CTNF 18/502,611 CTNF 77895 DETAILED ACTION I. Introduction This Office action addresses U.S. reissue application number 18/502,611 (“ 611 reissue application ” or “ instant application ”), having a filing date of 6 November 2023. Because the instant application was filed on or after September 16, 2012, the statutory provisions of the America Invents Act (“AIA”) will govern this proceeding. The instant application is a reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 (“ ’796 patent ”) titled “MULTIPLE METADATA PART-BASED ENCODING APPARATUS, ENCODING METHOD, DECODING APPARATUS, DECODING METHOD, AND PROGRAM”, which issued to Yuki Yamamoto et al. on 9 November 2021 with claims 1-4 (“ issued claims ”). The application resulting in the ‘796 patent was filed on 20 June 2019 and assigned U.S. patent application number 16/447,693 (“ ’693 application ”). The ‘796 patent is currently assigned to Sony Corporation . II. Other Proceedings After review of Applicant’s statements as set forth in the instant application, and the examiner's independent review of the ‘796 patent itself and its prosecution history, the examiner has failed to locate any current ongoing litigation. The examiner has likewise failed to locate any previous reexaminations ( ex parte or inter partes ), supplemental examinations, or other post issuance proceedings. III. Priority The ‘693 application is a continuation of U.S. Application 15/735,630 (“ ’630 application ”), filed 12 December 2017, now abandoned, which is a national stage application under 35 U.S.C. § 371 of PCT application PCT/JP2016/066574, filed 3 June 2016. The ‘693 application also claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) to Japanese application JP2015-123589, filed 19 June 2015, and JP2015-196494, filed 2 October 2015. As a reissue application, the instant application is entitled to the priority date of the ‘796 patent, the patent being reissued. Thus, the instant reissue application has a priority date of at least 3 June 2016, the filing date of the PCT application. The Office acknowledges the priority claim under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d), but notes that the priority claim has not been perfected through the filing of certified English language translations of the Japanese priority documents, which would establish enablement and written description support for the claims, as well as establishing the precise priority date for any given feature/limitation/claim. See MPEP § 2136(a)(II). The priority date will be determined on a claim-by-claim basis, as necessary. Because the effective filing date of the instant application is after March 16, 2013, the pre-AIA ‘First to Invent’ provisions do not apply. Instead, the AIA First Inventor to File (“AIA-FITF”) provisions will apply. 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. IV. Claim Construction During examination, claims are given the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and limitations in the specification are not read into the claims. See MPEP § 2111 et seq . Upon review of the original specification and prosecution history, the examiner has found no instances of lexicographic definitions, either express or implied, that are inconsistent with the ordinary and customary meaning of the respective terms. Therefore, for the purposes of claim interpretation, the examiner concludes that there are no claim terms for which applicant is acting as their own lexicographer. See MPEP § 2111.01(IV). If applicant intended lexicographic definitions that have not been identified as such by the examiner, they are asked to note the term and the location in the specification or prosecution history supporting the lexicographic definition in response to this Office action. Additionally, upon review of the pending claims, the examiner finds no instances where the claim terms explicitly include functional language which invokes the provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 112, sixth paragraph. V. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 07-42-04 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. 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. Applicant's submissions filed on 26 March and 24 April 2026 have been entered. VI. Applicant’s Response Applicant’s response (“Response”), filed 26 March 2026, has been received and entered into the record. The Response includes amendments to the claims and remarks. Specifically, claims 11 and 12 have been canceled, claims 1-8 have been amended, and new claims 13-16 have been added. Claims 9 and 10 had been previously canceled. Claims 1-8 and 13-16 are now pending. 12-261 AIA VII. Response to Arguments The Response includes several arguments. The arguments are addressed in turn below. Recapture Applicant argues that in view of the amendments to claims 5 and 6, the recapture rejections should be withdrawn (Response, pages 10-11). Specifically, Applicant argues that claims 5 and 6 have been amended to include reference to a bitstream (this feature was previously in the claims), metadata decoding (added in the current amendment), and how the number and position of metadata is identified in the bitstream (this feature was previously in the claims). In addition, applicant argues that the claims have been narrowed in other respects, and they therefore avoid the recapture rule. The Office respectfully disagrees. It is initially noted that although applicant has incorporated several new limitations into claims 5 and 6 (i.e., metadata decoding and VBAP gain calculation), none of the four limitations indicated as being improperly recaptured were added. The VPAB gain calculation does relate to three of the four surrendered limitations, however. Furthermore, in order to avoid recapture, it is not enough to narrow the claims in other respects. The claims must be materially narrowed, in a way that relates to the subject matter surrendered during original prosecution. In this case, Applicant has incorporated additional limitations related to a bitstream, decoding, and that the sample count is an integer. None of these limitations, however, is related to the recaptured subject matter, which is concerned with the repeated calculation of vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) gains of samples of the audio signal frame, the inclusion of metadata including position information of an audio object, and calculation of VBAP gains of two or three speakers around the position of the audio object. Since the newly incorporated limitations are unrelated to the recaptured subject matter, they fail to materially narrow the claims, and therefore recapture is not avoided. Applicant further argues that “the surrendered subject matter consists of highly specific algorithmic steps (e.g., determining if gains are calculated, returning to the calculation, and limiting to 2 or 3 speakers), not the general concept of VBAP.” The Office agrees. Applicant’s arguments during original prosecution, that these “highly specific algorithmic steps” distinguished over the prior art (discussed below in the Recapture section), however, resulted in the “highly specific algorithmic steps” becoming surrender-generating limitations, and now requires their restoration to the claims in order to avoid recapture. The rejections are maintained . Original Patent Requirement Applicant argues that in view of the amendment to claims 5 and 6, incorporating VBAP gain calculation, and the cancelation of claims 11 and 12, the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 251 as failing the original patent requirement should be withdrawn. The Office agrees. The pending rejections are withdrawn . Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) Applicant has addressed some of the indefiniteness rejections, while leaving some of the problematic claim language unchanged. Some of the rejections have been withdrawn , while others are maintained . Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112(d) In view of the cancelation of claim 11, the pending rejection is withdrawn . Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 Applicant argues that with respect to claims 1, 3, and 4, the prior art of record fails to disclose a gain calculating section configured to calculate vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) gains based on the decoded metadata . The Office respectfully disagrees. Robinson discloses a system for adaptive audio signal generation, coding, and rendering (see Title). The system allows the use of a variety of rendering algorithms, including vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) (see ¶ [0100]). Metadata for the audio is generated during the creation stage to encode certain positional information for the audio objects (see ¶¶ [0108], [0115], and [0120]). The rejection of claims 1, 3, and 4 are therefore maintained . Applicant also argues that with respect to claims 5 and 6, the prior art of record fails to disclose implicit metadata placement such that each of the plurality of metadata is metadata for each of multiple samples in the frame of the decoded audio signal, and the plurality of metadata include metadata for each of multiple samples arranged at intervals of a sample count obtained by dividing the number of the samples making up the frame by the number of the plurality of metadata, wherein the sample count obtained by dividing the number of the samples making up the frame by the number of the plurality of metadata is an integer . These limitations indicate that there are multiple metadata samples within a frame, and that the samples are uniformly distributed within the frame. Applicant specifically argues that Arnott fails to disclose the implicit placement of metadata within the frame, and that additional metadata, such as interpolation duration, is required for the placement of each metadata value within the frame. The Office finds this argument persuasive. Arnott discloses the inclusion of metadata that indicates the time interval between metadata instances (see col. 3, lines 47-53, col. 4, lines 52-54, col. 5, lines 29-32; col. 8, lines 58-60), whereas the claimed invention determines the time interval between metadata instances by calculating a uniform distribution, thereby reducing the amount of metadata required for rendering the audio signal. Arnott therefore fails to disclose the step of dividing the number of the samples making up the frame by the number of the metadata. The rejections of claims 2, 5, and 6 (and so also dependent claims 7 and 8) are withdrawn . VIII. Recapture under 35 U.S.C. § 251 In In re Clement, 131 F.3d at 1468-70, 45 USPQ2d at 1164-65, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit set forth a three-step test for recapture analysis. In North American Container, 415 F.3d at 1349, 75 USPQ2d at 1556, the court restated this test as follows: We apply the recapture rule as a three-step process: (1) first, we determine whether, and in what respect, the reissue claims are broader in scope than the original patent claims; (2) next, we determine whether the broader aspects of the reissue claims relate to subject matter surrendered in the original prosecution; and (3) finally, we determine whether the reissue claims were materially narrowed in other respects, so that the claims may not have been enlarged, and hence avoid the recapture rule. Step 1 With respect to step 1 (see MPEP § 1412.02(I)(A)), applicants seek to broaden the reissue claims by at least deleting/omitting the following limitations which are present in issued independent claim 1 of the ‘796 patent, but not in new reissue claim 6 (paraphrased): encoded data of a plurality of metadata for the frame determining whether vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) gains of a plurality of samples in the frame of the audio signal of the audio object have been calculated return to calculation of the VBAP gains the number of the metadata for the frame is identified based on information included in the bitstream the metadata include position information indicating a position of the audio object the rendering section calculates vector base amplitude panning VBAP gains of two or three speakers placed around the position of the audio object. Regarding issued claim 3, the following analogous limitations have been omitted from new reissue claim 5: encoded data of a plurality of metadata for the frame determining whether vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) gains of a plurality of samples in the frame of the audio signal of the audio object have been calculated return to calculation of the VBAP gains the number of the metadata for the frame is identified based on information included in the bitstream calculating VBAP gains of two or three speakers placed around the position of the audio object. Step 2 With respect to step 2 (see MPEP § 1412.02(I)(B)), there were several instances where applicants surrendered subject matter during prosecution of the original application (which became the patent to be reissued). Note that the "original application" includes the patent family’s entire prosecution history. MBO Laboratories, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co., 602 F.3d 1306, 94 USPQ2d 1598 (Fed. Cir. 2010). During prosecution of the ‘630 application, applicant filed a response to a first non-final rejection on 25 February 2019. Therein, applicant amended independent claims 1, 8, and 9 to include the following limitations, and argued that the new limitations distinguished over the prior art of record (see pages 6-7): metadata including position information indicating a position of the audio object calculate vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) gains of two or three speakers around the position of the audio object After a final rejection, applicant filed a response reiterating their arguments that the newly added limitations distinguished over the prior art of record. After an Advisory Action was issued, maintaining the rejections, there was no response by applicant. A Notice of Abandonment was mailed on 2 October 2019. During prosecution of the ‘693 application, applicant filed a response to a first non-final rejection on 17 February 2021. Therein, applicant amended independent claims 1, 5, and 6 to include the following limitations, and argued that the new limitations distinguished over the prior art of record (see pages 6-7): calculate vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) gains of two or three speakers around the position of the audio object metadata is metadata for multiple samples in the frame of the audio signal After a final rejection, applicant filed a request for continuing examination on 26 May 2021. Therein, applicant further amended independent claims 1, 5, and 6 to include the following additional limitations, and argued that the new limitations distinguished over the prior art of record (see pages 5-7): determine whether vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) gains of a plurality of samples in the frame of the audio signal of the audio object have been calculated return to calculation of the VBAP gains On 21 July 2021, a Notice of Allowance was mailed, citing the newly added limitations as the reasons for allowance. As noted in MPEP § 1412.02, “If an original patent claim limitation now being omitted or broadened in the present reissue application was originally relied upon by applicant in the original application to make the claims allowable over the art, the omitted limitation relates to subject matter previously surrendered by applicant. The reliance by applicant to define the original patent claims over the art can be by presentation of new/amended claims to define over the art, or an argument/statement by applicant that a limitation of the claim(s) defines over the art.” With respect to whether applicant surrendered any subject matter, it is to be noted that a patent owner (reissue applicant) is bound by the argument that applicant relied upon to overcome, for example, an art rejection in the original application for the patent to be reissued, regardless of whether the Office adopted the argument in allowing the claims. Greenliant Systems, Inc. v. Xicor LLC, 692 F.3d 1261, 1271, 103 USPQ2d 1951, 1958 (Fed. Cir. 2012). As pointed out by the court, "[i]t does not matter whether the examiner or the Board adopted a certain argument for allowance; the sole question is whether the argument was made." Id. Given the above-cited surrendered subject matter, and in consideration of the subject matter omitted in new independent claims 5 and 6 (cited above in step 1 of the analysis), the Office concludes that the following broader aspects of reissue claims 5 and 6 are related to the subject matter surrendered during original prosecution of the ‘693 application : determining whether vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) gains of a plurality of samples in the frame of the audio signal of the audio object have been calculated return to calculation of the VBAP gains metadata including position information indicating a position of the audio object calculating VBAP gains of two or three speakers placed around the position of the audio object. These limitations have been entirely eliminated from new reissue claims 5 and 6. Step 3 With respect to step 3 (see MPEP § 1412.02(I)(C)), the Office has reviewed and analyzed new independent claims 5 and 6, and concluded that there has been no material narrowing of the reissue claims in such a way that recapture has been avoided. Therefore, in view of the surrendered subject matter that has been broadened in the reissue claims, claims 5 and 6 are subject to rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 251. Dependent claims 7, 8, 11, and 12 are likewise rejected, as they fail to restore all of the surrendered subject matter to the claims. 