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 . See 35 U.S.C. § 100 (note).
Art Rejections
Obviousness
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. § 103 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made 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 31–38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of US Patent Application Publication 2021/0030308 (filed 07 February 2020) (“Grace”) and US Patent Application Publication 2019/0171409 (published 06 June 2019 (“Boulanger”).
Claim 31 is drawn to “a media playback system.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed system and the Grace reference.
Claim 31
The Grace Reference
“31. A media playback system comprising:
“a playback device having one or more amplifiers configured to drive one or more audio transducers;
“one or more processors; and
“data storage having instructions stored thereon that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the media playback system to perform operations comprising:
The Grace reference describes a system to create generative audio in order to influence the emotional state of multiple users. Grace at Abs., ¶¶ 62, 79, 527, 530.
The system includes audio playback devices that include speakers. Id. at ¶¶ 50, 54, FIG.1. One of ordinary skill would understand that the playback devices would inherently include drive circuitry, or amplifiers, to drive the speakers. Grace’s system also includes processors and data storage media that store processor executable instructions that control the system. Id. at ¶¶ 50, 163, 249, 256–259, FIGs.1, 11.
“receiving a first signal from a first sensor, the first signal being indicative of a current emotional state of a first user, the first user having access to at least one audio content source;
“receiving a second signal from a second sensor worn by a second user;
Grace describes receiving communication signals from multiple users and using those signals to determine each user’s current emotional state. Id. at ¶¶ 79, 138.
The users of Grace’s system have access to audio content sources
“receiving a third signal corresponding to a desired emotional state of at least one of the first user and the second user, the desired emotional state differing from the current emotional state of the first user;
Grace’s system and method receives a desired state, described as an optimal or target desired state. Id. at ¶¶ 192–231, FIGs.9A–9E, 10. For example, upon determining that a user is sad, Grace’s system and method receives a third signal from a user interface or from an automated component indicating that a desired emotional state is a happy emotional state. Id. at ¶¶ 79, 228, 229.
“determining whether the at least one audio content source includes at least one audio content item corresponding to the current emotional state of the first user; and
“after determining that the at least one audio content source does not include at least one audio content item corresponding to the current emotional state of the first user,
While Grace describes maintaining a current, optimal state. See id. at ¶¶ 9, 239, 465. Grace also describes gradually moving a user’s emotional state in a step-by-step manner, such that songs at each step will substantially correspond (i.e., are within a threshold distance) to a user’s current state at each step. See id. at ¶¶ 203, 232, FIG.9D. Grace does not describe the claimed determination of whether or not an audio content source includes at audio content item corresponding to a current emotional state of a user and then causing playback and adjustment of generative audio.
“causing the playback device to play back generative audio, and
“based on the first, second, and third signals, adjusting one or more audio characteristics of the generative audio.”
In order to move users from a current emotional state to a desired emotional state, Grace’s system and method generates, adjusts and plays generative audio. Id. at ¶¶ 191–192. The generative audio is adjusted in various ways, such as temporal, melodic and timbre to influence the users’ emotional states. Id. at ¶¶ 193–195, FIG.9A.
Table 1
The table above shows that the Grace reference describes a system that corresponds closely to the claimed system. The two differ because Grace does not describe the claimed determination of whether one audio content source corresponding to the user’s current emotional state exists prior to playing an adjusting generative audio.
The differences between the claimed invention and the Grace reference are such that the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this Application was effectively filed. The Grace reference describes a system for creating generative audio in order to influence a user’s emotional state. Grace at Abs., ¶ 211. Grace further describes known systems that use precomposed audio for a similar purpose. Grace at ¶¶ 581–583. According to Grace, relying strictly on precomposed audio limits the system’s ability to handle different states when the precomposed audio does not match the real-time conditions of the user or environment. Id.
The Boulanger reference describes a system to generate audio to influence a user’s emotional state that is similar to the one described by Grace. Boulanger at Abs., ¶ 26. Boulanger further teaches and suggests the use of audio sources 260, which Grace would refer to as precomposed music. Id. at ¶ 26. As described by Grace, Boulanger teaches and suggests that some audio sources 260 may not match a user’s current or desired mood. Id. at ¶¶ 48, 61. In that case, Boulanger teaches and suggests that when available audio source 260 does not match the desired emotional state, optimizing the content by selecting another arrangement of the song, or in the case another suitable arrangement does not exist, generating a new version based on a parameterized version of the original song. Boulanger at ¶¶ 61–65.
