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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/24/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. On page 8 of response applicant argues that Liu in view of Lepauloux does not clearly teach “wherein the apparatus is to generate the second echo estimate comprising the one or more second echo estimation signals by generating an intermediate signal from the one or more first estimation signals, and by filtering the intermediate signal using the second filter configuration.". The examiner respectfully disagrees. The Examiner first points out that the applicant has an “or” statement after the limitation “a second filter configuration”. Never the less, fig.2 207 by having the second filter represents a second configuration since applicant does not have any other details on what the second configuration actually entails. Meaning first configuration is out of 204 in fig.2 and second configuration is out of 207 since again no details on what is meant by the actual configuration in the claim language. Fig.3 also teaches, “filtering the intermediate signal using the second filter configuration in fig.3 the second filter is getting the intermediate signal as can be seen creating a second configuration. The Examiner suggests adding the subject matter of claim 4, which makes clear more of a structure. For these reasons the same rejection applies. Applicant also did not argue with regards to their “or” statement limitations. Claim 4 in all of the independent claims would overcome all of the prior art relied upon.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-3, 6-7, 9, 15-19 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu (US 2008/0219463) in view of Lepauloux (US 2017/0236528).
As per claims 1, and 21-22 Liu teaches, apparatus, method and non-transitory digital storage medium for conducting acoustic echo cancellation by generating one or more error signals (Liu, ¶ [0021] “FIG. 2 shows a block diagram of an embodiment of the acoustic echo cancellation system” and “The echo cancellation unit 203 is thus deemed to cancel the largest portion of echo contained in the input signal y(n) from the microphone 205.” Therefore by canceling the unwanted portion of the signal this would be the error signal), wherein the apparatus is to generate a first echo estimate comprising one or more first echo estimation signals by filtering one or more reference signals using a first filter configuration (Lui, ¶[0024] “The first echo estimate is generated from the first filter” this represents generate a first echo estimate by the first echo estimate and it is by filtering one or more reference signals using a first filter configuration ), wherein the one or more reference signals correspond to one or more loudspeaker signals or are derived from the one or more loudspeaker signals (Lui, fig.2 204 loudspeaker signal X(n) represents this signal), wherein the apparatus is to generate a second echo estimate comprising one or more second echo estimation signals by filtering the one or more first echo estimation signals using a second filter configuration (Lui, fig.2, 207 second filter represents second configuration); or wherein the apparatus is to generate the second echo estimate comprising the one or more second echo estimation signals by generating an intermediate signal from the one or more first estimation signals (Lui, fig.3, the examiner only has to address one of the limitations before or after the “or” bolded above. Never the less the Examiner will point out these limitations as well. Fig.3 showing intermediate signal after first filter), and by filtering the intermediate signal using the second filter configuration (Lui, fig.3 second filter after getting the intermediate signal), wherein the apparatus is to generate the one or more error signals depending on one or more microphone signals and depending on the one or more second echo estimation signals (Lui, fig.3 305 microphone signals looping around to the filters and ¶[0046] “A third filter 208 is, thus, employed to estimate this residual echo and cancel it from the signal d.sub.2(n).” the residual echo being the error and therefore it is being generated), wherein the apparatus is to update the second filter configuration depending on the one or more error signals, and wherein the apparatus is to output the one or more error signals (Lui, ¶[0046] “A third filter 208 is, thus, employed to estimate this residual echo and cancel it from the signal d.sub.2(n).” before being cancelled this would be the output of the error signal therefore the apparatus is outputting the error signal. As a reminder only one side of the “or” statement has to be correct, if applicant changes this language to not have the or statement then the scope of the claim then changes in the event that there are successful arguments).
Lui doesn’t clearly teach however Lepauloux teaches, one or more microphone signals in plural, as well as specifically as well as cancelling error (Lepauloux, fig.5 501 and 502 disclose multiple microphone signals and ¶ [0105] “The input signal of the secondary microphone 502 is supplied to delay block 521, which may delay the signal to compensate for the delay introduced by the pre-processor (for example AEC 503 (acoustic error canceling, like will be described in more detail below)). The output of the delay block 521 is supplied to a second analysis filter bank 506 (e.g. performing a discrete Fourier transformation).” The error is specifically taken away therefore the error must have been used).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of Lui with those of Lepauloux to cancel the error signal and have two signals for the microphone as intended by the invention.
The motivation would have been to improve noise cancelling as suggested by Lepauloux ¶ [0002] The present disclosure relates to audio processing circuits and methods for reducing noise in an audio signal.
As per claim 2, Lui in view of Lepauloux teaches, apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the apparatus is configured to not update the first filter configuration at runtime, or wherein the apparatus is configured to also update the first filter configuration at runtime, wherein the apparatus is to update the second filter configuration at runtime more often than the first filter configuration (Lui, fig.1 this shows to update to the filter 103, the other are or statements that do not have to be addressed ).
