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
Preliminary Amendment, filed 08/28/2024, has been entered.
Claims 1-20 are pending
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 2, 9-12, 19 and 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bleidt et al. (“Bleidt”) [U.S Patent Application Pub. 2018/0007398 A1] in view of Edwards (“Edwards”) [NPL Titled “RTP Payload for Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE)’]
Regarding claim 1, Bleidt meets the claim limitations as follows:
A signal transmission device [Figs. 15a-1, 15b-1; para. 0161-167] comprising
a multiplexing unit (i.e. ‘a transport multiplexer 260’) [Figs. 15a-1, 15b-1; para. 0161-0167] that converts data of at least one frame of a MADI signal (i.e. ‘HD-SDI video signal (with audio)’) [Figs. 15a-1, 15b-1 show HD-SDI ‘205’ as video with embedded audio up to 16 channels or 15 channels; para. 0003, 0010, 0161-0167] conforming to the Multichannel Audio Digital Interface (MADI) standard (e.g. AES3 or MADI) [para. 0003, 0010] into an ancillary (i.e. ‘audio’ or ‘metadata’) data format [Fig. 1; para. 0003, 0010: ‘transmission of control data or metadata to accompany an audio signal’] and
multiplexes (i.e. ‘a transport multiplexer 260’) [Figs. 15a-1, 15b-1; para. 0161-0167] the data as words transmittable within a horizontal blanking period (i.e. ‘VANC’ or ‘vertical blanking’) [Fig. 7: ‘vertical sync’ 160; para. 0018, 0052, 0106] of a video signal conforming to a predetermined standard (e.g., ‘legacy standards such as AES 3, MADI or embedded audio over SDI’ [para. 0010].
Bleidt does not disclose explicitly the following claim limitations (emphasis added):
multiplexes the data as words transmittable within a horizontal blanking period of a video signal conforming to a predetermined standard.
However in the same field of endeavor Edwards discloses the deficient claim as follows:
multiplexes the data as words transmittable within a horizontal blanking period (i.e. ‘HANC’) [Fig. 1; col. 1, ll. 55-65: ‘ancillary data’; col. 2, ll. 1-5; ] of a video signal conforming to a predetermined standard.
Bleidt and Edwards are combinable because they are from the same field of video/audio coding.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Bleidt and Edwards as motivation to transmit ancillary data in horizontal or vertical blanking areas of the HD-SDI signal in accordance with SMPTE standard [Bleidt para. 0011: ST 337; Edwards: ST 291-1].
Regarding claim 2, Bleidt meets the claim limitations as follows:
The signal transmission device according to claim 1, wherein the predetermined standard is the High-Definition Serial Digital Interface (HD-SDI) standard [Figs. 15a-1, 15b-1 show HD-SDI ‘205’ as video with embedded audio up to 16 channels or 15 channels; para. 0003, 0010, 0161-0167].
Regarding claim 9, all claim limitations are set forth as claim 1 in the method form and rejected as per discussion for claim 1.
Regarding claim 10, all claim limitations are set forth as claim 1 in the form of “A program for causing a computer” [Bleidt: para. 0029] and rejected as per discussion for claim 1.
Regarding claim 11, all claim limitations are set forth as claim 1 in the form of “A signal reception device” [Bleidt: Fig. 15a-2; 15b-2] and rejected as per discussion for claim 1.
Regarding claim 12, all claim limitations are set forth as claim 2 in the form of “A signal reception device” and rejected as per discussion for claim 2.
Regarding claim 19, all claim limitations are set forth as claim 1 in the form of “A signal reception device” [Bleidt: Fig. 15a-2; 15b-2] and rejected as per discussion for claim 1.
Regarding claim 20, all claim limitations are set forth as claim 1 in the form of “A program for causing a computer” [Bleidt: para. 0029] and rejected as per discussion for claim 1.
