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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. PCT/EP2022/087818, filed on 12/23/2022.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/23/2024, 10/06/2024 are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawing submitted on 06/23/2024 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 1-26 are drawn to a "software" per se “an audio decoder for providing a decoded audio representation on the basis of an encoded audio representation; wherein the audio decoder is configured to fill spectral holes of a decoded set of spectral values using respective filling values; wherein the audio decoder is configured to determine a filling value using a prediction or filtering,… wherein the audio decoder is configured to adapt a filtering strength in dependence on an encoded or quantized spectral value associated with the different frequency” and as such is non-statutory subject matter. See MPEP § 2106.1V.B.1 .a. Data structures not claimed as embodied in computer readable media are descriptive material per se and are not statutory because they are not capable of causing functional change in the computer. See, e.g., Warmerdam, 33 F.3d at 1361, 31 USPQ2d at 1760 (claim to a data structure per se held nonstatutory). Such claimed data structures do not define any structural and functional interrelationships between the data structure and other claimed aspects of the invention, which permit the data structure's functionality to be realized. In contrast, a claimed computer readable medium encoded with a data structure defines structural and functional interrelationships between the data structure and the computer software and hardware components which permit the data structure's functionality to be realized, and is thus statutory. Similarly, computer programs claimed as computer listings per se, i.e., the descriptions or expressions of the programs are not physical "things." They are neither computer components nonstatutory processes, as they are not "acts" being performed. Such claimed computer programs do not define any structural and functional interrelationships between the computer program and other claimed elements of a computer, which permit the computer program's functionality to be realized.
Claims 1, 18, and 27-30, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s), “An audio decoder for providing a decoded audio representation on the basis of an encoded audio representation; wherein the audio decoder is configured to fill spectral holes of a decoded set of spectral values using respective filling values; wherein the audio decoder is configured to determine a filling value using a prediction or filtering, such that a given filling value, which is associated with a given frequency, is acquired in dependence on another spectral value, which is associated with a different frequency, wherein the audio decoder is configured to adapt a filtering strength in dependence on an encoded or quantized spectral value associated with the different frequency.”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is other than reciting a decoder (for claims 1 and 18), non-transitory computer-readable medium (claims 29-30) nothing in the claims element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the ”an audio decoder for providing,” and “non-transitory computer-readable medium… to perform the method for providing,” language, “providing” in the context of this claim encompasses a user manually providing two sets of data one with an encoded audio representation and other with a decoded audio representation with fill or gap in it, and the user manually filling the gap in the decoded representation based on effective frequency filtering transformation in mind, in predicting a filling values associated with a given frequency dependence on encoded spectral value associated with difference frequency.
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular claims only recites one additional elements a decoder (for claims 1 and 18), non-transitory computer-readable medium (claims 29-30) in each of the independent claims at a high level of generality (i.e. An audio decoder for providing a decoded audio representation on the basis of an encoded audio representation), such that it amounts no more than the mere instruction to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into practical application, the additional element of using a decoder (for claims 1 and 18), non-transitory computer-readable medium (for claims 29-30) providing a decoded audio representation, without placing any limitation on how the decoder operates (i.e. how the hardware or audio decoder elements applied to obtain in a multiplicative manner, a frequency variable scaling, a spectral tilt using spectral tilt information to fill values in spectral holes), are mere data gathering recited at a high level of generality and is insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
Thus, even when considering in combination, the additional elements represent mere instruction to apply an exception and insignificant extra-solution activity, which cannot provide an inventive concept.
Thus, the claims 1, 18, and 27-30, are not patent eligible.
With respect to dependent claim 2 which depends of independent claim 1 and includes all the limitation of claim 1, recites “wherein the filtering strength determines an impact of the other spectral value onto the given filling value”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, the user manually filling the gap in the decoded representation based on effective frequency filtering transformation associated impact of the other spectral value with a predicted filling values in mind, in predicting a filling values associated with a given frequency dependence on encoded spectral value associated with difference frequency.
With respect to dependent claim 3 which depends of independent claim 1 and includes all the limitation of claim 1, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configured to adapt the filtering strength in dependence on the spectral value associated with the different frequency as it is determined by the encoded representation of individual spectral values in the encoded audio information”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, the user manually filling the gap in the decoded representation based on effective frequency filtering transformation in mind, in predicting a filling values associated with a given frequency from the encoded representation of individual spectral values in the encoded data.
With respect to dependent claim 4, which depends of independent claim 1 and includes all the limitation of claim 1, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configured to adapt the filtering strength in dependence on the spectral value associated with the different frequency before a noise filling is applied”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, the user before applying noise filling, manually filling the gap in the decoded representation based on effective frequency filtering transformation in mind, in predicting a filling values associated with a given frequency dependence on encoded spectral value associated with difference frequency.