As per claim 3, Lui in view of Lepauloux teaches, apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the apparatus is to introduce a delay into the one or more microphone signals (Lepauloux, fig.5 521 delay from the microphone signal), wherein the apparatus is to generate the one or more error signals depending on the one or more microphone signals after the delay is introduced by the apparatus into the one or more microphone signals and depending on the one or more second echo estimation signals ( Lepauloux, ¶ [0113] The audio processing circuit 500 includes a smoothing block 509 which smoothes the amplitude level difference calculated by the subtracting unit in order to avoid near-end speech attenuation during single talk (ST) period. In that sense, the DNR is more robust to any delay mismatch between the microphone signals and that could come up due to a change in the phone positions or an inaccurate compensation of the processing delay of the AEC (acoustic error canceling).” This represents generating the error signals since they are taken away, and it is after the delay and ¶[0104] “The input signal of the primary microphone 501 is processed by a pre-processor, for example an acoustic echo canceller 503. The output of the acoustic echo canceller 503 is supplied to a first analysis filter bank 504 (e.g. performing a discrete Fourier transformation) and to a FIR filter 505.” Would represent echo estimation).
As per claim 6, Lui teaches, apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the one or more loudspeaker signals are two or more loudspeaker signals (Lui, fig.3 REP and DEP represents two loudspeaker signals).
As per claim 7, Lui in view of Lepauloux teaches, apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the one or more microphone signals are two or more microphone signals (Lepauloux, fig.5 502 and 501 represents multiple microphones ), wherein the apparatus is to generate the first echo estimate comprising two or more first echo estimation signals as the one or more first echo estimation signals by filtering the one or more reference signals using the first filter configuration (Liu, fig.1 showing exactly 1 filter or first filter, and as the system cycles there would be echo estimation signals, and the rest of the figures show the different filter configurations), wherein, for each of the two or more microphone signals, one of the two or more first echo estimation signals indicates a first estimation of an echo in said one of the two or more microphone signals (Lepauloux, ¶ [0133] “The gain is determined by a gain calculation block 519, processed by an inverse discrete Fourier transformation 520 and supplied to the FIR filter 505 which filters the primary microphone input signal (processed by echo cancellation) accordingly.” The two echo signals coming from the microphones).
As per claim 9, Lui in view of Lepauloux teaches, apparatus according to claim 7, wherein the apparatus comprises exactly one first filter, wherein the exactly one first filter is to generate all of the two or more first echo estimation signals by filtering the one or more reference signals using the first filter configuration (Liu, fig.1 showing exactly 1 filter or first filter, and as the system cycles there would be echo estimation signals).
As per claim 15, Lui in view of Lepauloux teaches, apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the apparatus comprises one or more loudspeakers to output the one or more loudspeaker signals, and wherein the apparatus comprises one or more microphones to generate the one or more microphone signals (Lui, fig.1 104 loudspeaker and 105 microphone).
As per claim 16, Lui in view of Lepauloux teaches, apparatus according to claim 15, wherein the apparatus is to generate the first echo estimate comprising the one or more first echo estimation signals by filtering the one or more reference signals using the first filter configuration, depending on at least one room impulse between at least one of one or more loudspeakers and at least one of at least one microphone, wherein the one or more loudspeakers are to output the one or more loudspeaker signals, and wherein the one or more microphones are to record the one or more microphone signals (Liu, ¶[0024] “[0024] wherein n is the discrete time index and N.sub.1 is the length of the filter. The signal x(n) is output to the loudspeaker 204 which then goes through the room impulse response and then gets picked up by the microphone 205 as echo. The first echo estimate is generated from the first filter 203b convolved with x.sub.1(n):” this represents filtering the one or more reference signals using the first filter configuration depending on at least one room impulse between at least one of one or more loudspeakers and at least one of at least one microphone).
As per claim 17, Lui in view of Lepauloux teaches, apparatus according to claim 16, wherein the apparatus is to acquire at least one acoustic echo path by measuring said at least one acoustic echo path between said at least one of the one or more loudspeakers and said at least one of the at least one microphone (Lui, ¶[0065] “FIG. 6 is a flowchart of an embodiment of the acoustic echo cancellation method” this represents acquire at least one acoustic echo path since there is cancellation of this Echo ).
As per claim 18, Lui in view of Lepauloux teaches, apparatus according to claim 1, wherein, to generate the first echo estimate, the apparatus is to filter the one or more reference signals in a time domain to acquire the one or more first echo estimation signals (Lepauloux, ¶[0087] “overlap-add unit 310 applies an overlap-add to produce the enhanced time domain signal” reference signals in a time domain).
As per claim 19, Lui in view of Lepauloux teaches, apparatus according to claim 1, wherein, to generate the first echo estimate, the apparatus is to filter the one or more reference signals in a transform domain to acquire the one or more first echo estimation signals (Lepauloux, ¶[0082] “The time frequency analysis units 303 and 304 for example use a fast Fourier transform (FFT) but other types of time frequency analysis may also be used.“ filter the one or more reference signals in a transform domain which then acquire the one or more first echo estimation signals right after).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5, 8, 10-14, and 20 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.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANTIAGO GARCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5182. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30am-5:30pm.
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, Chineyere Wills-Burns can be reached at (571) 272-9752. 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.
/SANTIAGO GARCIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2673
/SG/
Prosecution Insights