DETAILED ACTION
In the response to this office action, the examiner respectfully requests that support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line numbers in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the examiner in prosecuting this application.
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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1-10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 states “1. An audio signal processing device for generating an output signal by alleviating a noise component in an input signal that includes both a sound component to be heard and the noise component, the audio signal processing device comprising:
a composite sound output part configured to output a composite sound signal;
an adaptive filter configured to receive as an input the composite sound signal output from the composite sound output part; and
a subtraction part configured to output an output sound signal by subtracting an output signal of the adaptive filter from an input sound signal…” which is confusing. Since this is an audio processing system, most of the “signals” are “sound signals”. Looking at the application as a whole, since the “output signal” is the “output sound signal” and the “input signal” is the “input sound signal” it would be better to use the same terms from the beginning. Also it would be better to expressly name the adaptive filter output, to avoid confusion. Perhaps the following could be used:
“1. An audio signal processing device for generating an output sound signal by alleviating a noise component in an input sound signal that includes both a sound component to be heard and the noise component, the audio signal processing device comprising:
a composite sound output part configured to output a composite sound signal;
an adaptive filter configured to receive as an input the composite sound signal output from the composite sound output part to output an adapted output signal; and
a subtraction part configured to output the output sound signal by subtracting the adapted output signal of the adaptive filter from the input sound signal…”
Claim 6 is objected in an analogous manner.
Claims 2-5 and 7-10 are objected as inheriting the problems as above.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
a composite sound output part in claim 1.
a subtraction part in claims 1 and 6.
an information storage part in claims 3 and 6.
a conversion part in claim 3.
a first conversion part in claim 6.
a second conversion part in claim 6.
a transmission part in claim 10.
a receiving part in claim 10.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 and 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Every (US 20180240452 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Every discloses an audio signal processing device (see at least figure 1) for generating an output signal by alleviating a noise component in an input signal that includes both a sound component to be heard and the noise component, the audio signal processing device comprising:
a composite sound output part (104 of figure 1) configured to output a composite sound signal (paragraph [0013]);
an adaptive filter (108) configured to receive as an input the composite sound signal output from the composite sound output part; and
a subtraction part (adder-subtractor 128, paragraph [0016]) configured to output an output sound signal by subtracting an output signal of the adaptive filter (via 134) from an input sound signal (via 120 to 110, 128 removes output of speaker from input provided by 106),
wherein the adaptive filter (108) is configured to perform an adaptation operation (via 122) assuming that the output from the subtraction part is an error (see figure 2, output of 128 including signal from 134 is an error signal), and
wherein the composite sound signal output from the composite sound output part is formed with pure tones of a plurality of frequencies extracted from a frequency band that is to be cancelled and that includes a frequency band of the noise component alleviated in the audio signal processing device (paragraph [0013], ” the reference signals may include a sum of pure tones at one or more engine order frequencies”, see figure 2, secondary noise from speaker cancels at least some of the primary noise and other noise).
Regarding claim 2, Every discloses wherein the composite sound signal output from the composite sound output part is formed with the pure tones of the plurality of frequencies extracted from the frequency band to be cancelled at predetermined frequency intervals (paragraph [0013], ” the reference signals may include a sum of pure tones at one or more engine order frequencies”, harmonics, multiples of engine knock).
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.
Claim(s) 3-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Every (US 20180240452 A1) in view of Zhao et al. (US 20200118537 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Every does not expressly disclose the use of frequency domain information.
Zhao discloses performing audio processing (see at least filters 320-330 of figure 3) in the frequency domain via frequency domain signals comprising frequency domain information (converts to frequency domain via FFT 315, processes via filters 320-330, then converts back to time domain signals via IFFT 355, paragraphs [0055] to [0062])
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use the frequency domain processing as taught by Zhao in the system of Every for the benefit of processing in the frequency domain, thereby making calculations simplified. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Zhao with Every, for the benefits above, to obtain the invention as specified in claim 6.
