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 statements submitted on 1/28/2026 and 2/18/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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 6 and 7 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 6, the claim recites in part:
“A storing method comprising:
…
a coding step of coding the merging index, or the first triangle merge index and the second triangle merge index to form a bitstream; and
a storing step of storing the bitstream on a recording medium,
…”
There appears to be a lack of focus on what it is that is being claimed – is it a generic storing method, or a coding method? The limitations of the claim are primarily directed towards details of coding, with one such recitation of “a storing step of storing the bitstream on a recording medium”. This raises a question as to the boundaries of the subject matter embodied by the claim. For instance, See MPEP 2173.05(g) “The use of functional language in a claim may fail “to provide a clear-cut indication of the scope of the subject matter embraced by the claim” and thus be indefinite. In re Swinehart, 439 F.2d 210, 213 (CCPA 1971).
Claim 7 is rejected based on analogous reasons presented for claim 6 above, wherein claim 7 recites “A transmission method” in place of the “storing method” per claim 6.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-4 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2, and 4-5 of U.S. Patent No. 12,261,997 B2 in view of Chiang et al. (US 20220070456 A1) (hereinafter Chiang).
Instant Application No. 19/055,900
Issued U.S. Patent No. 12,261,997 B2
Claim 1
A picture coding device for coding a moving picture using a merge mode and forming a bitstream, the picture coding device comprising:
a normal merging candidate list constructor structured to construct a normal merging candidate list including normal merging candidates;
a normal merging candidate selector structured to select a normal merging candidate being uni-prediction or bi-prediction from the normal merging candidate list based on a merge index;
a triangle merging candidate selector structured to select a first triangle merging candidate being uni-prediction from the normal merging candidate list based on a first triangle merge index and select a second triangle merging candidate being uni-prediction from the normal merging candidate list based on a second triangle merge index; and
a coding unit structured to code the merging index, or the first triangle merge index and the second triangle merge index,
wherein the first triangle merging candidate is selected with priority on the merging candidate in L0 motion information list over the merging candidate in L1 motion information list,
the second triangle merging candidate is selected with priority on the merging candidate in L1 motion information list over the merging candidate in L0 motion information list.
Claim 1
A picture coding device using a merge mode, the picture coding device comprising:
a normal merging candidate list constructor structured to construct a normal merging candidate list including normal merging candidates;
a normal merging candidate selector structured to select a normal merging candidate being uni-prediction or bi-prediction from the normal merging candidate list based on a merge index; and
a triangle merging candidate selector structured to select a first triangle merging candidate being uni-prediction from the normal merging candidate list based on a first triangle merge index and select a second triangle merging candidate being uni-prediction from the normal merging candidate list based on a second triangle merge index,
wherein
the first triangle merging candidate is selected with priority on the merging candidate in L0 motion information list over the merging candidate in L1 motion information list,
the second triangle merging candidate is selected with priority on the merging candidate in L1 motion information list over the merging candidate in L0 motion information list, and
the maximum number of the first triangle merge index is different from the maximum number of the second triangle merge index.
Claim 2
This claim recites analogous limitations to claim 1 in the form of a method rather than a device and is therefore rejected on the same premise.
Claim 2
Claim 3
A picture decoding device using a merge mode, the picture decoding device comprising:
a decoding unit structured to decode a merging index, or a first triangle merge index and a second triangle merge index,
a normal merging candidate list constructor structured to construct a normal merging candidate list including normal merging candidates;
a normal merging candidate selector structured to select a normal merging candidate being uni-prediction or bi-prediction from the normal merging candidate list based on the merge index; and
a triangle merging candidate selector structured to select a first triangle merging candidate being uni-prediction from the normal merging candidate list based on the first triangle merge index and select a second triangle merging candidate being uni-prediction from the normal merging candidate list based on the second triangle merge index,
wherein the first triangle merging candidate is selected with priority on the merging candidate in LO motion information list over the merging candidate in L1motion information list, the second triangle merging candidate is selected with priority on the merging candidate in L1 motion information list over the merging candidate in LO motion information list.
Claim 4
A picture decoding device using a merge mode, the picture decoding device comprising:
a normal merging candidate list constructor structured to construct a normal merging candidate list including normal merging candidates;
a normal merging candidate selector structured to select a normal merging candidate being uni-prediction or bi-prediction from the normal merging candidate list based on a merge index; and
a triangle merging candidate selector structured to select a first triangle merging candidate being uni-prediction from the normal merging candidate list based on a first triangle merge index and select a second triangle merging candidate being uni-prediction from the normal merging candidate list based on a second triangle merge index,
wherein the first triangle merging candidate is selected with priority on the merging candidate in L0 motion information list over the merging candidate in L1 motion information list,
the second triangle merging candidate is selected with priority on the merging candidate in L1 motion information list over the merging candidate in L0 motion information list, and
the maximum number of the first triangle merge index is different from the maximum number of the second triangle merge index.
