CTNF 19/232,014 CTNF 90645 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Specification The Abstract is objected to because it contains language in the alternative. The Abstract recites, “a video encoding/decoding method is provided […].” 06-16 AIA Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details. The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided. Double Patenting 08-33 AIA 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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. Co-pending 19/232,074 Claims 1-15 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of 19/232,074 in view of Zhou et al. (US 2012/0320984 A1 with Provisional 61/501,441) (hereinafter Zhou). Instant 19/232,014 Co-pending 19/232,074 1. A video decoding apparatus , comprising: 1 . A method of decoding a video signal, comprising: a memory configured to store a computer program; and a processor configured to execute the computer program to implement following operations: determining a merge candidate list of a current block; determining a merge candidate list of a current block, determining a combined merge candidate based on a first merge candidate and a second merge candidate in the merge candidate list; determining a combined merge candidate based on a first merge candidate and a second merge candidate in the merge candidate list; wherein the first merge candidate is a merge candidate with an index equal to 0 in the merge candidate list, wherein the first merge candidate is a merge candidate with an index equal to 0 in the merge candidate list, the second merge candidate is a merge candidate with an index equal to 1 in the merge candidate list, and a prediction direction flag corresponding to the first merge candidate indicates a reference picture list different from a reference picture list indicated by a prediction direction flag corresponding to the second merge candidate; wherein the second merge candidate is a merge candidate with an index equal to 1 in the merge candidate list, wherein a prediction list utilization flag corresponding to the first merge candidate indicates a reference picture list different from or same as a reference picture list indicated by a prediction list utilization flag corresponding to the second merge candidate. adding the combined merge candidate to the merge candidate list; adding the combined merge candidate to the merge candidate list, determining motion information of the current block according to the merge candidate list of the current block and a merge index, wherein the motion information comprises at least one of a prediction direction flag, a reference picture index or a motion vector; and determining motion information of the current block according to the merge candidate list of the current block, wherein the motion information comprises at least one of a prediction list utilization flag, a reference picture index or a motion vector; and determining an inter-prediction value of the current block according to the motion information of the current block. determining an inter-prediction value of the current block according to the motion information of the current block. Although the claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of the instant application falls within the scope of claim 1 of co-pending application 19/232,074. Furthermore, claim 1 in the instant application differs from claim 1 in the co-pending in that it recites a video decoding apparatus comprising a memory configured to store a computer program; and a processor configured to execute the computer program. However these limitations were known in the art before the effective filing date of the invention as seen in Zhou, wherein Paragraph [0061] & [0138]-[0140] disclose video decoder 512, comprising software instructions implementing all or part of the techniques may be stored in the memory 1512 and executed by the SPU 1502, as processor. It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the instant invention to add the teachings of Zhou as above, to implement and automate the invention in hardware and software (Zhou, Paragraphs [0145]-[0146]) . Regarding claims (2-5), claims (2-5) in the instant application correspond to claims (2-8) in co-pending 19/232,074. Regarding claims (6-10), claims (6-10) in the instant application correspond to claims (9-16) in co-pending 19/232,074. Regarding claims 11-15 , claims (11-15) are drawn to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having limitations similar to the video encoding apparatus of using the same as claimed in claims (6-10) treated in the above rejections. Therefore, non-transitory computer-readable storage medium claims (11-15) correspond to video encoding apparatus claims (6-10) and are rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim (s) 1-3, 6-8 & 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Zhou et al. (US 2012/0320984 A1 with Provisional 61/501,441) (hereinafter Zhou) . Regarding claim 1 , Zhou discloses a video decoding apparatus [Paragraph [0061], video decoder 512] , comprising: a memory configured to store a computer program; and a processor configured to execute the computer program [Paragraph [0138]-[0140], Software instructions implementing all or part of the techniques may be stored in the memory 1512 and executed by the SPU 1502, as processor] to implement following operations: determining a merge candidate list of a current block [Paragraph [0088]-[0090], video decoder forming inter-prediction merging candidate lists] ; determining a combined merge candidate based on a first merge candidate and a second merge candidate in the merge candidate list; wherein the first merge candidate is a merge