Response to Amendment
This action is responsive to the amendment filed on 06/10/2025.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-2, 4-10, 12-18, 20 are pending in the case. Independent claims are 1, 9, and 17. Claims 3, 11, 19, 21-24 are canceled.
Priority
No priority claims. Effective filing date is 01/11/2021.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-2, 4, 6-7, 9-10, 12, 14-15, 17-18, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jong et al. US20080189613A1, (hereinafter Jong) in view of Shibata et al. US 20130155423 A1, (hereinafter Shibata).
As to independent claim 1, Jong teaches:
A method of adjusting a volume level on a mobile device for a media asset, the method comprising:
receiving the media asset comprising an audio component (See Abstract mentions a multimedia file, and see Fig. 2, [0039], discussing playing multimedia asset having audio);
outputting the audio component of the media asset at a first volume level on the mobile device (See Fig. 2 with [0039] audio will naturally be playing at a first volume level);
receiving a first input via a user interface to initiate a two-dimensional (2D) volume control grid to adjust the volume level from the first volume level defined by a first location on the 2D volume control grid to a second volume level defined by a second location on the 2D volume control grid (See Fig. 3A with [0041] user touch event selects a specific sound source object which causes the display unit 121 to display the selected sound source object. An example of the display is shown in Figs. 4A-4B where the selected sound source object is displayed with a waveform. The user touch event that selects the specific sound source object is interpreted to be the claimed receiving a first input via user interface to initiate a 2D volume control grid, wherein the claimed “2D volume control grid” is found to be broad and interpreted to be the flat 2D display screen shown in e.g. figs. 4A-4B.
See Figs. 5A-5B with [0033], if generated input event is a drag event, calculate the displacement value in the vertical direction to control volume. Then see [0035] which mentions that if the drag is a diagonal direction, both the sound volume and play speed will be controlled. Thus the claimed “2D volume control grid” is broad and can be interpreted as the 2D flat display screen shown in Figs. 5A-5B, the claimed “first volume level defined by a first location on the 2D volume control grid” is interpreted to be shown by Fig. 5A where the sound source object is within a first area (i.e., claimed first location on 2D volume control grid) shown in the figure, and the claimed “second volume level defined by a second location on the 2D volume control grid” is interpreted to be shown by Fig. 5B where the sound source object has expanded to be within a second area shown in the figure.);
receiving a second input via the user interface to define the first location on the 2D volume control grid initiated by the first input, the first location corresponding to the first volume level (See Figs. 5A-5B with [0035], the paragraph mentions a diagonal drag event which is interpreted to be the claimed receiving a second input. Furthermore see [0033] which mentions detecting starting coordinates of the drag event, in other words this is interpreted to be the claimed define the first location on the 2D volume grid, and these starting coordinates corresponds to the first volume level because as shown by Fig. 5A, the waveform has yet to change shape when the drag has just started at the starting coordinates of the drag event, thus the waveform is still at the first volume level);
receiving a dragging input via the user interface from the first location on the 2D volume control grid to the second location on the 2D volume control grid (See Figs. 5A-5B with [0048], drag upwards to increase volume. In the alternative embodiment disclosed by [0035], this is a diagonal drag that changes both volume and playback speed);
determining the second volume level based on:
i) determining an initial direction of the received dragging input as indicating a volume increase or volume decrease (See [0035] – “Further, if the identified movement direction of the drag event is a diagonal direction…”, in other words identifying/determining an initial movement direction of the received dragging input to be of the diagonal direction. In regards to the claimed “as indicating a volume increase or volume decrease”, see [0033] – “As an example, if the movement direction of the drag event is a downward direction, the control unit 130 may reduce the sound volume, and if the movement direction of the drag event is an upward direction, the control unit 130 may increase the sound volume.”. Thus, it can be concluded that if the diagonal drag input mentioned in [0035] has an upward vertical component, then it indicates a volume increase);
ii) determining the displacement between the first location on the display and the second location on the display along a first axis (See [0035], calculate displacement value in vertical direction (i.e., interpreted to be the claimed first axis) to determine the change in volume); and
iii) determining the displacement between the first location on the display and the second location along a second axis perpendicular to the first axis (See [0035] – “Further, if the identified movement direction of the drag event is a diagonal direction, the control unit 130 controls the touch sensor 125 to calculate displacement values in the vertical direction and in the horizontal direction, and determines a coordinate having a greater displacement value as the movement direction of the drag event”, in other words both the displacement along the X and Y axis is calculated/determined, thus displacement along the Y axis (i.e., interpreted to be the claimed second axis) is calculated); and
outputting the audio component of the media asset at the second volume level (See [0035], control unit then controls sound volume according to the diagonal drag event, i.e. at a new second volume level).
