DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The Amendments filed September 2nd, 2026 have been entered. Claims 1-7 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments have overcome each and every 112b Rejection previously set forth in the Final office action mailed June 3rd, 2026 and are hereby withdrawn in light of applicant’s amendments.
Claim Interpretation
It has been previously considered that applicant explicitly defines that a specific time sequence is “The so-called "audio file having a specific time sequence", or more specifically the "audio file having audio signals arranged corresponding to a specific time sequence" means the audio file record with various sounds, e.g., sounds having different amplitudes and frequencies, along the progress of time” (page 4, lines 18-21). Notably the explanation appears to be directed specifically to the match audio file (prepared and downloaded). The explicit definition leads examiner to consider that all audio files, those prepared and downloaded to the database and those sensed by a sensor, must in some effect be inherently be provided such specific time sequence as explicitly defined by applicant. Examiner must as a matter of interpretation for the purposes of examination in light of applicant’s intrinsic evidence/disclosure consider that any audio file (sensed audio data/segments/packets/etc.), must possess this ‘specific time sequence’, whether the audio file is being sensed, recorded, and compared, or downloaded and compared to with an audio based signal. It is considered that the understood nature of sound is the amplitude and frequency of a wavelength over a period of time and that the signal/sensed ambient sound must comprise an amplitude and frequency to be so compared.
For the purposes of examination and to the best of examiner’s understanding, and in light of applicant’s previous arguments, it is considered a sound sensed and/or recorded, and thereafter transmitted, as a matter of inherency to the physics of sound and audio signals, must possess some specific time sequence therein that delineates the data as a specific data actable upon. It is further considered that such data compared and the system operable thereon on specifically audio based data and means thereof that correct action of the system must be comparing that signal with the specific time sequence as so explicitly defined (amplitudes and frequencies along a span of time), and that the match audio file that the system uses to identify/compare the specifically audio sensed/transmitted data must have present the same specific time sequence to be so compared and actionable upon.
It is considered for the purposes of examination such limitations are not incumbent on a process or length of use of the invention response and furthermore, the “specific time sequence” and thus the ‘audio signals of the match audio file’ (considered to be of those in the database of the control unit that are compared by the compare unit), are considered to encompass the features of those identified in the Claim Interpretation section immediately prior. Therefore, it is respectfully considered in light of the disclosure and understanding of the claims, an audio signal response can be considered subsequent upon initiation and carry through of operation of the signal. Further such that the initial signal to start action is indeed in the course of ‘controlling the actuator’, and that any carry through action of the signal (to fulfill the action by the initiation and motions produced), is both ‘according to the subsequent audio signals of the located matched audio file after the match audio file is located’, and that as has been previously established for the record, pertinent to applicant’s explicit definition, an audio file has a specific time sequence of amplitudes and frequencies over a span of time, and such time would therefore provide ‘subsequent audio signals… after the match audio file is located’ (to thus enact action and to be fulfilled by a computer/processor), and that a return to baseline/normal is also the carry through of such audio signal processing, as completing the motion is both subsequent the matching, and part of the audio file and the specific time sequence thereof.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sharma et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 20200138200); hereafter “Sharma”, in view of Erickson et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 20130005442); hereafter “Erickson.