Read in the context of Grace, the Boulanger reference teaches and suggests adding a content optimizer to Grace’s system. The content optimizer would attempt to utilize precomposed audio to the extent it meets the goals of preserving a user’s emotional state or moving a user to a new emotional state. If no precomposed audio is fit for those purposes, the content optimizer would attempt to find an alternative arrangement or otherwise generate suitable audio using Grace’s generative audio techniques. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Grace and the Boulanger references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 32 depends on claim 31 and further requires the following:
“wherein the operations further comprise receiving a fourth signal from a third sensor worn by a third user, wherein adjusting one or more audio characteristics of the generative audio is based on the received fourth signal from the third sensor.”
Grace describes receiving user-generated or automatically-generated goal emotional states for a plurality of users at various times. Grace at ¶¶ 62, 216, 229, 230, 486, 527, 530, 775. Grace describes creating generative audio that reflects all the users, such as through statistical mapping of each user to a common emotional state and creating generative audio that moves the group of users towards a common emotional goal state. Id. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Grace and the Boulanger references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 33 depends on claim 31 and further requires the following:
“wherein the operations further comprise generating a playlist of visual content to be synchronously played back with the generative audio.”
Grace describes generating visuals that are synchronized with the generative audio. Grace at ¶ 770. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Grace and the Boulanger references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 34 depends on claim 31 and further requires the following:
“wherein receiving the first signal comprises receiving a plurality of first signals from multiple sensors, at least one of the first signals being indicative of the current emotional state of the first user.”
Grace describes receiving input communications from multiple sensors indicative of a user’s current emotional state. Grace at ¶¶ 60, 138, 140, 167, 169. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Grace and the Boulanger references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 35 depends on claim 31 and further requires the following:
“wherein the generative audio is part of a playlist configured to alter the emotional state(s) of the first and second users to the desired emotional state.”
Grace describes creating generative music to guide a user from a current emotional state to a goal state. Grace at ¶¶ 79, 228, 229. The generative music may be presented as a playlist. Id. at ¶¶ 114. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Grace and the Boulanger references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 36 depends on claim 31 and further requires the following:
“wherein playing back the generative audio comprises playing back (i) a first playlist configured to alter the emotional state of the first user to the desired emotional state, and (ii) a second playlist, different than the first playlist, configured to alter the emotional state of the second user to the desired emotional state.”
Grace describes creating generative music to guide a user from a current emotional state to a goal state. Grace at ¶¶ 79, 228, 229. The generative music may be presented as a playlist. Id. at ¶¶ 114. Grace further describes guiding multiple users to a common goal based on each user’s current emotional state. Id. at ¶¶ 62, 216, 229, 230, 486, 527, 530, 775. One of ordinary skill would have understood that each playlist would have to include a custom set of generative music in order to move each user from his current emotional state to the common goal state since the goal of Grace is to bring multiple users into entrainment rather than to simply maintain an existing entrainment. See id. at ¶ 216 (generating music to cause a user to speed up or slow down to match users). For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Grace and the Boulanger references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 37 depends on claim 31 and further requires the following:
“wherein receiving the third signal comprises receiving a plurality of third signals corresponding to a first desired emotional state of the first user and a second desired emotional state of the second user.”
Grace describes receiving user-generated or automatically-generated goal emotional states for a plurality of users at various times. Grace at ¶¶ 62, 216, 229, 230, 486, 527, 530, 775. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Grace and the Boulanger references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 38 depends on claim 31 and further requires the following:
“wherein the generative audio comprises algorithmically generated audio based on one or more dynamically varying input parameter(s).”
Grace describes producing generative audio created by models that procedurally generate audio in real time based on feedback from one or more sensors and user interaction. Grace at ¶ 34. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Grace and the Boulanger references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Summary
Claims 31–38 are rejected under at least one of 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103 as being unpatentable over the cited prior art. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 C.F.R. § 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.
Deleted
Claims 23–30 and 39–43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication 2021/0030308 (filed 07 February 2020) (“Grace”).
Claim 23 is drawn to “a method.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed method and the Grace reference.
Claim 23
The Grace Reference
“23. A method comprising:
The Grace reference describes a system and a method to create generative audio in order to influence the emotional state of multiple users. Grace at Abs., ¶¶ 62, 79, 527, 530.