.
With respect to dependent claim 5, which depends of independent claim 1 and includes all the limitation of claim 1, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configured to adapt the filtering strength in dependence on whether the spectral value associated with the different frequency is quantized to zero or not”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, the user manually filling the gap in the decoded representation based on effective frequency filtering transformation in mind, in predicting a filling values associated with a given frequency dependence on encoded spectral value associated with difference frequency is quantized to zero or not.
With respect to dependent claim 6, which depends of independent claim 1 and includes all the limitation of claim 1, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configured to adapt the filtering strength in dependence on whether a noise filling is applied to the spectral value associated with the different frequency or not”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, the user manually filling the gap in the decoded representation based on effective frequency filtering transformation in mind, in predicting a filling values associated with a given frequency dependence on whether a noise filling is applied to the spectral value associated with the different frequency or not.
With respect to dependent claim 7, which depends of independent claim 1 and includes all the limitation of claim 1, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configured to selectively apply a filtering in a frequency direction or a prediction in a frequency direction for spectral values for which a noise filling is applied”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, the user manually filling the gap in the decoded representation based on effective frequency filtering transformation in mind, in predicting/selecting a filling values associated with a given frequency dependence on a noise filling is applied to the spectral value.
With respect to dependent claim 8, which depends of independent claim 1 and includes all the limitation of claim 1, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configured to apply the prediction or the filtering, in order to determine the given filling value on the basis of a random or pseudo-random noise values”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, the user manually filling the gap in the decoded representation based on effective frequency filtering transformation in mind, in predicting a filling values on the basis of a random or pseudo-random noise values.
With respect to dependent claim 10, which depends of independent claim 1 and includes all the limitation of claim 1, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configured to determine a spectral distance between the filling value associated with the given frequency and the other spectral value associated with the different frequency on the basis of an encoded information describing the spectral distance, which is comprised in the encoded representation of the audio information”, as drafted as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, the user manually filling the gap in the decoded representation based on effective frequency filtering transformation in mind, in predicting a filling values associated with a given frequency and the other spectral value associated with the different frequency on the basis of an encoded information describing the spectral distance.
With respect to dependent claim 11, which depends of independent claim 1 and includes all the limitation of claim 1, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configured to determine a weight, which is applied to the noise value associated with the given frequency, on the basis of a gain information which is comprised in the encoded representation of the audio information”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, the user manually decide a weight applied to a noise value associated with the given frequency on the basis of a gain information in the encoded representation of the audio information.
With respect to dependent claim 12, which depends of independent claim 1 and includes all the limitation of claim 1, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configured to determine a weight, which is applied to the noise value associated with the other frequency, or to the filling value associated with the other frequency, in dependence on a gain information which is comprised in the encoded representation of the audio information”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, the user manually decide a weight applied to a noise value or a weight applied to filling value associated with the other frequency on the basis of a gain information in the encoded representation of the audio information.
With respect to dependent claim 13, which depends of independent claim 1 and includes all the limitation of claim 1, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configured to determine the weight, which is applied to the noise value associated with the other frequency, or to the filling value associated with the other frequency, in dependence on a sign information which is comprised in the encoded representation of the audio information.”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, falls within the mathematical grouping of abstract idea.
For example, the user manually decide a weight applied to a noise value or a weight applied to filling value associated with the other frequency on the basis of a sign information in the encoded representation of the audio information.
With respect to dependent claim 16, which depends of independent claim 1 and includes all the limitation of claim 1, recites “use a reduced filtering strength which is applied to spectral coefficients which are not marked.”, as drafted as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, the user manually mark noise-filled zero-quantized spectral coefficients in the encoded representation audio data and apply reduced filtering strength in predicting filling values based on selectively use of spectral coefficients which are not marked in encoded representation audio data.
With respect to dependent claim 19, which depends of independent claim 18 and includes all the limitation of claim 18, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configured to adapt the filtering strength to reduce a contribution of a nonzero-quantized spectral coefficients comprised in the prediction or filtering”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, falls within the mathematical grouping of abstract idea.
For example, a user manually filling the gap in the decoded representation based on effective frequency filtering transformation in mind, to reduce a contribution of a nonzero-quantized spectral coefficients in predicting a filling values associated with a given frequency dependence on encoded spectral value associated with difference frequency.
With respect to dependent claim 20, which depends of independent claim 18 and includes all the limitation of claim 18, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configured to selectively adapt the filtering strength if a current spectral coefficient is zero and a previous spectral coefficient has not been encoded as zero or has not been quantized to zero”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, falls within the mathematical grouping of abstract idea.
