Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
2. Applicants’ arguments regarding the status of the double-patenting rejection have been considered. Applicant appears to place undue significance on the absence of the word “provisional” from the prior heading. Because the rejection was explicitly based on claims of a co-pending application, its provisional nature was apparent on the face of the rejection. The rejection was made over claims of a co-pending application and was therefore provisional in nature. The Office Action did not treat the co-pending application as an issued patent, rather it expressly identified the rejection as an obviousness type double patenting rejection based on the claims of the co-pending application. The fact those claims remain subject to amendment or cancellation is precisely why the rejection is provisional and does not render the rejection improper. For clarity, the heading has been revised to state provisional nonstatutory obviousness type double patenting rejection. This clarification does not alter the substance or basis of the previously made rejection. Applicant appears to place undue significance on the absence of the word “provisional” from the prior heading. Because the rejection was explicitly based on claims of a co-pending application, its provisional nature was apparent on the face of the rejection.
The rejection of claims 27, 31-36, 38, 40-43 and 45-46 over double patenting is maintained.
3. Applicants’ arguments regarding claim 27 have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Baumgarte does not itself disclose the claimed relationship between a first DRC set configured for providing dynamic range control and a selected DRC set configured for providing dynamic loudness compensation. This argument is not persuasive because the rejection does not rely upon Baumgarte alone for this limitation. Baumgarte provides the underlying decoder DRC processing framework, while the ISO/IEC is relied upon for the multiple DRC set architecture and the relationship between distinct DRC sets and dynamic loudness compensation.
Applicant further characterizes ISO/IEC as merely teaching a “generic dependency relationship” in which one DRC set references another. This characterization does not account for the actual teaching of ISO/IEC. ISO/IEC explicitly teaches that one DRC set is used for dynamic range compression and the other is issued for a different effect and further teaches that the first DRC set may contain depondsOnDrcSet, identifying the second DRC set. Therefore, the cited signaling does more than merely reference another set, it explicitly identifies DRC sets for combined application.
The amendment further explicitly teaches loudness compensation and explains that time varying loudness information may be recovered from DRC gain sequences to dynamically control the compensation module. It also teaches loudness equalization metadata identifying the combinations of DRC processing to which the information may be applied and references the corresponding DRC gain sequences/
Here, ISO/IEC already provides an architecture in which separate DRC sets represent separately declared effects and are explicitly configured application. The Amendment then introduces dynamic loudness compensation using DRC gain sequences. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have reason to implement the disclosed dynamic loudness compensation functionality using ISO/IEC’s already clearly established effect specific DRC set architecture and its existing dependency signaling, rather than creating a separate mechanism for identifying and coordinating such DRC gains. Doing so predictably permits the dynamic range control and dynamic loudness compensation effects to remain separately identified while ensuring their coordinated application.
Accordingly, Applicant’s argument that the rejection fails to identify a teaching, suggestion or technical reason to partition the functionality is not persuasive. The rejection does not merely establish that dependency syntax exists in isolation. ISO/IEC already established effect-specific DRC set architecture and its existing dependency signaling, rather than creating a separate mechanism for identifying and coordinating such DRC gains. Doing so predictably permits the dynamic range control and dynamic loudness compensation effects to remain separately identified while ensuring their coordinated application.
4. Applicant’s arguments with regards to the alleged signaling-efficiency distinction have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicant additionally argues that the claimed arrangement permits dynamic range control information and dynamic loudness compensation information to be represented separately, avoiding unnecessary duplication and providing more efficient signaling. Claim 27 does not require any particular reduction in duplicated gain information, metadata size or bitrate resulting from the claimed arrangement. Moreover, ISO/IEC teaches multiple DRC configurations and separately identified DRC effects.
5. Arguments with regards to new claim 47 have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicant argues that new claim 47 distinguishes the invention because the selected DRC set includes an indication that its gains are not intended for independent application and are to be applied in combination with gains corresponding to the first DRC set. However, ISO/IEC teaches the noIndependentUse flag and states that DRC sets having noIndependentUse equal to 1 can only be used in combination with a second DRC set. ISO/IEC further uses dependsOnDrcSet to identify the corresponding DRC set involved in the combined application. Therefore, the additional limitations of claim 47 does not distinguish over the cited combination.
