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 § 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 1-19 and 21 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 10 recite “partitioning the current block into sub-blocks… for each sub-block of at least some of the sub-blocks”. Let denote the number of sub-blocks partitioned in the “current block” as Nsubblock. Let’s denote “a least some of the sub-blocks” as NsomeSubblock. The limitation “partitioning the current block into sub-blocks” seems to suggest that Nsubblock ≥2. The limitation “a least some of the sub-blocks” seems to suggest that Nsubbloc≥ NsomeSubblock and NsomeSubblock≥2; to satisfy Nsubbloc≥ NsomeSubblock for all NsomeSubblock≥2; Nsubblock ≥3.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claims 1 and 10 recite the broad recitation “partitioning the current block into sub-blocks”, and the claim also recites “for each sub-block of at least some of the sub-blocks” which necessarily suggest a narrower range for the number of sub-blocks. The claims are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim 1 recite “wherein decoding the sub-blocks comprises: for each sub-block of at least some of the sub-blocks: identifying a motion shift that includes a direction and a distance; applying the motion shift to the base motion vector to obtain a refined motion vector; and decoding the each sub-block using the refined motion vector”. It is not clear whether “for each sub-block of at least some of the sub-blocks”:
NsomeSubblock different “motion shift”(s) will be identified to generate NsomeSubblock respective “refined motion vector”(s) “for each sub-block of at least some of the sub-blocks” and decoding “the each sub-block” using their respective “refined motion vector”(s).
One “motion shift” will be identified to generate one “refined motion vector” to decode “the each sub-block using the refined motion vector”
It also seem that, “decoding the sub-blocks comprises” is not necessarily applied to all the Nsubblock sub-blocks. This seems to further suggest that at least one of the Nsubblock sub-blocks is not decoded which is contrary to “decoding the sub-blocks…”.
Similar issues seems to be present in claim 10.
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 application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (1) as being anticipated by Charles Benjamin Dieterich [US 6100940 A]].
A bit stream generated by a method, the method comprising… is a product by process claim limitation where the product is the bit stream and the process is the method steps to generate the bitstream. MPEP §2113 recites “Product-by-Process claims are not limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps”. Thus, the scope of the claim is the storage medium storing the bitstream (with the structure implied by the method steps). The structure includes the information and samples manipulated by the steps.
“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(I)(A). When a claimed “computer-readable 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 21 merely serves as a support for the storage of the bitstream and provides no functional relationship between the stored bitstream and storage medium. Therefor the structure 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 Charles which recites a storage medium storing a bitstream (Col 16, line 50-55).
Claims 1, 3-5, 10-13 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (2) as being anticipated by Hiroyuki Kurashige et al. [US 20220070469 A1].
Regarding claim 1, Hiroyuki teaches:
1. (Original) A method for decoding a current block (i.e. FIG. 2 is a block diagram of a picture decoding device according to an embodiment of the present invention- ¶0009), comprising:
selecting a base motion vector (i.e. FIG. 14 is a diagram illustrating affine motion compensation at two control points- ¶0027… FIG. 15 is a diagram illustrating affine motion compensation at three control points- ¶0028) for the current block (i.e. The motion vector of each of subblocks is derived on the basis of one or more control points derived from the inter prediction information of a processed block in the neighbor of the target block, or a block belonging to the processed picture and located at the same position as or in the neighborhood (vicinity) of the target block- ¶0084);
partitioning the current block into sub-blocks (i.e. The affine motion compensation first splits a coding block into subblocks of a predetermined unit and then individually determines a motion vector for each of the split subblocks to perform motion compensation- ¶0084, fig. 15); and
decoding the sub-blocks, wherein decoding the sub-blocks comprises: for each sub-block of at least some of the sub-blocks:
identifying a motion shift (i.e. motion vector difference- ¶0240) that includes a direction and a distance (i.e. A motion vector difference can be added to motion vectors of the top two merging candidates (merging candidates with merge indexes of 0 and 1 in the merging candidate list). This motion vector difference is referred to as a merge motion vector difference- ¶0240… The information regarding the merge motion vector difference is an index mmvd_distance_idx indicating a distance to be added to the motion vector and an index mmvd_direction_idx indicating a direction in which the motion vector is added- ¶0241-0243);
applying the motion shift to the base motion vector to obtain a refined motion vector (i.e. A subblock motion vector predictor mode derivation unit 403 derives a plurality of subblock motion vector predictor candidates, selects a subblock motion vector predictor, and calculates an added value obtained by adding the selected subblock motion vector predictor and the decoded motion vector difference, and sets this added value as a motion vector- ¶0138); and
decoding the each sub-block using the refined motion vector (i.e. The decoded inter prediction mode, reference index, and motion vector will be the inter prediction information of the subblock motion vector predictor mode. This inter prediction information is supplied to the motion compensation prediction unit 406 via the switch 408- ¶0138… The motion compensation prediction unit 406 performs inter prediction on the reference picture signal stored in the decoded picture memory 208 on the basis of the determined inter prediction information. Detailed configuration and processing of the motion compensation prediction unit 406 are similar to the motion compensation prediction unit 306 on the coding side- ¶0140… The motion compensation prediction unit 406 has function similar to the motion compensation prediction unit 306 on the coding side. The motion compensation prediction unit 406 acquires inter prediction information from the normal motion vector predictor mode derivation unit 401, the normal merge mode derivation unit 402, the subblock motion vector predictor mode derivation unit 403, and the subblock merge mode derivation unit 404, via the switch 408. The motion compensation prediction unit 406 supplies the obtained motion compensation prediction signal to the decoded picture signal superimposer 207- ¶0213).
Regarding claim 3, Hiroyuki teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and Hiroyuki further teaches:
further comprising: decoding, from a compressed bitstream, at least one syntax element that indicates that the current block is decoded based on partitioning the current block into the sub-blocks (i.e. In the case of the motion vector predictor mode (merge_flag=0), a flag inter_affine_flag indicating whether to apply the subblock motion vector predictor mode is transmitted. In the case of applying the subblock motion vector predictor mode (inter_affine_flag=1), cu_affine_type_flag is transmitted. cu_affine_type_flag is a flag for determining the number of control points in the subblock motion vector predictor mode - ¶0088) and motion shifts that include directions and distances (i.e. The information regarding the merge motion vector difference is an index mmvd_distance_idx indicating a distance to be added to the motion vector and an index mmvd_direction_idx indicating a direction in which the motion vector is added- ¶0241).
Regarding claim 4, Hiroyuki teaches all the limitations of claim 3 and Hiroyuki further teaches:
wherein the at least one syntax element comprises a first syntax element indicating that the current block is decoded based on partitioning the current block into the sub-blocks and a second syntax element indicating that at least some of the sub-blocks are decoded using the directions and the distances (i.e. In the case of the motion vector predictor mode (merge_flag=0), a flag inter_affine_flag indicating whether to apply the subblock motion vector predictor mode is transmitted. In the case of applying the subblock motion vector predictor mode (inter_affine_flag=1), cu_affine_type_flag is transmitted. cu_affine_type_flag is a flag for determining the number of control points in the subblock motion vector predictor mode - ¶0088… The information regarding the merge motion vector difference is an index mmvd_distance_idx indicating a distance to be added to the motion vector and an index mmvd_direction_idx indicating a direction in which the motion vector is added- ¶0241).
Regarding claim 5, Hiroyuki teaches all the limitations of claim 1 and Hiroyuki further teaches:
further comprising:decoding, from a compressed bitstream, a bitstring indicating which of the sub-blocks are encoded using motion shifts (i.e. a flag inter_affine_flag indicating whether to apply the subblock motion vector predictor mode is transmitted. In the case of applying the subblock motion vector predictor mode (inter_affine_flag=1), cu_affine_type_flag is transmitted. cu_affine_type_flag is a flag for determining the number of control points in the subblock motion vector predictor mode- ¶0088).