“receiving a first signal from a first sensor, the first signal being indicative of a current emotional state of a first user;
“receiving a second signal from a second sensor worn by a second user, the second signal being indicative of a current emotional state of the second user;
Grace describes receiving communication signals from multiple users and using those signals to determine each user’s current emotional state. Id. at ¶¶ 79, 138.
“receiving a third signal corresponding to a desired emotional state of at least one of the first user and the second user, the desired emotional state differing from the current emotional state of the first user;
Grace’s system and method receives a desired state, described as an optimal, target, desired or goal state. Id. at ¶¶ 192–231, FIGs.9A–9E, 10. For example, upon determining that a user is sad, Grace’s system and method receives a third signal from a user interface or from an automated component indicating that a desired emotional state is a happy emotional state. Id. at ¶¶ 79, 96–108, 228, 229, FIGs.2A, 2B, 2C. The desired emotional state may be one of multiple desired emotional states located along a pathway of emotional states. Id. at ¶ 108, FIG.2C.
“causing a playback device to play back generative audio; and
In order to move users from a current emotional state to a desired emotional state, Grace’s system and method generates, adjusts and plays generative audio. Id. at ¶¶ 191–192.
“during play back of the generative audio,
“receiving an indication of an updated emotional state of at least one of the first user and the second user,
The Grace reference describes continuously tracking a user’s emotional state in order to track progress from an initial state towards a desired state and provide feedback in real time. Id. at ¶¶ 36, 90, 198, 211.
“determining an expected emotional state, for a current time, of at least one of the first user and the second user,
“wherein the determined expected emotional state, for the current time, of at least one of the first user and the second user, is different from each of the current emotional state of the first user, the current emotional state of the second user, and the desired emotional state of at least one of the first user and the second user [sic ,]
Grace does not describe determining an expected emotional state for a current time for system users.
“determining that a difference between the determined expected emotional state, for the current time, of at least one of the first user and the second user and the updated emotional state of at least one of the first user and the second user exceeds a threshold,
Grace describes determining the distance between a user’s current emotional state and a desired state in order to determine if the user is currently at a first state, at a second state or between the two states. Id. at ¶¶ 98–200, 211, FIGs.2C, 9C, 9D. The desired state may be mapped to a region on an X-Y plane or a circular shape, so that any desired state has a corresponding region distanced from all other states and defined by specific values. See id. at ¶ 103, FIGs.2C, 9D. One of ordinary skill would have understood from the division of an X-Y plane or circular plane into a discrete set mood regions that determining whether the user is at a state or between states includes determining the distance between a user’s emotional state vector and a region associated with a discrete state and determining if the distance is within the bounds of a region (i.e., less than a threshold distance) or outside the bounds of a region (i.e., more than a threshold distance).
If the user’s current state is not within a threshold distance of any defined region, the system determines that the user’s current emotional state is between two defined states. See id. at ¶¶ 198–200, 211, FIG.9C, 9D. Grace’s system then generates music reflective of the user’s position between two states by interpolating generation parameters corresponding to the two states. Id.
“the threshold corresponding to a maximum acceptable value below which audio characteristics of the generative audio remain unchanged, and
Grace describes that when a state is outside a threshold range of a desired state, adjusting generative audio parameters from the set used when in the desired state. Id. at ¶ 198, FIG.9C.
“based on the first signal, the second signal, the third signal, and the difference between the determined expected emotional state, for the current time, of at least one of the first user and the second user and the updated emotional state of at least one of the first user and the second user, adjusting one or more audio characteristics of the generative audio.”
Based on all the user’s current states and desired states, as well as whether the users are in a defined state or between two defined states, the generative audio is adjusted in various ways, such as temporal, melodic and timbre to influence the users’ emotional states. Id. at ¶¶ 193–195, FIG.9A.
Table 2
The table above shows that the Grace reference describes a method that corresponds closely to the claimed method. Grace does not anticipate the claimed invention, however, because Grace does not describe the determination of an expected emotional state for a current time and then comparing the difference between the expected emotional state and a user’s updated emotional state to a threshold.
The differences between the Grace reference and the claimed invention are such that the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this Application was effectively filed. Grace describes several features that together suggest modifying Grace to implement the specific method reflected in the claim. Grace describes gradually moving a user from a first emotional state to a second emotional state in a step-by-step manner based on feedback from a sensor. Grace at ¶ 232. This description is consistent with Grace's additional description of moving a user along a path that traces multiple states. Id. at ¶ 108, FIG.2C. Grace further describes that when moving between multiple stages, playing generative audio for a predetermined period of time, creating a lagging effect to prevent jarringly rapid switching of states. Id. at ¶ 109.