For example, a user manually filling the gap in the decoded representation based on effective frequency filtering transformation in mind, to selectively change the filtering strength of a filtering, if a current spectral coefficient is zero and a previous spectral coefficient has not been encoded as zero or has not been quantized to zero in predicting a filling values associated with a given frequency dependence on encoded spectral value associated with difference frequency .
With respect to dependent claim 21, which depends of independent claim 18 and includes all the limitation of claim 18, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configure to selectively reduce the filtering strength to a value between 0.25 and 0.75, in order to adapt the filtering strength”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, falls within the mathematical grouping of abstract idea.
For example, a user manually filling the gap in the decoded representation based on effective frequency filtering transformation in mind, to selectively reduce the filtering strength to a value between 0.25 and 0.75 in predicting a filling values associated with a given frequency dependence on encoded spectral value associated with difference frequency.
With respect to dependent claim 22, which depends of independent claim 18 and includes all the limitation of claim 18, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configured to selectively adapt the filtering strength if a current spectral coefficient is zero and a previous spectral coefficient has not been encoded as zero or has not been quantized to zero”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, falls within the mathematical grouping of abstract idea.
For example, a user manually filling the gap in the decoded representation based on effective frequency filtering transformation in mind, to selectively reduce the filtering strength of a filtering, with consideration a plurality of previous spectral coefficients, in dependence on values of a plurality of previous spectral coefficients, if the current spectral coefficient is encoded or quantized as zero in predicting a filling values associated with a given frequency dependence on encoded spectral value associated with difference frequency.
With respect to dependent claim 23, which depends of independent claim 22 and includes all the limitation of claim 22, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configured to selectively reduce the filtering strength if the current spectral coefficient is encoded or quantized or signaled as zero and if all previous spectral coefficients considered in the filtering, except for one previous spectral coefficient considered in the filtering, are encoded or quantized or signaled as zero”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, falls within the mathematical grouping of abstract idea.
For example, a user manually filling the gap in the decoded representation based on effective frequency filtering transformation in mind, to selectively reduce the filtering strength with consideration if the current spectral coefficient is encoded or quantized or signaled as zero and if all previous spectral coefficients considered in the filtering, except for one previous spectral coefficient considered in the filtering, are encoded or quantized or signaled as zero, in predicting a filling values associated with a given frequency dependence on encoded spectral value associated with difference frequency.
With respect to dependent claim 26, which depends of independent claim 18 and includes all the limitation of claim 18, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configured to use encoded or quantized or signaled spectral coefficients for deciding about the filtering strength, and wherein the audio decoder is configured to use preprocessed spectral coefficients as an input for the filtering or prediction”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, falls within the mathematical grouping of abstract idea.
For example, a user manually filling the gap in the decoded representation based on effective frequency filtering transformation in mind, use encoded or quantized or signaled spectral coefficients for deciding about the filtering strength, and use preprocessed spectral coefficients as for the filtering or prediction, a filling values associated with a given frequency dependence on encoded spectral value associated with difference frequency.
The claim(s) 2-8, 10-13, 16, 19-23 and 26 do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into practical application, the additional element of using a decoder (for claims 1 and 18), non-transitory computer-readable medium (for claims 29-30) providing a decoded audio representation, without placing any limitation on how the decoder operates (i.e. how the hardware or audio decoder elements applied to obtain in a multiplicative manner, a frequency variable scaling, a spectral tilt using spectral tilt information to fill values in spectral holes), are mere data gathering recited at a high level of generality and is insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
Thus, even when considering in combination, the additional elements represent mere instruction to apply an exception and insignificant extra-solution activity, which cannot provide an inventive concept.
Thus, the claims 2-8, 10-13, 16, 19-23 and 26 are not patent eligible.
With respect to dependent claim 9, which depends of independent claim 1 and includes all the limitation of claim 1, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configured to perform a weighted combination of a noise value associated with the given frequency, and of a noise value associated with the other frequency or a weighted combination of a noise value associated with the given frequency, and of a filling value associated with the other frequency, in order to acquire the given filling value; and wherein the audio decoder is configured to adjust a weight given to the noise value associated with the other frequency or the weight given to the filling value associated with the other frequency in dependence on whether a noise filling has been applied for a spectral value associated with the other frequency”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, falls within the mathematical grouping of abstract idea.
