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
Claim Objections
Claim 9 objected to because of the following informalities: the claim contains a subject verb disagreement. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 8-12, 16, 18, 19, 21-23, rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claims 8, 16 recite “the microphone arrangement,” in a manner lacking clear antecedent. Claims 18, 19 recite first and second modes for processing the signal; parent claim 1 does not discuss modes, it will be presumed for the art rejection infra that the first, second mode of the claims resolve the modes of claim 17. Appropriate correction is required. Claims 9-12, 21-23 do not remedy and are similarly rejected.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1-6, 14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated Sheaffer: 10798511 hereinafter She.
Regarding claim 1
She teaches:
An apparatus, comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed with the at least one processor (She: Fig 6: such as utilizing the system of the figure), cause the apparatus at least to:
obtain at least two audio signals based on signals from at least two microphones (She: Col 3:25-3:36; Fig 1; claims 1, 14, 15: a system for processing input audio channels such as generated as the output of a microphone array, plurality of microphones, etc.);
perform a first spatial audio processing of the obtained audio signals for at least a first frequency range to generate a first output (She: Col 3:32-3:36, 3:58-3:63, 5:11-5:16, 5:57-5:67; Fig 1: parametric rendering sub system processes frequency domain signals, frequency limited sub bands thereof, to generate therefrom a plurality of rendered channels within frequency limits for output);
perform a second spatial audio processing of the obtained audio signals for at least a second frequency range to generate a second output (She: 3:32-3:36, 3:58-3:63, 5:58-6:12; Fig 1: second linear rendering sub system processes frequency sub bands outside the limited bands and comprising direct and diffuse sound components, to generate therefrom a plurality of beamformed channels for output);
wherein the signal processing operations of the first spatial audio processing comprise processing based on parametric audio (She: 5:58-6:12; Fig 1: such as by processing band limited channels for output by the parametric renderer); and
the signal processing operations of the second spatial audio processing comprises comprise processing based on beamforming audio (She: 5:58-6:12; Fig 1: such as by processing bands outside the band limited channels for output by to generated beamformed channels for output): and
combine the first output and the second output to generate a combined output (She: 5:58-6:12, 6:23-6:57; Fig 1: such as by mixitively combining under user input direction the parametrically processed band limited channels and the generated beamformed channels for output by the combiner).
Regarding claim 2
She teaches:
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1,wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to perform the processing based on parametric audio that varies more over time than the processing based on beamforming audio (She: Col 5:5-5:10, 5:30-5:35, 6:1-6:10; Fig 1: parametric audio processes sub bands at each sub band of the direct audio component resulting in a plurality of direction of arrival angle component values; the beamformed signals are non-time varying such as by optimizing a target spatial response based on a least squares fir of the overall environment).
Regarding claim 3
She teaches:
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1,wherein the respective outputs comprise at least one of: binaural outputs; multi-channel outputs; or stereo outputs (She: Col 1:23-1:33, 5:37-5:43, 5:29-5:30; Fig 1: output in the form of: a target spatial response which may be binaural in the case of the disclosed HRTF target spatial response, or multiple channels such as for surround in the case of the 5.1 channel output; or simply a stereo response to drive stereo speakers).
Regarding claim 4
She teaches:
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1,wherein the second spatial audio processing is not performed for at least some of the first frequency range (She: 5:51-6:12; Fig 1: system processes band limited audio parametrically while processing bands outside the band limited channels using beamforming).
Regarding claim 5
She teaches:
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1,wherein the first spatial audio processing is not performed for at least some of the second frequency range (She: 5:51-6:12; Fig 1: system processes band limited audio parametrically while processing bands outside the band limited channels using beamforming).
Regarding claim 6
She teaches:
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1,wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to at least one of:
use the first output for the first frequency range and the second output for the second frequency range, or apply a weighting to the first output and the second output so that the first output has a higher weighting than the second output in a frequency range and the second output has a higher weighting than the first output in another frequency range (She: 5:25-5:43. 5:51-6:10, 6:40-6:44; parametric rendered processes first frequency range and provides first output, second linear renderer 132 processes second frequency range(s) and provides second output and the outputs are weighted at least by level adjustments thereto such as at the combiner).
