The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
The examiner notes that the claim 46 in the amendment filed on January 26, 2026 was inadvertently left out of the amendment filed on August 24, 2026. For examination purposes only, claim 46, as filed on January 26, 2026, will be considered as part of the listing of claims presented for examination in the amendment filed on August 24, 2026.
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 46 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim recites an audio object renderer, wherein a method being implemented by the audio object renderer. The method, comprises acquiring panned object loudspeaker gains using a point source panning of the audio object, acquiring object feature information loudspeaker gains, and combining the panned object loudspeaker gains and the object feature information loudspeaker gains in order to acquire combined loudspeaker gains, wherein the aforementioned loudspeaker gains are determined using mathematical formulas/equations. The subject matter of the claim is judged to be similar to the judicial exceptions found in Parker vs. Flook (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(I.)(B.)(iii) under mathematical concepts) as the current claim is directed to gathering data, plugging into mathematical formulas/equations, and computing a result. The claim is also judged to be similar to the judicial exception found in Electric Power Group vs. Alstom (see MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III.)(A.) second set of bullets, bullet one under mental processes) as the current claim is directed to collecting information, analyzing it, and computing certain results of the collection and analysis for output to a device (e.g., display, loudspeaker).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the independent claim merely recites the above mathematical steps and mental process without applying it to any specific result. The claim recite selements at a high level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function of using the above mathematical formulas to analyze data over a certain period of time) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using the generic computer components. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, as discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements of a processor to perform the mathematical formulas (i.e., “the audio object renderer is implemented using a hardware apparatus, or using a computer, or using a combination of a hardware apparatus and a computer”) amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claims 1-45 are allowed.
Applicant's arguments filed August 24, 2026 have been fully considered. The application cannot yet be allowed because of the outstanding issue presented above regarding claim 46. Please include a new listing of claims 1-46, wherein claim 46 is similarly amended as in claim 1 for example.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL W HUBER whose telephone number is (571)272-7588.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Duc Nguyen, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-7503. 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. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/PAUL W HUBER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2691
pwh
August 31, 2026
Prosecution Insights