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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This communication is a non-Final office action on merit. Claims 1-20, as originally filed, are presently pending and have been considered below.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/26/2025, 10/3/2025, and 1/5/2026 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 § 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.
Claim 3 is 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.
Claim 3 recites: The decoding method according to claim 1, wherein the first vertex is disposed on the first surface of the first node, based on a position of the third vertex in the first node and a position of a third vertex in a second node adjacent to the first node.
The claim language is ambiguous and/or unclear. A third vertex is generated in the first node according to claim 1 and the first limitation of claim 3. Whether both the third vertices are the same one or not generates ambiguity. Claim 3 therefore renders indefinite
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-11, 14-16, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2022/0327743 A1, Oh et al. (hereinafter Oh) in view of US 2004/0117163 A1, Rivara (hereinafter Rivara).
As to claim 1, Oh discloses a decoding method for decoding three-dimensional points, the decoding method comprising:
generating a first vertex on a first surface of a first node, at a position other than an edge of the first node (pars 0072, 0118, a point cloud content being rendered to a vertex point generated in a node or being projected in (x,y) plan and at center of the block (not at the edge of the node));
generating second vertices at edges of the first node (pars 0115-0116, vertices being along edges of the node);
generating a third vertex within the first node, based on the second vertices (pars 0117-0118);
generating, within the first node, a triangle defined by the first vertex, a second vertex among the second vertices, and the third vertex (pars 0116-0120); and
generating the three-dimensional points on a surface of the triangle (par 0117).
Oh does not expressly disclose the vertex generated on a surface at position not at the edge of the node.
Rivara, in the same or similar field of endeavor, further teaches (Figs 12, 25; pars 0004, 0008, the vertex/vertices being on the surface and in the interior of the object (e.g. not at edges)); generating second vertices at edges of the first node (pars 0015, 0091, 0093, 0097, vertices being along edges of the node).
Therefore, consider Oh and Rivara’s teachings as a whole, it would have been obvious to one of skill in the art before the filing date of invention to incorporate Rivara’s teachings in Oh’s method to generate vertices at different positions of the node.
As to claim 2, Oh as modified discloses the decoding method according to claim 1, wherein the first surface is a surface common between the first node and a second node adjacent to the first node (Oh: Fig 7; pars 0115, 0121-0122, 0134, neighboring nodes sharing an edge or at least one face with the cube; Rivara: pars 0012, 0024, 0037, 0073), and the first vertex represents three-dimensional points located in a vicinity of the first surface in the first node and the second node (Oh: Fig 7; pars 0114-0115, 0117, 0121, points being within a block (3D cube region of the nodes); Rivara: pars 0073, 0098).
As to claim 3, Oh as modified discloses the decoding method according to claim 1, wherein the first vertex is disposed on the first surface of the first node, based on a position of the third vertex in the first node and a position of a third vertex in a second node adjacent to the first node (Oh: pars 0072, 0111-0117; Rivara: Figs 17-18, 26, construct a restricted longest edge mesh structure to identify a set of neighboring vertices of the neighboring node connected to the vertex on surface of the node; par 0120).
As to claim 4, Oh as modified discloses the decoding method according to claim 1, wherein the first surface is a surface common between the first node and a second node adjacent to the first node (Rivara: pars 0098, 0103, 0110, neighboring nodes being on the same surface), the decoding method further comprises:
generating fourth vertices at edges of the second node (Oh: pars 0114-0118, multiple vertices being generated along edges of the node; Rivara: Figs 7, 17, 19);
generating a fifth vertex within the second node, based on the fourth vertices, and
the first vertex is generated based on information indicating that the third vertex is connected to the fifth vertex (Rivara: Figs 7, 17, 19-21, 26).
As to claim 5, Oh as modified discloses the decoding method according to claim 4, wherein the information is provided for each of three mutually orthogonal surfaces of the first node (Oh: Figs 15-18, 23, attribute information with respect to a node; pars 0098, 0109-0110; Rivara: Figs 17, 25-26, orthogonal vertex coordinates).
