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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on July 23, 2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Election of Species Requirement
In response to the Restriction Requirement, mailed June 29, 2026, claims 1-7, 15 and 17-20 are elected without traverse. Claims 8-14 and 16 have been withdrawn. No claims have been amended, canceled, nor added. No new matter has been added.
Accordingly, claims 1-7, 15 and 17-20 are pending in this application for examination on the merits.
Claim Interpretation
To be given patentable weight, non-transitory computer-readable recording medium and the bitstream (i.e. descriptive material) must be in a functional relationship. A functional relationship can be found where the descriptive material performs some function with respect to the storage medium to which it is associated. See MPEP §2111.05(I)(A). When a claimed “computer-readable recording medium merely serves as a support for information or data, no functional relationship exists”. MPEP §2111.05(III). Where the claim as a whole is directed to conveying a message or meaning to a human reader independent of the intended computer system, and/or the computer-readable medium merely serves as a support for information or data, no functional relationship exists. For example, a claim to a memory stick containing tables of batting averages, or tracks of recorded music, utilizes the intended computer system merely as a support for the information. Such claims are directed toward conveying meaning to the human reader rather than towards establishing a functional relationship between recorded data and the computer. MPEP §2111.05(III).
Claim 20 recites:
A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream of a video which is generated by a method performed by an apparatus for video processing, wherein the method comprises:
determining a motion shift (MS) of a current video block of the video based on at least one indication in the bitstream, the MS comprising a vector associated with a location of a prediction of the current video block;
determining temporal motion information of the current video block based on the MS; and
generating the bitstream based on the temporal motion information.
“[A] bitstream of a video which is generated by a method, the method comprises…,” recited in claim 20 is a product by process claim limitation where the product is the bitstream and the process is 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 a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream (with the structure implied by the method steps).
The storage medium storing the claimed bitstream in claim 20 merely services as a support for the storage of the bitstream and provides no functional relationship between the stored data and storage medium. Therefore, the structure of the data, which scope is implied by the method steps, is non-functional descriptive material and given no patentable weight. MPEP §2111.05(III). Thus, the claim scope is just a storage medium storing data and is anticipated by Chen et al., US 20230388513 A1 which recites a storage medium storing a data (Chen, ¶ [.0261] Fig. 3).
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 (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 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.
Claims 1-7, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen et al., US 20230388513 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Chen”).
Regarding claim 1, Chen discloses a method for video processing, comprising:
determining, for a conversion between a current video block of a video and a bitstream of the video, a motion shift (MS) of the current video block based on at least one indication in the bitstream (“[A] base index and displacement vector (DV) offset information of a current block in a current picture can be received from a coded video bitstream. The base index can indicate a DV predictor (DVP) in a plurality of DVP candidates of the current block.” Chen, ¶ [0220].), the MS comprising a vector associated with a location of a prediction of the current video block (“A displacement vector (DV) of the current CU can indicate a block in the collocated reference picture, for example, the DV points from the current block in the current picture to the block in the collocated reference picture.” ¶ [0163]);
determining temporal motion information of the current video block based on the MS (Determining temporal motion vector prediction and motion information. Chen, Figs. 22-23A); and performing the conversion based on the temporal motion information (Encoding/Decoding based on temporal motion information. Chen, Figs. 22-23A).
Regarding claim 2, Chen discloses the method of claim 1, wherein determining the MS comprises:
determining a motion shift prediction (MSP) and a motion shift difference (MSD) of the current video block based on the at least one indication ((“[A] base index and displacement vector (DV) offset information of a current block in a current picture can be received from a coded video bitstream. The base index can indicate a DV predictor (DVP… of the current block.” Chen, ¶ [0220].); and
determining the MS based on the MSP and the MSD (The processing circuitry determines a plurality of displacement vector (DV) predictor (DVP) candidates and receives a base index indicating a DVP in the plurality of DVP candidates and a DV offset of the current block. The processing circuitry determines a DV based on the DVP and the DV offset.” Chen, Abstract, ¶ [0220]),
wherein the at least one indication comprises an indication of the MSD, the MSD being a difference between the MS and a predictor of the MS (“In an example, the processing circuitry determines the DV to be a vector sum of the DVP and the DV offset.” ¶ [0023]), and/or
wherein the indication of the MSD is included in the bitstream based on one of: an integer-pel precision, or a fractional precision (Integer and fractional pel precision. Chen, ¶ [0133]; Table 2).