Jong teaches the second volume level and determined displacement along the first and second axis individually as cited above but Jong does not teach: determining the second volume level based on:
iv) determining a two-dimensional distance from the first location to the second location based on the determined displacement between the first location and the second location along the first axis, and the determined displacement between the first location and the second location along the second axis perpendicular to the first axis.
Shibata teaches: determining the second parameter level (See Figs. 16A-16B with [0082] which mentions a “magnification ratio”, which is seen as a parameter with a specific value/level. The magnification ratio is determined based on the drag input distance) based on:
iv) determining a two-dimensional distance from the first location to the second location (See Figs. 16A-16B with [0082] which mentions calculating the magnification ratio by determining parameters Z and L, where L is the movement distance of the drag input along a diagonal direction [i.e, determine a 2D distance from first to second location]) based on the determined displacement between the first location and the second location along the first axis, and the determined displacement between the first location and the second location along the second axis perpendicular to the first axis (See Figs. 16A-16B with [0082] and as explained above.
It is understood in the art that “the calculation for the straight-line displacement of a drag or swipe gesture on a screen uses the Pythagorean theorem. The touch screen's 2D coordinate system provides the change in the x and y coordinates, which are treated as the two legs of a right-angled triangle”.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the 2D diagonal drag that controls volume using only its vertical displacement and controls playback speed using its horizontal displacement as taught by Jong to include a 2D diagonal drag that uses both its vertical and horizontal displacement to calculate a 2D distance that controls a parameter value as taught by Shibata; Shibata’s teaching would have suggested to Jong to use a 2D distance to control the volume, since volume is understood to be a parameter value. Motivation to do so would be for “(F) Known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art;” (KSR Rationale F); in other words a diagonal distance of a drag is often used in controlling a zoom parameter, and it would have been obvious to apply this to a volume parameter, motivated by design incentives or other market forces.
As to dependent claim 2, Jong as modified teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as cited above.
Jong further teaches: wherein the first input comprises any one of: selecting a volume icon; selecting a volume bar; pressing a volume button on the mobile device; detecting user input at a predetermined location (See Fig. 1 with [0029] user touches the soundwave form); and/or detecting a gesture at a close proximity to the display.
As to dependent claim 4, Jong as modified teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as cited above.
Jong further teaches: wherein the second volume level is determined based on a displacement of the second location with respect to the first location (See Fig. 1 swipe displacement upwards).
As to dependent claim 6, Jong as modified teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as cited above.
Jong further teaches: wherein a plurality of predetermined locations on the display correspond to respective predetermined volume levels (See [0033] mentions displacement, in other words set distances of displacements correspond to increasing or decreasing volume levels).
As to dependent claim 7, Jong as modified teaches all the limitations of claim 6 as cited above.
Jong further teaches: wherein the second volume level is determined to be one of the plurality of predetermined volume levels (See [0033] mentions displacement, in other words set distances of displacements correspond to increasing or decreasing volume levels).
As to independent claim 9, it is rejected under similar rationale as claim 1 as cited above.
As to dependent claim 10, it is rejected under similar rationale as claim 2 as cited above.
As to dependent claim 12, it is rejected under similar rationale as claim 4 as cited above.
As to dependent claim 14, it is rejected under similar rationale as claim 6 as cited above.
As to dependent claim 15, it is rejected under similar rationale as claim 7 as cited above.
As to independent claim 17, it is rejected under similar rationale as claim 1 as cited above.