Regarding claim 1, Sharma discloses (FIGS. 1-25) an electric bed or chair movable along with ambient sounds (as illustrated in FIG. 1-25), the electric bed or chair comprising: a frame structure (as illustrated in FIGS. 2A-8, 19-25) comprising a base (as eminently demonstrated in FIGS. 2A-8 and 19-25) and a movable frame (as eminently demonstrated in FIGS. 2A-8 and 19-25) movably disposed on the base; an actuator having two ends disposed with the base and the movable frame, respectively (as eminently demonstrated in FIGS. 2A-8 and 19-25); a vibrator ([0003]: “Additionally, the adjustable furniture may include various types of mattresses, cushions, pillows, or similar elements to cushion the furniture for the user, and the furniture may allow for movement, vibration”) disposed with the frame structure; a control unit electrically connected with the actuator and the vibrator to control motions of the actuator and the vibrator (Abstract: “The apparatus includes a mechanical frame with linear actuators (such as electrical linear actuators, hydraulic actuators or pneumatic linear actuators, or any combination thereof) that are controlled by a computer”); a receiving unit ([0071]: “For example, the user, by means of a user application running on the user device, may select an option to turn ON the optional fans 106a. Based on the selection, the user device may communicate a turn ON signal to the BWAR computer (installed in the bed 102) over a communication network. The BWAR computer may receive the turn ON signal from the user device”, where a receiver is noted for use with the invention) configured to receive audio files each having a specific time sequence via a wire or wireless manner ([0011]: “It is another objective of the present invention to provide users with a unique experience with entertainment synchronized with movements, illumination as well as effect of fans. This entertainment could be a virtual reality entertainment but could be other entertainment such as music, songs, movies, television, or sports.”); a database (Abstract: “built in computer”; [0117]: “program code stored locally or remotely for access by single or multiprocessor machines.”) electrically connected with the control unit and the receiving unit for storing the audio files received by the receiving unit; a sound sensor configured to sense ambient sounds and to transmit signals corresponding to the sensed ambient sounds ([0017]: “vibration sensors, or other sensors, that provide inputs to a built-in computer” where sound is a known vibration); and a comparative unit electrically connected with the sound sensor, the control unit and the database, the comparative unit configured to compare the signals transmitted by the sound sensor with the audio files stored in the database to locate a match audio file from the audio files, which is matched with the sensed ambient sounds, and then transmit control signals to the control unit for enabling the control unit to control the actuator or the vibrator to move in synchronously with audio signals of the match audio file ([0017]: “Further, the computer may use these inputs to control the actuators and other mechanical or electrical components to provide a safe and enjoyable experience to the users of the furniture”; [0011]: “to provide users with a unique experience with entertainment synchronized with movements, illumination as well as effect of fans. This entertainment could be a virtual reality entertainment but could be other entertainment such as music, songs, movies”). Where [0011], [0017], and [0118] clearly establish that the apparatus responds to media and ambient sounds that then synchronize (otherwise a comparison of data) to enact movements therewith, and where the control unit is configured to control the actuator or vibrator according to subsequent audio signals of the located match audio file after the match audio file is located. Where particularly it is considered for the purposes of examination as considered in the Claim Interpretation section prior that the specific time sequence of the audio files concern the common features of sound files including amplitude and frequency over a period of time (per applicant’s explicit definition (page 4, lines 18-23), and furthermore as expressed in the Claim interpretation section prior, the initiation and action of a signal pertinent the audio data would fulfill controlling the actuator and furthermore according to subsequent audio signals of the located match audio file after the match audio file is located. And that the limitation is directed to a matching comparison of the data to operate, and furthermore uses a sound based sensor system to attenuate the operation of the system [0017].
However, while Sharma does note some synchronization efforts considered such that the actuator/vibrator synchronously matches with audio signals, there is questionable consideration for the actuator or the vibrator to act based on audio signals of the sensors and of the match audio file and matching sensed ambient sounds.
Regardless, Erickson teaches (FIGS. 1-4) an entertainment chair/resting portion that comprises a control unit to control the actuator or the vibrator to act synchronously {in} accordance with audio signals of the match audio file and matched with sensed ambient sounds ([0040]: “The audio and video content may comprise audio/visual cues or motion signals embedded in the content. The gaming chairs may be configured to recognize and interpret these audio/visual cues and move accordingly, synchronizing chair motion with the audio and video content” and [0041] “The motion controller may also allow synchronization of motion across multiple gaming chairs. In some embodiments, the motion controller dynamically reconfigures chair movements according to external effects, such as motion of adjacent chairs, motion of the player in the chair, motion of people near the chair, etc.”. Which thereby expresses both a match audio file (a file or sequence of a computer that enacts initiates, controls, and concludes an action of the receptacle), such match audio file is acted upon (thereby controlling the actuators/vibrators based upon the audio data), and that action is carried through until completion by moving the chair (based on the audio data) and then returning to baseline or zero, or even dynamically reconfiguring the chair movement to extent actions that are still initiated and matched to an initial received datum (signals transmitted by the sound sensor); whereupon the carry-through and completion of actions responsive to such audio data fulfills controlling the actuator or vibrator according to subsequent audio signals of the located match audio file after the match audio file is located.