candidate with an index equal to 0 in the merge candidate list, the second merge candidate is a merge candidate with an index equal to 1 in the merge candidate list [Paragraph [0054]-[0057] & [0103]-[0115], virtual merging candidate may be a combined bi-predictive merging candidate, formed by combining a forward motion vector (unidirectional) and a forward reference picture index (0) of a native merging candidate in a merging candidate list with a backward motion vector (also unidirectional) and a backward reference picture index (1) from another native merging candidate in the merging candidate list, and appending to the candidate MVP list in index 3 as shown in Table A.5 in 61/501,441] , and a prediction direction flag corresponding to the first merge candidate indicates a reference picture list different from a reference picture list indicated by a prediction direction flag corresponding to the second merge candidate [Paragraph [0034]-[0036] & [0112]-[0115], A merging candidate may include a prediction list utilization flag indicating prediction direction, i.e., forward, backward, or bi-directional. The prediction list utilization flag may be composed of two prediction list utilization flags used to indicate which of two reference picture lists, i.e., the forward reference picture list and the backward reference picture list, is to be used in indicating different reference picture lists] ; adding the combined merge candidate to the merge candidate list Paragraph [0054]-[0057] & [0103]-[0115], virtual merging candidate may be a combined bi-predictive merging candidate, and appending to the candidate MVP list in index 3 as shown in Table A.5 in 61/501,441] ; determining motion information of the current block according to the merge candidate list of the current block and a merge index, wherein the motion information comprises at least one of a prediction direction flag, a reference picture index or a motion vector [Paragraph [0034]-[0036] & [0112]-[0115], A merging candidate includes motion vector information, prediction list utilization flag information, and reference picture index information for a candidate motion data position] ; and determining an inter-prediction value of the current block according to the motion information of the current block [Paragraph [0071], For each PU in the CU, the motion estimation component selects the better of merge mode and normal inter-predicted mode based on the coding costs as determining inter-prediction value of the current block accordingly from the motion vector candidates in merging candidate list] . Regarding claim 2 , Zhou discloses the video decoding apparatus according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein when the prediction direction flag corresponding to the first merge candidate indicates a reference picture list 0, and the prediction direction flag corresponding to the second merge candidate indicates a reference picture list 1 [Paragraph [0034]-[0036] & [0112]-[0115], the forward motion vector may be referred to as the list 0 (or L0) motion vector, the backward motion vector may be referred to as the list 1 (or L1) motion vector, the two prediction list utilization flags be referred to as the list 0 (or L0) prediction list utilization flag and the list 1 (or L1) prediction list utilization flag] , the processor is further configured to execute the computer program to implement: determining, according to a reference picture index of the reference picture list 0 corresponding to the first merge candidate, a reference picture index of the reference picture list 0 corresponding to the combined merge candidate [Paragraph [0034]-[0036] & [0112]-[0115], and the reference picture indices may be referred to as the list 0 (or L0) reference picture index and the list 1 (or L1) reference picture index] ; determining a prediction direction flag of the reference picture list 0 corresponding to the combined merge candidate to be equal to 1 [Paragraph [0034]-[0036] & [0112]-[0115], In some embodiments, the prediction utilization flags of the prediction list utilization flag entry are both set to 1 to indicate bi-directional prediction] ; determining, according to a motion vector of the reference picture list 0 corresponding to the first merge candidate, a motion vector of the reference picture list 0 corresponding to the combined merge candidate [Paragraph [0034]-[0036], [0057] & [0112]-[0118], the motion vectors and reference picture indices are formed by combining a forward motion vector and a forward reference picture index of a native merging candidate in a merging candidate list with a backward motion vector and a backward reference picture index] ; determining, according to a reference picture index of the reference picture list 1 corresponding to the second merge candidate, a reference picture index of the reference picture list 1 corresponding to the combined merge candidate [Paragraph [0034]-[0036] & [0112]-[0115], and the reference picture indices may be referred to as the list 0 (or L0) reference picture index and the list 1 (or L1) reference picture index] ; determining a prediction direction flag of the reference picture list 1 corresponding to the combined merge candidate to be equal to 1 [Paragraph [0034]-[0036] & [0112]-[0115], In some embodiments, the prediction utilization flags of the prediction list utilization flag entry are both set to 1 to indicate bi-directional prediction] ; and determining, according to a motion vector of the reference picture list 1 corresponding to the second merge candidate, a motion vector of the reference picture list 1 corresponding to the combined merge candidate [Paragraph [0034]-[0036], [0057] & [0112]-[0118], the