Regarding claim 14—the claim is considered to recite substantially similar subject matter to that of claim 1 and is similarly rejected.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-6, 14, 17-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheaffer: 10798511 further in view of Tammi: 20190394606 hereinafter Tam.
Regarding claim 1
She teaches:
An apparatus, comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory storing instructions that, when executed with the at least one processor (She: Fig 6: such as utilizing the system of the figure), cause the apparatus at least to:
obtain at least two audio signals based on signals from at least two microphones (She: Col 3:25-3:36; Fig 1; claims 1, 14, 15: a system for processing input audio channels such as generated as the output of a microphone array, plurality of microphones, etc.);
perform a first spatial audio processing of the obtained audio signals for at least a first frequency range to generate a first output (She: Col 3:32-3:36, 3:58-3:63, 5:11-5:16, 5:57-5:67; Fig 1: parametric rendering sub system processes frequency domain signals, frequency limited sub bands thereof, to generate therefrom a plurality of rendered channels within frequency limits for output);
perform a second spatial audio processing of the obtained audio signals for at least a second frequency range to generate a second output (She: 3:32-3:36, 3:58-3:63, 5:58-6:12; Fig 1: second linear rendering sub system processes frequency sub bands outside the limited bands and comprising direct and diffuse sound components, to generate therefrom a plurality of beamformed channels for output);
wherein the signal processing operations of the first spatial audio processing comprise processing based on parametric audio (She: 5:58-6:12; Fig 1: such as by processing band limited channels for output by the parametric renderer); and
the signal processing operations of the second spatial audio processing comprises comprise processing based on beamforming audio (She: 5:58-6:12; Fig 1: such as by processing bands outside the band limited channels for output by to generated beamformed channels for output): and
combine the first output and the second output to generate a combined output (She: 5:58-6:12, 6:23-6:57; Fig 1: such as by mixitively combining under user input direction the parametrically processed band limited channels and the generated beamformed channels for output by the combiner).
It may be that She does not explicitly teach the performance of parametric and beamform processing on the obtained microphone signals but rather upon signals comprising separated components thereof.
In a related field of endeavor Tam teaches a system and method for processing first and second audio based on parametric processing and beamforming processing respectively comprising a processor operative under direction of instructions stored in and retrieved from memory (Tam: Fig 9: such as that of the figure) which direct the system to:
obtain at least two audio signals based on signals from at least two microphones (Tam: Abstract; ¶ 140, 141, 149; Fig 3, 5A-6: system processes at least two microphone signals by spatial filtering and beamforming);
perform a first spatial audio processing of the obtained audio signals for at least a first frequency range to generate a first output directive of parametric processing (Tam: ¶ 75-77, 85, 149; Fig 6: spatial analyzer operate with respect to dominant frequency sub bands of a channel to drive a spatial filter);
perform a second spatial audio processing of the obtained audio signals for at least a second frequency range to generate a beamformer output (Tam: ¶ 22; 117, 118, 149, 150; Fig 6: beamformer processes indicated frequency bands),
combine the first output and the second output to generate a combined output (Tam: ¶ 22; 117, 118, 149, 150; Fig 6: such as at the spatial synthesis filter to provide focused spatial audio output).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to improve the She taught device and method by directly operating upon the first and second obtained microphone signals as taught or suggested by Tam and for at least the purpose of reducing complexity, compute, processing time, etc. of the system and method; one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected only predictable results therefrom.
Regarding claim 2
She in view of Tam teaches or suggests:
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1,wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to perform the processing based on parametric audio that varies more over time than the processing based on beamforming audio (She: Col 5:5-5:10, 5:30-5:35, 6:1-6:10; Fig 1: parametric audio processes sub bands at each sub band of the direct audio component resulting in a plurality of direction of arrival angle component values; the beamformed signals are non-time varying such as by optimizing a target spatial response based on a least squares fir of the overall environment); (Tam: 77, 84, 85, 117, 118: directional components used to derive spatial metadata from rapidly fluctuating microphone signal information while beamforming uses delayed or undelayed microphone signals comprising more stable weights). The claim is considered obvious over She as modified by Tam as addressed in the base claim as it would have been obvious to apply the further teaching of She and/or Tam to the modified device of She and Tam; one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected only predictable results therefrom.