As to dependent claim 18, it is rejected under similar rationale as claim 2 as cited above.
As to dependent claim 20, it is rejected under similar rationale as claim 4 as cited above.
Claims 5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jong et al. US20080189613A1, (hereinafter Jong) in view of Shibata et al. US 20130155423 A1, (hereinafter Shibata) in view of Kamijo US 6996445 B1, (hereinafter Kamijo).
As to dependent claim 5, Jong as modified teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as cited above.
Jong as modified does not teach: wherein the second volume level is determined based on any one or more of: a preset user preference; a user profile; type of content; and/or historical volume level adjustments.
Kamijo teaches: wherein the second volume level is determined based on any one or more of: type of content (See Fig. 2 with Abstract and Col. 7 lines 45-50 which mentions a method of automatically adjusting volume setting for each individual application [i.e., each type of content]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jong to include automatic adjustment of volume settings based on a type of application currently active as taught by Kamijo. Motivation to do so would be for volume settings appropriate for each application (See Kamijo Col. 1 lines 10-15), in other words improved user interface with user preferences in mind.
As to dependent claim 13, it is rejected under similar rationale as claim 5 as cited above.
Claims 8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jong et al. US20080189613A1, (hereinafter Jong) in view of Shibata et al. US 20130155423 A1, (hereinafter Shibata) in view of Mushikabe et al. US 20180069957 A1, (hereinafter Mushikabe).
As to dependent claim 8, Jong as modified teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as cited above.
Jong as modified does not explicitly teach: wherein determining that the dragging input has ended comprises any one of:
determining that the dragging input has stopped;
determining that the dragging input has stabilized for a threshold period of time;
determining that the distance between the first location and the second location has stabilized for a threshold period of time; and/or
determining a second user action for outputting the second volume level.
Mushikabe teaches: wherein determining that the user action has ended comprises any one of:
determining that the user action has stopped (See Fig. 5 with [0088] – “When a user completes the slide manipulation on the slider 418S, the synchronous control of a volume value ends. The volume values of the audio devices 3A, 3B, and 3C are finalized at the moment when manipulation of the slider 418S is stopped”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the user interface taught by Jong to include system determination of when a user drag has stopped as taught by Mushikabe. Motivation to do so would be for precisely correlating a value with a location that a touch drag stops at.
As to dependent claim 16, it is rejected under similar rationale as claim 8 as cited above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments pertaining to the An reference has been considered but are moot since An has been withdrawn from the rejections necessitated by Applicant’s amendments.
Applicant’s arguments pertaining to the Jong and Shibata references have been considered but are not found persuasive. Applicant has amended and changed the scope of the independent claims. The scope of the independent claims has been made more precise; however, this has resulted in the Jong reference becoming more applicable to the current scope. For example, and as cited above in the rejection of claim 1, Jong Fig. 3A is found to be teaching the amended limitations “receiving a first input via a user interface to initiate a two-dimensional (2D) volume control grid…first volume level defined by a first location on the 2D volume control grid…”. The claim recites a “2D volume control grid”, however this can be reasonably interpreted as 2D flat display screen; In light of Applicant’s specification in Fig. 6 of the Drawings, elements 602 and 604 indicate that the 2D volume control grid is simply an area on the display screen that is not visually distinct from the display screen. Thus, the 2D volume control grid is not distinct from a sub-area of the display screen itself. In regards to the amended limitation “i) determining an initial direction of the received dragging input…”, Jong further teaches this along with Jong as modified by Shibata as explained in the rejection of claim 1 cited above. Thus, the Applicant’s argument and amendment are not persuasive in regards to Jong and Shibata. The other independent claims are similar in scope to claim 1, and the arguments to the dependent claims are not persuasive due to the arguments to the independent claims not being persuasive.
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 should be directed to DAVID V LUU at telephone number (571)270-0703.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID V LUU whose telephone number is (571)270-0703. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Tuesday from 11am-7pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew Ell, can be reached at telephone number 571-270-3264. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/DAVID V LUU/Examiner, Art Unit 2171
/MATTHEW ELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2171