6. Applicant’s argument with regards to newly added claim 48 have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicant argues that claim 48 further distinguishes the invention by requiring dynamic range control gains corresponding to the first DRC set and dynamic loudness compensation gains corresponding to the selected DRC set, with the selected DRC set configured for application together with the first DRC set. This argument is not persuasive. ISO/IEC explicitly teaches configurations wherein one DRC set is used for dynamic range compression, another DRC set provides a separately declared effect and the sets are configured for combined application. The amendment further explicitly teaches dynamic loudness compensation controlled using DRC gain sequences. It would have been obvious to use the Amendment’s disclosed dynamic loudness compensation gains as the separately identified effect of ISO/IEC’s second DRC set and to apply that set together with the first dynamic range control DRC set using ISO/IEC’s existing combined used architecture for the reasons discussed above.
Double Patenting
7. 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 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
8. Claims 27, 31-34, 36, 38, 40-42 and 45-46 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 28, 32-40 and 42-47 of co-pending U.S. Application No. 18/854,046 in view of ISO/IEC 23003-4 (DRC Standard), herein ISO/IEC. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
*It is noted that the co-pending application has been allowed, however, the notice of allowance mailed 9/8/2026 and there is currently no issued patent*
Regarding Claim 27:
Current Application
A method of processing audio data for playback, the method including:
receiving, by a decoder, a bitstream including encoded audio data and metadata,
wherein the metadata includes one or more dynamic range control (DRC) sets,
and for each DRC set, an indication of whether the DRC set is configured for providing a dynamic loudness compensation effect;
parsing the metadata, by the decoder, to identify DRC sets that are configured for providing the dynamic loudness compensation effect; decoding, by the decoder, the encoded audio data to obtain decoded audio data;
selecting, by the decoder, one of the identified DRC sets configured for providing the dynamic loudness compensation effect;
extracting from the bitstream, by the decoder, one or more DRC gains corresponding to the selected DRC set;
applying to the decoded audio data, by the decoder, the one or more DRC gains corresponding to the selected DRC set to obtain dynamic loudness compensated audio data;
(1) outputting the dynamic loudness compensated audio data for playback;
Claim 28 of ‘046
A method of processing audio data for playback, the method including:
receiving, by a decoder, a bitstream including encoded audio data and metadata,
wherein the metadata includes one or more dynamic range control (DRC) sets,
and for each DRC set, an indication of whether the DRC set is configured for providing a loudness leveling effect wherein the indication is whether the DRC set is specified in a loudness leveling bitstream payload included in an extension field of a previously defined bitstream syntax;
decoding, by the decoder, the encoded audio data and the encoded metadata to obtain decoded audio data and decoded metadata;
selecting, by the decoder, one of the DRC sets configured for providing the loudness leveling effect based on a personalization experience selected based on input from a playback device for outputting the decoded audio data;
extracting from the decoded metadata, by the decoder, one or more DRC gains corresponding to the selected DRC set;
applying to the decoded audio data, by the decoder, the one or more DRC gains corresponding to the selected DRC set to obtain dynamic loudness compensated audio data,
wherein the loudness leveling effect ensures a target average loudness for the dynamic loudness compensated audio data; (1) and outputting the dynamic loudness compensated audio data for playback.
‘046 discloses the claimed decoder-based DRC processing framework, including receiving encoded audio and metadata containing DRC sets, identifying a DRC set as providing a loudness effect, selecting the DRC set, extracting corresponding DRC gains, applying the gains to decoded audio to obtain dynamic loudness compensated audio data and outputting the compensated audio data. ‘046 does not explicitly disclose wherein a first DRC set is configured for providing dynamic range control and wherein the first DRC set comprises an indication that the selected DRC set configured for providing the dynamic loudness compensation effect is configured for application in combination with the first DRC set.
However, ISO/IEC discloses wherein the first DRC set comprises an indication that the selected DRC set configured for providing the dynamic loudness compensation effect is configured for application in combination with the first DRC set (ISO/IEC Page 7 and ISO/IEC Amendment Page 5: discloses dependsOnDRCSet field, which discloses if a set has dependency or combination with another DRC set).