Regarding claim 3, Chen discloses the method of claim 2, wherein at least one of:
a temporal motion vector prediction (TMVP) or a subblock-based TMVP (SbTMVP) is applied to the current video block, and the MS is determined by refining the MSP with the MSD, the MS comprising a motion vector (MV) to locate a location of a TMVP or an SbTMVP of the current video block (“At (S2210), a displacement vector (DV) predictor (DVP) in a plurality of DVP candidates and a DV offset of a current block in a current picture can be determined. The current block includes a plurality of subblocks and can be encoded using a subblock-based temporal motion vector prediction (SbTMVP) mode.” Chen, ¶ [0200]; Figs. 22-23B), and/or
wherein the at least one indication comprises at least one index indicating the MSD (“A distance index can indicate motion magnitude information of the MVD, such as the magnitude of the MVD.” Chen, ¶ [0133]), wherein the MSD is selected from an MSD set based on the at least one index, the MSD set comprising at least one MSD candidate,
wherein a candidate in the MSD set is associated with at least one of: a distance index or a direction index (“A distance index can indicate motion magnitude information of the MVD, such as the magnitude of the MVD.” Chen, ¶ [0133]), and/or
wherein the MSD set comprises a plurality of MSD candidates with a plurality of indexes, the plurality of indexes being reordered based on template matching costs, the plurality of indexes being a plurality of distance indexed or a plurality of direction indexes.
Regarding claim 4, Chen discloses the method of claim 3, wherein the distance index of the candidate comprises motion magnitude information of the candidate and indicates an offset from the MSP (“A distance index can indicate motion magnitude information of the MVD, such as the magnitude of the MVD. For example, the distance index indicates a distance (e.g., a pre-defined distance) from the starting point (e.g., the MVP indicated by the base candidate index).” Chen, ¶ [0133]),
wherein the offset is added to at least one of: a horizontal component of the MSP, or a vertical component of the MSP, or wherein the direction index indicates a direction of the candidate of the MSD relative to a starting point corresponding to the MSP (“A distance index can indicate motion magnitude information of the MVD, such as the magnitude of the MVD. For example, the distance index indicates a distance (e.g., a pre-defined distance) from the starting point (e.g., the MVP indicated by the base candidate index).” Chen, ¶ [0133]), or
wherein the direction index indicates at least one direction in a plurality of directions (“A direction index can represent the direction of the MVD relative to the starting point. The direction index can represent one of a plurality of directions, such as four directions as shown in Table 3. For example, the direction index being 00 indicates the direction of the MVD being along the positive x-axis.” Chen, ¶ [0134]).
Regarding claim 5, Chen discloses the method of claim 1, wherein determining the MS comprises:
determining a plurality of motion shift difference (MSD) candidates of the current video block (“The DVO can be indicated, for example, by signaling an index indicating the DVO from DVO candidates where the DVO information includes the index. A predefined DVO list can include the DVO candidates. One or more indices can be signaled to indicate which DVO in the DVO candidates can be selected as the DVO where the DVO information can include the one or more indices.” Chen, ¶ [0177]); determining an MSD based on the plurality of MSD candidates (“One or more indices can be signaled to indicate which DVO in the DVO candidates can be selected as the DVO where the DVO information can include the one or more indices.” Chen, ¶ [0177])); and
determining the MS based on the MSD (“The processing circuitry determines a DV based on the DVP and the DV offset.” Chen, Abstract), wherein the at least one indication comprises an index of a target MSD candidate in the plurality of MSD candidates, the MSD being determined based on the target MSD candidate, wherein the MSD is the target MSD candidate (“The DVO can be indicated, for example, by signaling an index indicating the DVO from DVO candidates where the DVO information includes the index. A predefined DVO list can include the DVO candidates. One or more indices can be signaled to indicate which DVO in the DVO candidates can be selected as the DVO where the DVO information can include the one or more indices.” Chen, ¶ [0177]), or wherein the MSD is determined by applying at least one of a shifting or a scaling to the target MSD candidate, wherein the MS is determined based on the MSD and a predictor of the MS (The processing circuitry determines a DV based on the DVP and the DV offset.” Chen, Abstract).