As to claim 7, Oh as modified discloses the decoding method according to claim 4, further comprising: receiving a bitstream including the information (Oh: Figs 2, 6, 13; pars 0071, 0090, generating/receiving geometry attribute bitstream).
As to claim 8, Oh as modified discloses the decoding method according to claim 4, wherein the information includes position information of the first vertex (Oh: par 0072; Rivara: par 0120, position information of vertex).
As to claim 9, Oh as modified discloses the decoding method according to claim 1, wherein the first vertex represents the three-dimensional points inside the first node and other three-dimensional points inside an other node (Oh: pars 0072, 0117; Rivara: Figs 1, 5; pars 0008, 0018, 0040, 0079).
As to claim 10, Oh as modified discloses the decoding method according to claim 1, wherein the first vertex is located apart from a line connecting two of the second vertices on the first surface, by a predetermined distance or more (Oh: Figs 18-19; Rivara: Fig 12; pars 0073, 0085, claim 5, distance/spacing between vertices/nodes).
As to claim 11, Oh as modified discloses the decoding method according to claim 1, further comprising: receiving a bitstream (Oh: Figs 2, 6, 13; pars 0071, 0090, generating/receiving geometry attribute bitstream) including information indicating, for each surface satisfying a predetermined condition among surfaces of the first node, whether the first vertex is to be generated on the surface (Rivara: Figs 12, 16-18; pars 0017, 0041, 0078, 0091, conditions a vertex being created or removed).
As to claim 14, it is essentially a mirror image of an decoder recited in claim 1. Rejection of claim 1 is therefore incorporated herein. In addition, Oh as modified also discloses the an encoding method for encoding three-dimensional points, the encoding method comprising: generating a first vertex on a first surface of a first node, at a position other than an edge of the first node; generating second vertices at edges of the first node; generating a third vertex within the first node, based on the second vertices; and storing information on the first vertex, the second vertices, and the third vertex in a bitstream (Oh: pars 0111; Rivara: Fig 6; pars 0082, 0096, 0109), wherein the first vertex, the second vertices, and the third vertex are generated to generate, within the first node, a triangle defined by the first vertex, a second vertex among the second vertices, and the third vertex, and the three-dimensional points are approximated with the triangle (Oh: pars 0116-0120, 0124; Rivara: pars 0008, 0021, 0024). See motivation statement of claim 1.
As to claim 15, Oh as modified discloses the encoding method according to claim 14, wherein the first surface is a surface common between the first node and a second node adjacent to the first node (Oh: Fig 7; pars 0115, 0121-0122, 0134, neighboring nodes sharing an edge or at least one face with the cube; Rivara: pars 0012, 0024, 0037, 0073), and the first vertex is generated based on the three-dimensional points inside the first node and three-dimensional points inside the second node (Oh: Fig 29; pars 0095-0096, 0113-0114, 0116, within the node from the edge or boundary).
As to claim 16, Oh as modified discloses the encoding method according to claim 15, wherein the first vertex is generated based on a plane or a curved surface within the first node and a plane or a curved surface within the second node (Oh: pars 18-19, 21, 30; pars 0118, 0249-0251).
As to claim 19, it is a device claim encompassed claim 1. Rejection of claim 1 is therefore incorporated herein.
As to claim 20, it is a device claim encompassed claim 14. Rejection of claim 14 is therefore incorporated herein.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 12-13 and 17-18 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.
Reasons for Allowance
Prior art of record (Oh, Rivara) neither discloses alone nor teaches in combination functions and features recited in claims 6, 12, 13 and 17, respectively. Claim 18 depends from claim 17.
Examiner’s Note
Examiner has cited particular column, line number, paragraphs and/or figure(s) in the reference(s) as applied to the claims for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the reference(s) in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Qun Shen whose telephone number is (571) 270-7927. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Friday from 9:00-5:00. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's Supervisor, Amandeep Saini can be reached on (571) 272-3382. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/QUN SHEN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2662
Prosecution Insights