‘046 and ISO/IEC are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor, i.e., the use of metadata associated with the encoded signal during playback of the decoded signal, to improve quality of playback in various types of consumer electronics end user devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have enabled ‘046’s metadata based decoder DRC framework to use the known MPEG-D DRC dependency signaling, such as the drcSetEffect(). The suggestion/motivation for doing so is “Consumer audio systems and devices are used in a large variety of configurations and acoustical environments. For many of these scenarios, the audio reproduction quality can be improved by appropriate control of content dynamics and loudness,” as disclosed in the introduction of the ISO/IEC.
Claim 31 of the current application corresponds to claim 32 of 18/854,046.
Claim 32 of the current application corresponds to claim 33 of 18/854,046.
Claim 33 of the current application corresponds to claim 28 of 18/854,046.
Claim 34 of the current application corresponds to claim 28, 36 and 37 of 18/854,046.
Claim 36 of the current application corresponds to claim 38 of 18/854,046.
Claim 38 of the current application corresponds to claim 39 of 18/854,046.
Claim 40 of the current application corresponds to claim 40 of 18/854,046.
Claim 41 of the current application corresponds to claim 42 and 43 of 18/854,046.
Claim 42 of the current application corresponds to claim 44 and 45 of 18/854,046.
Claim 45 of the current application corresponds to claim 47 of 18/854,046.
Claim 46 of the current application corresponds to claim 46 of 18/854,046.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
9. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
10. Claims 27-34, 36-42 and 44-48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baumgarte (US 2017/0032793) in view of ISO/IEC and the ISO/IEC 23004-4 Amendment 1, herein ISO/IEC amendment.
*Note: for purposes of examination, the Examiner treats ISO/IEC and ISO/IEC amendment as a single combined reference, because the amendment supplements the disclosure of the base standard*
Regarding Claim 27:
Baumgarte discloses a method of processing audio data for playback, the method including:
receiving, by a decoder, a bitstream including encoded audio data and metadata (Baumgarte: ¶32 discloses a decoder receiving a bitstream containing encoded audio plus metadata),
wherein the metadata includes one or more dynamic range control (DRC) sets (Baumgarte: ¶29 includes one or more sequences of DRC gain values, ¶24 also teaches multipole DRC gain sequences and multiple gain sets in the metadata in ¶39, i.e., this is metadata carrying multiple DRC gain sequences/sets)
and for each DRC set, an indication of whether the DRC set is configured for providing a dynamic loudness compensation effect (Baumgarte: ¶29 and ¶32 disclose metadata that identifies the DRC characteristics/effects associated with the transmitted DRC information, including loudness related operations);
parsing the metadata, by the decoder, to identify DRC sets that are configured for providing the dynamic loudness compensation effect (Baumgarte: ¶33 discloses the demux extracts metadata and provides it to DRC 1 processor 12, metadata includes the default and alternate DRC characteristic indications, i.e., the decoder is parsing and using metadata to identify the relevant DRC information for loudness related processing);
decoding, by the decoder, the encoded audio data to obtain decoded audio data (Baumgarte: ¶33 the decoder decodes the digital audio recording);
selecting, by the decoder, one of the identified DRC sets configured for providing the dynamic loudness compensation effect (Baumgarte: ¶36 discloses the decoder side selection between identified DRC alternatives);
extracting from the bitstream, by the decoder, one or more DRC gains corresponding to the selected DRC set (Baumgarte: ¶32 metadata include a sequence of encoder DRC gain values);
applying to the decoded audio data, by the decoder, the one or more DRC gains corresponding to the selected DRC set to obtain dynamic loudness compensated audio data (Baumgarte: ¶33 discloses multiplier block 11 applies either the default DRC gain values or a remapped set of DRC gains to produce a dynamic range adjusted audio recording);
outputting the dynamic loudness compensated audio data for playback (Baumgarte: ¶13 the DRC adjusted audio signals are converted to an analog form and then fed to a speaker driver input of an electro-acoustic transducer); and
wherein a first one of the DRC sets is configured for providing dynamic range control (Baumgarte: ¶25 discloses a default DRC gain sequence is produced by applying a selected one of a number of DRC characteristics, ¶27-29 repeatedly disclose that as a dynamic range adjustment control), and
Baumgarte does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the first DRC set comprises an indication that the selected DRC set configured for providing the dynamic loudness compensation effect is configured for application in combination with the first DRC set.