Regarding claim 10, Hiroyuki teaches:
10. (Original) A method for coding a current block (i.e. FIG. 1 is a block diagram of a picture coding device according to an embodiment of the present invention- ¶0008), comprising:
partitioning the current block into sub-blocks (i.e. The affine motion compensation first splits a coding block into subblocks of a predetermined unit and then individually determines a motion vector for each of the split subblocks to perform motion compensation- ¶0084);
identifying a first neighboring block and a second neighboring block of the current block (i.e. Each of the spatial motion vector predictor candidate derivation units 321 and 421 derives a motion vector predictor candidate from blocks in the neighbor of the left side. This process derives a motion vector predictor mvLXA with reference to inter prediction information of the block in the neighbor of the left side (A0 or A1 in FIG. 11)- ¶0158); and
for each sub-block of at least some of the sub-blocks, obtaining a respective prediction block for the each sub-block by:
obtaining, based on the first neighboring block, a first motion vector using a subblock-based temporal motion vector prediction mode; obtaining, based on the second neighboring block, a second motion vector using the subblock-based temporal motion vector prediction mode (i.e. The motion vector of each of subblocks is derived on the basis of one or more control points derived from the inter prediction information of a processed block in the neighbor of the target block, or a block belonging to the processed picture and located at the same position as or in the neighborhood (vicinity) of the target block. While the present embodiment sets the size of the subblock to 4×4 samples, the size of the subblock is not limited to this, and a motion vector may be derived in units of samples- ¶0084); and
obtaining the respective prediction block for the sub-block based on the first motion vector and the second motion vector (i.e. FIG. 15 illustrates an example of affine motion compensation in a case where there are three control points. In this case, each of the three control points has two parameters, that is, a horizontal component and a vertical component. Accordingly, the affine transform having three control points is referred to as six-parameter affine transform. CP1, CP2, and CP3 in FIG. 15 are control points- ¶0086).
Regarding claim 11, Hiroyuki teaches all the limitations of claim 10 and Hiroyuki further teaches:
wherein the first neighboring block and the second neighboring block are selected from a predefined list of spatially neighboring available blocks (i.e. FIG. 11 is a diagram illustrating reference blocks to be referred to for deriving inter prediction information in the motion vector predictor mode and the merge mode. A0, A1, A2, B0, B1, B2, and B3 are processed blocks in the neighbor of the target block- ¶0081).
Regarding claim 12, Hiroyuki teaches all the limitations of claim 11 and Hiroyuki further teaches:
wherein the first neighboring block is a bottom- left neighboring block of the current block, and wherein the second neighboring block is a top-right neighbor of the current block (i.e. A1 and A2 are blocks located on the left side of the target coding block and in the neighbor of the target coding block. B1 and B3 are blocks located above the target coding block and in the neighbor of the target coding block. A0, B0, and B2 are blocks respectively located at the lower left, the upper right, and the upper left of the target coding block.- ¶0082).
Regarding claim 13, Hiroyuki teaches all the limitations of claim 10 and Hiroyuki further teaches:
wherein identifying the first neighboring block and the second neighboring block of the current block comprises: decoding, from a compressed bitstream, an indication of at least one of the first neighboring block or the second neighboring block (i.e. Each of merging candidates is registered in a merging candidate list. A merging candidate to be used for prediction of a target block is specified by a merge index- ¶0080… T0 is a block belonging to the processed picture and located at the same position as the target block or in the neighborhood (vicinity) of the target block, in the target picture- ¶0081).
17. (Original) The method of claim 16, wherein a weighting of the first prediction block and the second prediction block is based on respective distances of the each sub-block to the first neighboring block and to the second neighboring block.
Regarding claim 18, apparatus claim 18 is drawn to the apparatus using/performing the same method as claimed in claim 1. Therefore, apparatus claim 18 corresponds to method claim 1, and is rejected for the same rationale as used above.
Regarding claim 19, apparatus claim 19 is drawn to the apparatus using/performing the same method as claimed in claim 10. Therefore, apparatus claim 19 corresponds to method claim 10, and is rejected for the same rationale as used above.
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 2, 6-7 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiroyuki Kurashige et al. [US 20220070469 A1] in view of Guichun Li et al. [US 20200099947 A1].
Regarding claim 2, Hiroyuki teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
However, Hiroyuki does not teach explicitly:
where selecting the base motion vector for the current block comprises: decoding, from a compressed bitstream, an indication of the base motion vector; and selecting the base motion vector from a list of candidate motion vectors based on the indication.