With respect to dependent claim 14, which depends of independent claim 1 and includes all the limitation of claim 1, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configured to determine the given filling value ?(i) according to ?(i)=d*c(i) + G?sf*c(i-P?sf), if the coefficient c(i-P?sf) was acquired using a noise filling; and according to ?(i)=d*c(i) + �*G?sf*c(i-P?sf), if the coefficient c(i-P?sf) was not acquired using a noise filling;wherein c(i) designates a spectral coefficient which is acquired using a noise filling and comprising a spectral index i; wherein d designates an attenuation coefficient, wherein G?sf designates a weight which is based on a gain value that is comprised in the encoded audio representation; and wherein c(i-P?sf) designates a spectral coefficient comprising a spectral index i-P?sf, wherein P?sf is a prediction parameter or a filtering parameter which is based on a prediction parameter information that is comprised in the encoded audio representation”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, falls within the mathematical grouping of abstract idea.
With respect to dependent claim 15, which depends of independent claim 1 and includes all the limitation of claim 1, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configured to acquire the prediction parameter or filtering parameter P?sf according to P?sf=psf+B, wherein psf is a lag index which is comprised in the encoded audio representation, and wherein B is a constant; and/or wherein the audio decoder is configured to acquire the weight G?sf according to G?sf=(-1)Ssf * (3+2*gsf)/8, wherein Ssf is a binary value which is comprised in the encoded representation and wherein gsf is a binary value which is comprised in the encoded representation; and/or wherein the audio decoder is configured to acquire the attenuation coefficient d according to d=(7.5-gsf)/8, wherein gsf is a binary value which is comprised in the encoded representation”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, falls within the mathematical grouping of abstract idea.
With respect to dependent claim 17, which depends of independent claim 1 and includes all the limitation of claim 1, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configured to perform the following processing for a plurality of subframes (sf): 1. Set P?sf=psf+B, G?sf=(-1)Ssf * (3+2*gsf)/8 and d=(7.5-gsf)/8,;2. perform noise filling, and mark noise-filled zero-quantized spectral coefficients 3. for a plurality of noise-filled zero-quantized spectral coefficient c at location i>=P?sf do: 4. if the coefficient c at location i-P?sf was marked in step 2, replace c(i) by d*c(i) + G?sf*c(i-P?sf); else 5. replace c(i) by d * c(i) + 1/2*G?sf*c(i-P?sf)”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, falls within the mathematical grouping of abstract idea.
With respect to dependent claim 24, which depends of independent claim 22 and includes all the limitation of claim 22, recites “wherein the audio decoder is configured to acquire a filtered current spectral coefficient comprising spectral index i in dependence on a plurality of previous spectral coefficients comprising spectral indices i-dsf to i-1 using the filtering or prediction, wherein the audio decoder is configured to selectively reduce the filtering strength if one or more spectral coefficients comprising spectral indices i-dsf+1 to i have been quantized or encoded or signaled as zero, and if a spectral coefficient comprising spectral index i-dsf has not been quantized or encoded or signaled as zero”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, falls within the mathematical grouping of abstract idea.
With respect to dependent claim 25, which depends of independent claim 24 and includes all the limitation of claim 24, recites “wherein filter coefficients which are associated with spectral coefficients comprising spectral indices between i-dsf+1 and i-1 are equal to zero”, as drafted is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, falls within the mathematical grouping of abstract idea.
The claim(s) 9, 14-15, 17, and 24-25, do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into practical application, the additional element of using a decoder (for claims 1 and 18), non-transitory computer-readable medium (for claims 29-30) providing a decoded audio representation, without placing any limitation on how the decoder operates (i.e. how the hardware or audio decoder elements applied to obtain in a multiplicative manner, a frequency variable scaling, a spectral tilt using spectral tilt information to fill values in spectral holes), are mere data gathering recited at a high level of generality and is insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g).
Thus, even when considering in combination, the additional elements represent mere instruction to apply an exception and insignificant extra-solution activity, which cannot provide an inventive concept.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 7-8, 11-12, 18, and 27-30, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Truman et al.(US 2003/233234 A1).
