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 .
Claim Status
This Office Action responds to application 19/254801 filed on 6/30/25. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for a provisional application filed on 7/1/24.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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)(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.
1. Claims 1 - 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zhang et al., US 2024/0323353 A1 (hereinafter Zhang).
As for claim 1, Zhang discloses an apparatus comprising: at least one processor ([2021], e.g., processors); and at least one memory ([2021], e.g., memory) storing instructions that, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus at least to: determine a plurality of pairwise merge candidates (Fig. 29, e.g., updated list, note the pairs in the list) for a current coding unit ([0227], e.g., current CU) based on a list ([0225], e.g., the order of each merge candidate is adjusted, note the list after adjustment/sorting) of merge candidates sorted ([0225], e.g., arranged … ascending order) according to a template cost ([0225], e.g., template matching cost), wherein multiple pairwise merge candidates (Fig. 29, e.g., updated list, note the pairs in the list) are determined for respective merge candidates of the sorted list of merge candidates; and select ([0139], e.g., an index of best merge candidate is encoded) at least one pairwise merge candidate of the plurality of pairwise merge candidates based, at least partially, on an averaged ([0149], e.g., averaging) template cost of the respective pairwise merge candidates of the at least one selected pairwise merge candidate.
As for claim 2, most of limitations of this claim have been noted in the rejection of Claim 1. In addition, Zhang further discloses the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to: obtain the list of merge candidates ([0225], e.g., the order of each merge candidate is adjusted, note the list before adjustment/sorting) for the current coding unit; and sort ([0225], e.g., arranged … ascending order) the list of merge candidates according to template cost ([0225], e.g., template matching cost) with respect to a template of the current coding unit.
As for claim 3, most of limitations of this claim have been noted in the rejection of Claim 1. In addition, Zhang further discloses the at least one selected pairwise merge candidate comprises at least one pairwise merge candidate based on two merge candidates (Fig. 29, e.g., updated list, note many other candidates than the lowest template cost) other than a merge candidate with a lowest template cost in the list of merge candidates sorted according to the template cost.
As for claim 4, most of limitations of this claim have been noted in the rejection of Claim 1. In addition, Zhang further discloses selecting the at least one pairwise merge candidate of the plurality of merge candidates comprises the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to: select up to four pairwise merge candidates ([0139], e.g., an index of best merge candidate is encoded, note the one selected is less than or equal to four), of the plurality of merge candidates, with lowest averaged template costs.
As for claim 5, most of limitations of this claim have been noted in the rejection of Claim 1. In addition, Zhang further discloses selecting the at least one pairwise merge candidate of the plurality of pairwise merge candidates comprises the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to: determine an average template cost for respective pairwise merge candidates of the plurality of pairwise merge candidates ([0149], e.g., averaging); sort ([0953], e.g., reordering) the plurality of pairwise merge candidates according to average template cost ([0954], e.g., average candidate); and select a predetermined number of the sorted plurality of pairwise merge candidates with lowest average template costs ([0139], e.g., an index of best merge candidate is encoded).
As for claim 6, most of limitations of this claim have been noted in the rejection of Claim 1. In addition, Zhang further discloses the list of merge candidates comprises at least one of: a spatial merge candidate ([0141], e.g., spatial merge candidate), a temporal merge candidate ([0142], e.g., temporal merge candidate), a non-adjacent merge candidate ([0152], e.g., non-adjacent), or a history-based merge candidate ([0143], e.g., history-based).
As for claim 7, most of limitations of this claim have been noted in the rejection of Claim 1. In addition, Zhang further discloses the averaged template cost of the respective pairwise merge candidates of the at least one selected pairwise merge candidate comprises one of: a template cost for the at least one selected pairwise merge candidate, an average of respective template costs of two merge candidates represented with the at least one selected pairwise merge candidate ([0149], e.g., averaging), a sum of the respective template costs of the two merge candidates represented with the at least one selected pairwise merge candidate, or a smaller of the respective template costs of the two merge candidates represented with the at least one selected pairwise merge candidate.
As for claim 8, most of limitations of this claim have been noted in the rejection of Claim 1. In addition, Zhang further discloses the apparatus comprises a decoder, wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to: decode the current coding unit based, at least partially, on one or more of the at least one selected pairwise merge candidate ([0096], e.g., decoder).
As for claim 9, most of limitations of this claim have been noted in the rejection of Claim 1. In addition, Zhang further discloses the apparatus comprises an encoder, wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to: encode the current coding unit based, at least partially, on one or more of the at least one selected pairwise merge candidate ([0093], e.g., encoder).
As for claim 10, the claim recites a method of the apparatus of claim 1, and is similarly analyzed.
As for claim 11, the claim recites a method of the apparatus of claim 2, and is similarly analyzed.
As for claim 12, the claim recites a method of the apparatus of claim 3, and is similarly analyzed.
As for claim 13, the claim recites a method of the apparatus of claim 4, and is similarly analyzed.
As for claim 14, the claim recites a method of the apparatus of claim 5, and is similarly analyzed.
As for claim 15, the claim recites a method of the apparatus of claim 6, and is similarly analyzed.
As for claim 16, the claim recites a method of the apparatus of claim 7, and is similarly analyzed.
As for claim 17, the claim recites a method of the apparatus of claim 8, and is similarly analyzed.
As for claim 18, the claim recites a method of the apparatus of claim 9, and is similarly analyzed.
As for claim 19, the claim recites a computer-readable medium comprising program instructions stored thereon of the apparatus of claim 1, and is similarly analyzed.
As for claim 20, the claim recites a computer-readable medium comprising program instructions stored thereon of the apparatus of claim 2, and is similarly analyzed.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
1. US 2003/0108099 discloses picture encoding method and apparatus, picture decoding method and apparatus and furnishing medium.
2. US 2005/0053294 discloses techniques and tools for progressive and interlaced video coding and decoding.
3. US 2006/0126962 discloses methods and systems for reducing blocking artifacts with reduced complexity for spatially-scalable video coding.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH SUH whose telephone number is 571-270-7484. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday, 7:30 AM - 6:00 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, Jay Patel can be reached on 571-272-2988. 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.
/JOSEPH SUH/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2485
Prosecution Insights