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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/26/26 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
In response to the final office action dated 11/28/2025 applicant has submitted a request for continued examination. Claims 1-10 have been cancelled. New claims 11-20 have been added. Claims 11-20 are currently pending in the application.
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.
Claims 13 and 15-20 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 13 and 15-16 depend on cancelled claims making them indefinite. For the purpose of examination, the examiner is interpreting claim 13 as depending on claim 11 and claims 15-16 as depending on claim 14. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the synchronized controller application" in line 15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There is no prior recitation of a synchronized controller application in the claim. Claim 19 has the same issue. Claims 18 and 20 are also rejected due to their dependency on the rejected independent claims.
Claims 19-20 rejected because the last two lines of claim 19 and all of claim 20 were cut off from the claims document submitted on 03/26/2026. The missing claims appear on page 1 of applicant arguments/remarks dated 03/26/2026. A corrected claims sheet is requested.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 11, 13, 14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang et al (U.S. Pub No. 2017/0195769, hereinafter Chang) in view of Hayward (US Patent No. 9832241, hereinafter Hayward) and Family et al (U.S. Patent No. 10063968, hereinafter Family).
Regarding claim 11, Chang teaches a method for substantially automatically establishing secure communications (See Chang Fig 3 Pairing Sequence 300 & ¶ [0025] lines 1-5, automatic pairing sequence begins when device is powered on) between similar audio devices (See Chang Fig 3 Pairing Sequence 300 & wireless speaker assemblies 200a-b), comprising: determining that at least two of the audio devices in the audio distribution network are similar audio devices (See Chang ¶ [0023] lines 27-29, device pairing can be restricted to specific devices, manufacturers, and software versions), wherein the similar audio devices are manufactured by the same manufacturer (See Chang ¶ [0023] lines 27-29, device pairing can be restricted to devices with the same manufacturer); designating one of the at least two similar audio devices as the controlling audio device (See Chang ¶ [0023] lines 6-14, establishes a master/slave designation during the pairing process), and setting up secure communications by the controlling audio device between all of the similar audio devices (See Chang ¶ [0023] lines 14-27, only the master speaker is in communication with the slave devices meaning all Bluetooth pairing and communications protocols flow from the master device to slave device), and wherein communications between the similar audio devices thereafter use the secure communications protocol (See Chang Fig 2 BT(A2DP) & ¶ [0030] lines 11-13, data communication using Bluetooth Advanced Audio Distribution Profile).
Chang teaches devices capable of wireless network communication ¶ [0017] but does not explicitly teach communications using internet protocol (IP); proprietary communications protocol; or using the lowest media access control (MAC) address to designate a controlling audio device.
Hayward teaches communications using internet protocol (IP) (See Hayward column 14 lines 5-22, network communication over internet); and proprietary communications protocol (See Hayward column 14 lines 5-22, proprietary network communication).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the internet protocol and proprietary protocol taught by Hayward with the method taught by Chang. Both internet protocol communication and proprietary communication are well known in the art and widely used to facilitate communication between devices. Internet protocol (IP) is a standardized rule that defines how data is formatted, addressed, transmitted, and received across networks regardless of manufacturer, operating system, or location. Proprietary communications protocols allow for tailored security and performance of manufacturer specific devices.
Chang in view of Hayward does not explicitly teach using the lowest media access control (MAC) address to designate a controlling audio device.
Family teaches using the lowest media access control (MAC) address to designate a controlling audio device (See Family column 10 lines 21-27, designating master based on lowest MAC address).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the communications protocols taught by Family with the pairing sequence taught by Chang in view of Hayward. MAC filtering within a network of paired devices is well known in the art and enables a user to configure how devices connect and communicate as pointed out by Family (column 10 lines 23-27).
Regarding claim 13, Chang in view of Hayward and Family teaches the method according to claim 11, further comprising: determining which dissimilar audio devices exist in the audio distribution system (See Chang ¶ [0023], device pairing can be set to look for specific devices, manufacturers, software versions, etc.); and issuing communications protocols by the controlling device to the dissimilar audio devices, wherein the communications protocols are non-secure communications protocol, and wherein communications between the dissimilar audio devices and the controlling audio device thereafter use the nonsecure communications protocol (See Chang ¶ [0019], Bluetooth uses public key (non-secure communication) to identify compatible devices, communication remains non-secure unless public key handshake is successful based on device pairing setting).