However, the ISO/IEC discloses wherein the first DRC set comprises an indication that the selected DRC set configured for providing the dynamic loudness compensation effect is configured for application in combination with the first DRC set (ISO/IEC Page 7 and ISO/IEC Amendment Page 5: discloses dependsOnDRCSet field, which discloses if a set has dependency or combination with another DRC set).
Baumgarte and ISO/IEC are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor, i.e., the use of metadata associated with the encoded signal during playback of the decoded signal, to improve quality of playback in various types of consumer electronics end user devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have enabled Baumgarte’s metadata based decoder DRC framework to use the known MPEG-D DRC dependency signaling, such as dependsOnDrcSet and noIndependentUse because Baumgarte already relies on metadata to indicate which DRC characteristics and gains are available and how the decoder should select and apply them, while the ISO/IEC provides a known and explicit way to signal that one DRC set is to be used in combination with another DRC set rather than independently. The suggestion/motivation for doing so is “Consumer audio systems and devices are used in a large variety of configurations and acoustical environments. For many of these scenarios, the audio reproduction quality can be improved by appropriate control of content dynamics and loudness,” as disclosed in the introduction of the ISO/IEC.
Regarding Claim 28:
The combination of Baumgarte and ISO/IEC further discloses the method according to claim 27, wherein the metadata includes a plurality of DRC sets configured for providing the dynamic loudness adjustment, wherein each of the plurality of DRC sets is also associated with one or more playback conditions, and wherein the selecting is performed in response to an indication of a playback condition provided to the decode (Baumgarte: ¶29 teaches metadata with multiple DRC gain sequences, the metadata can identify the scenario or condition in which alternate DRC should be applied and decoder choice may be based on playback related information).
Regarding Claim 29:
The combination of Baumgarte and ISO/IEC further discloses the method according to claim 27, wherein, in addition to providing a dynamic loudness compensation effect, the one or more DRC sets are also configured to provide dynamic range control (Baumgarte: ¶29 discloses an entire framework for DRC sets and characteristics that provide dynamic range control).
Regarding Claim 30:
The combination of Baumgarte and ISO/IEC further discloses the method according to claim 28, wherein the playback condition includes one or more of a device type of the decoder, characteristics of a playback device, characteristics of a loudspeaker, a loudspeaker setup, characteristics of background noise, characteristics of ambient noise and characteristics of the acoustic environment (Baumgarte: ¶4 expressly discloses playback devices and scenarios and acoustic environments, including headset, smartphone speakerphone, tablet, laptop, desktop and other playback environments. Also, teaches decoder choice may be based on the dynamic range of the playback transducer and playback system sensitivity see ¶36).
Regarding Claim 31:
The combination of Baumgarte and ISO/IEC further discloses the method according to claim 27, wherein the indication of whether the DRC set is configured for providing the dynamic loudness compensation effect is provided in a parameter indicating one or more effects provided by the DRC set (Baumgarte: ¶29 and ¶32 expressly discloses metadata carrying an indication of selected/default and alternate DRC characteristics).
Regarding Claim 32:
The combination of Baumgarte and ISO/IEC further discloses the method according to claim 31, wherein the parameter indicating one or more effects provided by the DRC set is a drcSetEffect bitfield of an MPEG-D DRC bitstream, wherein individual bits of the drcSetEffect bitfield correspond to different effects, and one of the bits of the drcSetEffect bitfield corresponds to the dynamic loudness compensation effect (Baumgarte: ¶27 discloses a gain value that is positive or negative to decide the effect, also ¶24 discloses metadata carried in extension fields of MPEG-D DRC).