In the same field of endeavor, Guichun teaches:
where selecting the base motion vector for the current block comprises: decoding, from a compressed bitstream, an indication of the base motion vector; and selecting the base motion vector from a list of candidate motion vectors based on the indication (i.e. According to an embodiment of the present invention, when the MMVD is applied, that is, in the MMVD mode, the MV may be determined based on a base motion vector, a distance parameter (or variable), or a direction parameter (or variable). Further, according to an embodiment of the present invention, the base motion vector may be determined from a candidate list. For example, the base motion vector may be determined from a merge candidate list. The encoder/decoder may determine the base motion vector from some of another candidate list. Some of the candidate list may be a front part of the candidate list (part having a smaller index). For example, the encoder/decoder may determine the base motion vector using first and second candidates among candidates of the merge candidate list. To this end, a candidate index indicating a specific candidate among the two candidates may be signaled from the encoder to the decoder. Referring to FIG. 21, a base candidate index which is an index for signaling the base motion vector may be defined. The encoder/decoder may determine a candidate applied to the current block among the candidates of the candidate list according to the base candidate index and determine a motion vector of the determined candidate as the base motion vector. In the present invention, the base candidate index is not limited to the name, and may be referred to as a base candidate index, a candidate index, a candidate flag, an MMVD index, an MMVD candidate index, an MMVD candidate flag, or the like- ¶0261).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Hiroyuki with the teachings of Guichun to improve the efficiency of affine motion compensation (Guichun- ¶0126).
Regarding claim 6, Hiroyuki teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
However, Hiroyuki does not teach explicitly:
further comprising: decoding, from a compressed bitstream, a table of directions and distances.
In the same field of endeavor, Guichun teaches:
further comprising: decoding, from a compressed bitstream, a table of directions and distances (i.e. In some embodiments, the distance offset index is decoded to determine a distance offset value based on the respective pre-determined mapping table of the distance offset index. The offset direction index is decoded to determine an offset direction based on the respective pre-determined mapping table of the offset direction index. A motion vector for one of the two or more control points of the block is subsequently derived in the current picture based on at least one of the base predictor, the distance offset value, and the offset direction.- ¶0014 & 0019).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Hiroyuki with the teachings of Guichun to improve the efficiency of affine motion compensation (Guichun- ¶0126).
Regarding claim 7, Hiroyuki and Guichun all the limitations of claim 6.
However, Hiroyuki does not teach explicitly:
wherein identifying the motion shift that includes the direction and the distance comprises: decoding, from the compressed bitstream, an index into the table; and using the index to obtain the direction and the distance from the table.
In the same field of endeavor, Guichun teaches:
wherein identifying the motion shift that includes the direction and the distance comprises: decoding, from the compressed bitstream, an index into the table; and using the index to obtain the direction and the distance from the table(i.e. In some embodiments, the distance offset index is decoded to determine a distance offset value based on the respective pre-determined mapping table of the distance offset index. The offset direction index is decoded to determine an offset direction based on the respective pre-determined mapping table of the offset direction index. A motion vector for one of the two or more control points of the block is subsequently derived in the current picture based on at least one of the base predictor, the distance offset value, and the offset direction- ¶0014 & 0019).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Hiroyuki with the teachings of Guichun to improve the efficiency of affine motion compensation (Guichun- ¶0126).
Regarding claim 14, Hiroyuki and Guichun all the limitations of claim 10.
However, Hiroyuki does not teach explicitly:
wherein obtaining the respective prediction block for the each sub-block based on the first motion vector and the second motion vector comprises: obtaining a motion vector that is a weighted combination of the first motion vector and the second motion vector; and obtaining the respective prediction block using the motion vector.
In the same field of endeavor, Guichun teaches:
wherein obtaining the respective prediction block for the each sub-block based on the first motion vector and the second motion vector comprises: obtaining a motion vector that is a weighted combination of the first motion vector and the second motion vector; and obtaining the respective prediction block using the motion vector (i.e. see equations 1-4).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Hiroyuki with the teachings of Guichun to improve the efficiency of affine motion compensation (Guichun- ¶0126).
Regarding claim 15, Hiroyuki and Guichun all the limitations of claim 14.
However, Hiroyuki does not teach explicitly:
wherein obtaining the respective prediction block for the each sub-block based on the first motion vector and the second motion vector comprises: obtaining a motion vector that is a weighted combination of the first motion vector and the second motion vector; and obtaining the respective prediction block using the motion vector.
