DETAILED ACTION
Introduction
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A request for continued examination (RCE) under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application on 04/17/2026 after the final rejection of 09/16/2025 and the pre-appeal conference decision of 02/25/2026. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. The Applicants’ RCE submission is therefore entered. No claims have been added or cancelled, but claims 1 and 17-18 have been amended in this submission. Thus, claims 1-20 are currently pending for reconsideration by the Examiner and are examined below.
Response to arguments
2. Applicant’s arguments with regards to the prior art have been fully considered but are moot in light of new grounds of rejection as necessitated by amendments presented in this latest response.
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.
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.
3. Claim 1, 3-7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balzer (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2019/0377901 A1) in view of Yanamandra (U.S. Patent # 12542145 B1).
With regards to claim 1, Balzer teaches a method comprising receiving a content item comprising an audio content and a video content (Paragraphs 6-8, teach a method comprising receiving a document including an item selected from the group consisting of an audio, an image and a video);
receiving text data associated with the audio content, wherein the text data is associated with speech (Paragraphs 6-8, further teach that the method further includes scanning a video for personally identifiable information or PII, located in embedded text, images, and/or transcribed audio of video or audio files);
comparing the text data to the audio content to determine a first portion of the audio content, wherein the first portion of the audio content comprises audio corresponding to the text data (Paragraphs 6-8, further teach that said method also comprises matching the voice or the personal attribute with records in a database to determine whether the voice or the personal attribute in the document is associated with personally identifiable information);
Although Balzer teaches removing a second portion of the audio content (Paragraphs 6-8, further teach generating an obfuscated version of the document, wherein the voice or the personal attribute in the document is obfuscated), it may not explicitly detail removing, based on the determination the first portion of the audio content comprises audio corresponding to the text data, a second portion of the audio content that does not comprise audio that corresponds to the text data. This limitation is taught by Yanamandra (Col. 1, line 59 to col. 2, line 11 and figures 1-8, teach hard and soft muting in audio output. Col. 7, lines 63-67, teach that to identify the muting, the system may align the text data with the first audio signal and/or the first component, such that muting may be performed accurately without capturing audio data besides the targeted speech);
Balzer and Yanamandra can be considered as analogous art as they belong to a similar field of endeavor in audio processing. It would thus have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to advantageously combine the teachings of Yanamandra (Selective removing of audio data corresponding to a specific text data) with those of Balzer (Use of a PII filter) so as to avoid jarring experience for users that is disruptive to the viewing experience for video content and results in loss of information and experience by eliminating all audio at the time of the omitted phrase (Yanamandra, col. 1, line 59 to col. 2, line 11).
With regards to claim 3, Balzer teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising converting the audio content to converted audio text, wherein to determine the first portion of the audio content comprises determining a portion of the converted audio text corresponds to the text data (Para 40, teaches algorithms for converting speech to text that can be used for determining the words spoken in an audio file. In this way, words such as names or other PII can be detected for redaction).
With regards to claim 4, Balzer teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising determining, based on the text data, that the text data corresponds to one or more spoken words within the first portion of the audio content (Para 40, teaches algorithms for converting speech to text that can be used for determining the words spoken in an audio file. In this way, words such as names or other PII can be detected for redaction).
With regards to claim 6, Balzer teaches the method of claim 1, wherein removing the second portion of the audio content comprises removing all of the other audio not corresponding to the text data in the audio content (Para 49, teaches that if none of the personally identifiable information matches with records in the client database, then the client database is updated with a new record).
With regards to claim 9, Balzer teaches the method of claim 1, wherein receiving the content item comprises receiving the audio content and the video content for a content segment of the content item (Para 45, teaches a client identifier that includes a plurality of segments to indicate several pieces of information. For example, a first segment may be associated with an individual and a second segment that may be associated with an organization. A third segment that may be associated with a group or company having a hierarchy, or a fourth segment that may be associated with a client database lookup system for example, checking passport numbers).
With regards to claim 5, Balzer may not explicitly detail the limitation wherein the text data comprises closed captioning data. However, this aspect is taught by Yanamandra (See col. 2, lines 13-37);
Balzer and Yanamandra can be considered as analogous art as they belong to a similar field of endeavor in audio processing. It would thus have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to advantageously combine the teachings of Yanamandra (Selective removing of audio data corresponding to a specific text data) with those of Balzer (Use of a PII filter) so as to avoid jarring experience for users that is disruptive to the viewing experience for video content and results in loss of information and experience by eliminating all audio at the time of the omitted phrase (Yanamandra, col. 1, line 59 to col. 2, line 11).
