DETAILED ACTION
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 .
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.
Status of Claims
A preliminary amendment filed on 2/26/2024 has been acknowledged and entered. Claim 19 has been canceled. Claim 21 has been added. Claims 1-18 and 20-21 are pending.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 1-18 and 20-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 and 20 of conflicting Patent No. 11,785,276 B2. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of the pending application is generic to all that is recited in claim 1 of the conflicting Patent No. 11,785,276 B2. That is, claim 1 of the pending application is anticipated by claim 1 of the conflicting application. Also the corresponding dependent claims are identically the same. Look below for example.
Table 1 illustrates the conflicting claim pairs:
Conflicting Patent No. 11,785,276 B2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Pending Application 18/685789
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Conflicting Patent No. 11,785,276 B2
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
20
1
Pending Application 18/685789
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Table 2 illustrates a mapping between the limitations claim 1 of the pending application and claim 1 of the conflicting Patent No. 11,785,276 B2. Claim 11, 18 and 21 of pending application and claim 11, 18 and 1 in the conflicting Patent No. 11,785,276 B2, respectively, are analyzed similarly. Additionally, the dependent claims are analyzed similarly.
Conflicting Patent No. 11,785,276 B2
Claim 1 of Conflicting Application
Serial Number (18/685789)
Claim 1 of Pending Application
1. A method of replacing or augmenting first device recorded audio content by second device recorded audio content in media content recorded by the first device, the media content comprising the audio content recorded by the first device synchronized with video content, the method comprising the steps of:
receiving the first device recorded media content; based on tag data and/or fingerprint data associated with the audio content of the media content, performing an audio/acoustic tag and/or fingerprint search to match the audio content of said media content with a portion of audio content recorded or provided by the second device; and
replacing or augmenting the audio content of the media content with the matched portion of the audio content recorded or provided by the second device by compiling the matched portion of the audio content with the video content of the media content;
wherein the method includes compensating for an amount of timing misalignment between the audio content of the media content and the matched portion of the audio content recorded or provided by the second when compiling the matched portion of the audio content with the video content of the media content.
1. A method of replacing or augmenting first device recorded audio content by second device recorded audio content in media content recorded by the first device, the media content comprising the audio content recorded by the first device and video content recorded by the first device, the method comprising the steps of:
replacing or augmenting the audio content of the media content with a received portion of the audio content recorded or provided by the second device by compiling the received portion of the audio content with the video content of the media content;
wherein the method includes compensating for an amount of timing misalignment between the audio content of the media content and the received portion of the audio content recorded or provided by the second when compiling the received portion of the audio content with the video content of the media content.
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 of this title, 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 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 20150279424 A1 to Marck in view of US Pub. No. 20120324505 A1 to Casagrande.
As to claims 1 and 21, Marck discloses a method of replacing or augmenting first device recorded audio content by second device recorded audio content in media content recorded by the first device, the media content comprising the audio content recorded by the first device and video content recorded by the first device (Marck Fig. 1-5, 7, ¶0028, 0039-0042, 0046-0047, replacing audio portion of the digital AV file recorded by first device with audio recorded by second device, the AV file comprising the audio and video recorded by the first device), the method comprising the steps of:
replacing or augmenting the audio content of the media content with a received portion of the audio content recorded or provided by the second device by compiling the received portion of the audio content with the video content of the media content (Marck Fig. 1-5, 7, ¶0028, 0039-0042, 0046-0047, replacing audio portion of the digital AV file recorded by first device with audio recorded by second device by creating a new AV file with the received portion of the audio recorded by the second device with the video content recorded by the first device).
Marck does not expressly disclose wherein the method includes compensating for an amount of timing misalignment between the audio content of the media content and the received portion of the audio content recorded or provided by the second when compiling the received portion of the audio content with the video content of the media content.
Casagrande discloses wherein the method includes compensating for an amount of timing misalignment between the audio content of the media content and the received portion of the audio content recorded or provided by the second when compiling the received portion of the audio content with the video content of the media content (Casagrande ¶0021, 0045-0046, appropriately align or synchronize the alternative audio content with the primary video content so that the presentation of the resulting revised audio/visual content segment 314 to the user is correct).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Marck by wherein the method includes compensating for an amount of timing misalignment between the audio content of the media content and the received portion of the audio content recorded or provided by the second when compiling the received portion of the audio content with the video content of the media content as disclosed by Casagrande. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to temporally align the audio into the video providing synchronization that correctly plays back the content to the user thereby enhancing the user’s experience.
Claims 2, 3 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 20150279424 A1 to Marck in view of US Pub. No. 20120324505 A1 to Casagrande and in further view of US Pub. No. 20050188297 A1 to Knight.
As to claim 2, Marck and Casagrande do not expressly disclose wherein the method includes, prior to compiling the received portion of the audio content with the video content of the media content, determining an amount of timing misalignment between the audio content of the media content and the received portion of the audio content.
Knight discloses wherein the method includes, prior to compiling the received portion of the audio content with the video content of the media content, determining an amount of timing misalignment between the audio content of the media content and the received portion of the audio content (Knight ¶0030, 0042, before/prior to playing the video/audio content, determining and comparing the duration of the second audio segment with the duration of the first audio segment).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Marck and Casagrande by wherein the method includes, prior to compiling the received portion of the audio content with the video content of the media content, determining an amount of timing misalignment between the audio content of the media content and the received portion of the audio content as disclosed by Knight. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to provide synchronized video/audio by determining/comparing the first and second audio duration thereby enhancing the user’s experience.