Claims 3, 5, 6, 13, 15, and 16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bleidt in view of Edwards in further view of Tektronix (“Tektronix”) [NPL Titled “A Guide to Standard and High-Definition Digital Video Measurements”] in further view of Avid (“Avid”) [NPL Titled “HD MADI Guide”] in further view of Kobayashi (“Kobayashi”) [US 2002/0102097 A1]
Regarding claim 3, Bleidt in view of Edwards meets the claim limitations set forth in claim 2.
Bleidt does not disclose explicitly the following claim limitations:
The signal transmission device according to claim 2, wherein
the MADI signal includes an audio signal having a sampling frequency of 48 kHz and 64 channels,
the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format is 263 words,
the video signal adopts a format in which the number of pixels of one frame is 1920×1080 and a frame rate is 29.97 fps,
a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words within the horizontal blanking period, and
the multiplexing unit multiplexes the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format in the horizontal blanking period of each of the Cb/Cr and Y signals.
However in the same field of endeavor Tektronix discloses the deficient claim as follows:
wherein
the MADI signal includes an audio signal having a sampling frequency of 48 kHz [p. 45 of 112: ‘Audio is sampled at a video synchronous clock frequency of 48 kHz’; p. 47 of 112: ‘Transmission of audio control packets is optional for 48 kHz synchronous operation’] and 64 channels [p. 45 of 112: Fig. 63: Type 1: User Data Words (0, 1, …, 255, i.e. User Data Words = 256 max); Fig. 63: Type2],
the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format is 263 words [pp. 45, 55 of 112: Fig. 53, 63: Type 1 or Type2 has 256 words at max and 7 words of ADF, DID, DBN, DC and CS. The total number of words: 263 words],
the video signal adopts a format in which the number of pixels of one frame is 1920×1080 [pp. 26, 31 of 112: Table 13] and a frame rate is 29.97 fps [p. 31 of 112: Table 13],
a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal [p. 32 of 112: Table 15] included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words within the horizontal blanking period, and
the multiplexing unit multiplexes the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format in the horizontal blanking period of each of the Cb/Cr and Y signals [p. 32 of 112: Table 15].
Bleidt, Edwards and Tektronix are combinable because they are from the same field of video/audio coding.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Bleidt, Edwards and Tektronix as motivation to include 3G-SDI standard according to SMPTE [Bleidt para. 0011: ST 337; Edwards: ST 291-1; Tektronix: p. 31 of 112: SMPTE 372M].
Tektronix does not disclose explicitly the following claim limitations (emphasis added):
wherein
the MADI signal includes an audio signal having a sampling frequency of 48 kHz and 64 channels,
the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format is 263 words,
the video signal adopts a format in which the number of pixels of one frame is 1920×1080 and a frame rate is 29.97 fps,
a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words within the horizontal blanking period, and
the multiplexing unit multiplexes the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format in the horizontal blanking period of each of the Cb/Cr and Y signals.
However in the same field of endeavor Avid discloses the deficient claim as follows:
wherein
the MADI signal includes an audio signal having a sampling frequency of 48 kHz and 64 channels [pp. 1, 8 of 36: ‘outputs for up to 64 discrete channels’; ‘Number of Channels’],
the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format is 263 words,
the video signal adopts a format in which the number of pixels of one frame is 1920×1080 and a frame rate is 29.97 fps,
a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words within the horizontal blanking period, and
the multiplexing unit multiplexes the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format in the horizontal blanking period of each of the Cb/Cr and Y signals.
Bleidt, Edwards, Tektronix and Avid are combinable because they are from the same field of video/audio coding.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Bleidt, Edwards, Tektronix and Avid as motivation to include 64 channels as commercial use of Avid HD MADI.
Avid does not disclose explicitly the following claim limitations (emphasis added):
wherein
the MADI signal …,
the data of one frame of the MADI signal ..,
the video signal adopts a format …,
a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words within the horizontal blanking period, and
the multiplexing unit multiplexes ….
However in the same field of endeavor Kobayashi discloses the deficient claim as follows:
wherein
the MADI signal …,
the data of one frame of the MADI signal ..,
the video signal adopts a format …,
a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words [para. 0082: ‘268-word ancillary data (ANC) part’]within the horizontal blanking period, and
the multiplexing unit multiplexes ….
