DETAILED ACTION
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 Status
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 04-21-2026 has been recorded.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) rejected in the official action dated 01-06-2026 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the same combination of references applied in the prior rejection.
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, 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 1-6, 8-12, 14-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ROMASWAMY (US 2007/0192782) in view of SHORT (US 2008/0317260).
Regarding claims 1, 9 and 15,
ROMASWAMY teaches a computing device, and corresponding method of operation, the computing device comprising:
a processor ([0037] teaches an audio engine (228); and [0038] teaches a video engine (232) – at least 228 and 232 having processing functionality);
and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, having stored thereon program instructions ([0017]-[0025] teach a series of machine readable instructions) that, upon execution by the processor, cause performance of operations comprising:
receiving a first audio signal associated with media presented by a monitored media device(see 116 in fig. 1; [0027] teaches a signal splitter 118 routes the inputs being provided to the television 116 to a multi-engine meter 120 to facilitate monitoring of the A/V content provided to and presented by the television 116);
receiving a second audio signal from a first media source of a plurality of media sources (104, 15, 108, 110, 112 in fig. 1) communicatively coupled to the monitored media device (116), each media source configured to provide media to the monitored media device ([0027] teaches a plurality of audio/visual (A/V) content sources 102 that may include any or all of a game console 104, a set-top box (STB) 106, a digital video disk (DVD) player 108, a video cassette recorder (VCR) 110, a personal video recorder (PVR), a digital video recorder (DVR) 112, etc. The A/V content sources 102 are coupled to the inputs of an A/V switch 114 to route the outputs from a selected one of the A/V content sources 102 to the inputs of a television 116);
comparing frequency band values of the first audio signal with corresponding frequency band values of the second audio signal to determine a comparison result ([0043] teaches that signature information for the content being presented may be compared to a set of reference signatures corresponding to a known set of content; [0047] teaches determining whether the input audio samples 304 correspond to an audio signal that possesses a particular spectral shape and gives as an example, processing the spectral shape of an audio signal whereby increased energy in a band at or near 15.75 kHz is detected – it is understood that spectral analysis is the process of examining a signal's content in terms of its frequencies. Said frequency band values are used in determining the source content in decision processor 600); and
based on the comparison result, detecting that the first media source of the plurality of media sources provided the media presented by the monitored media device ([0047] teaches a decision processor 224 of FIG. 2, to determine the A/V content source corresponding to the input audio samples 304).
Romaswamy fails to expressly teach receiving, via an audio sensor of the computing device, a first audio signal associated with media presented by a monitored media device and that has been output by one or more of an audio speaker of the monitored media device or an audio speaker coupled to the monitored media device.
SHORT discloses a system drawn to audio signal processing and sound source discrimination using characteristics of received acoustic signals and teaches receiving, via an audio sensor (12, 14) of the computing device, a first audio signal associated with media presented by a monitored media device and that has been output by one or more of an audio speaker of the monitored media device or an audio speaker coupled to the monitored media device. Short further teaches separating signals into frequency bands and comparing signal characteristics on a frequency-band basis to distinguish among sound sources ([0079] teaches “An acoustic wave from sound source 15 causes transducers 12, 14 to produce electrical signals representing characteristics of the acoustic wave as a function of time. Transducers 12, 14 are each preferably an omni-directional microphone element which can connect to other parts of the system via a wire or wirelessly).
Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to modify the system of Ramaswamy per the microphone-based acquisition technique of Short to obtain audio representative of a monitored source without requiring a direct electrical connection to the source signal path.
Regarding claims 2, 10 and 16,
Short teaches that the computing device and the audio sensor are located in a viewing environment of the monitored media device (Short teaches in [0079], "An acoustic wave from sound source 15 causes transducers 12, 14 to produce electrical signals representing characteristics of the acoustic wave" Short therefore teaches microphone/audio sensor physically located in the environment of the sound source being monitored .)
Regarding claim 3,
Romaswamy further teaches receiving a third audio signal from a second one of the plurality of media sources([0036] teaches “ The example multi-engine meter 200 is configured to process composite A/V inputs that include stereo left and right audio input signals 204 and a video input signal 208. The stereo audio input signals 204 are sampled by an audio sampler 212 at a suitable sampling rate, e.g., 48 kHz, and converted to a digital monaural audio signal. The resulting digital audio samples are stored in an audio buffer 216.” Thus teaching that samples are collected from more than a single source i.e., at least a second and a third audio signal); and comparing the frequency band values of the first audio signal with corresponding frequency band values of the third audio signal to determine a second comparison result, wherein detecting that the first media source provided the media is further based on the second comparison result ([0076] teaches a metering engine metric evaluator 652 samples the available audio, video and metadata metrics/results obtained from the audio/video/metadata engines. A sub-process 702 determines the A/V content source providing the monitored A/V content presentation. At sub-process 703, the metering engine metric evaluator 652 determines content identification information).