These teachings reasonably suggest modifying Grace's system to track a user's emotions at every time step in order to move the user from a starting emotional state to a desired emotional state on a step-by-step basis—namely, along a plurality of sequential steps, or expected states. Each expected state would correspond to a position in a sequence of emotional states, such that at any point in time, there will be one active expected state to be achieved during the current time period. After reaching an expected state, the expected state would be updated to the next expected state in the sequence, up to and including the final desired emotional state. If the user is moving towards the next expected state at a particular time, the system will adjust audio in order to bring the user closer to the expected state. See id. at ¶¶ 198, 232, FIGs.2C, 9C. Once the expected state is reached, audio will be maintained for a predetermined time until the system determines to move the user along to the next expected state, or the final desired state. See id. at ¶¶ 108, 109. This would prevent jarring transitions. See id. For example, if sensor values indicate that a user's emotional state is outside of an expected state (i.e., greater than a threshold distance from the expected state on an XY space), and has moved between the expected state and another state, the system will adjust generative audio parameters as seen in FIG.9C in order to move the user towards the expected state, possibly weighing the parameters of the expected state more heavily in order to encourage movement in that direction. See id. at ¶ 198, FIG.9C. For the foregoing reasons, the Grace reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 24 depends on claim 23 and further requires the following:
“further comprising receiving a fourth signal from a third sensor worn by a third user, wherein adjusting one or more audio characteristics of the generative audio is based on the received fourth signal from the third sensor.”
Grace describes receiving user-generated or automatically-generated goal emotional states for a plurality of users at various times. Grace at ¶¶ 62, 216, 229, 230, 486, 527, 530, 775. Grace describes creating generative audio that reflects all the users, such as through statistical mapping of each user to a common emotional state and creating generative audio that moves the group of users towards a common emotional goal state. Id. For the foregoing reasons, the Grace reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 25 depends on claim 23 and further requires the following:
“further comprising generating a playlist of visual content to be synchronously played back with the generative audio.”
Grace describes generating visuals that are synchronized with the generative audio. Grace at ¶ 770. For the foregoing reasons, the Grace reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 26 depends on claim 23 and further requires the following:
“wherein receiving the first signal comprises receiving a plurality of first signals from multiple sensors, at least one of the first signals being indicative of the current emotional state of the first user.”
Grace describes receiving input communications from multiple sensors indicative of a user’s current emotional state. Grace at ¶¶ 60, 138, 140, 167, 169. For the foregoing reasons, the Grace reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 27 depends on claim 23 and further requires the following:
“wherein the generative audio is part of a playlist configured to alter the emotional state(s) of the first and second users to the desired emotional state.”
Grace describes creating generative music to guide a user from a current emotional state to a goal state. Grace at ¶¶ 79, 228, 229. The generative music may be presented as a playlist. Id. at ¶¶ 114. For the foregoing reasons, the Grace reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 28 depends on claim 23 and further requires the following:
“wherein playing back the generative audio comprises playing back (i) a first playlist configured to alter the emotional state of the first user to the desired emotional state, and (ii) a second playlist, different than the first playlist, configured to alter the emotional state of the second user to the desired emotional state.”
Grace describes creating generative music to guide a user from a current emotional state to a goal state. Grace at ¶¶ 79, 228, 229. The generative music may be presented as a playlist. Id. at ¶¶ 114. Grace further describes guiding multiple users to a common goal based on each user’s current emotional state. Id. at ¶¶ 62, 216, 229, 230, 486, 527, 530, 775. One of ordinary skill would have understood that each playlist would have to include a custom set of generative music in order to move each user from his current emotional state to the common goal state since the goal of Grace is to bring multiple users into entrainment rather than to simply maintain an existing entrainment. See id. at ¶ 216 (generating music to cause a user to speed up or slow down to match users). For the foregoing reasons, the Grace reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 29 depends on claim 23 and further requires the following:
“wherein receiving the third signal comprises receiving a plurality of third signals corresponding to a first desired emotional state of the first user and a second desired emotional state of the second user.”