Regarding claim 14, Chang teaches an audio distribution system (See Chang Abstract, wireless speaker systems), comprising: at least two or more similar audio devices (See Chang Fig 3 Pairing Sequence 300 & wireless speaker assemblies 200a-b), wherein each of the at least two or more similar audio devices are manufactured by the same manufacturer (See Chang ¶ [0023] lines 27-29, device pairing can be restricted to devices with the same manufacturer) and share a secure communications protocol (See Chang ¶ [0019] lines 8-10, paired devices use Bluetooth v4.0), and wherein each of the at least two or more similar audio devices comprises: at least one processor (See Chang ¶ [0019] lines 11-14, digital signal processor); a memory operatively connected with the at least one processor (See Chang ¶ [0019] lines 11-14, memory), wherein the memory stores computer-executable instructions (See Chang ¶ [0019] lines 11-14, computer-executable instructions are required to perform the described functions) that, when executed by the at least one processor, causes the at least one processor to execute a method (See Chang Fig 3 Pairing Sequence 300) that comprises establishing communications between at least two audio devices in an audio distribution network (See Chang Fig 3 Pairing Sequence 300 & wireless speaker assemblies 200a-b); determining that at least two of the audio devices in the audio distribution network are similar audio devices (See Chang ¶ [0023] lines 27-29, device pairing can be restricted to specific devices, manufacturers, and software versions), wherein the similar audio devices are manufactured by the same manufacturer (See Chang ¶ [0023] lines 27-29, device pairing can be restricted to devices with the same manufacturer); designating one of the at least two similar audio devices as the controlling audio device (See Chang ¶ [0023] lines 6-14, establishes a master/slave designation during the pairing process); and setting up secure communications by the controlling audio device between all of the similar audio devices (See Chang ¶ [0023] lines 14-27, only the master speaker is in communication with the slave devices meaning all Bluetooth pairing and communications protocols flow from the master device to slave device), and wherein communications between the similar audio devices thereafter use the secure communications protocol (See Chang Fig 2 BT(A2DP) & ¶ [0030] lines 11-13, data communication using Bluetooth Advanced Audio Distribution Profile).
Chang teaches devices capable of wireless network communication ¶ [0017] but does not explicitly teach communications using internet protocol (IP); proprietary communications protocol; or using the lowest media access control (MAC) address to designate a controlling audio device.
Hayward teaches communications using internet protocol (IP) (See Hayward column 14 lines 5-22, network communication over internet); and proprietary communications protocol (See Hayward column 14 lines 5-22, proprietary network communication).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the internet protocol and proprietary protocol taught by Hayward with the method taught by Chang. Both internet protocol communication and proprietary communication are well known in the art and widely used to facilitate communication between devices. Internet protocol (IP) is a standardized rule that defines how data is formatted, addressed, transmitted, and received across networks regardless of manufacturer, operating system, or location. Proprietary communications protocols allow for tailored security and performance of manufacturer specific devices.
Chang in view of Hayward does not explicitly teach using the lowest media access control (MAC) address to designate a controlling audio device.
Family teaches using the lowest media access control (MAC) address to designate a controlling audio device (See Family column 10 lines 21-27, designating master based on lowest MAC address).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the communications protocols taught by Family with the pairing sequence taught by Chang in view of Hayward. MAC filtering within a network of paired devices is well known in the art and enables a user to configure how devices connect and communicate as pointed out by Family (column 10 lines 23-27).
Regarding claim 16, Chang in view of Hayward and Family teaches The audio distribution system according to claim 14, wherein the method further comprises: determining which dissimilar audio devices exist in the audio distribution system (See Chang ¶ [0023], device pairing can be set to look for specific devices, manufacturers, software versions, etc.); and issuing communications protocol by the controlling device to the dissimilar audio devices, wherein the communications protocol are non-secure communications protocol, and wherein communications between the dissimilar audio devices and the controlling audio device thereafter use the nonsecure communications protocol (See Chang ¶ [0019], Bluetooth uses public key (non-secure communication) to identify compatible devices, communication remains non-secure unless public key handshake is successful based on device pairing setting).