Regarding claim 3
She in view of Tam teaches or suggests:
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1,wherein the respective outputs comprise at least one of: binaural outputs; multi-channel outputs; or stereo outputs (She: Col 1:23-1:33, 5:37-5:43, 5:29-5:30; Fig 1: output in the form of: a target spatial response which may be binaural in the case of the disclosed HRTF target spatial response, or multiple channels such as for surround in the case of the 5.1 channel output; or simply a stereo response to drive stereo speakers); (Tam: ¶ 60, 117, etc.: such as by applying or generating binaural, stereo, 5.1, etc. audio). The claim is considered obvious over She as modified by Tam as addressed in the base claim as it would have been obvious to apply the further teaching of She and/or Tam to the modified device of She and Tam; one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected only predictable results therefrom.
Regarding claim 4
She in view of Tam teaches or suggests:
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1,wherein the second spatial audio processing is not performed for at least some of the first frequency range (She: 5:51-6:12; Fig 1: system processes band limited audio parametrically while processing bands outside the band limited channels using beamforming); (Tam: ¶ 35; Fig 6: such as by spatially processing, spatially filtering, etc. of a particular channel or of only particular frequency bands). The claim is considered obvious over She as modified by Tam as addressed in the base claim as it would have been obvious to apply the further teaching of She and/or Tam to the modified device of She and Tam; one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected only predictable results therefrom.
Regarding claim 5
She in view of Tam teaches or suggests:
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1,wherein the first spatial audio processing is not performed for at least some of the second frequency range (She: 5:51-6:12; Fig 1: system processes band limited audio parametrically while processing bands outside the band limited channels using beamforming); (Tam: ¶ 35-39; Fig 6: such as by beamforming only particular channels, frequency bands, etc.). The claim is considered obvious over She as modified by Tam as addressed in the base claim as it would have been obvious to apply the further teaching of She and/or Tam to the modified device of She and Tam; one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected only predictable results therefrom.
Regarding claim 6
She in view of Tam teaches or suggests:
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to at least one of:
use the first output for the first frequency range and the second output for the second frequency range, or apply a weighting to the first output and the second output so that the first output has a higher weighting than the second output in a frequency range and the second output has a higher weighting than the first output in another frequency range (She: 5:25-5:43. 5:51-6:10, 6:40-6:44; parametric rendered processes first frequency range and provides first output, second linear renderer 132 processes second frequency range(s) and provides second output and the outputs are weighted at least by level adjustments thereto such as at the combiner); (Tam: ¶ 35-39, 117, 118; Fig 6: system processes based on frequency band selection; such as based on a band indicator, a focus gain, etc.). The claim is considered obvious over She as modified by Tam as addressed in the base claim as it would have been obvious to apply the further teaching of She and/or Tam to the modified device of She and Tam; one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected only predictable results therefrom.
Regarding claim 14—the claim is considered to recite substantially similar subject matter to that of claim 1 and is similarly rejected.
Regarding claim 17
She in view of Tam teaches or suggests:
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one of the first frequency range or the second frequency range are different for different modes of the first spatial audio processing or the second spatial audio processing (She: Col 5:11-6:67; 12:62-12:67: fig 1, frequency bands within, outside the limited bands processed in a first, second mode respectively the combiner of the system can adjust the ratio of each of the input contribution to the output such that there exists a ratio of each/any/all three of the inputs, in this way the system may be directed to operate particular processing for a portion of the signal or all of the signal); (Tam: ¶ 146, etc.: system selectably operates to bypass spatial filtering based on presence of nuisance bands, frequency signature, etc.). The claim is considered obvious over She as modified by Tam as addressed in the base claim as it would have been obvious to apply the further teaching of She and/or Tam to the modified device of She and Tam; one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected only predictable results therefrom.