Regarding Claims 1, and 18, Truman teach: An audio decoder for providing a decoded audio representation on the basis of an encoded audio representation ([0059] In one implementation of the present invention, a decoder receives an input signal that conveys an encoded representation of quantized subband signals such as that shown in FIG. 4. The decoder decodes the encoded representation and identifies those subband signals in which one or more spectral components have non-zero values and a plurality of spectral components have a zero value.); wherein the audio decoder is configured to fill spectral holes of a decoded set of spectral values using respective filling values ([0059] The decoder generates synthesized spectral components that correspond to the zero-valued spectral components using a process such as those described below. The synthesized components are scaled according to a scaling envelope that is less than or equal to the threshold 40, and the scaled synthesized spectral components are substituted for the zero-valued spectral components in the subband signal. [0063] An example of such a scaling envelope is shown in FIG. 5, which uses hatched areas to illustrate the spectral holes that are filled with synthesized spectral components. The spectrum 43 represents an envelope of the spectral components of an audio signal with spectral holes filled by synthesized spectral components.); wherein the audio decoder is configured to determine a filling value using a prediction or filtering, such that a given filling value, which is associated with a given frequency, is acquired in dependence on another spectral value, which is associated with a different frequency ([0069] c) Filter [0070] A third way for establishing a scaling envelope is also well suited for decoders in audio coding systems that use block transforms, but it is also based on principles that may be applied to other types of filterbank implementations. This way provides a non-uniform scaling envelope that is derived from the output of a frequency-domain filter that is applied to transform coefficients in the frequency domain. The filter may be a prediction filter, a low pass filter, or essentially any other type of filter that provides the desired scaling envelope. This way usually requires more computational resources than are required for the two ways described above, but it allows the scaling envelope to vary as a function of frequency.), wherein the audio decoder is configured to adapt a filtering strength in dependence on an encoded or quantized spectral value associated with the different frequency ([0071] FIG. 8 is a graphical illustration of two scaling envelopes derived from the output of an adaptable frequency-domain filter. For example, the scaling envelope 52 could be used for filling spectral holes in signals or portions of signals that are deemed to be more tone like, and the scaling envelope 53 could be used for filling spectral holes in signals or portions of signals that are deemed to be more noise like. Tone and noise properties of a signal can be assessed in a variety of ways. Some of these ways are discussed below. Alternatively, the scaling envelope 52 could be used for filling spectral holes at lower frequencies where audio signals are often more tone like and the scaling envelope 53 could be used for filling spectral holes at higher frequencies where audio signal are often more noise like.).
Regarding Claim 2, Truman teach: Audio decoder according to claim 1, wherein the filtering strength determines an impact of the other spectral value onto the given filling value (See rejection of claim 1 and [0071] FIG. 8 is a graphical illustration of two scaling envelopes derived from the output of an adaptable frequency-domain filter. For example, the scaling envelope 52 could be used for filling spectral holes in signals or portions of signals that are deemed to be more tone like, and the scaling envelope 53 could be used for filling spectral holes in signals or portions of signals that are deemed to be more noise like. Tone and noise properties of a signal can be assessed in a variety of ways. Some of these ways are discussed below. Alternatively, the scaling envelope 52 could be used for filling spectral holes at lower frequencies where audio signals are often more tone like and the scaling envelope 53 could be used for filling spectral holes at higher frequencies where audio signal are often more noise like.).
Regarding Claim 3, Truman teach: Audio decoder according to claim 1, wherein the audio decoder is configured to adapt the filtering strength in dependence on the spectral value associated with the different frequency as it is determined by the encoded representation of individual spectral values in the encoded audio information (See rejection of claim 1 and [0089] A second way uses a technique called spectral translation or spectral replication that copies spectral components from one or more frequency subbands. Lower-frequency spectral components are usually copied to fill spectral holes at higher frequencies because higher frequency components are often related in some manner to lower frequency components. In principle, however, spectral components may be copied to higher or lower frequencies. [0095] If a subband contains spectral components that are significantly below the minimum quantizing level, the encoder can provide information to the decoder that indicates this condition. The information may be a type of index that a decoder can use to select from two or more scaling levels, or the information may convey some measure of spectral level such as average or root-mean-square (RMS) power. The decoder can adapt the scaling envelope in response to this information.).
Regarding Claim 5, Truman teach: Audio decoder according to claim 1, wherein the audio decoder is configured to adapt the filtering strength in dependence on whether the spectral value associated with the different frequency is quantized to zero or not (See rejection of claim 1 and [0059] In one implementation of the present invention, a decoder receives an input signal that conveys an encoded representation of quantized subband signals such as that shown in FIG. 4. The decoder decodes the encoded representation and identifies those subband signals in which one or more spectral components have non-zero values and a plurality of spectral components have a zero value. Preferably, the frequency extents of all subband signals are either known a priori to the decoder or they are defined by control information in the input signal. The decoder generates synthesized spectral components that correspond to the zero-valued spectral components using a process such as those described below. The synthesized components are scaled according to a scaling envelope that is less than or equal to the threshold 40, and the scaled synthesized spectral components are substituted for the zero-valued spectral components in the subband signal.[0061] For example, a composite scaling envelope may be derived that is equal to the maximum of all envelopes obtained from multiple ways, or by using different ways to establish upper and/or lower bounds for the scaling envelope. The ways may be adapted or selected in response to characteristics of the encoded signal, and they can be adapted or selected as a function of frequency.).