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to have incorporated the reactive programming/protocols of Erickson into Sharma. Where the results would have been predictable as both Sharma and Erickson are concerned with entertainment systems that a person is secured or reclining or resting therein, utilizes motion produced, and notes the uses of sensors. Where Erickson explicitly expresses that sound cues and motion cues external of the current pod/chair. Where advantageously, Erickson notes “In some embodiments, workers in a casino (e.g., a dealer at a blackjack or other wagering game table) may initiate motion of the players' gaming chairs to indicate wins and loses, encourage and boost morale, or just for fun.”, whereby the use of the systems thereof produce a more immersive and fun experience for the occupant, of which such merit would be granted to Sharma and further improve the responsive capabilities and reactive/more organic engagements of the system.
It is considered that Erickson avails both sound cues and motion cues external of the apparatus “The gaming chairs may be configured to recognize and interpret these audio/visual cues and move accordingly, synchronizing chair motion with the audio and video content” [0040] and furthermore both produces motion and accepts external stimuli to compare and attenuate the operation of the system [0041] and [0108]; and Sharma already considers both the use of an audio recording to operate the chair alongside already considering the use of a sound file for operation [0011], and that sound based signals may attenuate the operation of the system [0017], and that in combination, the comparison of more specifically external data may attenuate the operation of the system in correspondence to the match audio file in the data base that the system runs operably off of. It is therefore considered in the combination prior that the sound system of Sharma with Ericksons’ comparison protocols would avail operation of the system and the acceptance of external stimuli to attenuate the operation as by comparing the data, where as set forth in the Claim Interpretation section prior, it is considered audio files must comprise specific time sequences as explicitly defined by applicant (page 4, lines 18-23) as such explicit definition aligns with the characteristic physics of what sound and the capture thereof concerns.
Regarding claim 2, Sharma in view of Erickson discloses (FIGS. 1-8 and 19-25) the electric bed or chair as claimed in claim 1, wherein the vibrator is disposed on the movable frame (as illustrated in FIGS. 1-8 and 19-25).
Regarding claim 3, Sharma in view of Erickson discloses the electric bed or chair as claimed in claim 1, wherein the audio files received by the receiving unit are audio files of movies, operas, songs or pieces of music. As set forth in [0011] the media included is “music, songs, movies, television, or sports”.
Regarding claim 4, Sharma in view of Erickson discloses the electric bed or chair as claimed in claim 1, wherein the control unit controls the actuator to extend or retract and controls vibrating frequency and amplitude of the vibrator. Notably, [0017] notes “If the proximity sensors trigger, the motion of the furniture may be slowed or stopped to avoid injuries” which would understandably control the actuators to extend or retract and control the frequency of action/motion and amplitude of the vibrators/actuators.