Claim(s) 12, 15, 17, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang et al (U.S. Pub No. 2017/0195769, hereinafter Chang) in view of Hayward (US Patent No. 9832241, hereinafter Hayward) and Family et al (U.S. Patent No. 10063968, hereinafter Family) as applied to claims above, and further in view of Shani et al (U.S. Pub No. 2016/0262120).
Regarding claim 12, Chang in view of Hayward and Family teaches the method according to claim 11.
Chang in view of Hayward and Family does not explicitly teach storing a synchronized controller application on at least two similar audio devices.
Shani teaches storing a synchronized controller application on at least two similar audio devices (See Shani Fig 3, master device 302 and slave device 304 having stored sync controller applications).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the synchronized controller application taught by Shani with the method taught by Chang in view of Hayward and Family. Synchronization applications are well known in the art and provide wireless control data from a master device to slave devices as stated by Shani (¶ [0020] lines 7-10).
Regarding claim 15, Chang in view of Hayward and Family teaches the audio distribution system according to claim 14.
Chang in view of Hayward and Family does not explicitly teach storing a synchronized controller application on at least two similar audio devices.
Shani teaches storing a synchronized controller application on at least two similar audio devices (See Shani Fig 3, master device 302 and slave device 304 having stored sync controller applications).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the synchronized controller application taught by Shani with the method taught by Chang in view of Hayward and Family. Synchronization applications are well known in the art and provide wireless control data from a master device to slave devices as stated by Shani (¶ [0020] lines 7-10).
Regarding claim 17, Chang teaches a method for substantially automatically establishing secure communications (See Chang Fig 3 Pairing Sequence 300 & ¶ [0025] lines 1-5, automatic pairing sequence begins when device is powered on) between similar audio devices (See Chang Fig 3 Pairing Sequence 300 & wireless speaker assemblies 200a-b), comprising: establishing communications between at least two audio devices in an audio distribution network (See Chang Fig 3 Pairing Sequence 300 & ¶ [0025] lines 1-5, automatic pairing sequence begins when device is powered on); determining that at least two of the audio devices in the audio distribution network are similar audio devices (See Chang ¶ [0023] lines 27-29, device pairing can be restricted to specific devices, manufacturers, and software versions), wherein the similar audio devices are manufactured by the same manufacturer (See Chang ¶ [0023] lines 27-29, device pairing can be restricted to devices with the same manufacturer); designating one of the at least two similar audio devices as a controlling audio device (See Chang ¶ [0023] lines 6-14, establishes a master/slave designation during the pairing process); and setting up secure communications by the controlling audio device between all of the similar audio devices (See Chang ¶ [0023] lines 14-27, only the master speaker is in communication with the slave devices meaning all Bluetooth pairing and communications protocols flow from the master device to slave device) using the secure communications protocol, and wherein communications between the similar audio devices thereafter use the secure communications protocol (See Chang Fig 2 BT(A2DP) & ¶ [0030] lines 11-13, data communication using Bluetooth Advanced Audio Distribution Profile).
Chang does not explicitly teach communications using internet protocol (IP); proprietary communications protocol; using the lowest media access control (MAC) address to designate a controlling audio device, or a synchronized controller application.
Hayward teaches communications using internet protocol (IP) (See Hayward column 14 lines 5-22, network communication over internet); and proprietary communications protocol (See Hayward column 14 lines 5-22, proprietary network communication).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the internet protocol and proprietary protocol taught by Hayward with the method taught by Chang. Both internet protocol communication and proprietary communication are well known in the art and widely used to facilitate communication between devices. Internet protocol (IP) is a standardized rule that defines how data is formatted, addressed, transmitted, and received across networks regardless of manufacturer, operating system, or location. Proprietary communications protocols allow for tailored security and performance of manufacturer specific devices.
Chang in view of Hayward does not explicitly teach using the lowest media access control (MAC) address to designate a controlling audio device or a synchronized controller application.
Family teaches using the lowest media access control (MAC) address to designate a controlling audio device (See Family column 10 lines 21-27, designating master based on lowest MAC address).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the communications protocols taught by Family with the pairing sequence taught by Chang in view of Hayward. MAC filtering within a network of paired devices is well known in the art and enables a user to configure how devices connect and communicate as pointed out by Family (column 10 lines 23-27).
Chang in view of Hayward and Family does not explicitly teach a synchronized controller application.
