] Inter-coding wherein a plurality of collocated picture sets are available. Also, see 0097, a special index (i.e. coding information) is coded to specify which collocated picture in the CPS is used if N is larger than one. The special index is signaled at the CU, picture, or other level. In some embodiments, all blocks of current picture can use the same collocated picture. However, in alternate embodiments, blocks of a current picture can use different collocated pictures and which collocated picture is to be used can be specified by the special index for each block.]
performing the conversion based on the set of co-located frames. [See Yu [Fig. 4 or 6] Video encoding/decoding.]
Regarding claim 10, Yu discloses the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Yu discloses
further comprising at least one of: determining the number of co-located frames based on a characteristic of the current video block; or determining whether a reference frame is a co-located frame of the current frame based on a characteristic of the current video block, wherein the characteristic of the current video block comprises at least one of: a block size of the current video block, a quantization parameter of the current video block, or prediction information of the current video block, and/or wherein the prediction information indicates a uni-prediction or a bi-prediction of the current video block. [See Yu [0038] Selecting a reference picture as a collocated picture. Also, see 0039, take into account a prediction type of the current block.]
Regarding claim 11, Yu discloses the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Yu discloses
further comprising at least one of: determining the number of co-located frames based on a coding tool of the current video block; or determining whether a reference frame is a co-located frame of the current frame based on a coding tool of the current video block, wherein the coding tool of the current video block comprises at least one of: a regular coding tool, a template matching coding tool, a combined inter and intra prediction (CIIP) coding tool, a merge with motion vector difference (MMVD) coding tool, a geometric partitioning mode (GPM) coding tool, a triangle partition mode (TPM) coding tool, a subblock merge mode coding tool, an advanced motion vector prediction (AMVP) coding tool, an AMVP merge coding tool, an affine coding tool, a bi-directional optical flow (BDOF) coding tool, or a local illumination compensation (LIC) coding tool. [See Yu [0038] Selecting a reference picture as a collocated picture. Also, see 0039, take into account a prediction type of the current block.]
Regarding claim 12, Yu discloses the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Yu discloses
wherein a first co-located frame associated with the current video block is a co-located frame associated with a further video block, the current video block and the further video block being in at least one of: the current frame, a same slice, or a same tile. [See Yu [0097] all blocks of current picture use the same collocated picture.]
Regarding claim 13, Yu discloses the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Yu discloses
wherein a first co-located frame associated with the current video block is not a co-located frame associated with a further video block, the current video block and the further video block being in at least one of: the current frame, a same slice, or a same tile. [See Yu [0097] blocks of a current picture can use different collocated pictures and which collocated picture is to be used can be specified by the special index for each block.]
Regarding claim 14, Yu discloses the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Yu discloses
wherein the number of co-located frames associated with the current video block is a same number as or a different number than a second number of co-located frames associated with a further video block, the current video block and the further video block being in at least one of: the current frame, a same slice, or a same tile. [See Yu [0097] blocks of a current picture can use different collocated pictures and which collocated picture is to be used can be specified by the special index for each block.]
Regarding claim 15, Yu discloses the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Yu discloses
wherein a first reference frame associated with the current video block is a same reference frame as or a different reference frame than a second reference frame associated with a further video block, the first reference frame being a first co-located frame associated with the current video block, the second reference frame being a second co-located frame associated with the further video block, the current video block and the further video block being in at least one of: the current frame, a same slice, or a same tile. [See Yu [0097] blocks of a current picture can use different collocated pictures and which collocated picture is to be used can be specified by the special index for each block. Also, see 0075, any picture in the reference picture set are employed as a collocated picture.]
Regarding claim 16, Yu discloses the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Yu discloses
wherein the conversion includes encoding the current video block into the bitstream. [See Yu [Fig. 4] Video encoding.]
Regarding claim 17, Yu discloses the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Yu discloses
wherein the conversion includes decoding the current video block from the bitstream. [See Yu [Fig. 6] Video decoding.]
Regarding claim 18, see examiners rejection for claim 1 which is analogous and applicable for the rejection of claim 18.
Regarding claim 19, see examiners rejection for claim 1 which is analogous and applicable for the rejection of claim 19.
Regarding claim 20, see examiners rejection for claim 1 which is analogous and applicable for the rejection of claim 20.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-9 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES T BOYLAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8242. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-3pm.
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, JAMIE ATALA can be reached at 571-272-7384. 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.
/JAMES T BOYLAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2486
Prosecution Insights