Regarding claim 18
She in view of Tam teaches or suggests:
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein a first mode causes the apparatus to use the first spatial audio processing for the first frequency range and the second spatial audio processing for the second frequency range and a second mode causes the apparatus to use the first spatial audio processing for both the first frequency range and the second frequency range (She: Col 5:11-6:67; 12:62-12:67: fig 1, frequency bands within, outside the limited bands processed in a first, second mode respectively the combiner of the system can adjust the ratio of each of the input contribution to the output such that there exists a ratio of each/any/all three of the inputs, in this way the system may be directed to operate particular processing for a portion of the signal or all of the signal); (Tam: ¶ 146, etc.: system selectably operates to bypass spatial filtering based on presence of nuisance bands, frequency signature, etc.). The claim is considered obvious over She as modified by Tam as addressed in the base claim as it would have been obvious to apply the further teaching of She and/or Tam to the modified device of She and Tam; one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected only predictable results therefrom.
Regarding claim 19
She in view of Tam teaches or suggests:
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein a first mode causes the apparatus to use a first set of coefficients for the second spatial audio processing and a second mode causes the apparatus to use a second set of coefficients for the second spatial audio processing (She: Col 5:11-6:67; 12:62-12:67: fig 1, frequency bands within, outside the limited bands processed in a first, second mode respectively the combiner of the system can adjust the ratio of each of the input contribution to the output such that there exists a ratio of each/any/all three of the inputs, in this way the system may be directed to operate particular processing for a portion of the signal or all of the signal); (Tam: ¶ 146, etc.: system selectably operates to bypass spatial filtering based on presence of nuisance bands, frequency signature, etc.). The claim is considered obvious over She as modified by Tam as addressed in the base claim as it would have been obvious to apply the further teaching of She and/or Tam to the modified device of She and Tam; one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected only predictable results therefrom.
Regarding claim 20
She in view of Tam teaches or suggests:
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to adjust at least one of the first spatial audio processing or the second spatial audio processing based on a head orientation of a listener (She: Col 5:11-6:67; 12:62-12:67: fig 1, frequency bands within, outside the limited bands processed in a first, second mode respectively the combiner of the system can adjust the ratio of each of the input contribution to the output such that there exists a ratio of each/any/all three of the inputs, in this way the system may be directed to operate particular processing for a portion of the signal or all of the signal); (Tam: ¶ 17, 138-141, 146, etc.: system operates to adjust processing by the spatial filter based on head tracking). The claim is considered obvious over She as modified by Tam as addressed in the base claim as it would have been obvious to apply the further teaching of She and/or Tam to the modified device of She and Tam; one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected only predictable results therefrom.
Claims 8-12, 16, 21-23 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheaffer: 10798511 further in view of Tammi: 20190394606 hereinafter Tam and further in view of Yliaho: 20150277847 hereinafter Yli.
Regarding claim 8
She teaches:
A method, comprising: obtaining at least two audio signals based on signals from at least two microphones (She: Col 3:25-3:36; Fig 1; claims 1, 14, 15: a system for processing input audio channels such as generated as the output of a microphone array, plurality of micro[hones, etc.);
performing a first spatial audio processing of the obtained audio signals for at least a first frequency range to generate a first output (She: Col 3:32-3:36, 3:58-3:63, 5:11-5:16, 5:57-5:67; Fig 1: parametric rendering sub system processes frequency domain signals, frequency limited sub bands thereof, to generate therefrom a plurality of rendered channels within frequency limits for output);
performing a second spatial audio processing of the obtained audio signals for at least a second frequency range to generate a second output (She: 3:32-3:36, 3:58-3:63, 5:58-6:12; Fig 1: second linear rendering sub system processes frequency sub bands outside the limited bands and comprising direct and diffuse sound components, to generate therefrom a plurality of beamformed channels for output);
wherein the signal processing operations of the first spatial audio processing comprise processing based on parametric audio (She: 5:58-6:12; Fig 1: such as by processing band limited channels for output by the parametric renderer) and
the signal processing operations of the second spatial audio processing comprise processing based on beamforming audio (She: 5:58-6:12; Fig 1: such as by processing bands outside the band limited channels for output by to generated beamformed channels for output):
combining the first output and the second output to generate a combined output (She: 5:58-6:12, 6:23-6:57; Fig 1: such as by mixitively combining under user input direction the parametrically processed band limited channels and the generated beamformed channels for output by the combiner); and
determining an orientation of the microphone arrangement (She: Col 6:12-6:20, 7:45-49; Fig 1, 2: frequency determination based on the geometry of the microphones in an array and/or relative positions of the microphones one to the other to thereby calculate directionality of the obtained audio).