Claim 4
This claim recites analogous limitations to claim 3 in the form of a method rather than a device and is therefore rejected on the same premise.
Claim 5
Table 1
As noted above, claim 1 of the instant application is a variation of claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,261,997 B2. Specifically, claim 1 of the instant application recites: “a coding unit structured to code the merging index, or the first triangle merge index and the second triangle merge index,” which is a unique limitation not found in claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,261,997 B2. However, Chiang discloses: a coding unit structured to code the merging index, or the first triangle merge index and the second triangle merge index, [See Chiang, ¶ 0056 discloses coding units forming merge candidate lists, particularly with respect to triangle merge indices.]
It would have been obvious to the person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by U.S. Patent No. 12,261,997 B2 to add the teachings of Chiang in order to encode and signal motion information for first and second regions under a triangle merge mode.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chiang et al. (US 20220070456 A1) (hereinafter Chiang).
Regarding claim 1, Chiang discloses:
A picture coding device for coding a moving picture using a merge mode and forming a bitstream, the picture coding device comprising: [See Chiang, ¶ 0002, 0044, 0056 discloses generating a candidate list for triangular merge mode.]
a normal merging candidate list constructor structured to construct a normal merging candidate list including normal merging candidates; [See Chiang, ¶ 0056 discloses a first candidate list being a normal merge candidate list. Particularly, the first candidate list can be the normal Merge candidate list. To be specific, assuming that there are two kinds of Merge candidate lists employed in a video coding system. One Merge candidate list, including spatial merging candidates (spatial MVPs from spatial neighbouring CUs), temporal merging candidates (temporal MVP from one of collocated CUs), pairwise average merging candidates, zero motion vector merging candidates, history-based merging candidates or more merging candidates, is for the normal Merge mode (also referred to as regular merge mode),In an example, when a regular merge flag associated with the current block is true (e.g. regular_merge_flag=true), the Merge candidate list for the normal merge mode (i.e., the normal Merge candidate list) is generated for coding the current block. The other Merge candidate list employed in the video coding system is for the Merge mode containing different motion information for the sub-blocks partitioned from the current block.]
a normal merging candidate selector structured to select a normal merging candidate being uni-prediction or bi-prediction from the normal merging candidate list based on a merge index; [See Chiang, ¶ 0002, 0038, 0044, 0056, 0075 discloses generating a normal merge candidate list for triangle merge mode, and designating a selected target candidate as a uni-prediction candidate or a bi-prediction candidate.]
a triangle merging candidate selector structured to select a first triangle merging candidate being uni-prediction from the normal merging candidate list based on a first triangle merge index and select a second triangle merging candidate being uni-prediction from the normal merging candidate list based on a second triangle merge index; and [See Chiang, ¶ 0056-0057 discloses using the first candidate list and/or signaled candidate indices to generate the motion information for the first region and the second region for triangle Merge mode or the extensions of triangle Merge mode. One Merge candidate list, including spatial merging candidates (spatial MVPs from spatial neighbouring CUs), temporal merging candidates (temporal MVP from one of collocated CUs), pairwise average merging candidates, zero motion vector merging candidates, history-based merging candidates or more merging candidates, is for the normal Merge mode (also referred to as regular merge mode), In an example, when a regular merge flag associated with the current block is true (e.g. regular_merge_flag=true), the Merge candidate list for the normal merge mode (i.e., the normal Merge candidate list) is generated for coding the current block. The other Merge candidate list employed in the video coding system is for the Merge mode containing different motion information for the sub-blocks partitioned from the current block. Particularly, generating the motion information for the two regions of the current block coded in the triangle Merge mode or the extensions of triangle Merge mode based on the normal Merge candidate list.]
a coding unit structured to code the merging index, or the first triangle merge index and the second triangle merge index, [See Chiang, ¶ 0056 discloses coding units forming merge candidate lists.]
