DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed on 06/27/2025. Claims 1-20 have been examined.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/16/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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, 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 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.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2026/0046390) in view of Wang (US 2025/0337884).
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses the following claim limitations: a method comprising: searching, by a decoder, first candidate templates in a first search region and second candidate templates in a second search region to select a reference template based on calculating template matching (TM) costs comprising first TM costs of the first candidate templates and second TM costs of the second candidate templates [Kim discloses ¶0869-¶0870; at least one of blocks having an error cost lower than a threshold value may be determined to be a similar candidate… if an error cost (e.g., a template matching cost) for the adjacent/non-adjacent block or the corresponding block is higher than a threshold value (e.g., a predetermined multiple of an error cost of a predetermined order previously added to the candidate list, such as a first candidate), the block is determined not to be the similar candidate. ¶0890; a neighbor block having a minimum error cost is to be found using template matching. ¶0432, ¶0877. ¶Fig.22];
and decoding the CB based on a RB indicated by the reference template [Kim discloses ¶0564; decoding apparatus 200 may select a prediction motion vector candidate, indicated by the prediction motion vector index, from among prediction motion vector candidates included in the prediction motion vector candidate list, as the prediction motion vector of the target block. ¶0592; inter prediction information of the target block may be derived according to the mode indicated by the merge candidate selected by the merge index among the merge candidates in the merge candidate list. ¶0808-¶0809].
Kim does not explicitly disclose the following claim limitation: wherein: the first candidate templates, of first candidate reference blocks (RBs) from the first search region, each corresponds to a current template of a current block (CB); and the second candidate templates, of second candidate RBs from the second search region, each corresponds to the current template flipped in a direction.
However, in the same field of endeavor Wang discloses more explicitly the following:
wherein: the first candidate templates, of first candidate reference blocks (RBs) from the first search region, each corresponds to a current template of a current block (CB); and the second candidate templates, of second candidate RBs from the second search region, each corresponds to the current template flipped in a direction (Wang, paragraph 398 discloses a certain candidate in the candidate list is a reference block, another candidate is a fused reference block combination, the reference block templates corresponding to these reference blocks may be the first reference block templates and/or the second reference block templates, and these second reference block templates may be obtained by flipping or the like; in addition paragraph 381 discloses different search methods for matching).
It would have been obvious to one the ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to modify the teachings of Kim with Wang to create the system of Kim with obtaining a second reference block templates by flipping.
The reasoning being is to reduce a bandwidth and traffic pressure of digital video transmission (Wang, paragraph 4).
Regarding claim 2, Kim and Wang discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, in a bitstream, an indication of the CB being encoded in a template matching prediction (TMP) mode that searches for candidate templates that are flipped in the direction relative to the current template, wherein the determining the first candidate templates and the determining the second candidate templates are based on the receiving the indication (Wang, paragraphs 366-368 discloses he reconstructed block templates have a plurality of types; and encoding the syntax elements related to the intraTMP mode of the current block further includes: after encoding the intraTMP mode usage flag of the current block, encoding syntax elements related to reference block template types, where the syntax elements related to the reference block template types are used to indicate whether affine transformation is allowed to be used to obtain the reference block template, and/or to indicate a type of the affine transformation used; [where the type of the affine transformation includes any one or more of flipping, rotation and zoom). The same motivation that was utilized in claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 2.
Regarding claim 3, Kim and Wang discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the decoding the CB comprises: determining a reconstructed block based on combining the RB with a residual of the CB; determining whether to flip the reconstructed block in the direction based on whether the reference template is one of the first candidate templates or the second candidate templates; and decoding the CB based on whether to flip the reconstructed block in the direction (Wang, paragraph 378 discloses during searching for a reference block template in a reconstructed region, the reconstructed picture is compared intact with the current block template. During use, the reconstructed value of the reference block in the reconstructed picture is directly used as the prediction value of the current block. This form may be called a basic form, and the reference block template searched is the first reference block template in the above embodiments. In the present embodiment, affine transformation, such as horizontal flipping, vertical flipping, clockwise or counterclockwise rotation of 45 degrees, 90 degrees or 180 degrees, is performed on the reconstructed picture in the local region within the reconstructed region, so as to obtain a template (i.e., the second reference block template) having the same shape and the same size as the current block template via the affine transformation). The same motivation that was utilized in claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 3.
Regarding claim 4, Kim and Wang discloses the method of claim 1, wherein: each of the first candidate templates matches in shape, orientation, and size with the current template; and each of the second candidate templates matches in shape, orientation, and size with the current template flipped in the direction (Wang, paragraphs 378-379 discloses another way to obtain the second reference block template, which is to obtain, by searching, a template in the reconstructed region that has the same shape and the same size as the current block template after affine transformation). The same motivation that was utilized in claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 4.
Regarding claim 5, Kim and Wang discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first search region is different from the second search region, and wherein the second search region is defined based on the direction of flipping (Wang, paragraph 381 discloses different search methods for matching). The same motivation that was utilized in claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 5.
Regarding claim 6, Kim and Wang discloses the method of claim 5, wherein the second search region comprises: a first rectangular region located above and to the left of the CB; and a second rectangular region, wherein: based on the direction being horizontal, the second rectangular region is adjacent to and located to the left of the CB; and based on the direction being vertical, the second rectangular region is adjacent to and located above the CB (Wang, paragraph 114 discloses in FIG. 7, the rectangular regions on the left and top sides of the current block are set as templates. The height of the template at the left is generally the same as the height of the current block, and the width of the template at the top is generally the same as the width of the current block, but the heights or the widths may also be different. The optimal matching position of the template is searched in the reference picture to determine the motion information, or referred to as the motion vector, of the current block). The same motivation that was utilized in claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 6.
Regarding claim 7, Kim and Wang discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising searching, in a third search region and by the decoder, third candidate templates, of third candidate RBs from the third search region, that each corresponds to the current template flipped in a second direction, wherein the third search region is defined based on the second direction, and wherein: the TM costs further comprises third TM costs of the third candidate templates; and the reference template is selected from the first candidate templates, the second candidate templates, and the third candidate templates (Wang, paragraph 140 discloses determining M′ third search ranges according to BVs corresponding to M′ reference block templates with the smallest differences searched in the second search, determining M′ groups of BVs according to a third search step and the M′ third search ranges; searching for corresponding reference block templates in the M′ third search ranges according to the M′ groups of BVs, calculating the differences between the searched reference block templates and the current block template, and updating the candidate list according to the differences; where the third search step is smaller than the second search step, the third search range is smaller than the second search range, and the third search ranges do not overlap with each other, M′ being greater than or equal to N). The same motivation that was utilized in claim 1 applies equally as well to claim 7.
With regard to claims 8-20, claims 8-20 lists all the same features and elements to claims 1-7 as outlined above. Therefore, the same rationale that was utilized in claims 1-7 applies equally as well to claims 8-20. In addition, Wang paragraph 412 discloses a memory and a processor storing instructions.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERRY T JEAN BAPTISTE whose telephone number is (571)272-6189. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, William Vaughn can be reached at 571-272-3922. 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.
/JERRY T JEAN BAPTISTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2481
Prosecution Insights