Regarding claim 6, Chen discloses the method of claim 1, wherein determining the MS comprises:
determining a plurality of motion shift prediction (MSP) candidates of the current video block; determining an MSP based on the plurality of MSP candidates; and determining the MS based on the MSP (“The processing circuitry determines a plurality of displacement vector (DV) predictor (DVP) candidates and receives a base index indicating a DVP in the plurality of DVP candidates and a DV offset of the current block. The processing circuitry determines a DV based on the DVP and the DV offset.” Chen, Abstract),
wherein the at least one indication comprises an index of a target MSP candidate in the plurality of MSP candidates, the MSP being determined based on the target MSP candidate (A base index indicating a DVP in the plurality of DVP candidates Chen, Abstract. Figs. 22 and 23B),
wherein the MSP is the target MSP candidate (A base index indicating a DVP in the plurality of DVP candidates Chen, Abstract. Figs. 22 and 23B), or wherein the MSP is determined by applying at least one of a shifting or a scaling to the target MSP candidate.
Regarding claim 7, Chen discloses the method of claim 6, wherein the MS is determined based on the MSP and a motion shift difference (MSD), wherein the MSD is determined during the conversion, or wherein the MSD is defined, or wherein the MSD is included in the bitstream (“The processing circuitry determines a plurality of displacement vector (DV) predictor (DVP) candidates and receives a base index indicating a DVP in the plurality of DVP candidates and a DV offset of the current block. The processing circuitry determines a DV based on the DVP and the DV offset.” Chen, Abstract).
Regarding claim 17, Chen discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the conversion comprises encoding the current video block into the bitstream, or wherein the conversion comprises decoding the current video block from the bitstream (“Aspects of the disclosure provide methods and apparatuses for video encoding/decoding.” Chen, ¶ [0022]).
Regarding claim 18, independent claim 1 is sustainably similar to independent claim 18. Therefore claim 18 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 1.
Regarding claim 19, independent claim 1 is sustainably similar to independent claim 19. Therefore claim 19 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 1.
Regarding claim 20, A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a bitstream of a video which is generated by a method performed by an apparatus for video processing, wherein the method comprises: determining a motion shift (MS) of a current video block of the video based on at least one indication in the bitstream, the MS comprising a vector associated with a location of a prediction of the current video block; determining temporal motion information of the current video block based on the MS; and generating the bitstream based on the temporal motion information. (The terminal devices (333-330) may receive the coded video data. Chen, Fig. 3. “Such computer-readable media can be media associated with user-accessible mass storage as introduced above, as well as certain storage of the core (2440) that are of non-transitory nature, such as core-internal mass storage (2447) or ROM (2445). The software implementing various embodiments of the present disclosure can be stored in such devices and executed by core (2440). A computer-readable medium can include one or more memory devices or chips, according to particular needs.” Chen, ¶ [0261]).
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 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in further view of Kuo et al., US 20240146906 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Kuo”).
Regarding claim 15, Chen discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the at least one indication comprises at least one of: an index of a motion shift prediction (MSP) of the current video block, or an index of a motion shift difference (MSD) of the current video block (“[T]wo indices, such as a distance index and a direction index can be used to indicate an MVD in the MMVD mode. Alternatively, a single index can be used to indicate an MVD in the MMVD mode, for example, with a table that pairs the single index with the MVD.” Chen, ¶ [0141]. “The base index can indicate which DVP is selected from the plurality of DVPs.” Chen, ¶ [0176]).
Chen does not explicitly disclose the at least one indication in the bitstream is coded by at least one of: a truncated rice (TR) code, a truncated binary (TB) code, a k-th order exponential-Golomb (EGk) code, or a fixed-length (FL) code.
However, in the same field of endeavor directed to temporal motion vector prediction, Kuo discloses the claimed feature.
Kuo discloses a truncated rice (TR) code, a truncated binary (TB) code, a k-th order exponential-Golomb (EGk) code, or a fixed-length (FL) code (“Note that different binarization methods can be used for encoding the syntax elements, including: FLC: fixed length code; or TU: truncated unary code; or EGk: exponential-golomb code with order k, where k can be fixed.” Kuo, ¶ [0137]).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was filed to modify Chen with at least one indication in the bitstream is coded by at least one of: a truncated rice (TR) code, a truncated binary (TB) code, a k-th order exponential-Golomb (EGk) code, or a fixed-length (FL) code, as taught by Kuo, in order to improve the coding efficiency/video quality of temporal motion vector prediction. Kuo, ¶ [0002].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEIRDRE L BEASLEY whose telephone number is (571)270-0452. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8 a.m. -5 p.m.
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, Chris Kelley can be reached at (571) 272-7331. 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.
/DLB/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2482
/CHRISTOPHER S KELLEY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2482
Prosecution Insights