Regarding claim 5, Sharma in view of Erickson discloses (FIGS. 1-8 and 19-22) the electric bed or chair as claimed in claim 1, further comprising a rocker mount disposed below the base, and a first drive device disposed between the rocker mount and the base; the first drive device is electrically connected with the control unit in a way that the control unit controls the first drive device to drive the base to swing relative to the rocker mount along a first curve. As illustrated in FIG. 5 and 8, the base has rocker mounts thereunder that are actuated by drive devices that are actuated by the control unit and may facilitate the motion of swinging, where [0004] acknowledges that the furniture “swings”. Additionally, FIGS. 19-22 demonstrate a constrained rocker system that is able to rock along a first curve
Regarding claim 6, Sharma in view of Erickson discloses (FIGS. 1-8 and 19-22) the electric bed or chair as claimed in claim 5, further comprising a support mount disposed below the rocker mount, and a second drive device disposed between the rocker mount and the support mount; the second drive device is electrically connected with the control unit in a way that the control unit controls the second drive device to drive the rocker mount to swing relative to the support mount along a second curve. Notably in FIGS. 5 and 8, the rockers comprise a further second/support plate and actuators thereof that are able to move the apparatus in all Cartesianal directions (as eminently demonstrated in FIG. 8). Where [0077] notes “The connections of the linear actuators 201 to the surface 202 needs to be done with hinges to allow this freedom of movement. The linear actuators 210 in FIG. 5 are also individually controlled by the BWAR computer. Similarly, the linear actuators 221 in FIG. 6 are also individually controlled by the BWAR computer. This allows for providing various tilts as part of the ride”, availing multiple tilts. Additionally, FIGS. 19-22 demonstrate both a rocker mount (correspondent 2106 and others, FIG. 21), and a lower support mount (2104; FIG. 21) that are able to operate in coordination with the lift (1902; FIG. 19), and thus able to operate along two swing curves. Additionally, a second rocker frame is located beneath the first rocker frame (as illustrated in FIG. 22) with a first rocker (correspondent 2206; FIG. 22) and an underside rocker (correspondent the eminent rocker arrangement beneath 2208; FIG. 22)
Regarding claim 7, Sharma in view of Erickson discloses (FIGS. 22) the electric bed or chair as claimed in claim 6, wherein projection lines of the first curve and the second curve on a horizontal plane are perpendicular to each other (as illustrated in FIG. 22)
In the alternate, claims 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sharma, in view of Hamlin et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 20120289312); hereafter “Hamlin”.
Regarding claim 1, Sharma discloses (FIGS. 1-25) an electric bed or chair movable along with ambient sounds (as illustrated in FIG. 1-25), the electric bed or chair comprising: a frame structure (as illustrated in FIGS. 2A-8, 19-25) comprising a base (as eminently demonstrated in FIGS. 2A-8 and 19-25) and a movable frame (as eminently demonstrated in FIGS. 2A-8 and 19-25) movably disposed on the base; an actuator having two ends disposed with the base and the movable frame, respectively (as eminently demonstrated in FIGS. 2A-8 and 19-25); a vibrator ([0003]: “Additionally, the adjustable furniture may include various types of mattresses, cushions, pillows, or similar elements to cushion the furniture for the user, and the furniture may allow for movement, vibration”) disposed with the frame structure; a control unit electrically connected with the actuator and the vibrator to control motions of the actuator and the vibrator (Abstract: “The apparatus includes a mechanical frame with linear actuators (such as electrical linear actuators, hydraulic actuators or pneumatic linear actuators, or any combination thereof) that are controlled by a computer”); a receiving unit ([0071]: “For example, the user, by means of a user application running on the user device, may select an option to turn ON the optional fans 106a. Based on the selection, the user device may communicate a turn ON signal to the BWAR computer (installed in the bed 102) over a communication network. The BWAR computer may receive the turn ON signal from the user device”, where a receiver is noted for use with the invention) configured to receive audio files each having a specific time sequence via a wire or wireless manner ([0011]: “It is another objective of the present invention to provide users with a unique experience with entertainment synchronized with movements, illumination as well as effect of fans. This entertainment could be a virtual reality entertainment but could be other entertainment such as music, songs, movies, television, or sports.”); a database (Abstract: “built in computer”; [0117]: “program code stored locally or remotely for access by single or multiprocessor machines.”) electrically connected with the control unit and the receiving unit for storing the audio files received by the receiving unit; a sound sensor configured to sense ambient sounds and to transmit signals corresponding to the sensed ambient sounds ([0017]: “vibration sensors, or other sensors, that provide inputs to a built-in computer” where sound is a