It may be that She does not explicitly teach the performance of parametric and beamform processing on the obtained microphone signals, portions thereof, but rather upon signals comprising processed separated components of the microphone signals nor does She explicitly discuss determining an orientation of the microphones to thereby apply a mode of at least one of the first spatial audio processing or the second spatial audio processing based on the determined orientation.
In a related field of endeavor Tam teaches a system and method for processing first and second audio based on parametric processing and beamforming processing respectively comprising a processor operative under direction of instructions stored in and retrieved from memory (Tam: Fig 9: such as that of the figure) which direct the system to:
obtain at least two audio signals based on signals from at least two microphones (Tam: Abstract; ¶ 140, 141, 149; Fig 3, 5A-6: system processes at least two microphone signals by spatial filtering and beamforming);
perform a first spatial audio processing of the obtained audio signals for at least a first frequency range to generate a first output directive of parametric processing (Tam: ¶ 75-77, 85, 149; Fig 6: spatial analyzer operate with respect to dominant frequency sub bands of a channel to drive a spatial filter);
perform a second spatial audio processing of the obtained audio signals for at least a second frequency range to generate a beamformer output (Tam: ¶ 22; 117, 118, 149, 150; Fig 6: beamformer processes indicated frequency bands),
combine the first output and the second output to generate a combined output (Tam: ¶ 22; 117, 118, 149, 150; Fig 6: such as at the spatial synthesis filter to provide focused spatial audio output) and
determining an orientation of the microphone arrangement (Tam: ¶ 76, 87, 88, 94-98, 109, etc.; Figs 5A-7: system determines positioning data base on horizontal and vertical analysis of the microphones within the system) and
applying a mode of at least one of the first spatial audio processing or the second spatial audio processing based on the determined orientation (Tam: ¶ 17, 124 138: spatial filtering stage adjusted based on head tracking).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to improve the She taught device and method by directly operating upon the first and second obtained microphone signals as taught or suggested by Tam and for at least the purpose of reducing complexity, compute, processing time, etc. of the system and method; one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected only predictable results therefrom.
She in view of Tam does not explicitly discuss using the orientation of the microphones to selectively apply a particular processing mode of operation.
In a related field of endeavor Yli teaches a system and method for operating instructions stored in memory upon a processor for microphone selection based on apparatus orientation (Yli: Abstract; Fig 1) wherein a system obtains and perform mode dependent processing upon the at least two audio signals from at least two microphones (Yli: Abstract; Fig 1-3) comprising determining an orientation of the microphone arrangement (Yli: ¶ 79, 97, 109-111, 115, 118; Fig 3: orientation sensor determines portrait, landscape, etc. type device orientation which shift with device, microphone, etc. location and direct processing of audio channels based thereon) and applying a mode of at least one of the first spatial audio processing or the second spatial audio processing based on the determined orientation (Yli: Abstract; ¶ 109-111, 115, 118; Fig 3: recording mode determined and used to select a mode of operation by selectably applying signal processing parameters such as beamform operations based on the determined recording mode).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to utilize the signal processing corresponding to a mode selected based on orientation of the device, microphones therein, as taught or suggested by Yli to improve the She in view of Tam system and method to thereby adapt the parametric and beamforming modes thereof based on the Yli taught device orientation modes for at least the purpose of equipping a device to obtain and/or deliver audio more effectively based thereon; one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected only predictable results therefrom.