With regards to claim 7, Balzer may not explicitly detail the limitation wherein the audio content comprises a plurality of channels of audio content, wherein to determine the first portion of the audio content comprising the audio corresponding to the text data comprises determining a first portion of the plurality of channels of the audio content comprising one or more spoken words associated with the text data. This is taught by Yanamandra (Col. 14, lines 1-41 and figures 4-6, teach a 5.1 channel audio including a surround sound configuration and includes a center channel, front-left channel, front-right channel, low frequency equipment channel, rear-left channel, and rear-right channel. The center channel has the audio content of interest, such as vocal tracks, while the other channels may include other audio data. The other channels may also include vocal data or data of interest and may therefore be processed similar to center channel. The center channel is separated by the cross-modal speech separator or the separation module. The separated channels include a speech channel and a background channel. The background channel is passed through and remains unchanged so the background channel is identical to the background channel. The background channel may be adjusted, for example to apply a negative gain to the background channel. The speech channel may be aligned, by the alignment module according to text associated with the speech, such as a script, caption, lyrics, etc.);
wherein removing the second portion of the audio content comprises removing audio for a second portion of the plurality of channels of the audio content (Col. 14, lines 1-20 and figures 4-6, further teach that the speech channel may also be selectively muted, to remove targeted content and produce adjusted speech channel. The adjusted speech channel and the background channel may be combined to form the softmuted center channel, which is, in turn, re-mixed with the front-left channel, front-right channel, low frequency equipment channel, rear-left channel, and rear-right channel to form the softmuted 5.1 channel audio);
Balzer and Yanamandra can be considered as analogous art as they belong to a similar field of endeavor in audio processing. It would thus have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to advantageously combine the teachings of Yanamandra (Selective removing of audio data corresponding to a specific text data) with those of Balzer (Use of a PII filter) so as to avoid jarring experience for users that is disruptive to the viewing experience for video content and results in loss of information and experience by eliminating all audio at the time of the omitted phrase (Yanamandra, col. 1, line 59 to col. 2, line 11).
4. Claims 2, 17-18 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Balzer in view of Yanamandra and further in view of Frenzel (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2023/0386475 A1).
With regards to claim 17, Balzer teaches a method comprising receiving a content item comprising an audio content and a video content (Paragraphs 6-8, teach a method comprising receiving a document including an item selected from the group consisting of an audio, an image and a video);
receiving text data associated with the audio content, wherein the text data is associated with speech (Paragraphs 6-8, further teach that the method further includes scanning a video for personally identifiable information or PII, located in embedded text, images, and/or transcribed audio of video or audio files);
comparing the converted audio item to the audio content to determine a first portion of the audio content, wherein the first portion of the audio content comprises audio corresponding to the converted audio item (Paragraphs 6-8, further teach that said method also comprises matching the voice or the personal attribute with records in a database to determine whether the voice or the personal attribute in the document is associated with personally identifiable information. Para 40, teaches algorithms for converting speech to text that can be used for determining the words spoken in an audio file. In this way, words such as names or other PII can be detected for redaction);
Although Balzer teaches removing a second portion of the audio content (Paragraphs 6-8, further teach generating an obfuscated version of the document, wherein the voice or the personal attribute in the document is obfuscated), it may not explicitly detail removing, based on the determination the first portion of the audio content comprises audio corresponding to the text data, a second portion of the audio content that does not comprise audio that corresponds to the text data. This limitation is taught by Yanamandra (Col. 1, line 59 to col. 2, line 11 and figures 1-8, teach hard and soft muting in audio output. Col. 7, lines 63-67, teach that to identify the muting, the system may align the text data with the first audio signal and/or the first component, such that muting may be performed accurately without capturing audio data besides the targeted speech);
Balzer and Yanamandra can be considered as analogous art as they belong to a similar field of endeavor in audio processing. It would thus have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to advantageously combine the teachings of Yanamandra (Selective removing of audio data corresponding to a specific text data) with those of Balzer (Use of a PII filter) so as to avoid jarring experience for users that is disruptive to the viewing experience for video content and results in loss of information and experience by eliminating all audio at the time of the omitted phrase (Yanamandra, col. 1, line 59 to col. 2, line 11);
Balzer and Yanamandra may not explicitly detail converting the text data to a converted audio item. This limitation is taught by Frenzel (See para 17);
Balzer, Yanamandra and Frenzel can be considered as analogous art as they belong to a similar field of endeavor in speech processing. It would thus have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to advantageously combine the teachings of Frenzel (Use of a text to speech converter) with those of Balzer and Yanamandra so as to use a fingerprint to generate an output audio file from a source text file (Frenzel, para 17).