14-17 Claims 5-8 are therefore rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 251 as being an impermissible recapture of broadened claimed subject matter surrendered in the application for the patent upon which the present reissue is based. See Greenliant Systems, Inc. et al v. Xicor LLC , 692 F.3d 1261, 103 USPQ2d 1951 (Fed. Cir. 2012); In re Shahram Mostafazadeh and Joseph O. Smith , 643 F.3d 1353, 98 USPQ2d 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2011); North American Container, Inc. v. Plastipak Packaging, Inc. , 415 F.3d 1335, 75 USPQ2d 1545 (Fed. Cir. 2005); Pannu v. Storz Instruments Inc. , 258 F.3d 1366, 59 USPQ2d 1597 (Fed. Cir. 2001); Hester Industries, Inc. v. Stein, Inc. , 142 F.3d 1472, 46 USPQ2d 1641 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Clement , 131 F.3d 1464, 45 USPQ2d 1161 (Fed. Cir. 1997); Ball Corp. v. United States , 729 F.2d 1429, 1436, 221 USPQ 289, 295 (Fed. Cir. 1984). The reissue application contains claim(s) that are broader than the issued patent claims. The record of the application for the patent shows that the broadening aspect (in the reissue) relates to claimed subject matter that applicant previously surrendered during the prosecution of the application. Accordingly, the narrow scope of the claims in the patent was not an error within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 251, and the broader scope of claim subject matter surrendered in the application for the patent cannot be recaptured by the filing of the present reissue application. IX. Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112 07-30-01 AIA The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. 07-31-01 Claims 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Regarding claims 5 and 6, these claims include the limitation that the sample count obtained by dividing the number of the samples making up the frame by the number of the plurality of metadata is an integer . After review of applicant’s disclosure, the Office can find no support for this limitation. Claims 7 and 8, depending upon claims 5 and 6 respectively, are likewise rejected. 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 07-34-01 Claims 1-5, 7, 8, and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. With respect to claims 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, 13, 15, and 16, these claims include the limitation “return[ing] to calculation of the VBAP gains.” This renders the claims indefinite. Specifically, this limitation seems to be in the form of movement through a workflow (such as the flow from step S59 to step S57 in the workflow of Fig. 5), and not the execution of a proper method step. Claim 6 (and dependent claim 8) are directed to a decoding apparatus. However, claim 8 includes the step of rendering (“perform rendering based on the audio signal…” The presence of method steps within an apparatus claim renders the claim indefinite, since it is unclear whether the claim would be infringed by an apparatus capable of carrying out the claimed method steps, or if the actual execution of the method steps would be necessary for infringement. With respect to claim 1, this claim includes the limitation “wherein determining a number of the metadata for the frame is based....” However, there is no antecedent basis for the term “determining a number of the metadata for the frame” in the claim. This problem could be addressed by re-phrasing the limitation as an affirmative action, in the form “determining a/the number of the metadata for the frame based on information…” With respect to claims 5 and 6, these claims include the limitation “the encoded data of the plurality of metadata.” There is no antecedent basis for this term in the claims. The claims do recite “a plurality of metadata,” but fail to recite anything regarding “ encoded data of the plurality of metadata.” This renders the claims indefinite. With respect to claim 5, this claim includes the step of “decoding both...encoded audio data…and a plurality of metadata.” However, applicant’s latest amendment has incorporated the step of “decoding the encoded data of the plurality of metadata.” Since the metadata has already been decoded above, this new step renders the claim indefinite. With respect to claims 5 and 6, these claims include the step of rendering “based…on the plurality of metadata.” However, since the method includes the step of decoding the plurality of metadata, and the decoding apparatus includes a metadata decoding section, the plurality of metadata is by implication encoded. In other claimed instances of rendering, the rendering is based upon a plurality of metadata obtained by the decoding (i.e., decoded metadata). This renders the claims indefinite. Dependent claims 7 and 8, also including the step of rendering “based…on the plurality of metadata.” This renders claims 7 and 8 indefinite for the same reason as parent claims 5 and 6. With respect to claims 7 and 8, the claims include the term “the audio signal obtained by the decoding method/apparatus”. There is no antecedent for this term in the claims, since the method/apparatus obtain “encoded audio data”, and not an “audio signal.” With respect to claims 7 and 8, these claims both include rendering in response to the result of VBAP gain calculation. However, respective parent claims 5 and 6 already include analogous rendering, independent of any VBAP calculation. This renders the claims indefinite. With respect to claim 14, this claim includes the limitation that the metadata for multiple samples is arranged by dividing the number of the samples making up the frame by the number of the metadata. However, the meaning of this “arranging” is unclear. Contrast the language of claim 14 with that of amended claim 2. X. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1, 3, 4, 13, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 8,804,971 to Phillip A. Williams et al. (“ Williams ”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0133683 to Charles Q. Robinson et al. (“ Robinson ”) and U.S. Patent 9,883,316 to Seok-hwan Jo et al. (“ Jo ”) . Claim 1 With respect to claim 1, Williams teaches a decoding apparatus (see decoder 92 , Fig. 4; see also decoder of Fig. 3) as claimed, comprising: a) an acquisition section configured to acquire a bitstream (see receipt of encoded audio 31 , Fig. 3; see also disclosure of receipt of an E-AC-3 encoded audio bitstream, such as E-AC-3 encoded signal 31 , col. 11, lines 35-41) including: i) encoded audio data obtained by encoding an audio signal of an audio object in a frame of a predetermined time segment (see disclosure that each frame of an AC-3 encoded audio bitstream includes audio content, col. 1, lines 59-60); and ii) encoded data of a plurality of metadata for the frame (see disclosure that each frame of an AC-3 encoded audio bitstream includes metadata, col. 1, lines 59-60); b) an audio data decoding section configured to decode the encoded audio data (see Fig. 3; see also disclosure of decoder 92 , configured to generate and output a decoded audio signal indicative of audio content of the original multi-channel input signal, col. 20, lines 34-37); c) a metadata decoding section configured to decode the encoded data of the plurality of metadata (see disclosure that coupling parameters are frequency-banded metadata, col. 2, lines 52-62; see also disclosure that SPX parameters are metadata, col. 16, lines 1-4; see also disclosure of the extraction and decoding of coupling parameters [i.e., metadata] in the channel coupling stage 37 , col. 12, lines 31-38 and Fig. 3; see also disclosure of the extraction and decoding of SPX parameters [i.e., metadata] in the spectral extension decoding stage 38 , col. 12, lines 47-56 and Fig. 3); and d) a rendering section configured to perform rendering based on the audio signal obtained by the audio data decoding section and on the metadata obtained by the metadata decoding section (see disclosure that decoder 92 is typically configured to generate and output [e.g., to a rendering system] a decoded audio signal indicative of audio content of the original multi-channel input signal, col. 20, lines 34-37); e) wherein determining a number of the metadata for the frame is based on information included in the bitstream (see disclosure that each frame of an E-AC-3 encoded audio bitstream contains audio content and metadata for 256, 512, 768, or 1536 samples of digital audio, depending on whether the frame contains one, two, three, or six blocks of audio data, col. 1, lines 63-67); f) wherein each of the plurality of metadata is metadata for multiple samples in the frame of the audio signal (see disclosure that each frame of an E-AC-3 encoded audio bitstream contains audio content and metadata for 256, 512, 768, or 1536 samples of digital audio, depending on whether the frame contains one, two, three, or six blocks of audio data, col. 1, lines 63-67). Williams does not explicitly teach the claimed decoding apparatus wherein the metadata include position information indicating position of the audio objects. Robinson , however, teaches a decoding apparatus wherein the metadata include position information indicating position of the audio objects (see disclosure of the use of object position metadata, Abstract; see also presence of an object position metadata element in the rendering metadata, Fig. 5, and ¶¶ [0035], [0048], [0090], [0115], [0120], and Table 9). It would have been obvious to a POSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention to include metadata regarding the position of audio objects, since this would provide an immersive experience for the listener by ensuring that sounds that are meant to emanate from a specific region of a viewing screen or room are played through speakers located at that same relative position (see ¶ [0048]). Williams does not explicitly teach the claimed rendering section wherein the calculation of vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) gains