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 .
Response to Arguments/Amendments
Presented arguments have been fully considered, but are rendered moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection necessitated by amendment(s) initiated by the applicant(s).
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 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.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1,2,4,5,8,9,10,13,14,15,17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over He US 20170289566 in view of Lou US 20130114725.
Regarding claim 1, He disclose(s) the following claim limitations:
A method for video processing, comprising:
determining, for a conversion between a current video block of a video and a bitstream of the video, at least one of a temporal block vector (BV) prediction or a temporal BV candidate of the current video block (i.e. 2402-2408 checks BVs from neighbors and adds it to the merge candidate list if valid for intra BC, temporal BV candidates and derived temporal BVs) [171-174; fig. 24a,b]; and
performing the processing based on the at least one of the temporal BV prediction or the temporal BV candidate (i.e. bitstream converted to block for processing) [171-174; fig. 24a,b].
He do/does not explicitly disclose(s) the following claim limitations:
wherein determining at least one of the temporal BV prediction or the temporal BV candidate comprises: in accordance with a set of conditions associated with a motion grid covering a temporal position being satisfied, determining at least one of the temporal BV prediction or the temporal BV candidate based on the temporal position.
However, in the same field of endeavor Lou discloses the deficient claim limitations, as follows:
wherein determining at least one of the temporal BV prediction or the temporal BV candidate comprises: in accordance with a set of conditions associated with a motion grid covering a temporal position being satisfied, determining at least one of the temporal BV prediction or the temporal BV candidate based on the temporal position. (i.e. motion vectors scaled and is associated with a motion vector grid) [14-15].
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of He with Lou to perform the conversion based on the at least one of the temporal BV prediction or the temporal BV candidate.
It would be advantageous because bitstreams need to be converted to be processed efficiently.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill, in the art at the time of filing, to modify the teachings of He with Lou to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, He meets the claim limitations, as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein the temporal BV prediction is introduced in at least one of: a regular intra block copy (IBC) merge prediction (i.e. 2402-2408 checks BVs from neighbors and adds it to the merge candidate list if valid for intra BC, temporal BV candidates and derived temporal BVs) [171-174; fig. 23,a,b,24a,b], a regular IBC advanced motion vector prediction (AMVP) prediction, an IBC template matching (IBC-TM) merge prediction, an IBC-TM AMVP prediction, a reconstruction- reordered IBC (RR-IBC) merge prediction, an RR-IBC AMVP prediction, an IBC merge mode with block vector differences (IBC-MBVD) prediction, a string copy vector prediction, or a further BV prediction, and/or wherein the temporal BV candidate is included in a BV candidate list, wherein the BV candidate list comprises at least one of: a regular intra block copy (TBC) merge candidate list, a regular TBC advanced motion vector prediction (AMVP) candidate list, an IBC template matching (IBC-TM) merge candidate list, an IBC-TM AMVP candidate list, a reconstruction-reordered IBC (RR-IBC) merge candidate list, an RR-IBC AMVP candidate list, an IBC merge mode with block vector differences (IBC-MBVD) base candidate list, or a further BV candidate list.
