Obviousness

Based on the provided patent text for US10536714, there is no "Prior Art section" that lists specific patent documents, publications, or other references that would typically be used for an obviousness analysis under 35 U.S.C. § 103.

The "Prior art keywords" (motion vector, vector prediction, spatial motion, candidate, prediction) are general technical terms, not specific references. Furthermore, the "BACKGROUND INFORMATION" section of the patent explicitly states: "Unless otherwise indicated herein, what is described in this section is not prior art to the description and claims in this application and is not admitted to be prior art by inclusion in this section."

Without specific prior art references that disclose elements of the claimed invention, it is not possible to conduct an obviousness analysis. An obviousness analysis requires identifying specific references, determining if they disclose all elements of a claim, or if the combination of multiple references would render the claim obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, along with a motivation to combine those references. As such, I cannot identify combinations of prior art references or explain a motivation to combine them based solely on the information provided in the patent text.