of two or three speakers placed around the position of the audio object is based on position information, wherein the audio signal is rendered only after the VBAP gain calculation for all samples and objects has completed. Robinson , however, teaches a decoding apparatus comprising a gain calculating section configured to calculate vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) gains based on the decoded metadata, and a rendering section that calculates VBAP gains of two or three speakers placed around the position of the audio object based on information , wherein the audio signal is rendered only after the VBAP gain calculation for all samples and objects has completed (see disclosure of an adaptive audio system that can select a preferred rendering algorithm from a number of available rendering algorithms and/or surround sound formats, including vector-based amplitude panning [VBAP], ¶ [0100]). It would have been obvious to a POSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention to utilize vector-based amplitude panning (VBAP) in an audio rendering system since it is one of the most widespread spatial audio technologies for loudspeaker-based setups, and because it allows precise sound localization with a small computational footprint. To the extent that one could argue that Robinson does not explicitly disclose the rendering of audio data only after VBAP gain calculations have been completed for all objects and samples, Jo teaches a method of generating a multi-channel audio signal (see Title) through the use of vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) (see col. 5, lines 27-30) based upon received object sound data and object location metadata (see location information collection unit 110 and object sound collection unit 120 , col. 9, lines 34-44 and Fig. 10) wherein audio data is rendered only after VBAP gain calculations have been completed for all objects and samples (see disclosure of object sound reconfiguration unit 140 which calculates gains corresponding to the selected speakers using location vectors of the selected speakers and a location vector of the object sound and maps the object sound to the selected speakers by respectively applying the calculated gains to the selected speakers, and the channel control unit 150 which generates control signals for reproducing the object sound in the multi-channel speaker system, col. 10, lines 1-15; see also Fig. 10, illustrating that the functions of the object sound reconstruction unit 140 [i.e., gain calculations] must be complete before the functions of channel control unit 150 [i.e., rendering] commence): PNG media_image1.png 496 808 media_image1.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to a POSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention to render the audio data only after the gain calculations for all objects and samples has completed, since rendering the audio data prior to the completion of gain calculations would result in decreased sound quality and a lack of effective sound localization. Claim 3 With respect to claim 3, Williams teaches a decoding method (see decoder 92 , Fig. 4; see also decoder of Fig. 3) as claimed, comprising: a) acquiring a bitstream (see receipt of encoded audio 31 , Fig. 3; see also disclosure of receipt of an E-AC-3 encoded audio bitstream, such as E-AC-3 encoded signal 31 , col. 11, lines 35-41) including: i) encoded audio data obtained by encoding an audio signal of an audio object in a frame of a predetermined time segment (see disclosure that each frame of an AC-3 encoded audio bitstream includes audio content, col. 1, lines 59-60); and ii) encoded data of a plurality of metadata for the frame (see disclosure that each frame of an AC-3 encoded audio bitstream includes metadata, col. 1, lines 59-60); b) decoding the encoded audio data (see Fig. 3; see also disclosure of decoder 92 , configured to generate and output a decoded audio signal indicative of audio content of the original multi-channel input signal, col. 20, lines 34-37); c) decoding the encoded data of the plurality of metadata (see disclosure that coupling parameters are frequency-banded metadata, col. 2, lines 52-62; see also disclosure that SPX parameters are metadata, col. 16, lines 1-4; see also disclosure of the extraction and decoding of coupling parameters [i.e., metadata] in the channel coupling stage 37 , col. 12, lines 31-38 and Fig. 3; see also disclosure of the extraction and decoding of SPX parameters [i.e., metadata] in the spectral extension decoding stage 38 , col. 12, lines 47-56 and Fig. 3); and d) performing rendering based on the audio signal obtained by the audio data decoding section and on the metadata obtained by the metadata decoding section (see disclosure that decoder 92 is typically configured to generate and output [e.g., to a rendering system] a decoded audio signal indicative of audio content of the original multi-channel input signal, col. 20, lines 34-37); e) wherein the number of the metadata for the frame is identified based on information included in the bitstream (see disclosure that each frame of an E-AC-3 encoded audio bitstream contains audio content and metadata for 256, 512, 768, or 1536 samples of digital audio, depending on whether the frame contains one, two, three, or six blocks of audio data, col. 1, lines 63-67); f) wherein each of the plurality of metadata is metadata for multiple samples in the frame of the audio signal (see disclosure that each frame of an E-AC-3 encoded audio bitstream contains audio content and metadata for 256, 512, 768, or 1536 samples of digital audio, depending on whether the frame contains one, two, three, or six blocks of audio data, col. 1, lines 63-67). Williams does not explicitly teach the claimed calculation of vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) gains of two or three speakers placed around a position of the audio object based on the decoded metadata, wherein the audio signal is rendered only after the VBAP gain calculation for all samples and objects has completed. Robinson , however, teaches a decoding method comprising metadata including position information indicating position of the audio objects (see disclosure of the use of object position metadata, Abstract; see also presence of an object position metadata element in the rendering metadata, Fig. 5, and ¶¶ [0035], [0048], [0090], [0115], [0120], and Table 9), and calculating vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) gains of two or three speakers placed around a position of the audio object based on the decoded metadata , wherein the audio signal is rendered only after the VBAP gain calculation for all samples and objects has completed (see disclosure of an adaptive audio system that can select a preferred rendering algorithm from a number of available rendering algorithms and/or surround sound formats, including vector-based amplitude panning [VBAP], ¶ [0100]). It would have been obvious to a POSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention to utilize vector-based amplitude panning (VBAP) in an audio rendering system since it is one of the most widespread spatial audio technologies for loudspeaker-based setups, and because it allows precise sound localization with a small computational footprint. To the extent that one could argue that Robinson does not explicitly disclose the rendering of audio data only after VBAP gain calculations have been completed for all objects and samples, Jo teaches a method of generating a multi-channel audio signal (see Title) through the use of vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) (see col. 5, lines 27-30) based upon received object sound data and object location metadata (see location information collection unit 110 and object sound collection unit 120 , col. 9, lines 34-44 and Fig. 10) wherein audio data is rendered only after VBAP gain calculations have been completed for all objects and samples (see disclosure of object sound reconfiguration unit 140 which calculates gains corresponding to the selected speakers using location vectors of the selected speakers and a location vector of the object sound and maps the object sound to the selected speakers by respectively applying the calculated gains to the selected speakers, and the channel control unit 150 which generates control signals for reproducing the object sound in the multi-channel speaker system, col. 10, lines 1-15; see also Fig. 10, illustrating that the functions of the object sound reconstruction unit 140 [i.e., gain calculations] must be complete before the functions of channel control unit 150 [i.e., rendering] commence): PNG media_image1.png 496 808 media_image1.