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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,670,308. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the issued patent are narrower in scope than that of the instant application. Therefore, the claims of the issued patent anticipate the claims of the instant application. Please see the mapping below with respect to the comparison claims.
Issued Patent: 11,670,308
Instant Application: 19/171825
A method for generating a comfort noise (CN) parameter, the method comprising: receiving an audio input;
detecting, with a Voice Activity Detector (VAD), a current inactive segment in the audio input;
as a result of detecting, with the VAD, the current inactive segment in the audio input, calculating a CN parameter CN.sub.used;
and providing the CN parameter CN.sub.used to a decoder, wherein the CN parameter CN.sub.used is calculated based at least in part on the current inactive segment and a previous inactive segment
and calculating the CN parameter CN.sub.used comprises calculating CN.sub.used=ƒ(T.sub.active, T.sub.curr,T.sub.prev, CN.sub.curr, CN.sub.prev), where: CN.sub.curr refers to a CN parameter from the current inactive segment; CN.sub.prev refers to a CN parameter from the previous inactive segment; T.sub.prev refers to a time-interval parameter related to CN.sub.prev; T.sub.curr refers to a time-interval parameter related to CN.sub.curr; and T.sub.active refers to a time-interval parameter of an active segment between the previous inactive segment and the current inactive segment.
A method for generating a comfort noise (CN) parameter, the method comprising: receiving an audio input;
detecting, with a Voice Activity Detector (VAD), a current inactive segment in the audio input;
as a result of detecting, with the VAD, the current inactive segment in the audio input, calculating a CN parameter CNused;
and providing the CN parameter CNused to a decoder, wherein the CN parameter CNused is calculated based at least in part on the current inactive segment and a previous inactive segment.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because it recites a mental process.
Regarding claim 1, limitations include the actions of: receiving an audio input, detecting inactivity and calculating a CN parameter to provide it to a decoder. Those steps constitute an abstract idea directed to a mental process that can be executed by a human mentally or using pen and paper, which is a judicial exception to patent eligibility. A human can receive audio, detect an inactive segment, calculate a comfort noise parameter, wherein the comfort noise parameter is determined by the human perception of background noise during the inactive segments, and provide that comfort noise parameter to a second person. The claim recites additional elements such as a VAD, that is a generic tool automating the detection of speech or lack thereof, and a generic decoder, that receive the post-solution transmission of the results, where they don’t integrate the mental process into a practical application, and the sole purpose of the system claimed is not significantly more than performing the mental steps listed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jansson Toftgard; Tomas (US 20150235648 A1) hereinafter JANSSON.
Regarding claim 1, JANSSON in the Background section teaches:
A method for generating a comfort noise (CN) parameter, the method comprising: receiving an audio input;
JANSSON [0004] “For high quality DTX operation, i.e. without degraded speech quality, it is important to detect the periods of speech in the input signal. This is done by using a voice activity detector (VAD) or a sound activity detector (SAD). FIG. 1 shows a block diagram of a generalized VAD, which analyses the input signal in data frames (of 5-30 ms depending on the implementation), and produces an activity decision for each frame.” (Also see Figure 1, Input Signal).
PNG
media_image1.png
378
996
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1. JANSSON high level diagram of VAD system.
detecting, with a Voice Activity Detector (VAD), a current inactive segment in the audio input;
JANSSON [0004] “For high quality DTX operation, i.e. without degraded speech quality, it is important to detect the periods of speech in the input signal. This is done by using a voice activity detector (VAD) or a sound activity detector (SAD). FIG. 1 shows a block diagram of a generalized VAD, which analyses the input signal in data frames (of 5-30 ms depending on the implementation), and produces an activity decision for each frame.”
as a result of detecting, with the VAD, the current inactive segment in the audio input, calculating a CN parameter CNused;
JANSSON [0003] “In DTX operation active frames are coded in the normal codec modes, while inactive signal periods between active regions are represented with comfort noise. Signal describing parameters are extracted and encoded in the encoder and transmitted to the decoder in silence insertion description (SID) frames. The SID frames are transmitted at a reduced frame rate and a lower bit rate than used for the active speech coding mode(s). Between the SID frames no information about the signal characteristics is transmitted. Due to the low SID rate the comfort noise can only represent relatively stationary properties compared to the active signal frame coding. In the decoder the received parameters are decoded and used to characterize the comfort noise.”
and providing the CN parameter CNused to a decoder, wherein the CN parameter CNused is calculated based at least in part on the current inactive segment and a previous inactive segment.
JANSSON [0003] “In DTX operation active frames are coded in the normal codec modes, while inactive signal periods between active regions are represented with comfort noise. Signal describing parameters are extracted and encoded in the encoder and transmitted to the decoder in silence insertion description (SID) frames. The SID frames are transmitted at a reduced frame rate and a lower bit rate than used for the active speech coding mode(s). Between the SID frames no information about the signal characteristics is transmitted. Due to the low SID rate the comfort noise can only represent relatively stationary properties compared to the active signal frame coding. In the decoder the received parameters are decoded and used to characterize the comfort noise.”
JANSSON [0015] “Low-pass filtering or interpolation of the CN parameters is performed at the inactive frames in order to get natural smooth comfort noise dynamics. For the first SID frame following one or several active frames (from now on just denoted the “first SID”), the best basis for LSP interpolation and energy smoothing would be the CN parameters from previous inactive frames, i.e. prior to the active signal segment.”
Pertinent Art Not Cited
Gournay; Philippe et al. (US 20060293885 A1): SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ADAPTIVE TRANSMISSION OF COMFORT NOISE PARAMETERS DURING DISCONTINUOUS SPEECH TRANSMISSION is pertinent prior art because it teaches a similar Discontinuous Transmission (DTX) and Comfort Noise Generation (CNG) framework, including aspect of receiving audio and using a Voice Activity Detector (VAD) to distinguish inactive periods and calculating noise parameters over multiple frames, and generating Silence Descriptor (SID) frames containing the Comfort Noise (CN) parameters.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HECTOR J. CRESPO FEBLES whose telephone number is (571)272-4512. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 7:30 - 5:00.
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, Daniel Washburn can be reached at (571) 272-5551. 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.
/HECTOR J. CRESPO FEBLES/Examiner, Art Unit 2657
/DANIEL C WASHBURN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2657
Prosecution Insights