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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Summary
This action is in reply to Applicant’s Amendments and Remarks filed on 7/28/2026.
Claims 40-44, 46-48, 50, 52-55, 57, 59-61, 63-65 and 67 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Claims 67 have been amended and are directed to statutory subject matter. Therefore, the rejections of claims 67 under 35 U.S.C. § 101 are withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments with respect to amended claims and originally presented claims have been fully considered but they are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
During patent examination, the pending claims must be "given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification." Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, at 1316 (Fed. Cir. 2005). See also In re Hyatt, 211 F.3d 1367, 1372, 54 USPQ2d 1664, 1667 (Fed. Cir. 2000).
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
7. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (FP 7.30.03)
(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.
8. 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.
9. 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 processing module for applying restore processing the audio data; a rendering module is a module for applying frame-wise audio enhancement to the raw audio data and an editing module is a module for applying editing processing to the raw audio data in claim 59.
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. (FP 7.30.06)
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 40-44, 46-48, 50, 52-55, 57, 59-61, 63-65 and 67 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Riedmiller et al (US 20130246077 A1; hereinafter “Riedmiller6077”) in view of KOPPENS et al (US 20160197590 A1; hereinafter “KOPPENS”).
Regarding claim 40, Riedmiller6077 discloses a method of processing audio data [e.g. FIG. 1 and 3; audio processing] relating to user generated content [e.g. [0030 and 0073]; metadata including user preference or user specified metadata], the audio data captured by a capture device [e.g. FIG. 3; PCM audio input audio samples], the method comprising: obtaining the audio data [e.g. FIG. 3; input audio data] ; applying frame-wise audio enhancement to the audio data to obtain enhanced audio data [e.g. FIG. 6; [0030 and 0078-0079]; media (audio frames) processing with adaptive and automated loudness processing; [0070, 0081 and 0122]; automatically perform one or more of adapting corrective loudness or dynamics audio processing]; generating metadata for the enhanced audio data, based on one or more processing parameters of the frame-wise audio enhancement [e.g. FIG 1 and 6; [0030, 0073-0079 and 0086]; metadata generator; metadata includes the specific parameters used in and/or derived from the loudness domain processing]; and outputting the enhanced audio data together with the generated metadata for rendering at a playback device [e.g. FIG. 6-7 and 10; [0030]; the processing state metadata with the media data is time-synchronous; decoded PCM samples on one or more speakers and/or display panels]; wherein the metadata comprises first metadata [e.g. loudness metadata] generated based on the one or more processing parameters of the frame-wise audio enhancement and second metadata [e.g. dynamic range control gains] generated based on the result of analyzing multiple frames of the audio data [ e.g. FIG. 3, 6 and 11; [0054-0055]; the processing state metadata may include the parameters used in and/or derived from the certain processing or any constituent operations in the processing; Media feature may be extracted from a segment that lasts for a period of time (one frame, multiple frames]; and wherein generating the metadata comprises compiling the first and second metadata to obtain compiled metadata as the metadata for output [e.g. FIG. 6-7; loudness metadata in and/or associated with processing state metadata dynamic range control gains]; wherein the frame-wise audio enhancement is applied during or immediately following capture of the audio data [e.g. FIG. 6].
Although Riedmiller6077 discloses generating metadata based on the result of analyzing multiple frames of the audio data [ e.g. FIG. 3, 6 and 11; [0054-0055]], it is noted that Riedmiller6077 differs to the present invention in that Riedmiller6077 fails to explicitly the detail of generating the metadata.
However, KOPPENS teaches the well-known concept of generating metadata [e.g. FIG. 1; metadata includes loudness level and DRC gain] based on the results of analyzing multiple frames of the audio data [e.g. FIG. 1-2; [0075-0079 and 0123-0124]; frames during a time interval; DRC gains in the individual frequency bands as time-averaged over a certain time interval (e.g., longer than 5.3 milliseconds, 20 milliseconds, 50 milliseconds, 80 milliseconds, 100 milliseconds,]; wherein generating the metadata comprises separately generating the first metadata and the second metadata [e.g. FIG. 1; generating loudness from 112 and DRC gain from 114], and subsequently compiling the separately generated first and second metadata to obtain compiled metadata as the metadata for output [e.g. FIG. 1A and 1B; [0050 and 0083-0085]; decoded or encoded metadata] .
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the audio data processing system disclosed by Riedmiller6077 to exploit the well-known generating metadata technique taught by KOPPENS as above, in order to provide DRC enhanced audio output that drives audio channels in the specific playback environment. [See KOPPENS; [0180]].