Regarding claims 4, 11 and 18,
Romaswamy teaches the corresponding frequency band values of the second audio signal comprise frequency band values of a set of frequency bands, and the method further comprises selecting the set of frequency bands based on a first set of trending coefficients determined for the first audio signal and a second set of trending coefficients determined for the second audio signal (at least [0009] teaches signature-based identification wherein the content shall generate a substantially unique signature (e.g., a waveform, etc.) for that content. The signature information shall be compared to a set of reference signatures so as to determine a substantial match; [0047] teaches that audio signals may exhibit increased energy in a frequency band at or near 15.75 kHz due to video signal leakage. Thus, knowledge of whether the audio has a particular spectral shape i.e., increased energy corresponding to the identified and thus select trending coefficients, is used to determine the area of focus when determining a match.)
Regarding claims 5 and 12,
Romaswamy teaches that the frequency band values of the first audio signal and the frequency band values of the second audio signal are respective power spectral density values ([0109] –[0111] teaches the benefit of utilizing power spectral density (PSD) and teaches identifying different average values of different macroblocks, so as to identify a large sum of PSD differences as compared to a video image that does not exhibit macroblocking. This disclosure teaches that the compared signals used to detect macroblocking are derived from power spectral density (PSD) values. While the system also uses template matching, the specific process for macroblock detection is based on the analysis and comparison of signals derived from power spectral density values.)
Regarding claim 6,
Romaswamy teaches processing samples of the first audio signal to determine power spectral density values of the first audio signal; and processing samples of the second audio signal to determine power spectral density values of the second audio signal ([0109] teaches computing the power spectral density (PSD) of the signals in question).
Regarding claim 17,
Romaswamy teaches wherein the computing device is a meter located in a viewing environment of the monitored media device (see 1201 in fig. 1).
Regarding claims 8, 14 and 20,
Romaswamy teaches detecting that the first media source provided the media presented by the monitored media device based on the comparison result comprises detecting that the first media source provided the media presented by the monitored media device based on a determination that the comparison result satisfies a predefined threshold ([0110] teaches “…the macroblock detector 424 then compares the sum of PSD differences to a predetermined threshold set to detect macroblocking (block 1328). …Thus, if the sum of PSD differences is substantially zero (block 1336), the macroblock detector 424 reports that the A/V content source corresponds to a game console (block 1340). Otherwise, the macroblock detector 424 reports that the A/V content source is indeterminate (block 1344). The example process 1300 then ends.” This disclosure explicitly states that the determination is based on whether the comparison of the sum of PSD differences satisfies a predetermined threshold ).
Claims 7, 13 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ROMASWAMY (US 2007/0192782) in view of SHORT (US 2008/0317260) and further in view of THYSSEN (US 2013/0163781).
Regarding claims 7, 13 and 19,
Romaswamy as modified by Short, teaches the features of claims 1, 9 and 15, but fails to expressly teach comparing the frequency band values of the first audio signal with the corresponding frequency band values of the second audio signal to determine the comparison result comprises cross-correlating the frequency band values of the first audio signal with the corresponding frequency band values over a window of n time delays over a range of time to determine the comparison result.
Thyssen teaches processing the respective frequency band values of the first audio signal and the respective frequency band values of the second audio signal for the subset of the frequency bands comprises:
cross-correlating the frequency band values of the first audio signal with the corresponding frequency band values over a window of n time delays over a range of time to determine the comparison result ([0040] teaches that a measure of coherence between the first audio signal and the second audio signal may be calculated, for example, by estimating a cross-correlation between the first audio signal and the second audio signal in a time domain or estimating a cross-spectrum between the first audio signal and the second audio signal in the frequency domain; [0050] teaches determining that breathing noise is present in the first audio signal based on the comparison thus teaches determining the comparison result).
Before the effective filing date of the Applicant’s invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to further modify Romaswamy per the teachings of Thyssen for the purpose of utilizing cross-correlation techniques for determining the presence of an audio signal based upon a comparison.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 DIONNE PENDLETON whose telephone number is (571)272-7497. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-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, Davetta Goins can be reached at 571-272-2957. 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.
/DIONNE PENDLETON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689
Prosecution Insights