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 .
DETAIL ACTION
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d). The certified copy has been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 12/30/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement 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.
Claims 1-6 and 12-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter because the claim(s) as a whole, considering all claim elements both individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea. As summarized in the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, examiners must perform a Two-Part Analysis for Judicial Exceptions.
Step 1
In Step 1, it must be determined whether the claimed invention is directed to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter. The instant invention encompasses three sets of claims: a method in claims 1-5, 12 23 (i.e., a process), a method in claims 6, 13-15, 22, 24 (i.e., a process) and a device in claims 16-21 (i.e., a manufacture). All claims are directed to one of the four statutory categories and meet the requirements of step 1.
Step 2A
Prong One
The claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significant more. The instant invention is broadly directed to “generating a noise reduction audio frame by a voice noise reduction network model”. Claim 1 recites the following (with emphasis added):
Claim 1: A method for reducing voice noise,
comprising: acquiring an algorithm activity detection result corresponding to a current audio frame to be processed by detecting the current audio frame using a predetermined voice activity detection algorithm;
acquiring a target activity detection result corresponding to the current audio frame by merging a model activity detection result corresponding to a previous audio frame and the algorithm activity detection result corresponding to the current audio frame, wherein the model activity detection result is outputted by a predetermined voice noise reduction network model;
acquiring an initial noise reduction audio frame by performing, based on the target activity detection result, noise estimation and noise elimination on the current audio frame; and
outputting a target noise reduction audio frame and a model activity detection result corresponding to the current audio frame by inputting the initial noise reduction audio frame into the predetermined voice noise reduction network model.
The bold portions of claim 1 encompass the abstract idea, which is also encompassed by the dependent claims 2-5, 12, 23, and substantially also encompassed by claims 6, 13-15, 22, 24 and 16-21
Claims 1, 6 and 16 recite the steps to generate a noise reduction audio frame by a voice noise reduction network model. These limitations, when given their broadest reasonable interpretation, are directed to certain performing of organizing human activity and mental processes, which is abstract idea.
Prong Two
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because mere instruction to implement on computers (i.e. storage medium or processors in claim 16) or a computer model the predetermined voice noise reduction network model here in claim 1), or merely using computers as a tool to perform the abstract idea, adding insignificant extra solution activity, and/or generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a technological environment for field of use is not considered integration into a practical application. Claim 1 recites using a predetermined voice noise reduction network model to generate noise reduction audio frame. Claim 6 recites using acquired data to train a voice noise reduction network model. Using a trained machine-learning model is a generic feature of network model process, which does not represent a technological improvement. The using of the computer and network modeling process does not add improvement to the functioning of a computer or to any other technology field, which failed to enable the abstract idea to integrate into a practical application. The claims are drafted in a result-oriented fashion, without the requisite specificity needed to provide a nonabstract technological solution. The computing system and network modeling process are directed to the components of a system amount to merely field of use type limitations and/or extra solution activity to implement the abstract idea as presented.
Step 2B
Step 2B in the analysis requires us to determine whether the claims do significantly more than simply describe that abstract method. Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1297. We must examine the limitations of the claims to determine whether the claims contain an "inventive concept" to "transform" the claimed abstract idea into patent-eligible subject matter. Alice, 134 S. Ct. at 2357 (quoting Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1294, 1298). The transformation of an abstract idea into patent-eligible subject matter "requires 'more than simply stat[ing] the [abstract idea] while adding the words 'apply it."' Id. (quoting Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1294) (alterations in original). "A claim that recites an abstract idea must include 'additional features' to ensure 'that the [claim] is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the [abstract idea].'" Id. (quoting Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1297) (alterations in original). Those "additional features" must be more than "well-understood, routine, conventional activity." Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1298.
The present claims include the additional elements other than the abstract idea which include a processor, storage medium, network model (in claim 1 and 6). These additional elements are merely conventional computer and computer model. Any potentially technical aspects of the claims are well-known generic computer components performing conventional functions (e.g., a processor performing a mental process). The present claims have been analyzed both individually and in combination and, the instant claims do not provide any improvement of the functioning of the computer or improvement to computer technology or any other technical field. There do not appear to be any meaningful limitations other than those that are well-understood, routine and conventional in the field. Thus, the present claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Thus, the claims 2-5, 12, and 23 are not patent eligible.
Claims 6, 13-15, 22, 24 and 16-21 recite similar limitations of claims 1-5, 12, 23, thus are abstract idea and not patent eligible.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1-6 and 12-24 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 101, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the closest prior arts of TASHEV, Sargsyan, TOMMY, JENSEN, and Deng do not teach the limitations of the claims. Specifically, none of the cited prior art teaches acquiring an algorithm activity detection result to a current audio frame to be processed by detecting the current audio frame using a predetermined voice activity detection algorithm; acquiring a target activity detection result corresponding to the current audio frame by merging a model activity detection result outputted by a predetermined voice noise reduction network model corresponding to a previous audio frame and the algorithm activity detection result corresponding to the current audio frame, acquiring an initial noise reduction audio frame by performing noise estimation and noise elimination on the current audio frame based on the target activity detection result; and outputting a target noise reduction audio frame and a model activity detection result corresponding to the current audio frame by inputting the initial noise reduction audio frame into the predetermined voice noise reduction network model. Hence, none of the cited prior art, either singularly or in combination, fail to anticipate or render the above limitations obvious.
Conclusion
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