Regarding Claim 33:
The combination of Baumgarte and ISO/IEC further discloses the method according to claim 27, wherein the indication of whether the DRC set is configured for providing the dynamic loudness compensation effect is whether the DRC set is specified in a dynamic loudness compensation bitstream payload (Baumgarte: ¶29 teaches the presence of metadata indicating which DRC information corresponds to the DRC functionality and when it should be used).
Regarding Claim 34:
The combination of Baumgarte and ISO/IEC further discloses the method according to claim 33, wherein the dynamic loudness compensation bitstream payload is included in an extension field of a previously defined bitstream syntax (Baumgarte: ¶24 discloses metadata carried in extension fields of MPEG-D DRC).
wherein the extension field is a uniDrcConfigExtension field of an MPEG-D DRC bitstream (Baumgarte: ¶24 discloses that the metadata associated with the encoded digital audio recording may be carried in a number of extension fields of the ISO/IEC standard; ISO/IEC Page 4 discloses uniDrcConfig() contains all blocks except for the loudnessinfo() blocks, the last part of the uniDrcConfig() payload can include future extension payloads, in the event that a uniDrcConfigEXTType value is received the DRC tool parser reads and discards the bits of the extension payload.)
Examiner Interpretation {Baumgarte gives a broad teaching of an extension field in an MPEG-D DRC bitstream, however, does not give the exact syntactical name. ISO/IEC gives this exact syntax), and
wherein the dynamic loudness compensation bitstream payload is included only for specific values of a uniDrcConfigExtType parameter (ISO/IEC: Page 4 discloses that the extension payload handling to uniDrcConfigExtType governs extension payload presence);
and wherein a plurality of dynamic loudness compensation payloads specifying a plurality of DRC sets configured for providing the dynamic loudness compensation effect are included in the extension field of the previously defined bitstream syntax (Baumgarte: discloses multiple DRC gain structures in ¶10 and that there may be multiple sets in the metadata in ¶39, this teaches the plurality of sets).
Baumgarte and ISO/IEC are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor, i.e., the use of metadata associated with the encoded signal during playback of the decoded signal, to improve quality of playback in various types of consumer electronics end user devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Baumgarte’s MPEG-D DRC metadata and multiple DRC gain set framework using the known extension payload syntax of the MPEG-D DRC standard including the extension type payload parameters and loudness compensation metadata because both references address the same decoder side DRC metadata architecture and the ISO amendment provides the exact standardized syntax details for carrying such payloads in an MPEG-D DRC bitstream. The suggestion/motivation for doing so is “Consumer audio systems and devices are used in a large variety of configurations and acoustical environments. For many of these scenarios, the audio reproduction quality can be improved by appropriate control of content dynamics and loudness,” as disclosed in the introduction of the ISO/IEC.
Regarding Claim 36:
The combination of Baumgarte and ISO/IEC further discloses the method of claim 27, wherein the indication of whether the DRC set is configured for providing the dynamic loudness compensation effect is a field of a previously existing configuration element of a previously defined bitstream syntax (Baumgart: ¶29 disclose that the metadata includes DRC related indication and that the metadata may be enhanced using fields; ISO/IEC discloses logical blocks on page 4, uniDrcConfig contains all of these blocks. Examiner Interpretation {ISO/IEC places the relevant DRC/loudness compensation related indication into a field of an already existing configuration element in an already defined MPEG-D DRC syntax).
Baumgarte and ISO/IEC are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor, i.e., the use of metadata associated with the encoded signal during playback of the decoded signal, to improve quality of playback in various types of consumer electronics end user devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Baumgarte’s metadata indication using the known MPEG and DRC syntax structure of ISO/IEC. The suggestion/motivation for doing so is “This part of ISO/IEC 23003 provides a universal dynamic range control tool that supports loudness normalization. The DRC tool offers a bitrate efficient representation of dynamically compressed versions of an audio signal, as disclosed in the introduction of the ISO/IEC.