Regarding Claim 7, Truman teach: Audio decoder according to claim 1, wherein the audio decoder is configured to selectively apply a filtering in a frequency direction or a prediction in a frequency direction for spectral values for which a noise filling is applied (See rejection of claim 1 and [0071] FIG. 8 is a graphical illustration of two scaling envelopes derived from the output of an adaptable frequency-domain filter. For example, the scaling envelope 52 could be used for filling spectral holes in signals or portions of signals that are deemed to be more tone like, and the scaling envelope 53 could be used for filling spectral holes in signals or portions of signals that are deemed to be more noise like. Tone and noise properties of a signal can be assessed in a variety of ways. Some of these ways are discussed below. Alternatively, the scaling envelope 52 could be used for filling spectral holes at lower frequencies where audio signals are often more tone like and the scaling envelope 53 could be used for filling spectral holes at higher frequencies where audio signal are often more noise like. [0089] A second way uses a technique called spectral translation or spectral replication that copies spectral components from one or more frequency subbands. Lower-frequency spectral components are usually copied to fill spectral holes at higher frequencies because higher frequency components are often related in some manner to lower frequency components. In principle, however, spectral components may be copied to higher or lower frequencies.).
Regarding Claim 8, Truman teach: Audio decoder according to claim 1, wherein the audio decoder is configured to apply the prediction or the filtering, in order to determine the given filling value on the basis of a random or pseudo-random (non-uniform) noise values (See rejection of claim 1 and [0070] A third way for establishing a scaling envelope is also well suited for decoders in audio coding systems that use block transforms, but it is also based on principles that may be applied to other types of filterbank implementations. This way provides a non-uniform scaling envelope that is derived from the output of a frequency-domain filter that is applied to transform coefficients in the frequency domain. The filter may be a prediction filter, a low pass filter, or essentially any other type of filter that provides the desired scaling envelope. [0071] FIG. 8 is a graphical illustration of two scaling envelopes derived from the output of an adaptable frequency-domain filter. For example, the scaling envelope 52 could be used for filling spectral holes in signals or portions of signals that are deemed to be more tone like, and the scaling envelope 53 could be used for filling spectral holes in signals or portions of signals that are deemed to be more noise like. Tone and noise properties of a signal can be assessed in a variety of ways. Some of these ways are discussed below. Alternatively, the scaling envelope 52 could be used for filling spectral holes at lower frequencies where audio signals are often more tone like and the scaling envelope 53 could be used for filling spectral holes at higher frequencies where audio signal are often more noise like. ).
Regarding Claim 11, Truman teach: Audio decoder according to claim 1, wherein the audio decoder is configured to determine a weight, which is applied to the noise value associated with the given frequency, on the basis of a gain information which is comprised in the encoded representation of the audio information (See rejection of claim 1 and [0095] If a subband contains spectral components that are significantly below the minimum quantizing level, the encoder can provide information to the decoder that indicates this condition. The information may be a type of index that a decoder can use to select from two or more scaling levels, or the information may convey some measure of spectral level such as average or root-mean-square (RMS) power. The decoder can adapt the scaling envelope in response to this information.).
Regarding Claim 12, Truman teach: Audio decoder according to claim 1, wherein the audio decoder is configured to determine a weight, which is applied to the noise value associated with the other frequency, or to the filling value associated with the other frequency, in dependence on a gain information which is comprised in the encoded representation of the audio information(See rejection of claim 1 and [0095] If a subband contains spectral components that are significantly below the minimum quantizing level, the encoder can provide information to the decoder that indicates this condition. The information may be a type of index that a decoder can use to select from two or more scaling levels, or the information may convey some measure of spectral level such as average or root-mean-square (RMS) power. The decoder can adapt the scaling envelope in response to this information.).
