DETAILED ACTION
1. The Office Action is in response to Application 19161682 filed on 09/02/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. 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
3. The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 09/02/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in Application 19161682 filed on 09/02/2025.
Priority # Filling Data Country
KR10-2023-0034125 03/15/2023 KR
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
35 U.S.C. 101 requires that a claimed invention must fall within one of the four eligible categories of invention (i.e. process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter) and must not be directed to subject matter encompassing a judicially recognized exception as interpreted by the courts. The four eligible categories of invention include: (1) process which is an act, or a series of acts or steps, (2) machine which is an concrete thing, consisting of parts, or of certain devices and combination of devices, (3) manufacture which is an article produced from raw or prepared materials by giving to these materials new forms, qualities, properties, or combinations, whether by hand labor or by machinery, and (4) composition of matter which is all compositions of two or more substances and all composite articles, whether they be the results of chemical union, or of mechanical mixture, or whether they be gases, fluids, powders or solids.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as not falling within one of the four statutory categories of invention because the broadest reasonable interpretation of the instant claims in light of the specification encompasses transitory signals. But, transitory signals are not within one of the four statutory categories (i.e. non-statutory subject matter). However, claims directed toward a non-transitory recording medium may qualify as a manufacture and make the claim patent-eligible subject matter. Therefore, amending the claims to recite a “non-transitory recording medium” would resolve this issue.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
7. 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.
8. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (2) as being anticipated by LEE et al. ( US 20200244956).
Claim 20’s recitation of “recording medium storing a bitstream generated by an image encoding method…” 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 modes, coding block, flags and values 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 2 merely services 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 Lee recites a storage medium storing a bitstream (fig. 1 and fig. 2, the bitstream from fig. 1 is stored in fig. 2, 210; paragraph 0002, .. a method and apparatus for encoding/decoding an image and a recording medium storing a bitstream).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
9. 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.
10. Claim 1 and its dependent claims 2-18 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.
For claim 1, it recites limitations of “performing a bilateral matching (BM) search for a first BM reference image and a second BM reference image by using the first initial motion vector and the second initial motion vector”; However, it is not clear whether the first initial motion vector and the second initial motion vector are used in both first BM reference image and second reference image when perform BM search or only first initial motion vector is used for first BM reference image and second initial motion vector is used for second BM reference image, or other way around?
it recites limitations of “reconstructing the target block by using a first BM reference block and a second BM reference block obtained through the BM search”; However, it is not clear whether a first BM reference block is within the first BM reference image and a second BM reference block is within the second BM reference image or they can be anywhere?
Thus the scope of the claim and its dependent claim 2-18 are unclear.
11. Claim 19 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention for the similar reason as for independent claim 1 and its dependent claim 2-18.
12. Claim 20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention for the similar reason as for independent claim 1 and its dependent claim 2-18.
13. Claim 4 and its dependent claims 5-7 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
For claim 4, it recites limitations of “the BM block” in “wherein a final prediction block of the target block is obtained by performing a weighted sum operation between the BM block and an intra prediction block obtained by performing an intra prediction on the target block”; However, there is no antecedence basis for this limitation. In addition to that, it is not clear what is the relationship between “a prediction block” in claim 3 and the “final prediction block” in claim 4; Are they related or unrelated?
Thus the scope of the claim and its dependent claim 5-7 are unclear.
14. Claim 8 and its dependent claim 9 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.
For claim 8, it recites limitations of “the BM block” in “wherein a final prediction block of the target block is obtained by performing a weighted sum operation between the BM block and an inter prediction block obtained by performing an inter prediction on the target block”; However, there is no antecedence basis for this limitation. In addition to that, it is not clear what is the relationship between “a prediction block” in claim 3 and the “final prediction block” in claim 8; Are they related or unrelated?
Thus the scope of the claim and its dependent claim 9 are unclear.
15. Claim 12 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
For claim 12, it recites limitations of “prediction residual samples in the prediction residual block” in “wherein residual samples in the residual block are reconstructed by using prediction residual samples in the prediction residual block only in a partial region of the target block”; However, it is not clear how can the prediction residual samples in the prediction residual block can be in a partial region of the target block? From claim 10 (which claim 12 depends on), it defines “a residual block of the BM optimal block is configured as the prediction residual block”, it is not the target block at all; then how the prediction residual samples in the prediction residual block can be in the target block?
Thus the scope of the claim is unclear.
16. Claim 15 and its dependent claims 16-18 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.
For claim 15, it recites limitations of “a BM search region” in “wherein the BM search is performed only in a BM search region within the first BM reference image and the second BM reference image”; However, it is not clear BM search region for the first BM reference image and the second BM reference image are the same or are different?