Bleidt, Edwards, Tektronix, Avid and Kobayashi are combinable because they are from the same field of video/audio coding.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Bleidt, Edwards, Tektronix, Avid and Kobayashi as motivation to include ‘268-word ancillary data (ANC) part’ according to the NTSC 555 standard [Kobayashi: para. 0082].
Regarding claim 5, Bleidt in view of Edwards meets the claim limitations set forth in claim 2.
Bleidt does not disclose explicitly the following claim limitations:
The signal transmission device according to claim 2, wherein
the MADI signal includes an audio signal having a sampling frequency of 48 kHz and 56 channels,
the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format is 231 words,
the video signal adopts a format in which the number of pixels of one frame is 1920×1080 and a frame rate is 29.97 fps,
a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words within the horizontal blanking period, and
the multiplexing unit multiplexes the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format in the horizontal blanking period of each of the Cb/Cr and Y signals.
However in the same field of endeavor Tektronix discloses the deficient claim as follows:
wherein
the MADI signal includes an audio signal having a sampling frequency of 48 kHz [p. 45 of 112: ‘Audio is sampled at a video synchronous clock frequency of 48 kHz’; p. 47 of 112: ‘Transmission of audio control packets is optional for 48 kHz synchronous operation’] and 56 channels [p. 45 of 112: Fig. 63: Type 1: User Data Words (0, 1, …, 255, i.e. User Data Words = 256 max); Fig. 63: Type2],
the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format is 231 words [pp. 45, 55 of 112: Fig. 53, 63: Type 1 or Type2 has 256 words at max and 7 words of ADF, DID, DBN, DC and CS. Note: Type 1 or Type 2 can have 224 words less than (256 words at max). The total number of words: 224+7=231 words],
the video signal adopts a format in which the number of pixels of one frame is 1920×1080 [pp. 26, 31 of 112: Table 13] and a frame rate is 29.97 fps [p. 31 of 112: Table 13],
a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal [p. 32 of 112: Table 15] included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words within the horizontal blanking period, and
the multiplexing unit multiplexes the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format in the horizontal blanking period of each of the Cb/Cr and Y signals [p. 32 of 112: Table 15].
Bleidt, Edwards and Tektronix are combinable because they are from the same field of video/audio coding.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Bleidt, Edwards and Tektronix as motivation to include 3G-SDI standard according to SMPTE [Bleidt para. 0011: ST 337; Edwards: ST 291-1; Tektronix: p. 31 of 112: SMPTE 372M].
Tektronix does not disclose explicitly the following claim limitations (emphasis added):
wherein
the MADI signal includes an audio signal having a sampling frequency of 48 kHz and 56 channels,
the data of one frame of the MADI signal …,
the video signal adopts a format …,
a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words within the horizontal blanking period, and
the multiplexing unit multiplexes ….
However in the same field of endeavor Avid discloses the deficient claim as follows:
wherein
the MADI signal includes an audio signal having a sampling frequency of 48 kHz and 56 channels [pp. 1, 19, 20 of 36: ‘outputs for up to 64 discrete channels’; ‘Number of Channels’; ‘Varispeed Channel Count (56) Select this option for up to 56 channels of MADI I/O with varispeed’],
the data of one frame of the MADI signal …,
the video signal adopts a format …,
a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words within the horizontal blanking period, and
the multiplexing unit multiplexes ….
Bleidt, Edwards, Tektronix and Avid are combinable because they are from the same field of video/audio coding.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Bleidt, Edwards, Tektronix and Avid as motivation to include 64 channels as commercial use of Avid HD MADI.
Avid does not disclose explicitly the following claim limitations (emphasis added):
wherein
the MADI signal includes an audio signal having a sampling frequency of 48 kHz and 56 channels,
the data of one frame of the MADI signal …,
the video signal adopts a format …,
a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words within the horizontal blanking period, and
the multiplexing unit multiplexes ….
