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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim is NOT to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter. The claimed “program” is non-structural per se. Therefore, a reasonable interpretation in light of the specification leads to the conclusion that the claim encompasses pure software, which does not fall within the definition of a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter.
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 8 and 12 are 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.
Regarding claim 8, the claimed “the polar-coordinate object position information on the first object” lacks clear antecedent basis.
Regarding claim 12, the claimed “the listener orientation information at the second reference viewpoint” recited on the last two lines lacks clear antecedent basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 17, 9, 10, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tsuji et al. (WO 2018/096954 A1; the rejection is based on US 20200053499 A1; both references were cited by IDS filed on 3/29/2023, on the same IDS, US reference has been indicated as the equivalent of the WO reference; hereafter Tsuji).
Regarding claim 1, Tsuji discloses an information processing device comprising:
a listener-position information acquisition unit that acquires listener position information on a viewpoint of a listener (e.g., selecting a viewpoint by the current user, such as #1 as shown in Fig. 4; [0128], and can be changed as discussed in [0133]; read on the arbitrary viewpoint as discussed in [0172], step S11 in Fig. 21, [0191]);
a reference-viewpoint information acquisition unit that acquires position information on a first reference viewpoint (e.g., viewpoint #6 of Fig. 16), object position information on a first object (e.g., main guitar) at the first reference viewpoint (main guitar in viewpoint #6 in Fig. 15), position information on a second reference viewpoint (e.g., viewpoint #7 of Fig. 17), object position information on the first object at the second reference viewpoint (main guitar in viewpoint #7 in Fig. 15), and object position information on a second object (e.g., bass); and
an object position calculation unit (54, [0188]) that calculates position information on the first object at the viewpoint of the listener (e.g., the viewpoint of the listener is between the viewpoint #6 and viewpoint #7, see [0173] and [0183]) on a basis of the listener position information (#X in Fig. 19, [0187]), the position information on the first reference viewpoint, the object position information on the first object at the first reference viewpoint, the position information on the second reference viewpoint, and the object position information on the first object at the second reference viewpoint.
Regarding claim 2, Tsuji discloses that the first reference viewpoint and the second reference viewpoint are viewpoints set in advance by a contents producer ([0099], [0217], [0218]).
Regarding claim 3, Tsuji discloses that the first reference viewpoint and the second reference viewpoint are viewpoints selected on a basis of the listener position information ([0173], [0179]-[0181]).
Regarding claim 4, Tsuji discloses interpolation ([0181]).
Regarding claim 5, Tsuji discloses that object position information on the first object at the first reference viewpoint is coordinate information indicating a relative position of the first object with respect to the first reference viewpoint (see Fig. 15), and the object position information on the first object at the second reference viewpoint is coordinate information indicating a relative position of the first object with respect to the second reference viewpoint (see Fig. 15).
Regarding claims 6 and 7, Tsuji discloses polar coordinates (with angles being explicitly stated in Fig. 15, the standard radius is inherently included, in other words, without an inherent radius, there will not be any separation between the listener in Fig. 17 and any object, such as P5 side guitar, as illustrated in Fig. 17, a sufficient separation is provided, thus an inherent radius is included).
Regarding claim 9, Tsuji discloses three reference viewpoints ([0174]).
Regarding claim 10, the claimed coordinate information reads on the coordinates provided (see Fig. 15) and the claimed position of the listener reads on a selected viewpoint (e.g., #7 as illustrated in Fig. 17, or a new arbitrary viewpoint).
Claim 15 corresponds to claim 1 discussed above.
Regarding claim 16, most of limitations correspond to those in claim 1 discussed above. Tsuji discloses a program (abstract, [0001], [0363]-[0366], e.g.).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 8 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuji.
Regarding claims 8 and 11, Tsuji fails to show an absolute-coordinate position information and a common absolute coordinate space. The claimed subject matter is referring to how to use a shared coordinate, in this case, the claimed “a common absolute coordinate space”, as a guide/reference, for all objects defined at different viewpoints. For example, in Figs. 16 and 17 of Tsuji, the same objects have different position information depending on the viewpoints which are the corresponding reference (origin). The position of object of an arbitrary viewpoint is based on the predetermined viewpoints with different origins. The claimed feature is a well known mathematic calculation when dealing with positions from different origins. Examiner takes Official Notice that converting position information in one coordinate system to a common absolute coordinate system for organizing plural positions defined by different references is notoriously well known in the art. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Tsuji by converting the predetermined object position at different viewpoints (origins) into a common absolute coordinate system in order to facilitating determining the arbitrary position between the two or more predetermined viewpoints.
Claims 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuji in view of Nakano et al. (US 20020071661 A1; hereafter Nakano).
Regarding claims 12-14, Tsuji teaches at least three reference viewpoints ([0174]), but fails to explicitly show listener orientation information. However, as illustrated in Figs. 4, 16 and 17, the listener is facing the sound objects. In the same field of endeavor, Nakano teaches how to provide the precise listener’s orientation for the sound processor in order to generate corresponding audio signal following listener’s orientation (abstract, [0003], e.g.). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Tsuji in view of Nakano by generating audio signal for the speakers following the listener’s orientation in order to enhance the accuracy of the sound reproduction based on the precise orientation information.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PING LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-7522. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, Vivian Chin can be reached at 571-272-7848. 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.
/PING LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695