known vibration); and a comparative unit electrically connected with the sound sensor, the control unit and the database, the comparative unit configured to compare the signals transmitted by the sound sensor with the audio files stored in the database to locate a match audio file of the audio files, which is matched with the sensed ambient sounds, and then transmit control signals to the control unit to control the actuator or the vibrator based on audio signals of the match audio file ([0017]: “Further, the computer may use these inputs to control the actuators and other mechanical or electrical components to provide a safe and enjoyable experience to the users of the furniture”; [0011]: “to provide users with a unique experience with entertainment synchronized with movements, illumination as well as effect of fans. This entertainment could be a virtual reality entertainment but could be other entertainment such as music, songs, movies”). Where [0011], [0017], and [0118] clearly establish that the apparatus responds to media and ambient sounds that then synchronize (otherwise a comparison of data) to enact movements therewith, wherein the control unit is configured to control the actuator or vibrator according to subsequent audio signals of the located match audio file after the match audio file is located. Where particularly it is considered for the purposes of examination as considered in the Claim Interpretation section prior that the specific time sequence of the audio files concern the common features of sound files including amplitude and frequency over a period of time (per applicant’s explicit definition (page 4, lines 18-23); and furthermore as expressed in the Claim Interpretation section prior, the initiation and action of a signal pertinent the audio data would fulfill controlling the actuator and furthermore according to subsequent audio signals of the located match audio file after the match audio file is located. And that the limitation is directed to a matching comparison of the data to operate, and furthermore uses a sound based sensor system to attenuate the operation of the system [0017].
However, while Sharma does note some synchronization efforts considered such that the actuator/vibrator synchronously matches with audio signals, there is questionable consideration for the actuator or the vibrator to act based on audio signals of the sensors and of the match audio file and matching sensed ambient sounds.
Regardless, Hamlin teaches (FIGS. 2-5) an entertainment chair/resting portion that comprises a control unit to control the actuator or the vibrator to act synchronously {in} accordance with audio signals of the match audio file alongside matching sensed ambient sounds ([0043]: “For example, the chair may sway or bounce to the beat or tempo of the music. Audio data representing the sound of a coin dropping may be translated into commands or data causing a motion capable chair to move in response to the coin dropping. Audio data representing a door opening or closing may be translated to cause the chair to move in response to the door closing or opening. For example, the sound of the door closing or opening may cause the motion capable chair to bump or vibrate to alert the user that someone has entered or left. Audio data representing an audience clapping, cheering, yelling etc. may be translated into chair motion commands and data that cause the chair to rotate or tilt towards the source of the audio event” and [0041] “In some embodiments, the data may be filtered. For example, audio data representing game sounds originating from a wagering game machine associated with a motion capable chair may be filtered out or canceled so that the unfiltered audio data remaining may be for sounds or music external to the wagering game machine (e.g., music played within a casino or by another wagering game machine)” and [0062] “As noted above, sound may be filtered by the chair. Alternatively, certain sounds may be enhanced by the chair. Various combinations of motion, visual, and sound effects produced by the chair may be designed to stimulate various emotional responses in a player” and [0065] “determination of an emotional state may be based on a variety of data obtained from sensors or information servers. For example, audio data representing cheering or clapping may be used to determine an emotional state”. Furthermore, noting match audio file sorting/selection/synchronization/taxonomy through “For example, a file or "playlist" of commands or data may be selected based on the category. As an example, assume that the categories comprise emotional states. If a "happy" emotional state has been determined, a set of commands that cause the motion capable chair to move in a bouncy lilting manner may be selected while if a "sad" emotional state has been determined, then then a of commands may be selected that cause the chair to move in a more subdued manner. In this example, the selected chair motion commands or data complement the determined category.” [0068]. Hamlin further provides “the motion capable chair 150 is to be moved or positioned in a desired manner in response to stimuli originating externally from the wagering game assembly 100, such as external events or external conditions. These instructions translate data 250A/250B representing the external events or external conditions to commands and data that may be sent to the motion capable chair 150 