Regarding claim 4, Zhao discloses wherein the frequency-domain information of the composite sound signal is a Fourier coefficient (via FFT 315, see figure 3, paragraph [0055]), and
wherein the conversion part is configured to convert the frequency-domain information into the composite sound signal using an inverse fast Fourier transform (via IFFT 355, see figure 3, paragraph [0060]).
Regarding claim 5, Zhao discloses wherein the frequency-domain information of the composite sound signal is a wavelet transform coefficient (FFT 315 maybe a wavelet transform instead, paragraph [0062]), and
wherein the conversion part is configured to convert the frequency-domain information into the composite sound signal using an inverse wavelet transform (complement to above, FFT 315 maybe a wavelet transform instead, paragraph [0062]).
Regarding claim 6, Every discloses an audio signal processing device (see at least figure 1) for generating an output signal by alleviating a noise component in an input signal including both a sound component to be heard and the noise component, the audio signal processing device comprising:
a first conversion part configured to convert an input sound signal (sound that hits microphone 106 of figure 1) into first information (output of 106);
an information storage part (104 of figure 1) configured to store second information, the second information being information of a composite sound signal (output of 104 of figure 1, paragraph [0013]) formed with pure tones of a plurality of frequencies extracted from a frequency band that is to be cancelled and that includes a frequency band of the noise component alleviated in the audio signal processing device (paragraph [0013], ” the reference signals may include a sum of pure tones at one or more engine order frequencies”, see figure 2, secondary noise from speaker cancels at least some of the primary noise and other noise);
an adaptive filter (108) configured to receive the second information as an input and output third information, the third information being frequency-domain information of a noise-canceling sound (see figure 1, paragraph [0014]);
a subtraction part configured to output fourth information, the fourth information being frequency-domain information obtained by subtracting the third information (via 134) from the first information (via 120 to 110, 128 removes output of speaker from input provided by 106); and
a second conversion part (adder-subtractor 128, paragraph [0016]) configured to convert the fourth information into a sound signal (see figure 1) and output the sound signal as an output sound signal (via 120),
wherein the adaptive filter is configured to perform an adaptation operation assuming that the fourth information is an error (see figure 2, output of 128 including signal from 134 is an error signal).
Every does not expressly disclose the use of frequency domain information.
Zhao discloses performing audio processing (see at least filters 320-330 of figure 3) in the frequency domain via frequency domain signals comprising frequency domain information (converts to frequency domain via FFT 315, processes via filters 320-330, then converts back to time domain signals via IFFT 355, paragraphs [0055] to [0062])
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use the frequency domain processing as taught by Zhao in the system of Every for the benefit of processing in the frequency domain, thereby making calculations simplified. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Zhao with Every, for the benefits above, to obtain the invention as specified in claim 6.
Regarding claim 7, Every discloses wherein the composite sound signal is formed with the pure tones of the plurality of frequencies extracted at predetermined frequency intervals from the frequency band to be cancelled (paragraph [0013], ” the reference signals may include a sum of pure tones at one or more engine order frequencies”, harmonics, multiples of engine knock).
Regarding claim 8, Every discloses wherein the frequency-domain information is a Fourier coefficient,
wherein the first conversion part is configured to convert the input sound signal into the first information by performing a fast Fourier transform (via FFT 315, see figure 3, paragraph [0055]), and
wherein the second conversion part is configured to convert the fourth information into the output sound signal by performing an inverse fast Fourier transform (via IFFT 355, see figure 3, paragraph [0060]).
Regarding claim 9, Every discloses wherein the frequency-domain information is a wavelet transform coefficient,
wherein the first conversion part is configured to convert the input sound signal into the first information by performing a wavelet transform (FFT 315 maybe a wavelet transform instead, paragraph [0062]), and
wherein the second conversion part is configured to convert the fourth information into the output sound signal by performing an inverse wavelet transform (complement to above, FFT 315 maybe a wavelet transform instead, paragraph [0062]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the claim objections set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS JOHN SUTHERS whose telephone number is (571)272-0563. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8 am -5 pm.
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, Vivian Chin can be reached at 571-272-7848. 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.
/DOUGLAS J SUTHERS/ Examiner, Art Unit 2695
/PAUL KIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695