Regarding claim 4, He meets the claim limitations, as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein
determining at least one of the temporal BV prediction or the temporal BV candidate comprises:
determining a temporal position from a plurality of positions in a collocated picture of the current video block (i.e. 2402-2408 checks BVs from neighbors and adds it to the merge candidate list if valid for intra BC, temporal BV candidates and derived temporal BVs) [171-174; fig. 23,a,b,24a,b]; and
determining at least one of the temporal BV prediction or the temporal BV candidate based on the temporal position (i.e. 2402-2408 checks BVs from neighbors and adds it to the merge candidate list if valid for intra BC, temporal BV candidates and derived temporal BVs) [171-174; fig. 23,a,b,24a,b],
wherein the plurality of positions comprises a first position below and right to a collocated block of the current video block in the collocated picture and a second position at a central position of the collocated block (i.e. 2402-2408 checks BVs from neighbors and adds it to the merge candidate list if valid for intra BC, temporal BV candidates and derived temporal BVs) [171-174; fig. 23,a,b,24a,b],
wherein a width and a height of a collocated block in the collocated picture is the same as a width and a height of the current video block in a current picture (i.e. current block and collocated block is the same size.) [171-174; fig. 23,a,b,24a,b],
wherein a position of the collocated block in the collocated picture is the same as a position of the current video block in the current picture (i.e. position is the same) [171-174; fig. 23,a,b,24a,b], or
wherein a position of the collocated block in the collocated picture is determined based on a motion shift and a position of the current video block in the current picture,
wherein a position of the collocated block in the collocated picture is determined based on a motion shift and a position of the current video block in the current picture, wherein the motion shift comprises a motion vector of a spatial neighbor of the current video block (i.e. MV derivation from the current coding unit to a reference picture would show the motion shift) [185; fig. 28],
wherein the spatial neighbor comprises one of a plurality of spatial neighbors, the plurality of spatial neighbors comprises:
a first spatial neighbor left to the current video block, a second spatial neighbor above to the current video block, a third spatial neighbor above and right to the current video block, a fourth spatial neighbor below and left to the current video block, and a fifth spatial neighbor above and left to the current video block (i.e. neighboring blocks shown in fig. 23b) [171-174; fig. 23,a,b,24a,b].
Regarding claim 5, He meets the claim limitations, as follows:
The method of claim 4, wherein determining the motion shift comprises:
determining at least one valid motion vector of at least one spatial neighbor of the current video block as at least one motion shift, the at least one motion shift being determined in a predefined priority order of a plurality of spatial neighbors (i.e. MV derivation from the current coding unit to a reference picture would show the motion shift) [185; fig. 28],
wherein the at least one valid motion vector comprises a number of valid motion vectors, the number being one of: 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 (i.e. MV derivation from the current coding unit to a reference picture would show the motion shift, MV1,d,0) [185; fig. 28], and/or
wherein the predefined priority order comprises one of:
a first priority order of the first spatial neighbor, the second spatial neighbor, the third spatial neighbor, the fourth spatial neighbor, and the fifth spatial neighbor,
a second priority order of the second spatial neighbor, the first spatial neighbor, the third spatial neighbor, the fourth spatial neighbor, and the fifth spatial neighbor,
a third priority order of the fourth spatial neighbor, the first spatial neighbor, the third spatial neighbor, the second spatial neighbor, and the fifth spatial neighbor.
Regarding claim 8, He meets the claim limitations, as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein the temporal BV candidate comprises at least one temporal BV candidate selected from:
a candidate determined based on a first position of a collocated block of the current video block in a collocated picture or a candidate determined based on a second position of the collocated block of the current video block in the collocated picture [161-166], and a set of candidates determined based on a set of shifted first positions or a set of shifted second positions, the set of shifted first positions being shifted from the first position based on a set of motion shifts associated with a set of spatial neighbors of the current video block, the set of shifted second positions being shifted from the second position based on the set of motion shifts,
wherein the set of spatial neighbors comprises a first spatial neighbor left to the current video block, wherein the number of the at least one temporal BV candidate is less than or equal to 2 [161-166], or
wherein the set of spatial neighbors comprises at least one of:
a first spatial neighbor left to the current video block, a second spatial neighbor above to the current video block, a third spatial neighbor above and right to the current video block, a fourth spatial neighbor below and left to the current video block, and a fifth spatial neighbor above and left to the current video block (i.e. neighboring blocks shown in fig. 23b) [171-174; fig. 23,a,b,24a,b], and/or wherein the first position comprises a position below and right to the collocated block, and the second position comprises a central position of the collocated block, and/or wherein the number of the at least one temporal BV candidate is less than or equal to 6, and/or wherein a priority order of the first position and the second position is that the first position being prioritized over the second position, or that the second position being prioritized over the first position,
wherein a priority order of a shifted first position and a shifted second position is the same with the priority order of the first position and the second position, or is opposite to the priority order of the first position and the second position,
wherein the shifted first position and the shifted second position is based on a motion shift of a spatial neighbor, the spatial neighbor comprises at least one of: a first spatial neighbor left to the current video block, a second spatial neighbor above to the current video block, a third spatial neighbor above and right to the current video block, a fourth spatial neighbor below and left to the current video block, and a fifth spatial neighbor above and left to the current video block (i.e. neighboring blocks shown in fig. 23b) [171-174; fig. 23,a,b,24a,b].