In the same field of endeavor, Guichun teaches:
wherein a weighting of the first motion vector and the second motion vector is based on respective distances of the each sub-block to the first neighboring block and to the second neighboring block (i.e. In the disclosure, an affine merge candidate can include two or more control points. Each of the control points can include one or more MVs. Offsets (e.g., distance and direction) for each of the control point's MVs can be sent by the encoder to represent an affine motion. A distance offset table size can be variable and can be signaled or predefined. A value range of the distance offset can be variable and determined via a high-level syntax. A set of candidate step sizes are provided. An index of the selection can be signaled, such as at slice level. The encoder can use data from previous coded picture to make decision- ¶0127… In some embodiments, the current block has N control points (CPs), where N is a positive integer and more than one. For each of the N CPs, a zero_MVD flag is used to indicate whether a motion vector difference (MVD) is zero. The MVD is a difference between a MV of the control point and a motion vector prediction (MPV) of the control point. If first (N-1) CPs have zero_MVD flag that equals to one (i.e., zero MVD), a last CP's zero_MVD flag is inferred to be zero (i.e., none zero MVD).- ¶0128).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Hiroyuki with the teachings of Guichun to improve the efficiency of affine motion compensation (Guichun- ¶0126).
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiroyuki Kurashige et al. [US 20220070469 A1] in view of Geonjung Ko et al. [US 20210243476 A1].
Regarding claim 8, Hiroyuki teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
However, Hiroyuki does not teach explicitly:
wherein the base motion vector is selected from a list of candidate motion vectors, the method further comprising: constructing the list of candidate motion vectors, wherein constructing the list of candidate motion vectors comprises: identifying a new candidate motion vector to add to the list of candidate motion vectors; and adding the new candidate motion vector to the list of candidate motion vectors in response to determining that the list of candidate motion vectors does not include a motion vector that points to a same grid cell as the new candidate motion vector.
In the same field of endeavor, Geonjung teaches:
wherein the base motion vector is selected from a list of candidate motion vectors, the method further comprising: constructing the list of candidate motion vectors, wherein constructing the list of candidate motion vectors comprises: identifying a new candidate motion vector to add to the list of candidate motion vectors (i.e. In an embodiment, when there are a plurality of candidates which can belong to the subblock merge candidate, it may be determined whether to add the candidates to the candidate list in consideration of the size of the current block if sizes of subblocks of the plurality of candidates are different- ¶0163); and adding the new candidate motion vector to the list of candidate motion vectors in response to determining that the list of candidate motion vectors does not include a motion vector that points to a same grid cell as the new candidate motion vector (i.e. According to an embodiment of the present invention, when the MMVD is applied, that is, in the MMVD mode, the MV may be determined based on a base motion vector, a distance parameter (or variable), or a direction parameter (or variable). Further, according to an embodiment of the present invention, the base motion vector may be determined from a candidate list. For example, the base motion vector may be determined from a merge candidate list. The encoder/decoder may determine the base motion vector from some of another candidate list. Some of the candidate list may be a front part of the candidate list (part having a smaller index). For example, the encoder/decoder may determine the base motion vector using first and second candidates among candidates of the merge candidate list. To this end, a candidate index indicating a specific candidate among the two candidates may be signaled from the encoder to the decoder. Referring to FIG. 21, a base candidate index which is an index for signaling the base motion vector may be defined. The encoder/decoder may determine a candidate applied to the current block among the candidates of the candidate list according to the base candidate index and determine a motion vector of the determined candidate as the base motion vector. In the present invention, the base candidate index is not limited to the name, and may be referred to as a base candidate index, a candidate index, a candidate flag, an MMVD index, an MMVD candidate index, an MMVD candidate flag, or the like- ¶0261).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Hiroyuki with the teachings of Geonjung to reduce signaling overhead and increase compression efficiency by controlling a syntax parsing order (Geonjung- ¶0021).
Regarding claim 9, Hiroyuki teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
However, Hiroyuki does not teach explicitly:
wherein the base motion vector is selected from a list of candidate motion vectors, the method further comprising: comparing a new candidate motion vector to other candidate motion vectors in the list of candidate motion vectors; and excluding the new candidate motion vector from the list of candidate motion vectors in a case that a motion shift associated with the new candidate motion vector is similar to a motion shift of another motion vector in the list candidate motion vectors.