wherein the first triangle merging candidate is selected with priority on the merging candidate in L0 motion information list over the merging candidate in L1 motion information list, [See Chiang, ¶ 0056-0057 discloses generating motion information for two regions of a current block coded in a triangle merge mode or extension of triangle merge mode based on normal merge candidate list. The motion information can include motion vectors and reference picture index; See Chiang, ¶ 0025 discloses prediction direction signaling based on a pre-defined priority order of UMVE prediction direction. Priority order is L0/L1 prediction, L0 prediction and L1 prediction. If the prediction direction of merge candidate is L1, code ‘0’ is signaled for UMVE prediction direction L1. Code ‘10’ is signaled for UMVE prediction direction L0 and L1. Code ‘11’ is signaled for UMVE prediction direction L0. If L0 and L1 prediction lists are the same, UMVE prediction direction information is not signaled.]
the second triangle merging candidate is selected with priority on the merging candidate in L1 motion information list over the merging candidate in L0 motion information list. [See Chiang, ¶ 0025 discloses prediction direction signaling based on a pre-defined priority order of UMVE prediction direction. Priority order is L0/L1 prediction, L0 prediction and L1 prediction. If the prediction direction of merge candidate is L1, code ‘0’ is signaled for UMVE prediction direction L1. Code ‘10’ is signaled for UMVE prediction direction L0 and L1. Code ‘11’ is signaled for UMVE prediction direction L0. If L0 and L1 prediction lists are the same, UMVE prediction direction information is not signaled.]
Regarding claim 2, this claim recites analogous limitations to claim 1 in the form of a method rather than a device, and is therefore rejected on the same premise.
Regarding claim 3, one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention would have been aware that decoding is simply the inverse operation of encoding and, in fact is often more generally referred to as "coding", encompassing both. Such a person would have been aware that in order to most accurately decode, it is typically best to use the same method on both the encoding and decoding ends.
Claim 3 thus recites analogous limitations to claim 1, and is therefore rejected based on the decoder of claim 3 performing the complimentary operations of the corresponding encoder and encoding process with respect to video encoding device claim 1 as such.
Regarding claim 4, this claim recites analogous limitations to claim 3 in the form of a method rather than a device, and is therefore rejected on the same premise.
Regarding claim 6, this claim recites analogous limitations to claim 1 in the form of “a storing method” rather than “a coding method” and is therefore rejected on the same premise.
Further, claim 6 recites the following limitations which are not explicitly found from claim 1, but are addressed as follows:
Chiang discloses:
a storing step of storing the bitstream on a recording medium, [See Chiang, ¶ 0078 discloses embodiment of the present invention as described above may be implemented in various hardware, software codes, or a combination of both. For example, an embodiment of the present invention can be one or more circuit circuits integrated into a video compression chip or program code integrated into video compression software to perform the processing described herein. An embodiment of the present invention may also be program code to be executed on a Digital Signal Processor (DSP) to perform the processing described herein. The invention may also involve a number of functions to be performed by a computer processor, a digital signal processor, a microprocessor, or field programmable gate array (FPGA). These processors can be configured to perform particular tasks according to the invention, by executing machine-readable software code or firmware code that defines the particular methods embodied by the invention.]
Regarding claim 7, this claim recites analogous limitations to claim 1 in the form of “a transmission method” rather than “a coding method” and is therefore rejected on the same premise.
Further, claim 7 recites the following limitations which are not explicitly found from claim 1, but are addressed as follows:
Chiang discloses:
A transmitting method comprising:
a transmitting step of transmitting the bitstream, [See Chiang, ¶ 0005 discloses encoding and transmission of prediction information forming a bitstream.]
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Coban et al. (US 20200007873 A1) (hereinafter Coban).
Regarding claim 5, the claim recites in part: “A non-transitory computer readable medium storing a bitstream formed by the picture coding method”
However, to be given patentable weight, the printed matter and associated product must be in a functional relationship. A functional relationship can be found where the printed matter performs some function with respect to the product to which it is associated". MPEP §2111.05(1)(A). When a claimed "non-transitory computer-readable storage medium" merely serves as a support for information or data, no functional relationship exists. MPEP §2111.05(III). The storage medium storing the claimed bitstream in claim 5 merely services as a support for the storage of the bitstream and provides no functional relationship between the stored bitstream and storage medium. Therefore, the bitstream, which scope is implied by the method steps, is non- functional descriptive material and given no patentable weight. MPEP §2111.05(III). Thus, the claim scope is just a storage medium storing data and is anticipated by Coban et al. (US 20200007873 A1) which recites a storage medium storing a bitstream. Coban’s paragraph 0051 discloses a device may store software instructions in an appropriate and non-transitory computer-readable medium and may execute instructions by using hardware such as one or more processors to execute video encoding/decoding.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK E DEMOSKY whose telephone number is (571)272-8799. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7-4 EST.
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 5712727384. 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.
/PATRICK E DEMOSKY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2486