motion vectors and reference picture indices are formed by combining a forward motion vector and a forward reference picture index of a native merging candidate in a merging candidate list with a backward motion vector and a backward reference picture index ] . Regarding claim 3 , Zhou discloses the video decoding apparatus according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein when the prediction direction flag corresponding to the first merge candidate indicates a reference picture list 1, and the prediction direction flag corresponding to the second merge candidate indicates a reference picture list 0 [Paragraph [0034]-[0036] & [0112]-[0115], For example, the forward prediction utilization flag may be set to 1, or L1 the values for the forward reference picture index and the motion vectors may be copied from the PU, the backward prediction list unitization flag may be set to 0, or L0] , the processor is further configured to execute the computer program to implement: determining, according to a reference picture index of the reference picture list 0 corresponding to the second merge candidate, a reference picture index of the reference picture list 0 corresponding to the combined merge candidate [Paragraph [0034]-[0036] & [0112]-[0115], the backward prediction list unitization flag may be set to 0, the backward reference picture index may be set to −1, with the reference picture indices may be referred to as the list 0 (or L0) reference picture index and the list 1 (or L1) reference picture index] ; determining a prediction direction flag of the reference picture list 0 corresponding to the combined merge candidate to be equal to 1 [Paragraph [0034]-[0036] & [0112]-[0115], In some embodiments, the prediction utilization flags of the prediction list utilization flag entry are both set to 1 to indicate bi-directional prediction] ; determining, according to a motion vector of the reference picture list 0 corresponding to the second merge candidate, a motion vector of the reference picture list 0 corresponding to the combined merge candidate [Paragraph [0034]-[0036], [0057] & [0112]-[0118], the motion vectors and reference picture indices are formed by combining a forward motion vector and a forward reference picture index of a native merging candidate in a merging candidate list with a backward motion vector and a backward reference picture index ] ; determining, according to a reference picture index of the reference picture list 1 corresponding to the first merge candidate, a reference picture index of the reference picture list 1 corresponding to the combined merge candidate [Paragraph [0034]-[0036] & [0112]-[0115], the forward prediction utilization flag may be set to 1, the values for the forward reference picture index and the motion vectors may be copied from the PU with the reference picture indices may be referred to as the list 0 (or L0) reference picture index and the list 1 (or L1) reference picture index] ; determining a prediction direction flag of the reference picture list 1 corresponding to the combined merge candidate to be equal to 1 [Paragraph [0034]-[0036] & [0112]-[0115], In some embodiments, the prediction utilization flags of the prediction list utilization flag entry are both set to 1 to indicate bi-directional prediction] ; and determining, according to a motion vector of the reference picture list 1 corresponding to the first merge candidate, a motion vector of the reference picture list 1 corresponding to the combined merge candidate [Paragraph [0034]-[0036], [0057] & [0112]-[0118], the motion vectors and reference picture indices are formed by combining a forward motion vector and a forward reference picture index of a native merging candidate in a merging candidate list with a backward motion vector and a backward reference picture index] . Regarding claims 6-8 , claims (6-8) are drawn to a video encoding apparatus having limitations similar and reciprocal to the video decoding apparatus of using the same as claimed in claims (1-3) treated in the above rejections. Therefore, video encoding apparatus claims (6-8) correspond to video decoding apparatus claims (1-3) and are rejected for the same rationale as used above. Furthermore, Zhou discloses a video encoding apparatus [Paragraph [0058], Fig. 5, video encoder 506]. Regarding claims 11-13 , claims (11-13) are drawn to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having limitations similar to the video encoding apparatus of using the same as claimed in claims (6-8) treated in the above rejections. Therefore, non-transitory computer-readable storage medium claims (11-13) correspond to video encoding apparatus claims (6-8) and are rejected for the same rationale as used above. Furthermore, in claims 11-15 , “non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising a bitstream, wherein the bitstream is generated according to a method for encoding a video signal…” is a product by process claim limitation where the product is the bitstream and the process are 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, “non-transitory computer-readable storage medium,” merely serves as a support for information or data, no functional relationship exists. MPEP §2111.05(III). The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium in claims 11-15 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 claim scope is just a storage medium storing data and is anticipated by Zhou which recites in Paragraph [0081] & [0140] of a video buffer 636 storing compressed bitstream, coded video sequence stored in memory 1512 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4, 9 & 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al. (US 