However in the same field of endeavor Kobayashi discloses the deficient claim as follows:
wherein
the MADI signal …,
the data of one frame of the MADI signal ..,
the video signal adopts a format …,
a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words [para. 0082: ‘268-word ancillary data (ANC) part’]within the horizontal blanking period, and
the multiplexing unit multiplexes ….
Bleidt, Edwards, Tektronix, Avid and Kobayashi are combinable because they are from the same field of video/audio coding.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Bleidt, Edwards, Tektronix, Avid and Kobayashi as motivation to include ‘268-word ancillary data (ANC) part’ according to the NTSC 555 standard [Kobayashi: para. 0082].
Regarding claim 6, Bleidt in view of Edwards meets the claim limitations set forth in claim 2.
Bleidt does not disclose explicitly the following claim limitations:
The signal transmission device according to claim 2, wherein
the MADI signal includes an audio signal having a sampling frequency of 96 kHz and 32 channels,
the data of two frames of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format is 263 words,
the video signal adopts a format in which the number of pixels of one frame is 1920×1080 and a frame rate is 29.97 fps,
a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words within the horizontal blanking period, and
the multiplexing unit multiplexes the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format in the horizontal blanking period of each of the Cb/Cr and Y signals.
However in the same field of endeavor Tektronix discloses the deficient claim as follows:
wherein
the MADI signal includes an audio signal having a sampling frequency of 96 kHz and 32 channels,
the data of two frames of the MADI signal (i.e. two frames per channels x 32 channels = 64 frames; equivalently 1 frame per channel for 64 channels) in the ancillary data format is 263 words [pp. 45, 55 of 112: Fig. 53, 63: Type 1 or Type2 has 256 words at max and 7 words of ADF, DID, DBN, DC and CS. The total number of words: 263 words],
the video signal adopts a format in which the number of pixels of one frame is 1920×1080 [pp. 26, 31 of 112: Table 13] and a frame rate is 29.97 fps [p. 31 of 112: Table 13],
a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal [p. 32 of 112: Table 15] included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words within the horizontal blanking period, and
the multiplexing unit multiplexes the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format in the horizontal blanking period of each of the Cb/Cr and Y signals [p. 32 of 112: Table 15].
Bleidt, Edwards and Tektronix are combinable because they are from the same field of video/audio coding.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Bleidt, Edwards and Tektronix as motivation to include 3G-SDI standard according to SMPTE [Bleidt para. 0011: ST 337; Edwards: ST 291-1; Tektronix: p. 31 of 112: SMPTE 372M].
Tektronix does not disclose explicitly the following claim limitations (emphasis added):
wherein
the MADI signal includes an audio signal having a sampling frequency of 96 kHz and 32 channels,
the data of two frames of the MADI signal …,
the video signal adopts a format …,
a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words within the horizontal blanking period, and
the multiplexing unit multiplexes ….
However in the same field of endeavor Avid discloses the deficient claim as follows:
wherein
the MADI signal includes an audio signal having a sampling frequency of 96 kHz and 32 channels [pp. 1, 5, 6, 8, 9, 17, 19, 20 of 36: ‘outputs for up to 64 discrete channels’; ‘Number of Channels’],
the data of two frames of the MADI …,
the video signal adopts a format …,
a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words within the horizontal blanking period, and
the multiplexing unit multiplexes ….
Bleidt, Edwards, Tektronix and Avid are combinable because they are from the same field of video/audio coding.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Bleidt, Edwards, Tektronix and Avid as motivation to include 64 channels as commercial use of Avid HD MADI.
Avid does not disclose explicitly the following claim limitations (emphasis added):
wherein
the MADI signal …,
the data of two frames of the MADI signal ..,
the video signal adopts a format …,
a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words within the horizontal blanking period, and
the multiplexing unit multiplexes ….
However in the same field of endeavor Kobayashi discloses the deficient claim as follows:
wherein
the MADI signal …,
the data of two frames of the MADI signal ..,
the video signal adopts a format …,
a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words [para. 0082: ‘268-word ancillary data (ANC) part’]within the horizontal blanking period, and
the multiplexing unit multiplexes ….