Regarding Claim 27, Truman teach: Method for providing a decoded audio representation on the basis of an encoded audio representation, the method comprising: filling spectral holes of a decoded set of spectral values using respective filling values; determining a filling value using a prediction or filtering, such that a given filling value, which is associated with a given frequency, is acquired in dependence on another spectral value, which is associated with a different frequency (See rejection of claim 1 specifically: [0069] c) Filter [0070] A third way for establishing a scaling envelope is also well suited for decoders in audio coding systems that use block transforms, but it is also based on principles that may be applied to other types of filterbank implementations. This way provides a non-uniform scaling envelope that is derived from the output of a frequency-domain filter that is applied to transform coefficients in the frequency domain. The filter may be a prediction filter, a low pass filter, or essentially any other type of filter that provides the desired scaling envelope. This way usually requires more computational resources than are required for the two ways described above, but it allows the scaling envelope to vary as a function of frequency.), adapting a filtering strength in dependence on an encoded or quantized spectral value associated with the different frequency ([0071] FIG. 8 is a graphical illustration of two scaling envelopes derived from the output of an adaptable frequency-domain filter. For example, the scaling envelope 52 could be used for filling spectral holes in signals or portions of signals that are deemed to be more tone like, and the scaling envelope 53 could be used for filling spectral holes in signals or portions of signals that are deemed to be more noise like. Tone and noise properties of a signal can be assessed in a variety of ways. Some of these ways are discussed below. Alternatively, the scaling envelope 52 could be used for filling spectral holes at lower frequencies where audio signals are often more tone like and the scaling envelope 53 could be used for filling spectral holes at higher frequencies where audio signal are often more noise like.).
Regarding Claim 28, Truman teach: Method for providing a decoded audio representation on the basis of an encoded audio representation, the method comprising: determining a processed spectral value (scaling envelope) using a prediction or filtering, such that a given processed spectral value, which is associated with a given frequency, is acquired in dependence on another spectral value, which is associated with a different frequency (See rejection of claim 1 specifically: [0069] c) Filter [0070] A third way for establishing a scaling envelope is also well suited for decoders in audio coding systems that use block transforms, but it is also based on principles that may be applied to other types of filterbank implementations. This way provides a non-uniform scaling envelope that is derived from the output of a frequency-domain filter that is applied to transform coefficients in the frequency domain. The filter may be a prediction filter, a low pass filter, or essentially any other type of filter that provides the desired scaling envelope. This way usually requires more computational resources than are required for the two ways described above, but it allows the scaling envelope to vary as a function of frequency.), adapting a filtering strength in dependence on an encoded or quantized spectral value associated with the different frequency ([0071] FIG. 8 is a graphical illustration of two scaling envelopes derived from the output of an adaptable frequency-domain filter. For example, the scaling envelope 52 could be used for filling spectral holes in signals or portions of signals that are deemed to be more tone like, and the scaling envelope 53 could be used for filling spectral holes in signals or portions of signals that are deemed to be more noise like. Tone and noise properties of a signal can be assessed in a variety of ways. Some of these ways are discussed below. Alternatively, the scaling envelope 52 could be used for filling spectral holes at lower frequencies where audio signals are often more tone like and the scaling envelope 53 could be used for filling spectral holes at higher frequencies where audio signal are often more noise like.).
Regarding Claim 29, Truman teach: A non-transitory digital storage medium having a computer program stored thereon to perform the method for providing a decoded audio representation on the basis of an encoded audio representation, the method comprising (Claim 42. A medium that conveys a program of instructions and is readable by a device for executing the program of instructions to perform a method for generating an output signal, wherein the method comprises: generating a set of subband signals each having one or more spectral components representing spectral content of an audio signal by quantizing information that is obtained by applying an analysis filterbank to audio information; identifying within the set of subband signals a particular subband signal in which one or more spectral components have a non-zero value and are quantized by a quantizer having a minimum quantizing level that corresponds to a threshold, and in which a plurality of spectral components have a zero value; deriving scaling control information from the spectral content of the audio signal, wherein the scaling control information controls scaling of synthesized spectral components to be synthesized and substituted for the spectral components having a zero value in a receiver that generates audio information in response to the output signal; and generating the output signal by assembling the scaling control information and information representing the set of subband signals.): filling spectral holes of a decoded set of spectral values using respective filling values; determining a filling value using a prediction or filtering, such that a given filling value, which is associated with a given frequency, is acquired in dependence on another spectral value, which is associated with a different frequency, adapting a filtering strength in dependence on an encoded or quantized spectral value associated with the different frequency, when said computer program is run by a computer (See rejection of claim 1).