Regarding claim 9, He meets the claim limitations, as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein the temporal BV candidate comprises at least one temporal BV candidate selected from: a candidate determined based on a first position of a collocated block of the current video block in a collocated picture [161-166], a candidate determined based on a second position of the collocated block of the current video block in the collocated picture, a set of candidates determined based on a set of shifted first positions, the set of shifted first positions being shifted from the first position based on a set of motion shifts associated with a set of spatial neighbors of the current video block, and a set of candidates determined based on a set of shifted second positions, the set of shifted second positions being shifted from the second position based on the set of motion shifts,
wherein the set of spatial neighbors comprises a first spatial neighbor left to the current video block [fig. 23a-b], wherein the number of the at least one temporal BV candidate is less than or equal to 4 [161-166], or wherein the set of spatial neighbors comprises at least one of: a first spatial neighbor left to the current video block [fig. 23a-b], a second spatial neighbor above to the current video block, a third spatial neighbor above and right to the current video block, a fourth spatial neighbor below and left to the current video block, and a fifth spatial neighbor above and left to the current video block, wherein the first position comprises a position below and right to the collocated block, and the second position comprises a central position of the collocated block, and/or wherein the number of the at least one temporal BV candidate is less than or equal to 12, wherein a priority order of the first position and the second position is that the first position being prioritized over the second position, or that the second position being prioritized over the first position, wherein a priority order of a shifted first position and a shifted second position is the same with the priority order of the first position and the second position, or is opposite to the priority order of the first position and the second position, and/or wherein the shifted first position and the shifted second position is based on a motion shift of a spatial neighbor , the spatial neighbor comprises at least one of: a first spatial neighbor left to the current video block [fig. 23a-b], a second spatial neighbor above to the current video block, a third spatial neighbor above and right to the current video block, a fourth spatial neighbor below and left to the current video block, and a fifth spatial neighbor above and left to the current video block.
Regarding claim 10, He meets the claim limitations, as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein at least one temporal BV candidate is determined based on a set of temporal positions, wherein the set of temporal positions is predefined, or wherein the set of temporal positions is determined based on coding information, wherein the set of temporal positions is determined based on at least one of: a position of the current video block, a width of the current video block, or a height of the current video block, wherein at least one distance between the at least one temporal BV candidate and the current video block is based on a width and a height of the current video block [161,173,174; fig. 23-25].
Regarding claim 13, He meets the claim limitations, as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein at least one pattern of temporalBV candidate is used, and/or
wherein at least one temporal BV candidate comprises a first temporal BV candidate determined in a first manner and a second temporal BV candidate determined in a second manner (i.e. TBVP determined using spatial or temporal or last or default predictors) [166], and/or
wherein the number of temporalBV candidates of the current video block is less than or equal to a threshold number, wherein the number of temporal BV candidates after a full pruning process is less than or equal to the threshold number, wherein the threshold number is 5 or 4, or
wherein the threshold number is based on a coding mode of the current video block, wherein the coding mode comprises at least one of: IBC-TM AMVP mode or IBC-TM merge mode, and the threshold number is 1 or 2, or wherein the coding mode comprises a further IBC mode, and the threshold number is 4 or 5.