Bleidt, Edwards, Tektronix, Avid and Kobayashi are combinable because they are from the same field of video/audio coding.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Bleidt, Edwards, Tektronix, Avid and Kobayashi as motivation to include ‘268-word ancillary data (ANC) part’ according to the NTSC 555 standard [Kobayashi: para. 0082].
Regarding claim 13, all claim limitations are set forth as claim 3 in the form of “A signal reception device” [Bleidt: Fig. 15a-2; 15b-2] and rejected as per discussion for claim 3.
Regarding claim 15, all claim limitations are set forth as claim 5 in the form of “A signal reception device” [Bleidt: Fig. 15a-2; 15b-2] and rejected as per discussion for claim 5.
Regarding claim 16, all claim limitations are set forth as claim 6 in the form of “A signal reception device” [Bleidt: Fig. 15a-2; 15b-2] and rejected as per discussion for claim 6.
Claims 7 and 17 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bleidt in view of Edwards in further view of Tektronix (“Tektronix”) [NPL Titled “A Guide to Standard and High-Definition Digital Video Measurements”]
Regarding claim 7, Bleidt in view of Edwards meets the claim limitations set forth in claim 1.
Bleidt does not disclose explicitly the following claim limitations:
The signal transmission device according to claim 1, wherein the predetermined standard is the 3G-SDI standard, the 6G-SDI standard, or the 12G-SDI standard.
However in the same field of endeavor Tektronix discloses the deficient claim as follows:
wherein the predetermined standard is the 3G-SDI standard [p. 31 of 112: ‘Dual Link and 3G Formats’], the 6G-SDI standard, or the 12G-SDI standard.
Bleidt, Edwards and Tektronix are combinable because they are from the same field of video/audio coding.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Bleidt, Edwards and Tektronix as motivation to include 3G-SDI standard according to SMPTE [Bleidt para. 0011: ST 337; Edwards: ST 291-1; Tektronix: p. 31 of 112: SMPTE 372M].
Regarding claim 17, all claim limitations are set forth as claim 7 in the form of “A signal reception device” [Bleidt: Fig. 15a-2; 15b-2] and rejected as per discussion for claim 7.
Claims 8 and 18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bleidt in view of Edwards in further view of Tektronix (“Tektronix”) [NPL Titled “A Guide to Standard and High-Definition Digital Video Measurements”] in further view of Avid (“Avid”) [NPL Titled “HD MADI Guide”] in further view of Kobayashi (“Kobayashi”) [US 2002/0102097 A1]
Regarding claim 8, Bleidt in view of Edwards meets the claim limitations set forth in claim 7.
Bleidt does not disclose explicitly the following claim limitations:
The signal transmission device according to claim 7, wherein the MADI signal includes an audio signal having a sampling frequency of 48 kHz and 64 channels, the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format is 263 words, the video signal conforms to the 3G-SDI standard and adopts a format in which the number of pixels of one frame is 1920×1080 and a frame rate is 59.94 fps, a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal of links A and B included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words within the horizontal blanking period, and the multiplexing unit multiplexes the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format in the horizontal blanking period of each of the Cb/Cr and Y signals of the link A.
However in the same field of endeavor Tektronix discloses the deficient claim as follows:
wherein the MADI signal includes an audio signal having a sampling frequency of 48 kHz [p. 45 of 112: ‘Audio is sampled at a video synchronous clock frequency of 48 kHz’ p. 47 of 112: ‘Transmission of audio control packets is optional for 48 kHz synchronous operation’] and 64 channels [p. 45 of 112: Fig. 63: Type 1: User Data Words (0, 1, …, 255, i.e. User Data Words = 256 max); Fig. 63: Type2],
the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format is 263 words [pp. 45, 55 of 112: Fig. 53, 63: Type 1 or Type2 has 256 words at max and 7 words of ADF, DID, DBN, DC and CS. The total number of words: 263 words],
the video signal conforms to the 3G-SDI standard and adopts a format in which the number of pixels of one frame is 1920×1080 [pp. 26, 31 of 112: Table 13] and a frame rate is 59.94 fps [p. 31 of 112: Table 13], a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal of links A and B [p. 32 of 112: Table 15] included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words within the horizontal blanking period, and
the multiplexing unit multiplexes the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format in the horizontal blanking period of each of the Cb/Cr and Y signals of the link A [p. 32 of 112: Table 15].