2012/0320984 A1 with Provisional 61/501,441) (hereinafter Zhou) in view of Lin et al. (US 2018/0324454 A1) (hereinafter Lin), and further in view of Coban et al. (US 2013/0083853 A1) (hereinafter Coban) . Regarding claim 4 , Zhou discloses the video decoding apparatus according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein: when the prediction direction flag corresponding to the first merge candidate and the prediction direction flag corresponding to the second merge candidate indicate a reference picture list 0 [Paragraph [0034]-[0036] & [0112]-[0115], the prediction list utilization flag is set to indicate bidirectional prediction, the forward motion vector and the backward motion vector are set to zero, and the forward and backward reference picture indices are set to zero] , the processor is further configured to execute the computer program to implement: determining, according to a reference picture index of the reference picture list 0 corresponding to the first merge candidate, a reference picture index of the reference picture list 0 corresponding to the combined merge candidate [Paragraph [0034]-[0036] & [0112]-[0115], and the reference picture indices may be referred to as the list 0 (or L0) reference picture index and the list 1 (or L1) reference picture index] ; and determining a prediction direction flag of the reference picture list 0 corresponding to the combined merge candidate to be equal to 1 [Paragraph [0034]-[0036] & [0112]-[0115], In some embodiments, the prediction utilization flags of the prediction list utilization flag entry are both set to 1 to indicate bi-directional prediction] ; or when the prediction direction flag corresponding to the first merge candidate and the prediction direction flag corresponding to the second merge candidate indicate a reference picture list 1 [Paragraph [0034]-[0036] & [0112]-[0115], In some embodiments, the prediction utilization flags of the prediction list utilization flag entry are both set to 1 to indicate bi-directional prediction] , the processor is further configured to execute the computer program to implement: determining, according to a reference picture index of the reference picture list 1 corresponding to the first merge candidate, a reference picture index of the reference picture list 1 corresponding to the combined merge candidate [Paragraph [0034]-[0036] & [0112]-[0115], and the reference picture indices may be referred to as the list 0 (or L0) reference picture index and the list 1 (or L1) reference picture index] ; and determining a prediction direction flag of the reference picture list 1 corresponding to the combined merge candidate to be equal to 1 [Paragraph [0034]-[0036] & [0112]-[0115], In some embodiments, the prediction utilization flags of the prediction list utilization flag entry are both set to 1 to indicate bi-directional prediction] . However, Zhou does not explicitly disclose determining, according to an average of a motion vector of the reference picture list 0 corresponding to the first merge candidate and a motion vector of the reference picture list 0 corresponding to the second merge candidate, a motion vector of the reference picture list 0 corresponding to the combined merge candidate; or determining, according to an average of a motion vector of the reference picture list 1 corresponding to the first merge candidate and a motion vector of the reference picture list 1 corresponding to the second merge candidate, a motion vector of the reference picture list 1 corresponding to the combined merge candidate. Lin teaches determining, according to an average of a motion vector of the reference picture list 0 corresponding to the first merge candidate and a motion vector of the reference picture list 0 corresponding to the second merge candidate, a motion vector of the reference picture list 0 corresponding to the combined merge candidate [Abstract, Paragraph [0046]-[0051], Figs. 4-6, Proposed mean candidate is derived by Average candidate 524 (merge_idx = 4) derived as the average of selected motion vectors of first motion vector MVL0_a 520 and second motion vector MVL0_b 522] ; or determining, according to an average of a motion vector of the reference picture list 1 corresponding to the first merge candidate and a motion vector of the reference picture list 1 corresponding to the second merge candidate, a motion vector of the reference picture list 1 corresponding to the combined merge candidate [Abstract, Paragraph [0046]-[0051], Figs. 4-6, Proposed mean candidate is derived by Average candidate 524 (merge_idx = 4) derived as the average of selected motion vectors of first motion vector MVL1_a 620 and second motion vector MVL1_c 622] . It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Zhou to integrate the combined merge candidate in Lin, to improve coding efficiency (Lin, Paragraph [0046]). As shown above, all of the limitations are known, they can be applied to a known method or device to yield a predictable result of adding a combined merging block candidate to a candidate list that is combined/derived through averaging of two merging candidates. Lastly, Zhou and Lin do not explicitly disclose determining, according to a weighted average of a motion vector of the reference picture list. Coban teaches determining, according to a weighted average of a motion vector of the reference picture list [Paragraph [0074]-[0075], Fig. 4B, the motion vector predictor candidates may include combinations of motion vectors for two or more of the neighboring blocks, e.g., an average, median, or weighted average of the two or more motion vectors ]. It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Zhou