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to a POSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention to render the audio data only after the gain calculations for all objects and samples has completed, since rendering the audio data prior to the completion of gain calculations would result in decreased sound quality and a lack of effective sound localization. Claim 4 With respect to claim 4, Williams teaches at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium encoded with executable instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform a decoding method (see decoder 92 , Fig. 4; see also decoder of Fig. 3) as claimed, comprising: a) acquiring a bitstream (see receipt of encoded audio 31 , Fig. 3; see also disclosure of receipt of an E-AC-3 encoded audio bitstream, such as E-AC-3 encoded signal 31 , col. 11, lines 35-41) including: i) encoded audio data obtained by encoding an audio signal of an audio object in a frame of a predetermined time segment (see disclosure that each frame of an AC-3 encoded audio bitstream includes audio content, col. 1, lines 59-60); and ii) encoded data of a plurality of metadata for the frame (see disclosure that each frame of an AC-3 encoded audio bitstream includes metadata, col. 1, lines 59-60); b) decoding the encoded audio data (see Fig. 3; see also disclosure of decoder 92 , configured to generate and output a decoded audio signal indicative of audio content of the original multi-channel input signal, col. 20, lines 34-37); c) decoding the encoded data of the plurality of metadata (see disclosure that coupling parameters are frequency-banded metadata, col. 2, lines 52-62; see also disclosure that SPX parameters are metadata, col. 16, lines 1-4; see also disclosure of the extraction and decoding of coupling parameters [i.e., metadata] in the channel coupling stage 37 , col. 12, lines 31-38 and Fig. 3; see also disclosure of the extraction and decoding of SPX parameters [i.e., metadata] in the spectral extension decoding stage 38 , col. 12, lines 47-56 and Fig. 3); and d) performing rendering based on the audio signal obtained by the audio data decoding section and on the metadata obtained by the metadata decoding section (see disclosure that decoder 92 is typically configured to generate and output [e.g., to a rendering system] a decoded audio signal indicative of audio content of the original multi-channel input signal, col. 20, lines 34-37); e) wherein the number of the metadata for the frame is identified based on information included in the bitstream (see disclosure that each frame of an E-AC-3 encoded audio bitstream contains audio content and metadata for 256, 512, 768, or 1536 samples of digital audio, depending on whether the frame contains one, two, three, or six blocks of audio data, col. 1, lines 63-67); f) wherein each of the plurality of metadata is metadata for multiple samples in the frame of the audio signal (see disclosure that each frame of an E-AC-3 encoded audio bitstream contains audio content and metadata for 256, 512, 768, or 1536 samples of digital audio, depending on whether the frame contains one, two, three, or six blocks of audio data, col. 1, lines 63-67). Williams does not explicitly teach the claimed calculation of vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) gains of two or three speakers placed around a position of the audio object based on the decoded metadata, wherein the audio signal is rendered only after the VBAP gain calculation for all samples and objects has completed. Robinson , however, teaches a decoding method comprising metadata including position information indicating position of the audio objects (see disclosure of the use of object position metadata, Abstract; see also presence of an object position metadata element in the rendering metadata, Fig. 5, and ¶¶ [0035], [0048], [0090], [0115], [0120], and Table 9), and calculating vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) gains of two or three speakers placed around a position of the audio object based on the decoded metadata , wherein the audio signal is rendered only after the VBAP gain calculation for all samples and objects has completed (see disclosure of an adaptive audio system that can select a preferred rendering algorithm from a number of available rendering algorithms and/or surround sound formats, including vector-based amplitude panning [VBAP], ¶ [0100]). It would have been obvious to a POSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention to utilize vector-based amplitude panning (VBAP) in an audio rendering system since it is one of the most widespread spatial audio technologies for loudspeaker-based setups, and because it allows precise sound localization with a small computational footprint. To the extent that one could argue that Robinson does not explicitly disclose the rendering of audio data only after VBAP gain calculations have been completed for all objects and samples, Jo teaches a method of generating a multi-channel audio signal (see Title) through the use of vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) (see col. 5, lines 27-30) based upon received object sound data and object location metadata (see location information collection unit 110 and object sound collection unit 120 , col. 9, lines 34-44 and Fig. 10) wherein audio data is rendered only after VBAP gain calculations have been completed for all objects and samples (see disclosure of object sound reconfiguration unit 140 which calculates gains corresponding to the selected speakers using location vectors of the selected speakers and a location vector of the object sound and maps the object sound to the selected speakers by respectively applying the calculated gains to the selected speakers, and the channel control unit 150 which generates control signals for reproducing the object sound in the multi-channel speaker system, col. 10, lines 1-15; see also Fig. 10, illustrating that the functions of the object sound reconstruction unit 140 [i.e., gain calculations] must be complete before the functions of channel control unit 150 [i.e., rendering] commence): PNG media_image1.png 496 808 media_image1.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to a POSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention to render the audio data only after the gain calculations for all objects and samples has completed, since rendering the audio data prior to the completion of gain calculations would result in decreased sound quality and a lack of effective sound localization. Claim 13 With respect to claim 13, Williams teaches a decoding apparatus (see decoder 92 , Fig. 4; see also decoder of Fig. 3) as claimed, comprising: a) an acquisition section configured to acquire a bitstream (see receipt of encoded audio 31 , Fig. 3; see also disclosure of receipt of an E-AC-3 encoded audio bitstream, such as E-AC-3 encoded signal 31 , col. 11, lines 35-41) including: i) encoded audio data obtained by encoding an audio signal of an audio object in a frame of a predetermined time segment (see disclosure that each frame of an AC-3 encoded audio bitstream includes audio content, col. 1, lines 59-60); and ii) encoded data of a plurality of metadata for the frame (see disclosure that each frame of an AC-3 encoded audio bitstream includes metadata, col. 1, lines 59-60); b) an audio data decoding section configured to decode the encoded audio data (see Fig. 3; see also disclosure of decoder 92 , configured to generate and output a decoded audio signal indicative of audio content of the original multi-channel input signal, col. 20, lines 34-37); c) a metadata decoding section configured to decode the encoded data of the plurality of metadata (see disclosure that coupling parameters are frequency-banded metadata, col. 2, lines 52-62; see also disclosure that SPX parameters are metadata, col. 16, lines 1-4; see also disclosure of the extraction and decoding of coupling parameters [i.e., metadata] in the channel coupling stage 37 , col. 12, lines 31-38 and Fig. 3; see also disclosure of the extraction and decoding of SPX parameters [i.e., metadata] in the spectral extension decoding stage 38 , col. 12, lines 47-56 and Fig. 3); and d) a rendering section configured to perform rendering based on the audio signal obtained by the audio data decoding section and on the metadata obtained by the metadata decoding section (see disclosure that decoder 92 is typically configured to generate and output [e.g., to a rendering system] a decoded audio signal indicative of audio content of the original multi-channel input signal, col. 20, lines 34-37); e) wherein the number of the metadata for the frame is identified based on information included in the bitstream (see disclosure that each frame of an E-AC-3 encoded audio bitstream contains audio content and metadata for 256, 512, 768, or 1536 samples of digital audio, depending on whether the frame contains one, two, three, or six blocks of audio data, col. 1, lines 63-67); f) wherein each of the plurality of metadata is metadata for multiple samples in the frame of the audio signal (see disclosure that each frame of an E-AC-3 encoded audio bitstream contains audio content and metadata for 256, 512, 768, or 1536 samples of digital audio, depending on whether the frame contains one, two, three, or six blocks of audio data, col. 1, lines 63-67). Williams does not explicitly teach the claimed decoding apparatus wherein the metadata include position information indicating position of the audio objects. Robinson , however, teaches a decoding apparatus wherein the metadata include position information indicating position of the audio objects (see disclosure of the use of object position metadata, Abstract; see also presence of an object position metadata element in the rendering metadata, Fig. 5, and ¶¶ [0035], [0048], [0090], [0115], [0120], and Table 9). It would have been obvious to a POSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention to include metadata regarding the position of audio objects, since this would provide an immersive experience for the listener by ensuring that sounds that are meant to emanate from a specific region of a viewing screen or room are played through speakers located at that same relative position (see ¶ [0048]). Williams does not explicitly teach the claimed rendering section calculates vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) gains of two or three speakers placed around the position of the audio object, wherein the audio signal is rendered only after the VBAP gain calculation for all samples and objects has completed. Robinson , however, teaches a decoding apparatus comprising a gain calculating section configured to calculate vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) gains based on the decoded metadata, and a rendering section that calculates VBAP gains of two or three speakers placed around the position of the audio object , wherein the audio signal is rendered only after the VBAP gain calculation for all samples and objects has completed (see disclosure of an adaptive audio system that can select a preferred rendering algorithm from a number of available rendering algorithms and/or surround sound formats, including vector-based amplitude panning [VBAP], ¶ [0100]). It would have been obvious to a POSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention to utilize vector-based amplitude panning (VBAP) in an audio rendering system since it is one of the most widespread spatial audio technologies for loudspeaker-based setups, and because it allows precise sound localization with a small computational footprint. To the extent that one could argue that Robinson does not explicitly disclose the rendering of audio data only after VBAP gain calculations have been completed for all objects and samples, Jo teaches a method of generating a multi-channel audio signal (see Title) through the use of vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) (see col. 5, lines 27-30) based upon received object sound data and object location metadata (see location information collection unit 110 and object sound collection unit 120 , col. 9, lines 34-44 and Fig. 10) wherein audio data is rendered only after VBAP gain calculations have been completed for all objects and samples (see disclosure of object sound reconfiguration unit 140 which calculates gains corresponding to the selected speakers using location vectors of the selected speakers and a location vector of the object sound and maps the object sound to the selected speakers by respectively applying the calculated gains to the selected speakers, and the channel control unit 150 which generates control signals for reproducing the object sound in the multi-channel speaker system, col. 10, lines 1-15; see also Fig. 10, illustrating that the functions of the object sound reconstruction unit 140 [i.e., gain calculations] must be complete before the functions of channel control unit 150 [i.e., rendering] commence): PNG media_image1.png 496 808 media_image1.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to a POSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention to render the audio data only after the gain calculations for all objects and samples has completed, since rendering the audio data prior to the completion of gain calculations would result in decreased sound quality and a lack of effective sound localization. Claim 15 With respect to claim 15, Williams teaches a decoding method (see decoder 92 , Fig. 4; see also decoder of Fig. 3) as claimed, comprising: a) acquiring a bitstream (see receipt of encoded audio 31 , Fig. 3; see also disclosure of receipt of an E-AC-3 encoded audio bitstream, such as E-AC-3 encoded signal 31 , col. 11, lines 35-41) including: i) encoded audio data obtained by encoding an audio signal of an audio object in a frame of a predetermined time segment (see disclosure that each frame of an AC-3 encoded audio bitstream includes audio content, col. 1, lines 59-60); and ii) encoded data of a plurality of metadata for the frame (see disclosure that each frame of an AC-3 encoded audio bitstream includes metadata, col. 1, lines 59-60); b) decoding the encoded audio data (see Fig. 3; see also disclosure of decoder 92 , configured to generate and output a decoded audio signal indicative of audio content of the original multi-channel input signal, col. 20, lines 34-37); c) decoding the encoded data of the plurality of metadata (see disclosure that coupling parameters are frequency-banded metadata, col. 2, lines 52-62; see also disclosure that SPX parameters are metadata, col. 16, lines 1-4; see also disclosure of the extraction and decoding of coupling parameters [i.e., metadata] in the channel coupling stage 37 , col. 12, lines 31-38 and Fig. 3; see also disclosure of the extraction and decoding of SPX parameters [i.e., metadata] in the spectral extension decoding stage 38 , col. 12, lines 47-56 and Fig. 3); and d) performing rendering based on the audio signal obtained by the audio data decoding section and on the metadata obtained by the metadata decoding section (see disclosure that decoder 92 is typically configured to generate and output [e.g., to a rendering system] a decoded audio signal indicative of audio content of the original multi-channel input signal, col. 20, lines 34-37); e) wherein the number of the metadata for the frame is identified based on information included in the bitstream (see disclosure that each frame of an E-AC-3 encoded audio bitstream contains audio content and metadata for 256, 512, 768, or 1536 samples of digital audio, depending on whether the frame contains one, two, three, or six blocks of audio data, col. 1, lines 63-67); f) wherein each of the plurality of metadata is metadata for multiple samples in the frame of the audio signal (see disclosure that each frame of an E-AC-3 encoded audio bitstream contains audio content and metadata for 256, 512, 768, or 1536 samples of digital audio, depending on whether the frame contains one, two, three, or six blocks of audio data, col. 1, lines 63-67). Williams does not explicitly teach the claimed calculation of vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) gains of two or three speakers placed around a position of the audio object based on the decoded metadata, wherein the audio signal is rendered only after the VBAP gain calculation for all samples and objects has completed. Robinson , however, teaches a decoding method comprising metadata including position information indicating position of the audio objects (see disclosure of the use of object position metadata, Abstract; see also presence of an object position metadata element in the rendering metadata, Fig. 5, and ¶¶ [0035], [0048], [0090], [0115], [0120], and Table 9), and calculating vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) gains of two or three speakers placed around a position of the audio object based on the decoded metadata , wherein the audio signal is rendered only after the VBAP gain calculation for all samples and objects has completed (see disclosure of an adaptive audio system that can select a preferred rendering algorithm from a number of available rendering algorithms and/or surround sound formats, including vector-based amplitude panning [VBAP], ¶ [0100]). It would have been obvious to a POSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention to utilize vector-based amplitude panning (VBAP) in an audio rendering system since it is one of the most widespread spatial audio technologies for loudspeaker-based setups, and because it allows precise sound localization with a small computational footprint. To the extent that one could argue that Robinson does not explicitly disclose the rendering of audio data only after VBAP gain calculations have been completed for all objects and samples, Jo teaches a method of generating a multi-channel audio signal (see Title) through the use of vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) (see col. 5, lines 27-30) based upon received object sound data and object location metadata (see location information collection unit 110 and object sound collection unit 120 , col. 9, lines 34-44 and Fig. 10) wherein audio data is rendered only after VBAP gain calculations have been completed for all objects and samples (see disclosure of object sound reconfiguration unit 140 which calculates gains corresponding to the selected speakers using location vectors of the selected speakers and a location vector of the object sound and maps the object sound to the selected speakers by respectively applying the calculated gains to the selected speakers, and the channel control unit 150 which generates control signals for reproducing the object sound in the multi-channel speaker system, col. 10, lines 1-15; see also Fig. 10, illustrating that the functions of the object sound reconstruction unit 140 [i.e., gain calculations] must be complete before the functions of channel control unit 150 [i.e., rendering] commence): PNG media_image1.png 496 808 media_image1.