DETAILED ACTION
1. This office action is in response to U.S. Patent Application No.: 18/500,927 filed on 6/30/2025 with effective filing date 8/6/2018. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
2. 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.
Claim 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
In regards to claims 18-20, the claims recite “computer-readable recording medium” which appears to cover both transitory and non-transitory embodiments. This is broad and is open to many interpretations such as signal or software. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is required to give claims their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification during proceeding before the USPTO. See In re Zletz, 893 F.2d 319 (Fed. Cir. 1989) (during patent examination the pending claims must be interpreted as broadly as their terms reasonably allow). The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a computer readable medium (also called machine readable medium and other such variations) in light of specification (para: 240 of PGPUB) covers both forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se. See MPEP 2111.01. When the broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim covers a signal per se, the claim must be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as covering non-statutory subject matter. See ln re Nuijten, 500 F.3d 1346, 1356-57 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (transitory embodiments are not directed to statutory subject matter) and Interim Examination Instructions for Evaluating Subject Matter Eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101 Aug. 24 2009; p. 2.
Examiner suggests that the Applicant add the limitation “non-transitory” to the computer readable storage medium as recited in the claim(s) in order to properly render the claim(s) in statutory form in view of their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the originally filed specification
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. Claim(s) 1, 2-3, 7-10, 16-17 & 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim et al. US 2019/0200040 A1 in view of Chono US 2015/0281726 A1.
Per claims 1, 17 & 19-20, Lim et al. discloses an image decoding method, comprising: generating a candidate list including motion information derived from a neighboring block adjacent to a current block (para: 555-556, e.g. a merge candidate list of a current block including at least one merge candidate corresponding to each of a plurality of reference picture lists may be generated at step S3301; the merge candidate corresponding to each of the plurality of reference picture lists may mean a merge candidate having LX motion information corresponding to reference picture list L ); deriving motion information of the current block using the candidate list (para: 557, e.g. the merge candidate list includes at least one of a spatial merge candidate derived from a spatial neighbor block of the current block, a temporal merge candidate derived from a collocated block of the current block, a modified spatial merge candidate derived by modifying the spatial merge candidate, a modified temporal merge candidate derived by modifying the temporal merge candidate, and a merge candidate having a predefined motion information value).
Lim et al. fails to explicitly disclose the remaining claim limitations.
Chono however in the same field of endeavor teaches generating a prediction block of the current block using the derived motion information of the current block (para: 50, e.g. in step S102, the merge motion information candidate list generation unit 102 generates a merge motion information candidate list).
Therefore, in view of disclosures by Chono, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine Lim et al. and Chono in order to determine by using a merge index of merge motion information in merge motion information candidate list from which unsuitability merge index is excluded.
Per claim 2, Lim et al. further teaches the image decoding method of claim 1, further comprising: updating the derived motion information of the current block in a motion information list to be used for inter prediction, wherein the neighboring block comprises a spatial neighboring block and a temporal neighboring block (para: 557, e.g. the merge candidate list includes at least one of a spatial merge candidate derived from a spatial neighbor block of the current block, a temporal merge candidate derived from a collocated block of the current block, a modified spatial merge candidate derived by modifying the spatial merge candidate, a modified temporal merge candidate derived by modifying the temporal merge candidate, and a merge candidate having a predefined motion information value).
Per claim 3, Lim et al. further teaches the image decoding method of claim 2, wherein the inter prediction uses a merge mode (para: 230, & fig. 13, e.g. when the merge candidate list is generated, motion information of the current block may be determined by using the generated merge candidate list at step S1303. Next, the decoding apparatus may perform motion compensation by using the motion information at step S1304).
Per claim 7, Lim et al. further teaches the image decoding method of claim 2, wherein when the motion information of the updated motion information list in the block decoded before decoding for the current block is the same as the motion information previously included in the candidate list, the generating of the candidate list is performed in such a manner as not to include the motion information of the motion information list in the candidate list (para: 229 & fig. 12, e.g. an encoding apparatus may derive a merge candidate at step S1201, and may generate a merge candidate list based on the derived merge candidate. When the merge candidate list is generated, motion information is determined by using the generated merge candidate list at step S1202, and motion compensation of the current block may be performed by using the determined motion information at step S1203).
Per claim 8, Lim et al. further teaches the image decoding method of claim 2, wherein the motion information list is initialized when decoding of a predetermined region is completed so that the region is changed, and the predetermined region is any one of a block composed of one or more Coding Units (CUs) or a block composing of one or more Coding Tree Units (CTUs) (para: 421 & fig. 28).