to integrate the motion vector combining techniques in Coban, to increase signaling efficiency (i.e., fewer bits), thus improving video coding efficiency (Coban, Paragraph [0072]-[0073]). As shown above, all of the limitations are known, they can be applied to a known method or device to yield a predictable result of adding a combined merging block candidate to a candidate list that is combined/derived through weighted averaging of two merging candidates. Regarding claim 9 , claim 9 is drawn to a video encoding apparatus having limitations similar and reciprocal to the video decoding apparatus of using the same as claimed in claim 4 treated in the above rejection. Therefore, video encoding apparatus claim 9 corresponds to video decoding apparatus claim 4 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above. Regarding claim 14 , claim 14 is drawn to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having limitations similar to the video encoding apparatus of using the same as claimed in claim 9 treated in the above rejections. Therefore, non-transitory computer-readable storage medium claim 14 corresponds to video encoding apparatus claim 4 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 5, 10 & 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhou et al. (US 2012/0320984 A1 with Provisional 61/501,441) (hereinafter Zhou), Lin et al. (US 2018/0324454 A1) (hereinafter Lin), and Coban et al. (US 2013/0083853 A1) (hereinafter Coban) in view of Demos (US 2012/0044995 A1) (hereinafter Demos) . Regarding claim 5 , Zhou, Lin, and Coban disclose the video decoding apparatus according to claim 4, and are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to the claim. However, Zhou, Lin, and Coban do not explicitly disclose the particulars of claim 5. Demos teaches wherein a weight of the motion vector corresponding to the first merge candidate is equal to a weight of the motion vector corresponding to the second merge candidate [Paragraph [0071] & [0170], For example, for mode 3, the bi- directional prediction for each macroblock of a frame is an equal average of the subsequent and previous frame macroblocks, as displaced by the two corresponding motion vectors. It is specified in MPEG-1, 2, and 4, as well as in the H.261 and H.263 standards, that B frames use an equal weighting of pixel values of the forward referenced and backward referenced frames] ; or wherein a ratio of the weight of the motion vector corresponding to the first merge candidate to the weight of the motion vector corresponding to the second merge candidate is [1:1] [Paragraph [0071] & [0170], For example, for mode 3, the bi-directional prediction for each macroblock of a frame is an equal average of the subsequent and previous frame macroblocks, as displaced by the two corresponding motion vectors. It is specified in MPEG-1, 2, and 4, as well as in the H.261 and H.263 standards, that B frames use an equal weighting, as 1:1, of pixel values of the forward referenced and backward referenced frames] . It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Zhou to integrate the bidirectional weighing average in Demos, to determine pixels of bi-directionally predicted frames as a weighted proportion of corresponding pixel values in non-bidirectionally predicted frames for improving the image quality of one or more predicted frames in a video compression system (Demos, Paragraph [0017]-[0019]). Regarding claim 10 , claim 10 is drawn to a video encoding apparatus having limitations similar and reciprocal to the video decoding apparatus of using the same as claimed in claim 5 treated in the above rejection. Therefore, video encoding apparatus claim 10 corresponds to video decoding apparatus claim 5 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above. Regarding claim 15 , claim 15 is drawn to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having limitations similar to the video encoding apparatus of using the same as claimed in claim 10 treated in the above rejections. Therefore, non-transitory computer-readable storage medium claim 15 corresponds to video encoding apparatus claim 10 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL CHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-5707. The examiner can normally be reached M-Sa, 12PM - 10 PM. 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, David Czekaj can be reached at 571-272-7327. 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. /DANIEL CHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 2 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 3 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 4 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 5 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 6 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 7 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 8 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 9 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 10 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 11 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 12 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 13 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 14 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 15 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 16 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 17 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 18 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 19 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 20 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 21 Art Unit: 2487 Application/Control Number: 19/232,014 Page 22 Art Unit: 2487
Prosecution Insights