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to a POSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention to render the audio data only after the gain calculations for all objects and samples has completed, since rendering the audio data prior to the completion of gain calculations would result in decreased sound quality and a lack of effective sound localization. Claim 16 With respect to claim 16, Williams teaches at least one non-transitory computer-readable storage medium encoded with executable instructions that, when executed by at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to perform a decoding method (see decoder 92 , Fig. 4; see also decoder of Fig. 3) as claimed, comprising: a) acquiring a bitstream (see receipt of encoded audio 31 , Fig. 3; see also disclosure of receipt of an E-AC-3 encoded audio bitstream, such as E-AC-3 encoded signal 31 , col. 11, lines 35-41) including: i) encoded audio data obtained by encoding an audio signal of an audio object in a frame of a predetermined time segment (see disclosure that each frame of an AC-3 encoded audio bitstream includes audio content, col. 1, lines 59-60); and ii) encoded data of a plurality of metadata for the frame (see disclosure that each frame of an AC-3 encoded audio bitstream includes metadata, col. 1, lines 59-60); b) decoding the encoded audio data (see Fig. 3; see also disclosure of decoder 92 , configured to generate and output a decoded audio signal indicative of audio content of the original multi-channel input signal, col. 20, lines 34-37); c) decoding the encoded data of the plurality of metadata (see disclosure that coupling parameters are frequency-banded metadata, col. 2, lines 52-62; see also disclosure that SPX parameters are metadata, col. 16, lines 1-4; see also disclosure of the extraction and decoding of coupling parameters [i.e., metadata] in the channel coupling stage 37 , col. 12, lines 31-38 and Fig. 3; see also disclosure of the extraction and decoding of SPX parameters [i.e., metadata] in the spectral extension decoding stage 38 , col. 12, lines 47-56 and Fig. 3); and d) performing rendering based on the audio signal obtained by the audio data decoding section and on the metadata obtained by the metadata decoding section (see disclosure that decoder 92 is typically configured to generate and output [e.g., to a rendering system] a decoded audio signal indicative of audio content of the original multi-channel input signal, col. 20, lines 34-37); e) wherein the number of the metadata for the frame is identified based on information included in the bitstream (see disclosure that each frame of an E-AC-3 encoded audio bitstream contains audio content and metadata for 256, 512, 768, or 1536 samples of digital audio, depending on whether the frame contains one, two, three, or six blocks of audio data, col. 1, lines 63-67); f) wherein each of the plurality of metadata is metadata for multiple samples in the frame of the audio signal (see disclosure that each frame of an E-AC-3 encoded audio bitstream contains audio content and metadata for 256, 512, 768, or 1536 samples of digital audio, depending on whether the frame contains one, two, three, or six blocks of audio data, col. 1, lines 63-67). Williams does not explicitly teach the claimed calculation of vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) gains of two or three speakers placed around a position of the audio object based on the decoded metadata, wherein the audio signal is rendered only after the VBAP gain calculation for all samples and objects has completed. Robinson , however, teaches a decoding method comprising metadata including position information indicating position of the audio objects (see disclosure of the use of object position metadata, Abstract; see also presence of an object position metadata element in the rendering metadata, Fig. 5, and ¶¶ [0035], [0048], [0090], [0115], [0120], and Table 9), and calculating vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) gains of two or three speakers placed around a position of the audio object based on the decoded metadata , wherein the audio signal is rendered only after the VBAP gain calculation for all samples and objects has completed (see disclosure of an adaptive audio system that can select a preferred rendering algorithm from a number of available rendering algorithms and/or surround sound formats, including vector-based amplitude panning [VBAP], ¶ [0100]). It would have been obvious to a POSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention to utilize vector-based amplitude panning (VBAP) in an audio rendering system since it is one of the most widespread spatial audio technologies for loudspeaker-based setups, and because it allows precise sound localization with a small computational footprint. To the extent that one could argue that Robinson does not explicitly disclose the rendering of audio data only after VBAP gain calculations have been completed for all objects and samples, Jo teaches a method of generating a multi-channel audio signal (see Title) through the use of vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) (see col. 5, lines 27-30) based upon received object sound data and object location metadata (see location information collection unit 110 and object sound collection unit 120 , col. 9, lines 34-44 and Fig. 10) wherein audio data is rendered only after VBAP gain calculations have been completed for all objects and samples (see disclosure of object sound reconfiguration unit 140 which calculates gains corresponding to the selected speakers using location vectors of the selected speakers and a location vector of the object sound and maps the object sound to the selected speakers by respectively applying the calculated gains to the selected speakers, and the channel control unit 150 which generates control signals for reproducing the object sound in the multi-channel speaker system, col. 10, lines 1-15; see also Fig. 10, illustrating that the functions of the object sound reconstruction unit 140 [i.e., gain calculations] must be complete before the functions of channel control unit 150 [i.e., rendering] commence): PNG media_image1.png 496 808 media_image1.png Greyscale It would have been obvious to a POSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention to render the audio data only after the gain calculations for all objects and samples has completed, since rendering the audio data prior to the completion of gain calculations would result in decreased sound quality and a lack of effective sound localization . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1, 3, 4, 13, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 8,804,971 to Phillip A. Williams et al. (“ Williams ”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0133683 to Charles Q. Robinson et al. (“ Robinson ”) and U.S. Patent 9,883,316 to Seok-hwan Jo et al. (“ Jo ”), and U.S. Patent 9,743,210 to Christian Borss et al. (“ Borss ”) . Claims 1, 3, 4, 13, 15, and 16 With respect to claims 1, 3, 4, 13, 15, and 16, Williams , Robinson , and Jo teach a decoding apparatus, method, and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium as claimed (see rejections above). To the extent that one could argue that Williams fails to disclose a decoding apparatus, method, and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium wherein each of the plurality of metadata is metadata for multiple samples in the frame of the audio signal , Borss teaches such an apparatus (see disclosure of a metadata decoder for receiving one or more compressed metadata signals, wherein each of the one or more compressed metadata signals includes a plurality of first metadata samples, wherein the first metadata samples of each of the one or more compressed metadata signals indicate information associated with an audio object signal of one of more audio object signals, col. 4, lines 21-54, and col. 8, lines 29-32 “Each of the one or more original metadata signals comprises a plurality of metadata samples.”). It would have been obvious to a POSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention to include metadata for multiple samples in the audio signal frame, since this would allow a higher density of metadata for the audio data samples, thus ensuring a more accurate reproduction of the source audio signal by decreasing the degree of interpolation necessary for rendering . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1, 3, 4, 13, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent 8,804,971 to Phillip A. Williams et al. (“ Williams ”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0133683 to Charles Q. Robinson et al. (“ Robinson ”) and U.S. Patent 9,883,316 to Seok-hwan Jo et al. (“ Jo ”), and U.S. Patent 9,607,624 to Frank M. Baumgarte (“ Baumgarte ”) . Claims 1, 3, 4, 13, 15, and 16 With respect to claims 1, 3, 4, 13, 15, and 16, Williams , Robinson , and Jo teach a decoding apparatus, method, and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium as claimed (see rejections above). To the extent that one could argue that Williams fails to disclose a decoding apparatus, method, and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium wherein each of the plurality of metadata is metadata for multiple samples in the frame of the audio signal , Baumgarte teaches such an apparatus (see disclosure that metadata systems can advantageously incorporate Dynamic Range Control/Compression (DRC) metadata into an audio bitstream, col. 2, lines 56-65; see also disclosure that in most cases, traditional DRC metadata systems update gain values for the audio stream at the rate of once per frame, but for AC-3 encoding, the gain values are updated at an approximately 6 times faster rate, col. 3, lines 3-11; see also disclosure that metadata that efficiently represents the compression gain samples may be updated as fast as necessary to accurately represent gain changes, such that if the gain is virtually constant, it may be sufficient to only include a single gain sample per DRC frame, but when there are larger gain changes, smaller update intervals would be necessary to ensure sufficient accuracy of the reconstructed DRC gain values in an audio signal after decoding [i.e., the metadata contains metadata for multiple samples], col. 4, lines 1-17). It would have been obvious to a POSITA prior to the effective filing date of the invention to include metadata for multiple samples in the audio signal frame, since this would allow a higher density of metadata for the audio data samples, thus ensuring a more accurate reproduction of the source audio signal by decreasing the degree of interpolation necessary for rendering. XI. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 5 and 6 would be allowable over the prior art of record, contingent upon resolution of the above claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 251 for improper recapture and 35 U.S.C. §§ 112(a) written description and (b) indefiniteness. Claims 2, 7, and 8, likewise contain allowable subject matter . 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The claims include the limitation that each of the plurality of metadata is metadata for multiple samples arranged at intervals of a sample count obtained by dividing the number of the samples making up the frame by the number of the metadata (i.e., the metadata is uniformly distributed within the frame). Arnott includes the disclosure that metadata instances can be random time values, synchronous time values generated by a clock circuit, time events related to the audio content, such as frame boundaries, or any other appropriate timed event, col. 8, lines 30-43. Arnott also discloses that the time interval between the metadata instances, referred to as the “interpolation duration”, may be uniform or they may be different (see col. 3, lines 47-53). However, Arnott specifies the time interval between audio samples through the inclusion of interpolation duration within the associated metadata (see col. 4, lines 52-54, col. 5, lines 29-32; col. 8, lines 58-60), as opposed to the claimed determination of the time interval between audio samples through the calculation of a uniform distribution, thereby reducing the amount of metadata required for rendering the audio signal. Arnott therefore fails to disclose the step of obtaining intervals of a sample count by dividing the number of the samples making up the frame by the number of the metadata . XII. Conclusion In accordance with MPEP § 1406, the examiner has reviewed and considered the prior art cited or of record in the original prosecution of the ‘796 patent. Applicants are reminded that a listing of the information cited or of record in the original prosecution of the ‘796 patent need not be resubmitted in this reissue application unless Applicant(s) desire the information to be printed on a patent issuing from this reissue application. Applicant(s) are reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 CFR § 1.178(b), to timely apprise the Office of any prior or concurrent proceeding in which ‘796 patent is or was involved. These proceedings would include interferences, reissues, reexaminations, other post-grant proceedings in the Office, and litigation. Applicant(s) are further reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 C.F.R. § 1.56, to timely apprise the Office of any information which is material to patentability of the claims under consideration in this reissue application. These obligations rest with each individual associated with the filing and prosecution of this application for reissue. See also MPEP §§ 1404, 1442.01 and 1442.04. Applicant(s) are also reminded that any amendments to the claims must comply with the provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 112 first paragraph, having clear support and antecedent basis in the specification. See 37 C.F.R. § 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). 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. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Luke S. Wassum whose telephone number is (571) 272-4119. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8 AM-5 PM, alternate Fridays off. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael Fuelling can be reached on 571-270-1367. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-9900. In addition, INFORMAL or DRAFT communications may be faxed directly to the examiner at 571-273-4119. Such communications must be clearly marked as INFORMAL, DRAFT or UNOFFICIAL. Patent Center Patent Center is available to all users for electronic filing and management of patent applications. For more information, please visit the Patent Center information page at www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center . /LUKE S WASSUM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992 Conferees: /ANGELA M LIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992 Michael Fuelling /MF/ Supervisory Patent Examiner Art Unit 3992 lsw 1 June 2026 Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 2 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 3 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 4 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 5 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 6 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 7 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 8 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 9 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 10 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 11 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 12 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 13 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 14 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 15 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 16 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 17 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 18 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 19 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 20 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 21 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 22 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 23 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 24 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 25 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 26 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 27 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 28 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 29 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 30 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 31 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 32 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 33 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 34 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 35 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 36 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 37 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 38 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 39 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 40 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 41 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 42 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 43 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 44 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 45 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 46 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 47 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 48 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 49 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 50 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 51 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 52 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 53 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 54 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 55 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 56 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 57 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 58 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 59 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 60 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 61 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection Application/Control Number: 18/502,611 Page 62 Art Unit: 3992 Reissue of U.S. Patent 11,170,796 – Non-Final Rejection
Prosecution Insights