Per claim 9, Lim et al. further teaches the image decoding method of claim 2, wherein when there is a plurality of motion information in the updated motion information list in the block decoded before decoding for the current block, the generating of the candidate list is performed in such a manner as to include an average of at least two or more motion information of the plurality of motion information in the candidate list (para: 230, & fig. 13, e.g. when the merge candidate list is generated, motion information of the current block may be determined by using the generated merge candidate list at step S1303. Next, the decoding apparatus may perform motion compensation by using the motion information at step S1304), and reference information of one of the at least two or more motion information is used as reference information of the average (para: 185, e.g. it may be generated by an average value of upper reference samples of the current block and left reference samples of the current block. In addition, filtering may be performed on one or more upper rows and one or more left columns adjacent to the reference sample in the encoding/decoding block by using reference sample values).
Per claim 10, Lim et al. further teaches the image decoding method of claim 2, wherein the motion information list has a limitation of a predetermined size (para: 211).
Per claim 16, Lim et al. further teaches the image decoding method of claim 1, wherein an average of a plurality of motion information of the candidate list is added to the candidate list (para: 230, & fig. 13, e.g. when the merge candidate list is generated, motion information of the current block may be determined by using the generated merge candidate list at step S1303. Next, the decoding apparatus may perform motion compensation by using the motion information at step S1304).
Per claim 18, Lim et al. further teaches a computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream generated by the image encoding method of claim 17 (para: 556).
6. Claim(s) 4 & 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lim et al. US 2019/0200040 A1 in view of Chono US 2015/0281726 A1 and Xu et al. US 2020/0112727 A1.
Per claim 4, Lim et al. in view of Chono fails to explicitly teach the limitation of claim 4.
Xu et al. however in the same field of endeavor teaches the image decoding method of claim 2, wherein the inter prediction uses an Advanced Motion Vector Prediction (AMVP) mode (para: 94, e.g. the coding of a BV can be either explicit or implicit. In the explicit mode, a BV difference between a BV and a BV predictor is signaled, which is similar to advanced motion vector prediction (AMVP) in the inter prediction).
Therefore, in view of disclosures by Xu et al., it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine Lim et al., Chono and Xu et al. in order to decode prediction information of a current block in a current picture from a coded video bitstream. The prediction information has a prediction mode for reconstructing the current block being one of an inter prediction mode and an intra block copy (IBC) mode.
Per claim 13, Xu et al. further teaches the image decoding method of claim 1, further comprising: storing the derived motion information in a motion information list to be used for Intra Block Copy (IBC) mode (para: 10, e.g. the processing circuitry selects a base vector from a candidate list including a block vector candidate used in the IBC mode and determines an offset vector based on offset information that includes directions and sizes for constructing offset vectors).
Per claim 14, Xu et al. further teaches the image decoding method of claim 13. wherein the IBC mode comprises a merge mode (para: 77, e.g. merge mode can be an inter picture prediction submode where the motion vector is derived from one or more motion vector predictors without the benefit of a coded motion vector component outside the predictors).
Per claim 15, Xu et al. further teaches the image decoding method of claim 13, wherein the IBC mode comprises an Advanced Motion Vector Prediction (AMVP) mode (para: 94-95).
Allowable Subject Matter
7. Claims 5-6 & 11-12 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. Examiner notes that Terminal disclaimer will be required based on how the claims are amended against the parent US patent.
Conclusion
8. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zhao et al. US 2020/0137398 A1, e.g. a method of processing a video signal based on inter prediction includes constructing a first merge candidate list of a current block using a spatial merge candidate and temporal merge candidate of the current block, constructing a second merge candidate list by adding a history-based merge candidate indicating motion information of a block coded prior to the current block to the first merge candidate list.
Nishitani et al. US 2017/0105000 A1, e.g. In a first inter-image prediction mode in which information on a motion vector is used, a first mode detection unit constructs a first candidate list from a plurality of reference block candidates based on a first predetermined order, assigns indices for designating reference block candidates added in the first candidate list, and outputs the indices of the plurality of reference candidate blocks. In a second inter-image prediction mode in which is used a motion vector difference between a motion vector predictor based on information on a motion vector, and a motion vector of a coding target block.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IRFAN HABIB whose telephone number is (571)270-7325. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Th 9AM-7PM.
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, Jay Patel can be reached at 5712722988. 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.
/Irfan Habib/Examiner, Art Unit 2485
Prosecution Insights