With regards to claim 18, Balzer may not explicitly detail the limitation wherein the first portion of the audio content comprises at least a portion of the converted audio item associated with the text data. This is taught by Yanamandra (Col. 14, lines 1-41 and figures 4-6, teach a 5.1 channel audio including a surround sound configuration and includes a center channel, front-left channel, front-right channel, low frequency equipment channel, rear-left channel, and rear-right channel. The center channel has the audio content of interest, such as vocal tracks, while the other channels may include other audio data. The other channels may also include vocal data or data of interest and may therefore be processed similar to center channel. The center channel is separated by the cross-modal speech separator or the separation module. The separated channels include a speech channel and a background channel. The background channel is passed through and remains unchanged so the background channel is identical to the background channel. The background channel may be adjusted, for example to apply a negative gain to the background channel. The speech channel may be aligned, by the alignment module according to text associated with the speech, such as a script, caption, lyrics, etc.);
Balzer and Yanamandra can be considered as analogous art as they belong to a similar field of endeavor in audio processing. It would thus have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to advantageously combine the teachings of Yanamandra (Selective removing of audio data corresponding to a specific text data) with those of Balzer (Use of a PII filter) so as to avoid jarring experience for users that is disruptive to the viewing experience for video content and results in loss of information and experience by eliminating all audio at the time of the omitted phrase (Yanamandra, col. 1, line 59 to col. 2, line 11).
With regards to claim 2, Balzer teaches the limitation wherein determining the first portion of the audio content comprises determining a portion of the audio content that corresponds to the audio data (Paragraphs 6-8, further teach that said method also comprises matching the voice or the personal attribute with records in a database to determine whether the voice or the personal attribute in the document is associated with personally identifiable information);
However, Balzer may not explicitly detail converting the text data to audio data. This is taught by Frenzel (See para 17);
Balzer, Yanamandra and Frenzel can be considered as analogous art as they belong to a similar field of endeavor in speech processing. It would thus have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to advantageously combine the teachings of Frenzel (Use of a text to speech converter) with those of Balzer and Yanamandra so as to use a fingerprint to generate an output audio file from a source text file (Frenzel, para 17).
With regards to claim 19, Balzer may not explicitly detail the limitation wherein the text data comprises closed captioning data. However, this aspect is taught by Yanamandra (See col. 2, lines 13-37);
Balzer and Yanamandra can be considered as analogous art as they belong to a similar field of endeavor in audio processing. It would thus have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to advantageously combine the teachings of Yanamandra (Selective removing of audio data corresponding to a specific text data) with those of Balzer (Use of a PII filter) so as to avoid jarring experience for users that is disruptive to the viewing experience for video content and results in loss of information and experience by eliminating all audio at the time of the omitted phrase (Yanamandra, col. 1, line 59 to col. 2, line 11).
With regards to claim 20, Balzer may not explicitly detail the limitation wherein the audio content comprises a plurality of channels of audio content, wherein to determine the first portion of the audio content comprising the audio corresponding to the text data comprises determining a first portion of the plurality of channels of the audio content comprising one or more spoken words associated with the text data. This is taught by Yanamandra (Col. 14, lines 1-41 and figures 4-6, teach a 5.1 channel audio including a surround sound configuration and includes a center channel, front-left channel, front-right channel, low frequency equipment channel, rear-left channel, and rear-right channel. The center channel has the audio content of interest, such as vocal tracks, while the other channels may include other audio data. The other channels may also include vocal data or data of interest and may therefore be processed similar to center channel. The center channel is separated by the cross-modal speech separator or the separation module. The separated channels include a speech channel and a background channel. The background channel is passed through and remains unchanged so the background channel is identical to the background channel. The background channel may be adjusted, for example to apply a negative gain to the background channel. The speech channel may be aligned, by the alignment module according to text associated with the speech, such as a script, caption, lyrics, etc.);
wherein removing the second portion of the audio content comprises removing audio for a second portion of the plurality of channels of the audio content (Col. 14, lines 1-20 and figures 4-6, further teach that the speech channel may also be selectively muted, to remove targeted content and produce adjusted speech channel. The adjusted speech channel and the background channel may be combined to form the softmuted center channel, which is, in turn, re-mixed with the front-left channel, front-right channel, low frequency equipment channel, rear-left channel, and rear-right channel to form the softmuted 5.1 channel audio);
Balzer and Yanamandra can be considered as analogous art as they belong to a similar field of endeavor in audio processing. It would thus have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to advantageously combine the teachings of Yanamandra (Selective removing of audio data corresponding to a specific text data) with those of Balzer (Use of a PII filter) so as to avoid jarring experience for users that is disruptive to the viewing experience for video content and results in loss of information and experience by eliminating all audio at the time of the omitted phrase (Yanamandra, col. 1, line 59 to col. 2, line 11).
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 –
(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.