Thus the scope of the claim and its dependent claim 16-18 are unclear.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
17. 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.
18. Claims 1-3, 10-11, 13-17, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (2) as being anticipated by Chen et al. (US 20220210438).
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches a method of decoding an image (fig. 12), the method comprising:
deriving a first initial motion vector and a second initial motion vector for a target block (fig. 5, initial MV is derived; from fig. 9, at least two initial MV (MV0 and MV1) is derived; paragraph 01016, …derive two initial motion vectors MV0 and MV1);
performing a bilateral matching (BM) search for a first BM reference image and a second BM reference image by using the first initial motion vector and the second initial motion vector (as shown in fig. 9, both initial motion vectors (MV0 and MV1 for example) are used in first BM (i.e. reference image refPic in list L0) and second BM reference image (i.e. reference image refPic in list L1); the bilateral matching search is shown in fig. 8; paragraph 0109, … implementing bilateral matching, video encoder 200 and video decoder 300 may be configured to perform a local search around the initial MV0 and MV1 to derive the final MV0′ and MV1′…. the bilateral matching cost of the eight surrounding MVs in the search pattern are calculated and compared to the bilateral matching cost of center MV. The MV which has minimum bilateral matching cost becomes the new center MV in the next search iteration)
and reconstructing the target block by using a first BM reference block and a second BM reference block obtained through the BM search (as shown in fig. 12; the first BM reference block and a second BM reference block are shown in fig. 9 ).
Regarding claim 19, Chen teaches a method of encoding an image (fig. 11), the method comprising:
deriving a first initial motion vector and a second initial motion vector for a target block (fig. 5, initial MV is derived; from fig. 9, at least two initial MV (MV0 and MV1) is derived; paragraph 01016, …derive two initial motion vectors MV0 and MV1);
performing a bilateral matching (BM) search for a first BM reference image and a second BM reference image by using the first initial motion vector and the second initial motion vector (as shown in fig. 9, both initial motion vectors (MV0 and MV1 for example) are used in first BM (i.e. reference image refPic in list L0) and second BM reference image (i.e. reference image refPic in list L1); the bilateral matching search is shown in fig. 8; paragraph 0109, … implementing bilateral matching, video encoder 200 and video decoder 300 may be configured to perform a local search around the initial MV0 and MV1 to derive the final MV0′ and MV1′…. the bilateral matching cost of the eight surrounding MVs in the search pattern are calculated and compared to the bilateral matching cost of center MV. The MV which has minimum bilateral matching cost becomes the new center MV in the next search iteration)
and encoding the target block by using a first BM reference block and a second BM reference block obtained through the BM search (as shown in fig. 11; the first BM reference block and a second BM reference block are shown in fig. 9 ).
Regarding claim 20, Chen teaches a recording medium (fig. 1, 112) storing a bitstream (as shown in fig. 1) generated by an image encoding method (fig. 11), the recording medium comprising:
deriving a first initial motion vector and a second initial motion vector for a target block (fig. 5, initial MV is derived; from fig. 9, at least two initial MV (MV0 and MV1) is derived; paragraph 01016, …derive two initial motion vectors MV0 and MV1);
performing a bilateral matching (BM) search for a first BM reference image and a second BM reference image by using the first initial motion vector and the second initial motion vector (as shown in fig. 9, both initial motion vectors (MV0 and MV1 for example) are used in first BM (i.e. reference image refPic in list L0) and second BM reference image (i.e. reference image refPic in list L1); the bilateral matching search is shown in fig. 8; paragraph 0109, … implementing bilateral matching, video encoder 200 and video decoder 300 may be configured to perform a local search around the initial MV0 and MV1 to derive the final MV0′ and MV1′…. the bilateral matching cost of the eight surrounding MVs in the search pattern are calculated and compared to the bilateral matching cost of center MV. The MV which has minimum bilateral matching cost becomes the new center MV in the next search iteration)
and encoding the target block by using a first BM reference block and a second BM reference block obtained through the BM search (as shown in fig. 11; the first BM reference block and a second BM reference block are shown in fig. 9 ).
Regarding claim 2, Chen teaches the limitations recited in claim 1 as discussed above. In addition, Chen further discloses that a BM optimal block is derived based on an average operation or a weighted sum operation of the first BM reference block and the second BM reference block (paragraph 0189, …. for bi-directional inter-prediction, motion compensation unit 224 may retrieve data for two reference blocks identified by respective motion vectors and combine the retrieved data, e.g., through sample-by-sample averaging or weighted averaging).