Regarding Claim 37:
The combination of Baumgarte and ISO/IEC further discloses the method of claim 36, wherein the field is a dynamicLoudCompDRCSet parameter (Baumegarte: ¶29-31 discloses that metadata include an indication identifying the relevant DRC characteristic/set and that the indication may be implemented in different metadata forms), and the previously existing configuration element is a downmixInstructions element, a drcInstructionsBasic element, or a drcInstructionsUniDRC element of an MPEG-D DRC bitstream, and optionally, wherein the field is a previously existing field reserved for future use (ISO/IEC amendment Page 2: discloses the logical blocks and that the config contains all blocks except for the loudness info block. This is the exact bitstream syntax, downStreamMix instruction, drcInstructionsBasic, drcInstructionsUniDrc are all expressly identified as existing logical configuration blocks in the MPEG-D DRC syntax).
Baumgarte and ISO/IEC are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor, i.e., the use of metadata associated with the encoded signal during playback of the decoded signal, to improve quality of playback in various types of consumer electronics end user devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Baumgarte’s metadata indication using the known MPEG and DRC syntax structure of ISO/IEC. The suggestion/motivation for doing so is “This part of ISO/IEC 23003 provides a universal dynamic range control tool that supports loudness normalization. The DRC tool offers a bitrate efficient representation of dynamically compressed versions of an audio signal,” as disclosed in the introduction of the ISO/IEC.
Regarding Claim 38:
The combination of Baumgarte and ISO/IEC further discloses the method of claim 27, wherein the indication of whether the DRC set is configured for providing the dynamic loudness compensation effect is a field of an updated version of a previously existing configuration element of a previously defined bitstream syntax (Baumgarte: ¶32 discloses metadata also include an indication of the default DRC characteristic as well as an indication of an alternate DRC characteristic and the metadata is enhanced by defining additional fields in which the alternate DRC characteristic may be indicated; ISO/IEC Amendment Page 3: discloses pre-existing configuration element downmixInstructions() or drcInstructionsUniDrc() and the updated version of these elements, downMixInstructionsV1() and drcInstrucitonsUniDrcV1()
Examiner Interpretation {Baumgarte teaches a metadata carried DRC indication implemented through fields/parameters, while ISO/IEC teaches updated versions of previously existing MPEG-D DRC configuration elements with updated versions containing the same information plus enhancements}).
Baumgarte and ISO/IEC are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor, i.e., the use of metadata associated with the encoded signal during playback of the decoded signal, to improve quality of playback in various types of consumer electronics end user devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to place the dynamic loudness compensation indication field into an updated version of an existing MPEG-D DRC configuration elements because the ISO/IEC expressly teaches extending prior configuration elements through versioned payloads that preserve prior syntax while adding enhanced metadata. The suggestion/motivation for doing so is “This part of ISO/IEC 23003 provides a universal dynamic range control tool that supports loudness normalization. The DRC tool offers a bitrate efficient representation of dynamically compressed versions of an audio signal,” as disclosed in the introduction of the ISO/IEC.
Regarding Claim 39:
The combination of Baumgarte and ISO/IEC further discloses the method of claim 38, wherein the field is a dynamicLoudCompDRCSet parameter (Baumegarte: ¶29-31 teaches metadata based DRC indication carried in fields/parameters), and the updated version of the previously existing configuration element is a downmixInstructionsV2 element or a drcInstructionsUniDrcV2 element (ISO/IEC amendment page 3: discloses that previously existing MPEG-D DRC configuration elements are extended through updated versioned payloads such as downmixInstructionsV1 and drcInstructionUniDrcV1, which contain the same information plus enhancements).
Baumgarte and ISO/IEC are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor, i.e., the use of metadata associated with the encoded signal during playback of the decoded signal, to improve quality of playback in various types of consumer electronics end user devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to carry the dynamicLoudCompDrc() set indication in a further updated version of an existing MPEG-D DRC configuration element because Baumgarte already teaches metadata carried DRC indication fields and ISO/IEC teaches versioned successors of prior instruction/configuration payloads that preserve prior functionality while adding enhanced metadata. The suggestion/motivation for doing so is “This part of ISO/IEC 23003 provides a universal dynamic range control tool that supports loudness normalization. The DRC tool offers a bitrate efficient representation of dynamically compressed versions of an audio signal,” as disclosed in the introduction of the ISO/IEC.