Regarding claim 9
She in view of Tam in view of Yli teaches or suggests:
The method as claimed in claim 8,wherein at least one of the first frequency range or the second frequency range are different for different modes of the first spatial audio processing or the second spatial audio processing (She: Col 5:11-6:12: fig 1, frequency bands within, outside the limited bands processed in a first, second mode respectively); (Tam: ¶ 146, etc.: system operates to bypass spatial filtering based on presence of nuisance bands, frequency signature, etc.); (Yli: Abstract; ¶ 109-111, 115, 118; Fig 3: mode determined based on location and orientation of the apparatus, microphones therein). The claim is considered obvious over She as modified by Tam, and Yli as addressed in the base claim as it would have been obvious to apply the further teaching of She, Tam, and/or Yli to the modified device of She, Tam, and Yli; one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected only predictable results therefrom.
Regarding claim 10
She in view of Tam in view of Yli teaches or suggests:
The method as claimed in claim 8,wherein a first mode comprises using the first spatial audio processing for the first frequency range and the second spatial audio processing for the second frequency range and a second mode comprises using the first spatial audio processing for both the first frequency range and the second frequency range (She: Col 5:11-6:67; 12:62-12:67: fig 1, frequency bands within, outside the limited bands processed in a first, second mode respectively the combiner of the system can adjust the ratio of each of the input contribution to the output such that there exists a ratio of each/any/all three of the inputs, in this way the system may be directed to operate particular processing for a portion of the signal or all of the signal); (Tam: ¶ 146, etc.: system selectably operates to bypass spatial filtering based on presence of nuisance bands, frequency signature, etc.); (Yli: Abstract; ¶ 109-111, 115, 118; Fig 3: mode determined based on location and orientation of the apparatus, microphones therein). The claim is considered obvious over She as modified by Tam, and Yli as addressed in the base claim as it would have been obvious to apply the further teaching of She, Tam, and/or Yli to the modified device of She, Tam, and Yli; one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected only predictable results therefrom.
Regarding claim 11
She in view of Tam in view of Yli teaches or suggests:
The method as claimed in claim 8, wherein a first mode uses a first set of coefficients for the second spatial audio processing and a second mode uses a second set of coefficients for the second spatial audio processing (She: Col 5:11-6:12: fig 1, frequency bands within, outside the limited bands processed in a first, second mode respectively); (Tam: ¶ 17, 138-141, 146, etc.: system operates to bypass spatial filtering based on presence of nuisance bands, frequency signature, etc.); (Yli: Abstract; ¶ 109-111, 115, 118; Fig 3: mode determined based on location and orientation of the apparatus, microphones therein). The claim is considered obvious over She as modified by Tam, and Yli as addressed in the base claim as it would have been obvious to apply the further teaching of She, Tam, and/or Yli to the modified device of She, Tam, and Yli; one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected only predictable results therefrom.
Regarding claim 12
She in view of Tam in view of Yli teaches or suggests:
The method as claimed in claim 8, further comprising adjusting at least one of the first spatial audio processing or the second spatial audio processing based on a head orientation of a listener (Tam: ¶ 17, 138-141, 146, etc.: system operates to adjust processing by the spatial filter based on head tracking); (Yli: Abstract; ¶ 109-111, 115, 118; Fig 3: mode determined based on location and orientation of the apparatus, microphones therein). The claim is considered obvious over She as modified by Tam, and Yli as addressed in the base claim as it would have been obvious to apply the further teaching of She, Tam, and/or Yli to the modified device of She, Tam, and Yli; one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected only predictable results therefrom.
Regarding claim 16
She in view of Tam teaches or suggests:
The apparatus as claimed in claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed with the at least one processor, cause the apparatus to determine an orientation of the microphone arrangement (She: Col 6:12-6:20, 7:45-49; Fig 1, 2: frequency determination based on the geometry of the microphones in an array and/or relative positions of the microphones one to the other to thereby calculate directionality of the obtained audio); (Tam: ¶ 76, 87, 88, 94-98, 109, etc.; Figs 5A-7: system determines positioning data base on horizontal and vertical analysis of the microphones within the system) and apply a mode of at least one of the first spatial audio processing or the second spatial audio processing based on the determined orientation (Tam: ¶ 17, 124 138: spatial filtering stage adjusted based on head tracking).
She in view of Tam does not explicitly discuss using the orientation of the microphones to selectively apply a particular processing mode of operation.