Regarding claim 3, Chen teaches the limitations recited in claim 2 as discussed above. In addition, Chen further discloses that wherein the BM optimal block is configured as a prediction block of the target block (fig. 15, step 416; paragraph 0189-0190, …. combine the retrieved data, e.g., through sample-by-sample averaging or weighted averaging… generate a prediction block using motion vectors and motion vector refinement).
Regarding claim 10, Chen teaches the limitations recited in claim 2 as discussed above. In addition, Chen further discloses that wherein a residual block of the target block is derived as a sum of a prediction residual block and a BM residual block (fig. 12, component 310, in which, the output from 304 is a residual block of the target block and output from 308 is BM residual block, input from 304 is a prediction residual block; paragraph 0220), wherein the BM residual block is obtained from residual coefficients decoded from a bitstream (as shown in fig. 12, 308 decoded residual coefficients; paragraph 0216, … inverse transform processing unit 308 may apply one or more inverse transforms to the transform coefficient block to generate a residual block associated with the current block), and wherein a residual block of the BM optimal block is configured as the prediction residual block (as shown in fig. 12, output from 304 is a residual block of the BM optimal block).
Regarding claim 11, Chen teaches the limitations recited in claim 10 as discussed above. In addition, Chen further discloses that wherein the residual block of the BM optimal block is derived by subtracting a prediction block of the target block from the BM optimal block (fig. 11, component 204 (examiner’s note: decoding is an inverse operation of encoding); in which, it subtracts a prediction block (output from the 202) from the BM optimal block (output from 230); paragraph 0192, … Residual generation unit 204 calculates sample-by-sample differences between the current block and the prediction block. The resulting sample-by-sample differences define a residual block for the current block).
Regarding claim 13, Chen teaches the limitations recited in claim 1 as discussed above. In addition, Chen further discloses that the first initial motion vector is derived based on Advanced Motion Vector Prediction (AMVP) encoding information (paragraph 0005, performed for either or both of selecting a motion vector candidate from a candidate list or for motion vector refinement. Template matching may be applied in both advanced motion vector predictor (AMVP) mode and regular merge mode), and wherein the second initial motion vector is derived based on merge encoding information (paragraph 0005, … In regular merge mode, a template matching mode flag may be signaled to indicate the use of template matching, and template matching may then be used for motion vector refinement of a motion vector selected from a merge candidate list).
Regarding claim 14, Chen teaches the limitations recited in claim 1 as discussed above. In addition, Chen further discloses that the first initial motion vector is configured to be a same as a motion vector of a merge candidate included in a merge candidate list (paragraph 0005, …a template matching mode flag may be signaled to indicate the use of template matching, and template matching may then be used for motion vector refinement of a motion vector selected from a merge candidate list), and wherein a vector that a size is a same as and a direction is opposite to the first initial motion vector is configured as the second initial motion vector (as shown in fig. 9, MV1 has the same size of MV0 but opposite direction).
Regarding claim 15, Chen teaches the limitations recited in claim 1 as discussed above. In addition, Chen further discloses that the BM search is performed only in a BM search region within the first BM reference image and the second BM reference image (as shown in fig. 5, a search range is used when do search in reference image; also in fig. 8, when the BM search is performed, it is within search range in first/second reference images). .
Regarding claim 16, Chen teaches the limitations recited in claim 15 as discussed above. In addition, Chen further discloses that a shape of the BM search region is determined based on index information indicating one of shape candidates, and wherein among the shape candidates, a first shape candidate is a rectangular shape and a second shape candidate is a rhombus shape (as shown in fig. 5, the search range is 8x8, which is also an index; paragraph 0035, … The search range for the motion vector refinement may, for example, be set equal to (−8, +8) luma samples around the initial motion vector; also shown in fig. 8, in which, the search range are squares; note: squares are both rectangular shape and rhombus shape).
Regarding claim 17, Chen teaches the limitations recited in claim 15 as discussed above. In addition, Chen further discloses that the BM search region is configured as N times a size of a basic unit (N is a natural number greater than or equal to 1) based on a position indicated by an initial motion vector, and wherein the basic unit is at least one of the target unit, a coding tree unit or a virtual pipeline data unit (VPDU) (as shown in fig. 5/fig. 8, the BM search region is 8x8, which is N times a size of a basic unit (for example, a PU)).
19. Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See form 892.
20. Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZAIHAN JIANG whose telephone number is (571)272-1399. The examiner can normally be reached on flexible.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sath Perungavoor can be reached on (571)272-7455. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-270-0655.
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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ZAIHAN JIANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488
Prosecution Insights