As to claim 3, Knight discloses wherein the step of determining an amount of timing misalignment comprises comparing one or more segments of the audio content of the media content with one or more segments of the received portion of the audio content recorded or provided by the second device (Knight ¶0030, 0042, before/prior to playing the video/audio content, determining and comparing the duration of the second audio segment with the duration of the first audio segment).
As to claim 9, Casagrande discloses wherein an amount of timing misalignment between the audio content of the media content and the received portion of the audio content recorded or provided by the second device is based on time stamp data of one or both of the audio content of the media content and the received portion of the audio content (Casagrande ¶0041, Presentation Time Stamp (PTS), Decoding Time Stamp (DTS)
Claims 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 20150279424 A1 to Marck in view of US Pub. No. 20120324505 A1 to Casagrande and in further view of US Pub. No. 20050188297 A1 to Knight and in further view of US Pub. No. 20150301718 A1 to Trollope.
As to claim 10, Marck, Casagrande and Knight do not expressly disclose wherein the time stamp data comprises start and end times of one or both of the audio content of the media content and the received portion of the audio content.
Trollope discloses wherein the time stamp data comprises start and end times of one or both of the audio content of the media content and the received portion of the audio content (Trollope ¶0075, a start timestamp corresponding to the start of the audio segment and an end timestamp corresponding to the end of the audio segment)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Marck, Casagrande and Knight by wherein the time stamp data comprises start and end times of one or both of the audio content of the media content and the received portion of the audio content as disclosed by Trollope. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to accurately identify the audio using the start timestamp and end timestamp thereby improving the identification process of the audio.
Claims 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 20150279424 A1 to Marck in view of US Pub. No. 20140343704 A1 to Liu.
As to claim 11, Marck discloses a method of replacing or augmenting first device recorded audio content by second device recorded audio content in media content recorded by the first device, the media content comprising the audio content recorded by the first device and video content recorded by the first device (Marck Fig. 1-5, 7, ¶0028, 0039-0042, 0046-0047, replacing audio portion of the digital AV file recorded by first device with audio recorded by second device, the AV file comprising the audio and video recorded by the first device), the method comprising the steps of:
replacing or augmenting the audio content of the media content with a received portion of the audio content recorded or provided by the second device by compiling the received portion of the audio content with the video content of the media content (Marck Fig. 1-5, 7, ¶0028, 0039-0042, 0046-0047, replacing audio portion of the digital AV file recorded by first device with audio recorded by second device by creating a new AV file with the received portion of the audio recorded by the second device with the video content recorded by the first device).
Marck does not expressly disclose wherein the method includes obtaining tag data and/or fingerprint data for the audio content of the media content by: determining a plurality of hash values based on frequency peaks of the audio content of the media content.
Liu wherein the method includes obtaining tag data and/or fingerprint data for the audio content of the media content by: determining a plurality of hash values based on frequency peaks of the audio content of the media content (Liu ¶0030, 0036, 0068, 0073, calculating the first audio fingerprint based on the first audio signal includes: extracting one or more first peak points from the first audio signal; for each first peak point, acquiring a first acquisition time and a first acquisition frequency of the first peak point; acquiring a matching time and a matching frequency of a pairing peak point matching with the first peak point within a predetermined range; calculating a time difference between the first acquisition time and the matching time and a frequency difference between the first acquisition frequency and the matching frequency; calculating a hash value based on at least information associated with the first acquisition frequency, the time difference and the frequency difference; determining the hash value as a hash code corresponding to the first peak point)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Marck by wherein the method includes obtaining tag data and/or fingerprint data for the audio content of the media content by: determining a plurality of hash values based on frequency peaks of the audio content of the media content as disclosed by Liu. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to accurately provide program/audio identification using audio fingerprints thereby enhancing the user’s experience.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. No. 20150279424 A1 to Marck in view of US Pub. No. 20140343704 A1 to Liu and in further view of US Pub. No. 20190087117 A1 to Colgrove.
As to claim 12, Marck and Liu do not expressly disclose wherein it includes determining one or more metrics from said plurality of hash value
Colgrove discloses wherein it includes determining one or more metrics from said plurality of hash value (Colgrove ¶0027, performance metric may be based, on retrieving hash values).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Marck by wherein it includes determining one or more metrics from said plurality of hash value as disclosed by Colgrove. The suggestion/motivation would have been in order to determining metrics using hash values providing efficient data comparison and/or de-duplication thereby optimizing performance.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-8 and 13-17 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.
Reasons for Allowance
Claims 18 and 20 are considered allowable since when reading the claims in light of the specification (MPEP § 2111.01) or In re Sneed, 710 F.2 1544, 1548, 218 USPQ 385,388 Fed. Cir. 1983), none of the references of record alone or in combination disclose or suggest the combination of limitations specified in independent claim 18, wherein the Applicant discloses replacing or augmenting the audio content of the media content with a received portion of the audio content recorded or provided by the second device by compiling the received portion of the audio content with the video content of the media content; and wherein, prior to performing an audio/acoustic tag and/or fingerprint search to match the audio content of said media content with a portion of audio content recorded or provided by the second device, obtaining one or more feature vectors from the audio content of the media content, and using said one or more feature vectors to reduce a size of a search of stored instances of audio content recorded or provided by one or more second devices.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled "Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance."
Conclusion
Claims 1-3, 9-12 and 21 have been rejected.
Claims 4-8 and 13-17 are objected.
Claims 18 and 20 are allowed.
Correspondence Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KYU CHAE whose telephone number is (571)270-5696. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00am -4:30pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, NASSER MOAZZAMI can be reached on 571-272-4195. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KYU CHAE/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2426
Prosecution Insights