Note, the claims V2 iteration is an obvious further versioning iteration.
Regarding Claim 40:
The combination of Baumgarte and ISO/IEC further discloses the method of claim 27, wherein an indication that a dynamic loudness compensation effect is desired is provided to the decoder through an interface, and wherein the DRC set is selected in response to the indication provided to the decoder through the interface (Baumgarte: ¶36 discloses that the decoder side dynamic range choice can be made in response to user input and playback side information, ¶32 also teaches that the metadata carries the relevant DRC indication used by the decoder).
Regarding Claim 41:
The combination of Baumgarte and ISO/IEC further discloses the method of claim 40, wherein indications of additional desired effects are provided to the decoder through the interface, wherein the metadata includes a plurality of DRC sets configured to provide the dynamic loudness compensation effect, and wherein the selection depends on the additional desired effects (Baumgarte ¶29 discloses multiple DRC options in metadata and decoder side selection among them);
and/or wherein the indication that a dynamic loudness compensation effect is desired is provided through a drcEffectTypeRequest parameter of a dynamicRangeControllerInterface payload (ISO/IEC Page 3 and ISO/IEC Amendment Page 2 discloses the selection block for deciding which DRC gains to apply based on playback scenario and applicable DRC configurations. ISO/IEC Page 6 discloses effect-based selection through drcSetEffect).
Examiner Interpretation {Baumgarte teaches the decoder-side DRC selection may be driven by user input and ISO/IEC and its Amendment teaches host controlled effect based DRC selection using control parameters and effect metadata, including loudness compensation related processing. Therefore, the second branch of claim 41 is taught functionally by Baumgarte in view of ISO/IEC}
Baumgarte and ISO/IEC are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor, i.e., the use of metadata associated with the encoded signal during playback of the decoded signal, to improve quality of playback in various types of consumer electronics end user devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to let decoder selection among multiple DRC sets depend on additional requested effects because Baumgarte already teaches metadata based decoder selection among DRC alternatives using user input and the ISO/IEC teaches standardized selection among applicable DRC configuration based on playback scenario, effect related metadata and additional host requested processing. The suggestion/motivation for doing so is “The DRC set selection block decides based on the playback scenario and the applicable DRC configurations which DRC gains to apply to the audio signal” as disclosed on page 3 of the ISO/IEC.
Regarding Claim 42:
The combination of Baumgarte and ISO/IEC further discloses the method of claim 27, wherein the metadata includes one or more static loudness values configured for providing static loudness adjustment to the decoded audio data (Baumgarte: ¶30 discloses a loudness parameter and loudness information is included in the metadata, and that they are used to measure loudness so the decoding system can evaluate when given a choice as to whether or not to apply the DRC).
and wherein the method comprises applying static loudness adjustment, in response to one or more of the static loudness values, to the decoded audio data or the dynamic loudness compensated audio data (Baumgarte: ¶30 teaches that loudness information in metadata is used by the decoder in deciding and applying DRC/loudness processing, also teaches applying the selected gains to produce the adjusted output).
Regarding Claim 44:
The combination of Baumgarte and ISO/IEC further discloses the method of claim 27, wherein the selected DRC set comprises an indication of whether the one or more DRC gains corresponding to the selected DRC set may only be applied in combination with DRC gains corresponding to the first DRC set (ISO/IEC: Page 7 discloses a second DRC set may be specified for certain configurations and the second DRC set contains a non zero field dependsOnDrcSet that has the value of the drcSetId of the first DRC set it depends on, it further teaches that if the first DRC set is not designed to be used without combining it with another DRC set the noIndependentUse flag must be set to 1. The ISO/IEC Amendment keeps the same consistency with this concept as well);
and/or further comprising extracting from the bitstream the DRC gains corresponding to the first DRC set, and applying the DRC gains corresponding to the first DRC set to the decoded audio data (Baumgarte: ¶32 teaches extraction of DRC gains from metadata/bitstream and application of those gains to the decoded audio, ¶33 also teaches the multiplier block applies the default gain values or a re-mapped set of gains to produce a dynamic range adjusted audio recording and ¶36 discloses the decoder has the option of applying the default DRC gain values that are received in the metadata).