through the chair interface 202 such that the motion capable chair 150 moves in response to the external stimuli” [0029], and that “data 250 representing an external event or external condition received from a sensor 304 or information server 306 to a wagering game assembly 100. In such embodiments, chair server 302 functions as a relay for the data. The data 250 is then received and processed by the wagering game machine or motion capable chair such that the data representing external events or external conditions is translated to motion commands or data for the motion capable chair” [0035]. Effectively providing external conditions in the form of sounds that are transmitted to the system as data and signals, and acted upon (as by a comparison of the data to actuating conditions and within the operation of a protocol that may attenuate and react deviatingly therefrom correspondent external stimuli), using particularly audio based data for operation. Which thereby expresses both a match audio file (a file or sequence of a computer that enacts initiates, controls, and concludes an action of the receptacle), such match audio file is acted upon (thereby controlling the actuators/vibrators based upon the audio data), and that action is carried through until completion by moving the chair (based on the audio data) and then returning to baseline or zero, or even dynamically reconfiguring the chair movement to extent actions that are still initiated and matched to an initial received datum (signals transmitted by the sound sensor); whereupon the carry-through and completion of actions responsive to such audio data fulfills controlling the actuator or vibrator according to subsequent audio signals of the located match audio file after the match audio file is located.
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the application was effectively filed to have incorporated the reactive programing/protocols of Hamlin into Sharma. Where the results would have been predictable as both Sharma and Hamlin are concerned with entertainment systems that a person is secured or reclining or resting therein, utilizes motion produced, and notes the uses of sensors. Where Hamlin explicitly expresses that sound cues and motion cues external of the current pod/chair. Where advantageously, Hamlin notes “Various combinations of motion, visual, and sound effects produced by the chair may be designed to stimulate various emotional responses in a player”, whereby the use of the systems thereof produce a more immersive and fun experience for the occupant, of which such merit would be granted to Sharma and further improve the responsive capabilities and reactive/more organic engagements of the system.
As previously considered for Sharma in view of Erickson, It is analogously considered that Hamlin avails external stimuli in the form of sound cues “Audio data representing the sound of a coin dropping may be translated into commands or data… Audio data representing an audience clapping, cheering, yelling etc. may be translated into chair motion commands and data that cause the chair to rotate or tilt towards the source of the audio event” [0043] and “the data may be filtered. For example, audio data representing game sounds originating from a wagering game machine associated with a motion capable chair may be filtered out or canceled so that the unfiltered audio data remaining may be for sounds or music external to the wagering game machine (e.g., music played within a casino or by another wagering game machine)” [0056], and furthermore both produces motion and accepts external stimuli to compare and attenuate the operation of the system [0056] and [0043]; and Sharma already considers both the use of an audio recording to operate the chair alongside already considering the use of a sound file for operation [0011], and that sound based signals may attenuate the operation of the system [0017], and that in combination, the comparison of more specifically external data may attenuate the operation of the system in correspondence to the match audio file in the data base that the system runs operably off of. It is therefore considered in the combination prior that the sound system of Sharma with Hamlin’s comparison protocols (and more specifically to sound files and recordings and data thereof) would avail operation of the system and the acceptance of external stimuli to attenuate the operation as by comparing the data, where as set forth in the Claim Interpretation section prior, it is considered audio files must comprise specific time sequences as explicitly defined by applicant (page 4, lines 18-23) as such explicit definition aligns with the characteristic physics of what sound and the capture thereof concerns.
It should be understood for the sake of conciseness of the record that claims 2-7 may be identically mapped as they have to Sharma as they have been set forth in claims 1-7 under Sharma in view of Erickson; as Sharma is cited for claims 2-7.
Therefore, claims 1-7 respectfully remain rejected under 103 for reasons and rationale as set forth herein.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks (pages 4), filed September 2nd, 2026, with respect to 112b Rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 112b Rejections of June 2nd, 2026 has been withdrawn. Particularly, the incorporation of Examiner’s configured to suggestion is acknowledged and obviates the rejections thereof.
