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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
1. 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.
2. Claims 1 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Master et al. (2019/0007754).
As to claim 1, Master teaches an audio signal processing method comprising: acquiring first audio metadata of an audio signal comprised in an Audio Definition Model (ADM) ([0161] - “ADM” refers to Audio Definition Model. In some embodiments, an ADM container and/or construct can carry media metadata such as object audio metadata, IAT data, and so forth. The ADM container and/or construct can carry media metadata independent of (or without being coded specifically for) a codec such as non-live, file based audio metadata. For instance, the ADM container and/or construct or the media metadata therein can be associated with media content such as PCM-based media content data as a large data chunk in a way file (BWAV ADM). Additionally, optionally or alternatively, the ADM container and/or construct (e.g., a serialized version thereof, etc.) can carry media metadata for live media content); acquiring audio metadata of the audio signal not comprised in the ADM ([0161] - The ADM container and/or construct can carry media metadata independent of (or without being coded specifically for) a codec such as non-live, file based audio metadata. For instance, the ADM container and/or construct or the media metadata therein can be associated with media content such as PCM-based media content data as a large data chunk in a way file (BWAV ADM). Additionally, optionally or alternatively, the ADM container and/or construct (e.g., a serialized version thereof, etc.) can carry media metadata for live media content); and performing audio rendering processing on the audio signal according to the first metadata portion and the second metadata portion ([0091] received IAT data to access online or offline media data or other information and perform further operations, e.g. rendering…).
Master does not explicitly discuss the first audio metadata corresponds to a first metadata portion / the second audio metadata corresponds to a second metadata portion.
However, Master teaches an ADM container carries audio metadata, IAT data… ([0161]) and some or all IAT data includes to only, any of EMDF, SAMOA, PMD, ADM inserted at various points along a media content creation and delivery chain, IAT data carried in a mezzanine encoding formats such as ED2, PCM audio formats ([0155-0157]). Hence Master suggests the ADM carries more than one audio metadata, media coding data…
It would have been obvious to incorporate audio metadata portions into the teachings of Master for the purpose of performing audio rendering processing on audio signal based on the complete audio metadata.
Claims 18-20 are rejected for the same reasons discussed above with respect to claim1. Furthermore, Master teaches a chip comprises at least one processor and at least one interface ([0291-0292, 0295-0297]), a memory; a processor coupled to a memory, instruction stored in the memory, a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium on which a computer program is stored executed by a processor ([0284, 0291-0292]).
3. Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Master et al. (2019/0007754) in view of Miyajima et al. (US Patent 8,868,585).
As to claim 4, Master does not explicitly the audio signal processing method according to claim 1, wherein the performing audio rendering processing on the audio signal according to the first metadata and second metadata portions comprises: determining complete audio metadata of the audio signal based on the first metadata and second metadata portions and performing an audio rendering process on the audio signal based on the complete audio metadata.
Miyajima teaches searching first metadata associated with data objects of a first kind for portions of the first metadata matching second metadata associated with data objects of a second kind; identifying matching data objects from the searching, wherein the matching data objects comprise data objects of the first kind associated with the portions of the first metadata matching the second metadata (claims 12 and 19); and the metadata added to audio data is referred to base on the metadata, and the audio replay means are controlled by the control means, and the audio data searched by the search means are replayed in relation to each other (col. 3, lines 3-9).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Miyajima into the teachings of Master for the purpose of securely select and display a still image suitable for music to be replayed and to add background music optimum to still images to be sequentially displayed, the accumulated music audio data and image data can be effectively and efficiently utilized.
As to claim 14, Miyajima teaches the audio signal of claim 4 wherein determining the complete audio metadata of the audio signal based on the first metadata and the second metadata portions comprises: assembling the first metadata portion and the second metadata portion into the complete audio metadata (claims 12 and 19 - searching first metadata associated with data objects of a first kind for portions of the first metadata matching second metadata associated with data objects of a second kind; identifying matching data objects from the searching, wherein the matching data objects comprise data objects of the first kind associated with the portions of the first metadata matching the second metadata).
4. Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Master and Miyajima in view of Liu (2014/0236987).
As to claim 17, Master and Miyajima do not explicitly teach the audio signal processing according to claim 4, wherein the performing audio rendering processing on the audio signal according to the first and second metadata portions comprises: encapsulating the complete audio metadata in a metadata structure module; and transmitting the metadata structure module by a rendering controller module to a rendering engine for audio rendering processing.
Liu teaches transmission of audio data and audio metadata involves further formatting and encapsulation ([0025]) and generally the audio metadata are structured ([0036]); the agentlib and audio signal collection agent module send/receive audio data and audio metadata using predefined protocols to encapsulate audio metadata before sending to the audio signal collection agent module ([0037]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Liu into the teachings of Master and Miyajima for the purpose of conducting serialization and deserialization for the audio metadata with the collection device to complete the collection of audio data.
Allowable Subject Matter
5. Claims 2, 5, 11, 15 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. Claims 3 and 10, 6-9 and 13, 12, 16 are objected because they depend on objected claims 2, 5, 11, 15, respectively.
Conclusion
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUYNH H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-7489. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30AM-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, Ahmad Matar can be reached on 571-272-7488. 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.
/QUYNH H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693