Shani teaches storing a synchronized controller application (See Shani Fig 3, master device 302 and slave device 304 having stored sync controller applications).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the synchronized controller application taught by Shani with the method taught by Chang in view of Hayward and Family. Synchronization applications are well known in the art and can provide wireless control data from a master device to slave devices as stated by Shani (¶ [0020] lines 7-10).
Regarding claim 19, Chang teaches an audio distribution system (See Chang Abstract, wireless speaker systems), comprising: at least two or more similar audio devices (See Chang Fig 3 Pairing Sequence 300 & wireless speaker assemblies 200a-b), wherein each of the at least two or more similar audio devices are manufactured by the same manufacturer (See Chang ¶ [0023] lines 27-29, device pairing can be restricted to devices with the same manufacturer) and share a secure communications protocol (See Chang ¶ [0019] lines 8-10, paired devices use Bluetooth v4.0), and wherein each of the at least two or more similar audio devices comprises: at least one processor (See Chang ¶ [0019] lines 11-14, digital signal processor); a memory operatively connected with the at least one processor (See Chang ¶ [0019] lines 11-14, memory), wherein the memory stores computer-executable instructions (See Chang ¶ [0019] lines 11-14, computer-executable instructions are required to perform the described functions) that, when executed by the at least one processor, causes the at least one processor to execute a method (See Chang Fig 3 Pairing Sequence 300) that comprises establishing communications between at least two audio devices in an audio distribution network (See Chang Fig 3 Pairing Sequence 300 & wireless speaker assemblies 200a-b); determining that at least two of the audio devices in the audio distribution network are similar audio devices (See Chang ¶ [0023] lines 27-29, device pairing can be restricted to specific devices, manufacturers, and software versions), wherein the similar audio devices are manufactured by the same manufacturer (See Chang ¶ [0023] lines 27-29, device pairing can be restricted to devices with the same manufacturer); designating one of the at least two similar audio devices as the controlling audio device (See Chang ¶ [0023] lines 6-14, establishes a master/slave designation during the pairing process); and setting up secure communications by the controlling audio device between all of the similar audio devices (See Chang ¶ [0023] lines 14-27, only the master speaker is in communication with the slave devices meaning all Bluetooth pairing and communications protocols flow from the master device to slave device), and wherein communications between the similar audio devices thereafter use the secure communications protocol (See Chang Fig 2 BT(A2DP) & ¶ [0030] lines 11-13, data communication using Bluetooth Advanced Audio Distribution Profile).
Hayward teaches communications using internet protocol (IP) (See Hayward column 14 lines 5-22, network communication over internet); and proprietary communications protocol (See Hayward column 14 lines 5-22, proprietary network communication).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the internet protocol and proprietary protocol taught by Hayward with the method taught by Chang. Both internet protocol communication and proprietary communication are well known in the art and widely used to facilitate communication between devices. Internet protocol (IP) is a standardized rule that defines how data is formatted, addressed, transmitted, and received across networks regardless of manufacturer, operating system, or location. Proprietary communications protocols allow for tailored security and performance of manufacturer specific devices.
Chang in view of Hayward does not explicitly teach using the lowest media access control (MAC) address to designate a controlling audio device.
Family teaches using the lowest media access control (MAC) address to designate a controlling audio device (See Family column 10 lines 21-27, designating master based on lowest MAC address).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the communications protocols taught by Family with the pairing sequence taught by Chang in view of Hayward. MAC filtering within a network of paired devices is well known in the art and enables a user to configure how devices connect and communicate as pointed out by Family (column 10 lines 23-27).
Chang in view of Hayward and Family does not explicitly teach a synchronized controller application.
Shani teaches storing a synchronized controller application (See Shani Fig 3, master device 302 and slave device 304 having stored sync controller applications).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the synchronized controller application taught by Shani with the method taught by Chang in view of Hayward and Family. Synchronization applications are well known in the art and can provide wireless control data from a master device to slave devices as stated by Shani (¶ [0020] lines 7-10).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zoehner (US Patent No. 11202146) teaches an IP speaker system.
Yore et al (US Pub No. 2022/0248139) teaches data allocation between playback devices after detecting a trigger.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TYLER LIEBGOTT whose telephone number is (703)756-1818. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10-6:30 EST.
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, Fan Tsang can be reached at (571)272-7547. 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.
/T.M.L./Examiner, Art Unit 2694
/FAN S TSANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2694
Prosecution Insights