Applicant's arguments filed March 18th, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Particularly, Applicant alleges (Remarks: pages 5-6) that Sharma does not address a sound sensor and a comparative unit and that Sharma’s vibration sensors are not sound sensors configured to sense ambient sounds. Examiner respectfully disagrees that vibration is not ambient sound (because sound is in fact vibration). However, Examiner has already taken the position that Sharma’s synchronizations may not be within the full spirit of applicant’s claim scope, though it is to a degree within the broadest reasonable interpretation, even if input by a user, “acting within acceptable ride parameters” still necessitates an input of data measured to expectation and such expectation is in the form of files, which may take the form of ‘match audio files’ as the system operates on audio elections and basis in the exemplary embodiment. However, Examiner respectfully introduces both Erickson and Hamlin, both of which appear to use sound sensors (indicating use with identifying external stimuli and noises such as the casino’s music, compared to intrinsic sounds/datas of the system and thereafter enacting action based on that response and actuating [0041] [0043] [0062] [0065] of Hamlin and [0040] [0041] and [0108] of Erickson.
With regard to applicant’s allegations (Remarks: pages 6-8), concerning that Erickson does not disclose acoustic matching against a stored audio file, Erickson explicitly states “a motion database including the prescribed chair motions, wherein the motion database is accessible to the chair motion management unit.” [0015] and “The motion database 208 can store such prescribed chair movements and events that trigger them.” [0061] (such events including sound/audio based) and “In some embodiments, the chair motion management unit 220 can first determine a set of movements from information in the motion database 208, and then modify the set of motions in accordance with the player-customized chair motion preferences.” [0085]; and “The chair motion management unit 220 can compare the player-induced motion with system-induced motion (if any) of the gaming chair 205, and determine whether to vary the gaming chair motion.” [0108] that avails both an initial file/program, and sensing and acting according to external events outside the systems ordinary procedure, but still operating within the parameters of a subset of the system and matching/comparing by ‘determining a set of movements from information in the motion database’. Where Erickson identifies that the external conditions can include people around the system (not just merely ‘in the content’) and reaction to those nearby (such condition is recognized to not be intrinsic or internal to the system), while Hamlin specifically calls such information “external stimuli” and can include coins dropping, people cheering, the beat of the tempo of music of the room (even noting isolation of that beat or tempo from the invention’s primary operating outputs). When taken particularly in consideration that Sharma provides the ‘match audio file’ as by its baseline operable audio file, and reactively attenuated in performance by sensor and computation, in combination with either Hamlin or Erickson, the comparison of external stimuli and data would appear to anticipate or make obvious applicant’s claimed invention, where particularly the data type is audio data sensed, transmitted and acted upon. Respectfully, Erickson and Hamlin both do not “merely react to external events or triggers”, but more comprehensively uses those events or triggers to augment a chosen or determined baseline of operation (whether chosen manually or sensed autonomously and profiled by the system), identifying both an anticipation and reproduction of motions corresponding to matched audio & movement profiles and ‘playlists’ from a collection of data.
Additionally, it is considered applicant has not explicitly claimed nor explicitly defined what “a match audio” is in the claim or the specification, only that it may be movies, songs, operas, which could include the entire spectrum of sound, to which a coin dropping, people cheering, or similar such as in Erickson would be within the reasonable interpretation of the claim. It is further considered by examiner in the interest of compact prosecution however, that Hamlin openly acknowledges using external music to control the motion of the chair (particularly in [0041] [0043]), indicating explicitly “the casino’s music”. Which thus requires a sound sensor, and a comparison of current behavior to external stimuli to modify operation that would thereby consider locating a match file that would possess the necessary instructions of motion and thereafter actuating the instructions of motion correspondent the sound there by respectfully achieving a match audio file that is compared.