5. Claims 10-11 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (2) as being anticipated by Yanamandra.
With regards to claim 10, Yanamandra teaches a method comprising receiving a content item comprising an audio content and a video content, wherein the audio content comprises a plurality of channels of audio content (Col. 13, line 61 to col. 14, line 41 and figures 4-6, teach an audio from an audiovisual file processed to adjust one or more characteristics of the vocal content. The audio includes 5.1 channel audio for a video. This 5.1 channel audio includes a surround sound configuration and includes a center channel, front-left channel, front-right channel, low frequency equipment channel, rear-left channel, and rear-right channel);
receiving text data associated with the audio content, wherein the text data is associated with speech (Col. 13, line 61 to col. 14, line 41 and figures 4-6, further teach that the speech channel may be aligned, by the alignment module according to text associated with the speech, such as a script, caption, lyrics, etc.);
comparing the text data to the audio content to determine a first portion of the plurality of channels of audio content, wherein the first portion of the plurality of channels of audio content comprises audio corresponding to the text data (Col. 13, line 61 to col. 14, line 41 and figures 4-6, further teach that the center channel has the audio content of interest, such as vocal tracks, while the other channels may include other audio data. The other channels may also include vocal data or data of interest and may therefore be processed similar to center channel. The center channel is separated by the cross-modal speech separator or the separation module. The separated channels include a speech channel and a background channel. The background channel is passed through and remains unchanged so the background channel is identical to the background channel. The background channel may be adjusted, for example to apply a negative gain to the background channel. The speech channel may be aligned, by the alignment module according to text associated with the speech, such as a script, caption, lyrics, etc.);
and removing a second portion of the plurality of channels of the audio content (Col. 14, lines 1-20 and figures 4-6, further teach that the speech channel may also be selectively muted, to remove targeted content and produce adjusted speech channel. The adjusted speech channel and the background channel may be combined to form the softmuted center channel, which is, in turn, re-mixed with the front-left channel, front-right channel, low frequency equipment channel, rear-left channel, and rear-right channel to form the softmuted 5.1 channel audio);
With regards to claim 11, Yanamandra teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the second portion of the plurality of channels of the audio content comprise audio not corresponding to the text data (Col. 13, line 61 to col. 14, line 41 and figures 4-6, further teach that the center channel has the audio content of interest, such as vocal tracks, while the other channels may include other audio data. The other channels may also include vocal data or data of interest and may therefore be processed similar to center channel. The speech channel may also be selectively muted, to remove targeted content and produce adjusted speech channel).
With regards to claim 13, Yanamandra teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the audio of the first portion of the plurality of channels of audio content comprises one or more spoken words corresponding to the text data and non-speech audio, wherein the method further comprises removing the non- speech audio from the audio content of the first portion of the plurality of channels (Col. 13, line 61 to col. 14, line 41 and figures 4-6, further teach that the center channel has the audio content of interest, such as vocal tracks, while the other channels may include other audio data. The other channels may also include vocal data or data of interest and may therefore be processed similar to center channel. The center channel is separated by the cross-modal speech separator or the separation module. The separated channels include a speech channel and a background channel. The background channel is passed through and remains unchanged so the background channel is identical to the background channel. The background channel may be adjusted, for example to apply a negative gain to the background channel. The speech channel may be aligned, by the alignment module according to text associated with the speech, such as a script, caption, lyrics, etc. Col. 14, lines 1-20 and figures 4-6, further teach that the speech channel may also be selectively muted, to remove targeted content and produce adjusted speech channel. The adjusted speech channel and the background channel may be combined to form the softmuted center channel, which is, in turn, re-mixed with the front-left channel, front-right channel, low frequency equipment channel, rear-left channel, and rear-right channel to form the softmuted 5.1 channel audio);
With regards to claim 14, Yanamandra teaches the method of claim 10, further comprising muting the second portion of the plurality of channels of the audio content ((Col. 1, line 59 to col. 2, line 11 and figures 1-8, teach hard and soft muting in audio output. Col. 14, lines 1-20 and figures 4-6, further teach that the speech channel may also be selectively muted, to remove targeted content and produce adjusted speech channel. The adjusted speech channel and the background channel may be combined to form the softmuted center channel, which is, in turn, re-mixed with the front-left channel, front-right channel, low frequency equipment channel, rear-left channel, and rear-right channel to form the softmuted 5.1 channel audio).
Allowable Subject Matter
6. Claims 8, 12 and 15-16 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. The prior art of record, alone or in combination, does not currently suggest or teach the invention as outlined in these claims. More detailed reasons for allowance will be outlined as and when the Application proceeds to allowability.
Conclusion
7. The following prior art, made of record but not relied upon, is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Gao (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2016/0100267 A1), Duncan (U.S. Patent Application Publication # 2021/0352380 A1). These references are also included in the PTO-892 form attached with this office action.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. If you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). In case you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NEERAJ SHARMA whose contact information is given below. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday 8 am to 5 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Pierre Louis-Desir can be reached on 571-272-7799 (Direct Phone). The fax number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
/NEERAJ SHARMA/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2659
571-270-5487 (Direct Phone)
571-270-6487 (Direct Fax)
neeraj.sharma@uspto.gov (Direct Email)
Prosecution Insights