Bleidt, Edwards and Tektronix are combinable because they are from the same field of video/audio coding.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Bleidt, Edwards and Tektronix as motivation to include 3G-SDI standard according to SMPTE [Bleidt para. 0011: ST 337; Edwards: ST 291-1; Tektronix: p. 31 of 112: SMPTE 372M].
Tektronix does not disclose explicitly the following claim limitations (emphasis added):
wherein the MADI signal includes an audio signal having a sampling frequency of 48 kHz and 64 channels, the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format is 263 words, the video signal conforms to the 3G-SDI standard and adopts a format in which the number of pixels of one frame is 1920×1080 and a frame rate is 59.94 fps, a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal of links A and B included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words within the horizontal blanking period, and the multiplexing unit multiplexes the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format in the horizontal blanking period of each of the Cb/Cr and Y signals of the link A.
However in the same field of endeavor Avid discloses the deficient claim as follows:
wherein the MADI signal includes an audio signal having a sampling frequency of 48 kHz and 64 channels [pp. 1, 8 of 36: ‘outputs for up to 64 discrete channels’; ‘Number of Channels”], the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format is 263 words, the video signal conforms to the 3G-SDI standard and adopts a format in which the number of pixels of one frame is 1920×1080 and a frame rate is 59.94 fps, a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal of links A and B included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words within the horizontal blanking period, and the multiplexing unit multiplexes the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format in the horizontal blanking period of each of the Cb/Cr and Y signals of the link A.
Bleidt, Edwards, Tektronix and Avid are combinable because they are from the same field of video/audio coding.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Bleidt, Edwards, Tektronix and Avid as motivation to include 64 channels as commercial use of Avid HD MADI.
Avid does not disclose explicitly the following claim limitations (emphasis added):
wherein the MADI signal includes an audio signal having a sampling frequency of 48 kHz and 64 channels, … in which the number of pixels of one frame is 1920×1080 and a frame rate is 59.94 fps, a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal of links A and B included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words within the horizontal blanking period, and the multiplexing unit multiplexes the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format in the horizontal blanking period of each of the Cb/Cr and Y signals of the link A ….
However in the same field of endeavor Kobayashi discloses the deficient claim as follows:
wherein the MADI signal includes an audio signal having a sampling frequency of 48 kHz and 64 channels, … in which the number of pixels of one frame is 1920×1080 and a frame rate is 59.94 fps, a Cb/Cr signal and a Y signal of links A and B included in the video signal each can transmit 268 words [para. 0082: ‘268-word ancillary data (ANC) part’] within the horizontal blanking period, and the multiplexing unit multiplexes the data of one frame of the MADI signal in the ancillary data format in the horizontal blanking period of each of the Cb/Cr and Y signals of the link A ….
Bleidt, Edwards, Tektronix, Avid and Kobayashi are combinable because they are from the same field of video/audio coding.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine teachings of Bleidt, Edwards, Tektronix, Avid and Kobayashi as motivation to include ‘268-word ancillary data (ANC) part’ according to the NTSC 555 standard [Kobayashi: para. 0082].
Regarding claim 18, all claim limitations are set forth as claim 8 in the form of “A signal reception device” [Bleidt: Fig. 15a-2; 15b-2] and rejected as per discussion for claim 8.
Allowable Subject Matter
Regarding claim 4, it is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 14, it is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See form 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER D LE whose telephone number is (571)270-5382. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Alternate Friday: 10AM-6:30PM.
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, SATH PERUNGAVOOR can be reached on 571-272-7455. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PETER D LE/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488