Baumgarte and ISO/IEC are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor, i.e., the use of metadata associated with the encoded signal during playback of the decoded signal, to improve quality of playback in various types of consumer electronics end user devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use ISO/IEC’s dependency signaling in Baumgarte’s metadata based decoder DRC framework because Baumgarte already teaches extraction and application of DRC gains from bitstream metadata. The suggestion/motivation for doing so is “Furthermore, the DRC tool supports metadata-based loudness equalization to compensate the effect of playback level changes on the spectral balance” as disclosed on page 1 of the ISO/IEC Amendment.
Regarding Claim 45:
The combination of Baumgarte and ISO/IEC further discloses the decoder for processing audio data for playback, wherein the decoder comprises one or more processors and non-transitory memory configured to perform the method of claim 27 (Baumgarte: ¶32 expressly discloses a decoder implemented with hardware and or programmed processors and memory).
Regarding Claim 46:
The combination of Baumgarte and ISO/IEC further discloses the non-transitory computer readable storage medium comprising instructions adapted to cause a device to carry out the method according to claim 27 (Baumgarte: ¶32 expressly teaches processor executed instructions stored in memory for performing the decoder operations).
Regarding Claim 47:
The combination of Baumgarte and ISO/IEC further discloses the method of claim 27, wherein the selected DRC set configured for providing the dynamic loudness compensation effect comprises an indication that gains corresponding to the selected DRC set are not intended for independent application and are to be applied in combination with gains corresponding to the first DRC set (ISO/IEC Amendment Page 5 discloses the noIndependentUse flag wherein if the DRC set is not designed to be used without combining it with another DRC set the noIndependentUse flag is set to 1 and in that case the DRC set can only be used in combination with another DRC set as indicated by the dependsOnDrcSet field of the other set that is combined with it; ISO/IEC further teaches that DRC sets comprise corresponding DRC gain sequences).
Baumgarte and ISO/IEC are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor, i.e., the use of metadata associated with the encoded signal during playback of the decoded signal, to improve quality of playback in various types of consumer electronics end user devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to discloses designating the selected DRC set as not independently applicable and to apply its gains in combination with gains of the first DRC set, because ISO/IEC explicitly teaches that “various DRC configurations can be converted in a separate bitstream element, such as configuration for a downmix or combined DRCs” on page 1 under page 3, Clause 5 replacement. ISO/IEC further reconfirms that DRC sets have noIndependentUse set to 1 can only be used in combination with a second DRC set.
Regarding Claim 48:
The combination of Baumgarte and ISO/IEC further discloses the selected DRC set comprises dynamic loudness compensation gains (Baumgarte: ¶33-36 disclose DRC gains applied to decoded audio to provide dynamic range control); and
wherein the selected DRC set is configured for application together with the first DRC set to provide dynamic loudness compensation in combination with dynamic range control (ISO/IEC Amendment Page 1 disclose dynamic loudness compensation wherein time varying loudness information is recovered from DRC gain sequences to dynamically control the compensation module, ISO/IEC Amendment Page 5 further discloses first and second DRC sets configured for combined application through dependsOnDrcSet and noIndependentUse)
Baumgarte and ISO/IEC are combinable because they are from the same field of endeavor, i.e., the use of metadata associated with the encoded signal during playback of the decoded signal, to improve quality of playback in various types of consumer electronics end user devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to discloses designating the selected DRC set as not independently applicable and to apply its gains in combination with gains of the first DRC set, because ISO/IEC explicitly teaches that “various DRC configurations can be converted in a separate bitstream element, such as configuration for a downmix or combined DRCs” on page 1 under page 3, Clause 5 replacement. ISO/IEC further reconfirms that DRC sets have noIndependentUse set to 1 can only be used in combination with a second DRC set.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IAN SCOTT MCLEAN whose telephone number is (703)756-4599. The examiner can normally be reached "Monday - Friday 8:00-5:00 EST, off Every 2nd Friday".
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Hai Phan can be reached at (571) 272-6338. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/IAN SCOTT MCLEAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2654
/HAI PHAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2654
Prosecution Insights