With regards to applicant’s argument (Remarks (page 7-9) concerning that the system translates detected audio events into motion commands reactively, respectfully Examiner has established Applicant’s invention is a not a method tied to a sequence of processes that must occur, but an apparatus, and whether the commands are short or long, there is still an action taken by the system, that necessitates acquisition of a sound, a comparison of that sound to files in a database that are particular to that sound and possess qualities that can be so matched, and enacting motions thereafter subsequent the acquisition, comparison, and enaction of the sound and motion thereafter.
Additionally, Examiner is confused how Applicant’s invention is not also operative on a reactive, event driven basis, as applicants respectfully do not explicitly claim predictive synchronization, the claim “the control unit is configured to control the actuator or vibrator according to subsequent audio signals of the match audio files after the match audio file is located” does not define some manner of predictive, algorithmized, machine learning, or AI, the claim respectfully merely establishes that the control unit would control the actuator or vibrator, such action being according to subsequent audio signals of the located match audio file, where such subsequent audio signals (that translate to instructions of motion) can be any length however long or brief. However, It is respectfully considered Hamlin has considered predictive synchonization “For example, a file or "playlist" of commands or data may be selected based on the category. As an example, assume that the categories comprise emotional states. If a "happy" emotional state has been determined, a set of commands that cause the motion capable chair to move in a bouncy lilting manner may be selected while if a "sad" emotional state has been determined, then then a of commands may be selected that cause the chair to move in a more subdued manner. In this example, the selected chair motion commands or data complement the determined category” [0068]. Hamlin establishes that a profile of operation (a type of file, that comprises audio files therein that the sensor data may compare to thereby act), is “determined” of the user, determination in a computer system simply must be a matter of data acquisition, therefore, there is a predictive synchronization, to operate within how the user is feeling at the present time, and taking a number of actions/intensities thereof.
Respectfully, applicant’s explanation (Remarks: pages 8) appears to state a sound is heard, there is a database of files that match those sounds, the system chooses one of those files that match that sound, and thereafter enacts action. However, the length, nor specificity disclosed of the actions broadly leaves open the content of those sounds, the length of them open to considerable interpretation. Where Hamlin clearly provides a system that enacts chair movement, takes in external sounds to operate, and furthermore operates based on those sounds how to move and act within a predictive profile, regardless of length or complexity, because it would still necessitate a series of actions based on the subsequent audio signals of the match audio file (understood to be instructions perhaps), to engage, deploy, return/retract to baseline or zero position, and disengage.
With regard to applicant’s arguments there’s no motivation to combine, Examiner respectfully disagrees. Where the examiner has identified rationale to combine the specific engageable elements thereof, wherein Erickson notes “In some embodiments, workers in a casino (e.g., a dealer at a blackjack or other wagering game table) may initiate motion of the players' gaming chairs to indicate wins and loses, encourage and boost morale, or just for fun.”, whereby the use of the systems thereof produce a more immersive and fun experience for the occupant, of which such merit would be granted to Sharma and further improve the responsive capabilities and reactive/more organic engagements of the system; and wherein Hamlin notes “Various combinations of motion, visual, and sound effects produced by the chair may be designed to stimulate various emotional responses in a player”, whereby the use of the systems thereof produce a more immersive and fun experience for the occupant, of which such merit would be granted to Sharma and further improve the responsive capabilities and reactive/more organic engagements of the system.
Therefore, Examiner is not respectfully persuaded at the present time that Sharma in view of Erickson and Hamlin fails to avail the claimed invention for reasons and rational as set forth previously.
Therefore, claims 1-7 remain rejected under 103 in light of Sharma in view of Erickson, and alternatively Sharma in view of Hamlin as set forth previously and as further elucidated in the pertinent sections.
Conclusion
The prior art previously made of record and not relied upon is still considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Luke F Hall whose telephone number is (571)272-5996. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-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, Justin Mikowski can be reached on 571-272-8525. 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.
/LUKE HALL/Examiner, Art Unit 3673
/JUSTIN C MIKOWSKI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3673