In a related field of endeavor Yli teaches a system and method for operating instructions stored in memory upon a processor for microphone selection based on apparatus orientation (Yli: Abstract; Fig 1) wherein a system obtains and perform mode dependent processing upon the at least two audio signals from at least two microphones (Yli: Abstract; Fig 1-3) comprising determining an orientation of the microphone arrangement (Yli: ¶ 79, 97, 109-111, 115, 118; Fig 3: orientation sensor determines portrait, landscape, etc. type device orientation which shift with device, microphone, etc. location and direct processing of audio channels based thereon) and applying a mode of at least one of the first spatial audio processing or the second spatial audio processing based on the determined orientation (Yli: Abstract; ¶ 109-111, 115, 118; Fig 3: recording mode determined and used to select a mode of operation by selectably applying signal processing parameters such as beamform operations based on the determined recording mode).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to utilize the signal processing corresponding to a mode selected based on orientation of the device, microphones therein as taught or suggested by Yli to improve the She in view of Tam system and method to thereby adapt the parametric and beamforming modes thereof based on the Yli taught device orientation modes for at least the purpose of equipping a device to deliver audio more effectively based thereon; one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected only predictable results therefrom.
Regarding claim 21
She in view of Tam in view of Yli teaches or suggests:
The method as claimed in claim 12, wherein the processing based on parametric audio varies more over time than the processing based on beamforming audio (She: Col 5:5-5:10, 5:30-5:35, 6:1-6:10; Fig 1: parametric audio processes sub bands at each sub band of the direct audio component resulting in a plurality of direction of arrival angle component values; the beamformed signals are non-time varying such as by optimizing a target spatial response based on a least squares fir of the overall environment); (Tam: 77, 84, 85, 117, 118: directional components used to derive spatial metadata from rapidly fluctuating microphone signal information while beamforming uses delayed or undelayed microphone signals comprising more stable weights). The claim is considered obvious over She as modified by Tam, and Yli as addressed in the base claim as it would have been obvious to apply the further teaching of She, Tam, and/or Yli to the modified device of She, Tam, and Yli; one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected only predictable results therefrom.
Regarding claim 22
She in view of Tam in view of Yli teaches or suggests:
The method as claimed in claim 12, further comprising at least one of: the second spatial audio processing is not performed for at least some of the first frequency range; or the first spatial audio processing is not performed for at least some of the second frequency range (She: 5:51-6:12; Fig 1: system processes band limited audio parametrically while processing bands outside the band limited channels using beamforming); (Tam: ¶ 35-39; Fig 6: such as by spatially processing, spatially filtering, etc. of a particular channel or of only particular frequency bands and/or by beamforming only particular channels, frequency bands, etc.). The claim is considered obvious over She as modified by Tam, and Yli as addressed in the base claim as it would have been obvious to apply the further teaching of She, Tam, and/or Yli to the modified device of She, Tam, and Yli; one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected only predictable results therefrom.
Regarding claim 23
She in view of Tam in view of Yli teaches or suggests:
The method as claimed in claim 12, wherein the combining comprises at least one of: using the first output for the first frequency range and the second output for the second frequency range; or applying a weighting to the first output and the second output so that the first output has a higher weighting than the second output in a frequency range and the second output has a higher weighting than the first output in another frequency range (She: 5:25-5:43. 5:51-6:10, 6:40-6:44; parametric rendered processes first frequency range and provides first output, second linear renderer 132 processes second frequency range(s) and provides second output and the outputs are weighted at least by level adjustments thereto such as at the combiner); (Tam: ¶ 35-39, 117, 118; Fig 6: system processes based on frequency band selection; such as based on a band indicator, a focus gain, etc.). The claim is considered obvious over She as modified by Tam, and Yli as addressed in the base claim as it would have been obvious to apply the further teaching of She, Tam, and/or Yli to the modified device of She, Tam, and Yli; one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected only predictable results therefrom.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL C MCCORD whose telephone number is (571)270-3701. The examiner can normally be reached 730-630 M-F.
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, CAROLYN EDWARDS can be reached at (571) 270-7136. 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.
/PAUL C MCCORD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2692
Prosecution Insights