Regarding claim 41, Riedmiller6077 and KOPPENS further disclose applying at least one of: noise management; loudness management [e.g. KOPPENS: FIG. 1-2; [0030, 0073 and 0079]; adjustment of dialogue loudness].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the audio data processing system disclosed by Riedmiller6077 to exploit the well-known generating metadata technique taught by KOPPENS as above, in order to provide DRC enhanced audio output that drives audio channels in the specific playback environment. [See KOPPENS; [0180]].
Regarding claim 42, Riedmiller6077 and KOPPENS further disclose the one or more processing parameters include band gains and/or full-band gains applied during the frame-wise audio enhancement [e.g. Riedmiller6077: [0145 and 0265]; dynamic range gain control values].
Regarding claim 43, Riedmiller6077 and KOPPENS further disclose the one or ore processing parameters include at least one of: band gains for noise management; full-band gains for loudness management [e.g. Riedmiller6077: [0145 and 0265]; loudness and/or dynamic range gain control values]; full-band gains for peak limiting; and band gains for timbre management.
Regarding claim 44, Riedmiller6077 and KOPPENS further disclose the analysis of multiple frames of the audio data yields one or more audio features of the audio data; and optionally herein the audio features of the audio data relate to at least one of: a content type of the audio data [e.g. Riedmiller6077: [0030 and 0054]; a plurality of media data classes]; an indication of a capturing environment of the audio data; a signal-to-noise ratio of the audio data; an overall loudness of the audio data [e.g. Riedmiller6077: [0104]; loudness value; KOPPENS: [0053]; loudness level]; and a spectral shape of the audio data.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the audio data processing system disclosed by Riedmiller6077 to exploit the well-known generating metadata technique taught by KOPPENS as above, in order to provide DRC enhanced audio output that drives audio channels in the specific playback environment. [See KOPPENS; [0180]].
Regarding claim 46, this is a restoring audio data method that includes same limitation as same limitation as in claim 40, the rejection of which are incorporated herein. Furthermore, Riedmiller6077 and KOPPENS applying restore processing to the audio data, using the one or more processing parameters [e.g. Riedmiller6077: FIG. 1 and 7], to at least partially reverse the previous frame-wise audio enhancement [e.g. Riedmiller6077 and KOPPENS: decoding the encoded audio data], thereby obtaining raw audio data [e.g. recovering the original audio samples; KOPPENS: FIG. 1-2; [0022]; pre-generate differential gains in reference to a specific default dynamic range compression curve that corresponds to a specific default gain profile]; and subsequent to obtaining the raw audio data [e.g. KOPPENS: FIG. 1-2], applying frame-wise audio enhancement to the raw audio data to obtain enhanced audio data , or applying editing processing to the raw audio data to obtain edited audio data [e.g. KOPPENS: FIG. 1B; [0080-0083. 0090-0093 and 0100-0101]; encode the audio data blocks/frames and the metadata (e.g. loudness and DRC gains) into the encoded audio signal; the decoder performing post-processing DRC parameters]; wherein the second metadata are retained following the restore processing [e.g. KOPPENS: FIG. 1B; [0080-0083. 0090-0093 and 0100-0101]; encode the audio data blocks/frames and the metadata (e.g. loudness and DRC gains) into the encoded audio signal].
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the audio data processing system disclosed by Riedmiller6077 to exploit the well-known generating metadata technique taught by KOPPENS as above, in order to provide DRC enhanced audio output that drives audio channels in the specific playback environment. [See KOPPENS; [0180]].
Regarding claim 47, this is a restoring audio data method that includes same limitation as in claim 46+41 above, the rejection of which are incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 48, this is a restoring audio data method that includes same limitation as in claim 46+43 above, the rejection of which are incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 50, this is a restoring audio data method that includes same limitation as in claim 46+44 above, the rejection of which are incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 52, this is a restoring audio data method that includes same limitation as in claim 46+41 above, the rejection of which are incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 53-55 and 57, this is an apparatus that includes same limitation as in claim 40-42 and 44 above respectively, the rejection of which are incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 59-61 and 63-65, this is an apparatus that includes same limitation as in claim 46-48, 50, 50 and 52 above respectively, the rejection of which are incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 67, this is a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program to perform the steps that includes same limitation as in claim 40 above, the rejection of which are incorporated herein.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
VILKAMO et al (US 20200260206 A1).
Olivieri et al (US 20180357038 A1).
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHUBING REN whose telephone number is (571)272-2788. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
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, Richemond Dorvil can be reached at 571-272-7602. 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.
/ZHUBING REN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2658
Prosecution Insights