Regarding Claim 30, Truman teach: A non-transitory digital storage medium having a computer program stored thereon to perform the method for providing a decoded audio representation on the basis of an encoded audio representation, the method comprising (Claim 42. A medium that conveys a program of instructions and is readable by a device for executing the program of instructions to perform a method for generating an output signal, wherein the method comprises: generating a set of subband signals each having one or more spectral components representing spectral content of an audio signal by quantizing information that is obtained by applying an analysis filterbank to audio information; identifying within the set of subband signals a particular subband signal in which one or more spectral components have a non-zero value and are quantized by a quantizer having a minimum quantizing level that corresponds to a threshold, and in which a plurality of spectral components have a zero value; deriving scaling control information from the spectral content of the audio signal, wherein the scaling control information controls scaling of synthesized spectral components to be synthesized and substituted for the spectral components having a zero value in a receiver that generates audio information in response to the output signal; and generating the output signal by assembling the scaling control information and information representing the set of subband signals.): determining a processed spectral value using a prediction or filtering, such that a given processed spectral value, which is associated with a given frequency, is acquired in dependence on another spectral value, which is associated with a different frequency See rejection of claim 1 specifically: [0069] c) Filter [0070] A third way for establishing a scaling envelope is also well suited for decoders in audio coding systems that use block transforms, but it is also based on principles that may be applied to other types of filterbank implementations. This way provides a non-uniform scaling envelope that is derived from the output of a frequency-domain filter that is applied to transform coefficients in the frequency domain. The filter may be a prediction filter, a low pass filter, or essentially any other type of filter that provides the desired scaling envelope. This way usually requires more computational resources than are required for the two ways described above, but it allows the scaling envelope to vary as a function of frequency.), adapting a filtering strength in dependence on an encoded or quantized spectral value associated with the different frequency, when said computer program is run by a computer ([0071] FIG. 8 is a graphical illustration of two scaling envelopes derived from the output of an adaptable frequency-domain filter. For example, the scaling envelope 52 could be used for filling spectral holes in signals or portions of signals that are deemed to be more tone like, and the scaling envelope 53 could be used for filling spectral holes in signals or portions of signals that are deemed to be more noise like. Tone and noise properties of a signal can be assessed in a variety of ways. Some of these ways are discussed below. Alternatively, the scaling envelope 52 could be used for filling spectral holes at lower frequencies where audio signals are often more tone like and the scaling envelope 53 could be used for filling spectral holes at higher frequencies where audio signal are often more noise like.).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Truman in view of Oh et al.(US 2013/0013321 A1).
Regarding Claim 10, Truman does not teach: wherein the audio decoder is configured to determine a spectral distance between the filling value associated with the given frequency and the other spectral value associated with the different frequency on the basis of an encoded information describing the spectral distance, which is comprised in the encoded representation of the audio information.
Oh et al. teach: wherein the audio decoder is configured to determine a spectral distance (lag information) between the filling value associated with the given frequency and the other spectral value associated with the different frequency on the basis of an encoded information describing the spectral distance, which is comprised in the encoded representation of the audio information ([0108] Afterwards, according to the substitution type information extracted in the step S220, the following steps proceed. If the substitution type scheme indicates that the shape prediction scheme is applied to the current frame (or the current band) [yes in the step S230], the lag extracting unit 218 extracts lag information, prediction mode information and perceptual gain from the bitstream [S240]. In this case, the lag information means an interval between the current band (or the spectral coefficient of the current band) and the predictive shape vector. In particular, the lag information can include the lag D.sub.m,i shown in Formula 6. The prediction mode information can include the prediction mode information K shown in Formula 6 and indicates an intra frame mode or an inter frame mode. The perceptual gain is gain generated in steps of S170 and S175. [0110] For instance, in case that the prediction mode is intra frame, the predictive shape vector is obtained from the spectral data in a current frame. If the prediction mode is inter frame, the predictive shape vector is obtained from the spectral data in a previous frame. In this case, the previous frame is non-limited by a frame just prior to the current frame. In other words, if the current frame is m.sup.th frame, the previous frame is able to correspond to (m-k).sup.th frame (where k is equal to or greater than 2) as well as (m-1).sup.th frame. Since the lag information indicating the interval between the predictive shape vector and the current band, the predictive shape vector is determined using the spectral data of the current or previous frame spaced apart by the interval indicated by the lag information. When the shape prediction scheme is applied, modeling error can occurs in course that spectrum of original signal is modeled. The error can be compensated by using gain control with the perceptual gain. The perceptual gain is the same as a perceptual gain, which will be explained with reference to S250 step.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled before the effective filling date of the invention was made for Truman to include the teaching of Oh et al. above in order to determine predictive shape vector using the spectral data of the current or previous frame spaced apart by the interval indicated by the lag information for effectively reducing perceptual distortion.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4, 6, 9, 13-17, and 19-26 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art of record Ravelli et al.(US 2020/0286494 A1) teach: AUDIO ENCODERS, AUDIO DECODERS, METHODS AND COMPUTER PROGRAMS ADAPTING AN ENCODING AND DECODING OF LEAST SIGNIFICANT BITS.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMMAD K ISLAM whose telephone number is (571)270-5878. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday, EST (IFP).
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, Paras Shah can be reached at 571-270-1650. 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.
/MOHAMMAD K ISLAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2653