In the same field of endeavor, Geonjung teaches:
wherein the base motion vector is selected from a list of candidate motion vectors, the method further comprising: comparing a new candidate motion vector to other candidate motion vectors in the list of candidate motion vectors; and excluding the new candidate motion vector from the list of candidate motion vectors (i.e. When the MMVD flag is ahead of the merge flag and the MMVD flag is 0, candidates using the MMVD may be excluded from the candidate list- ¶0291) in a case that a motion shift associated with the new candidate motion vector is similar to a motion shift of another motion vector in the list candidate motion vectors (i.e. According to an embodiment of the present invention, when the MMVD is applied, that is, in the MMVD mode, the MV may be determined based on a base motion vector, a distance parameter (or variable), or a direction parameter (or variable). Further, according to an embodiment of the present invention, the base motion vector may be determined from a candidate list. For example, the base motion vector may be determined from a merge candidate list. The encoder/decoder may determine the base motion vector from some of another candidate list. Some of the candidate list may be a front part of the candidate list (part having a smaller index). For example, the encoder/decoder may determine the base motion vector using first and second candidates among candidates of the merge candidate list. To this end, a candidate index indicating a specific candidate among the two candidates may be signaled from the encoder to the decoder. Referring to FIG. 21, a base candidate index which is an index for signaling the base motion vector may be defined. The encoder/decoder may determine a candidate applied to the current block among the candidates of the candidate list according to the base candidate index and determine a motion vector of the determined candidate as the base motion vector. In the present invention, the base candidate index is not limited to the name, and may be referred to as a base candidate index, a candidate index, a candidate flag, an MMVD index, an MMVD candidate index, an MMVD candidate flag, or the like- ¶0261).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Hiroyuki with the teachings of Geonjung to reduce signaling overhead and increase compression efficiency by controlling a syntax parsing order (Geonjung- ¶0021).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiroyuki Kurashige et al. [US 20220070469 A1] in view of Hongbin Liu et al. [US 20160219302 A1].
Regarding claim 16, Hiroyuki teaches all the limitations of claim 10.
However, Hiroyuki does not teach explicitly:
wherein obtaining the respective prediction block for the each sub-block based on the first motion vector and the second motion vector comprises:obtaining a first prediction block based on the first motion vector; obtaining a second prediction block based on the second motion vector; andobtaining the respective prediction block as a weighted combination of the first prediction block and the second prediction block. .
In the same field of endeavor, Hongbin teaches:
wherein obtaining the respective prediction block for the each sub-block based on the first motion vector and the second motion vector comprises:obtaining a first prediction block based on the first motion vector; obtaining a second prediction block based on the second motion vector; andobtaining the respective prediction block as a weighted combination of the first prediction block and the second prediction block (i.e. In some examples, video encoder 20 and/or video decoder 30 may be configured to perform OBMC on the current sub-block. In such examples, video encoder 20 and/or video decoder 30 may be configured to derive one or more prediction blocks for the current sub-block. For example, video encoder 20 and/or video decoder 30 may be configured to derive four prediction blocks for the current sub-block using motion vectors of four connected neighboring sub-blocks (e.g., four sub-blocks that share a border with the current sub-block) if available. As another example, video encoder 20 and/or video decoder 30 may be configured to derive four prediction blocks for the current sub-block using motion vectors of four connected neighboring sub-blocks (e.g., four sub-blocks that share a border with the current sub-block) if they are available and are not identical to the current motion vector for the current block. Video encoder 20 and/or video decoder 30 may be configured to perform a weighted average on these multiple prediction blocks (e.g., the four prediction blocks based on the four connected neighboring sub-blocks) based on multiple motion vectors (e.g., one motion vector associated with each of the four prediction blocks, or two motion vectors associated with each of the four prediction blocks as described below). In some examples, video encoder 20 and/or video decoder 30 may be configured to perform a weighted average to generate the final prediction block of the current sub-block. For example, video encoder 20 and/or video decoder 30 may be configured to use multiple motion vectors to obtain multiple prediction samples, then apply a weighted average to the samples. The final prediction block may refer to a block of predicted pixels for pixels in the current sub-block. Note that the examples above in this paragraph apply to uni-directional prediction, but in examples involving bi-directional prediction, the prediction block in the examples above may be generated by using two motion vectors from each of the four neighboring blocks- ¶0155).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Hiroyuki with the teachings of Hongbin reduce encoding and/or decoding complexity (Hongbin- ¶0114).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLIFFORD HILAIRE whose telephone number is (571)272-8397. The examiner can normally be reached 5:30-1400.
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, SATH V PERUNGAVOOR can be reached at (571)272-7455. 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.
CLIFFORD HILAIRE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2488
/CLIFFORD HILAIRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488
Prosecution Insights