Regarding claim 14, He meets the claim limitations, as follows:
The method of claim 1, further comprising at least one of:
performing at least one of a redundancy check or a pruning process to at least one temporal BV candidate, wherein a full pruning process is performed on a plurality of temporal BV candidates, if a difference between first motion information of a first temporal BV candidate and second motion information of a second temporal BV candidate is less than or equal to a threshold, at least one of the first or the second temporal BV candidate is excluded from a temporal BV candidate list (i.e. redundancy removed from candidate list. This would mean if the BVs meet the threshold of being redundant, it would be removed.) [109], and/or wherein the pruning process comprises a partial pruning process,
adding a plurality of temporal BV candidates in a BV candidate list of the current video block, wherein the plurality of temporal BV candidates is added in the BV candidate list before a history-based motion vector prediction (HMVP) candidate, or wherein a partial of the plurality of temporal BV candidates is added in the BV candidate list before a history-based motion vector prediction (HMVP) candidate, and remaining of the plurality of temporal BV candidate is added in the BV candidate list after the HMVP candidate, or wherein the plurality of temporal BV candidates is added in the BV candidate list after a history-based motion vector prediction (HMVP) candidate.
Regarding claim 15, He meets the claim limitations, as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein at least one temporal BV prediction or at least one temporal BV candidate of the current video block is determined based on a set of collocated pictures of the current video block,
wherein the number of the set of collocated pictures is larger than or equal to a first value (i.e. fig. 15 shows a set of collocated pictures with 4) [fig. 15],
wherein an indication of the set of collocated pictures is included at least one of: a sequence level, a group of pictures level, a picture level, a slice level or a tile group level, wherein the indication of the set of collocated pictures is included in at least one of: a sequence header, a picture header, a sequence parameter set (SPS), a Video Parameter Set (VPS), a decoded parameter set (DPS), Decoding Capability Information (DCI), a Picture Parameter Set (PPS), an Adaptation Parameter Set (APS), a slice header or a tile group header, and/or
wherein the set of collocated pictures is selected from a plurality of collocated pictures based on at least one of: a plurality of picture of count (POC) distances of the plurality of collocated pictures relative to a current picture comprising the current video block, a plurality of quantization parameter (QP) differences of the plurality of collocated pictures relative to the current picture, or a plurality of QPs of the plurality of collocated pictures, wherein the set of collocated pictures comprises top N collocated pictures with least POC distances, N being a positive integer.
Regarding claim 17, He meets the claim limitations, as follows:
The method of claim 1, wherein the conversion includes encoding the current video block into the bitstream, or wherein the conversion includes decoding the current video block from the bitstream [78; fig. 10,11,12].
Claim 18 is rejected using similar rationale as claim 1 and further below.
He meets the claim limitations, as follows:
processor and memory [fig. 11]
Claim 19 is rejected using similar rationale as claim 1.
Claim 20 is rejected using similar rationale as claim 1
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3,6,7,11,12,16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 16, He meets the claim limitations, as follows:
The method of claim 1, further comprising:
determining a BV candidate list of the current video block, wherein a processing process is applied for the determining the BV candidate list, the processing process comprising at least one of: a reordering process or a refinement process [218],
wherein the processing process is based on template matching costs of BV candidates, and/or wherein determining the BV candidate list comprises:
determining a set of candidates, the set of candidates comprising at least one of: a first number of adjacent spatial candidates [fig. 23a,b], a second number of temporal candidates [fig. 23a,b], a third number of history-based motion vector prediction (HMVP) candidates, a fourth number of pairwise average candidates, or a fifth number of predefined BV candidates;
updating the set of candidates by performing a full pruning process to the set of candidates to remove duplicate candidates [109; fig. 15];
reordering the updated set of candidates; and
determining the BV candidate list based on the reordering of the updated set of candidates, wherein the BV candidate list comprises top N candidates in the updated set of candidates with lowest costs, N being a positive integer.
He does not teach or suggest the limitations not mapped.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JARED T WALKER whose telephone number is (571)272-1839. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:00 - 3:00 Mountain.
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, Nasser Goodarzi can be reached on 571-272-4195. 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.
/Jared Walker/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426
Prosecution Insights