Grace describes receiving user-generated or automatically-generated goal emotional states for a plurality of users at various times. Grace at ¶¶ 62, 216, 229, 230, 486, 527, 530, 775. For the foregoing reasons, the Grace reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 30 depends on claim 23 and further requires the following:
“wherein the generative audio comprises algorithmically generated audio based on one or more dynamically varying input parameter(s).”
Grace describes producing generative audio created by models that procedurally generate audio in real time based on feedback from one or more sensors and user interaction. Grace at ¶ 34. For the foregoing reasons, the Grace reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 43 depends on claim 23 and further requires the following:
“further comprising: determining, based at least in part on a pathway between the current emotional state of at least one [sic, of] the first user and the second user and the desired emotional state of at least one of the first user and the second user, the threshold, wherein the threshold corresponds to an acceptable difference between the expected emotional state of at least one of the first user and the second user and the updated emotional state of at least one of the first user and the second user.”
Grace describes mapping discrete emotional states to an X-Y plane or other shape (e.g., a circle). Grace at ¶ 69, FIG.2C, 9D. Grace receives sensor information used to estimate a user’s current emotional state and determines if the user’s current emotional state is located at a discrete emotional state or between two states. Id. at ¶ 211 The determination involves determining the distance between a user vector and the mapped states. Id. One of ordinary skill would have recognized that measuring distance in order to determine if something is located at a position or between two positions inherently involves determining if the distance (i.e., the distance between the user vector and a mapped state) is more or less than a threshold distance. Grace further describes that some emotional states may be mapped to a larger area than others. See id. at ¶ 107, FIG.2C. Thus, the acceptable threshold distance for determining if a user’s current emotional state will depend on the pathway between a user’s current emotional state and a desired emotional state. For the foregoing reasons, the Grace reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 39 is drawn to “one or more tangible, non-transitory computer-readable media.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed media and the Grace reference.
Claim 39
The Grace Reference
“39. One or more tangible, non-transitory computer-readable media comprising instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a media playback system, cause the media playback system to perform operations comprising:
The Grace reference describes a system and a method to create generative audio in order to influence the emotional state of multiple users. Grace at Abs., ¶¶ 62, 79, 527, 530.
Grace describes implementing the system and method with the claimed tangible, non-transitory computer-readable media with processor executable instructions that control the system. Id. at ¶¶ 163, 249, 256–259, FIG.11.
“receiving a first signal from a first sensor, the first signal being indicative of a current emotional state of a first user;
“receiving a second signal from a second sensor worn by a second user, the second signal being indicative of a current emotional state of the second user;
Grace describes receiving communication signals from multiple users and using those signals to determine each user’s current emotional state. Id. at ¶¶ 79, 138.
“receiving a third signal corresponding to a desired emotional state of at least one of the first user and the second user, the desired emotional state differing from the current emotional state of the first user;
Grace’s system and method receives a desired state, described as an optimal or target desired state. Id. at ¶¶ 192–231, FIGs.9A–9E, 10. For example, upon determining that a user is sad, Grace’s system and method receives a third signal from a user interface or from an automated component indicating that a desired emotional state is a happy emotional state. Id. at ¶¶ 79, 228, 229.
“causing a playback device to play back generative audio; and
In order to move users from a current emotional state to a desired emotional state, Grace’s system and method generates, adjusts and plays generative audio. Id. at ¶¶ 191–192.
“during play back of the generative audio,
“receiving an indication of an updated emotional state of at least one of the first user and the second user,
The Grace reference describes continuously tracking a user’s emotional state in order to track progress from an initial state towards a desired state and provide feedback in real time. Id. at ¶¶ 36, 90, 198, 211.
“determining an expected emotional state, for a current time, of at least one of the first user and the second user,
“determining that a difference between the determined expected emotional state, for the current time, of at least one of the first user and the second user and the updated emotional state of at least one of the first user and the second user exceeds a threshold, and
Grace describes determining the distance between a user’s current emotional state and a desired state in order to determine if the user is currently at a first state, at a second state or between the two states. Id. at ¶¶ 98–200, 211, FIGs.2C, 9C, 9D. The desired state may be mapped to a region on an X-Y plane or a circular shape, so that any desired state has a corresponding region distanced from all other states and defined by specific values. See id. at ¶ 103, FIGs.2C, 9D. One of ordinary skill would have understood from the division of an X-Y plane or circular plane into a discrete set mood regions that determining whether the user is at a state or between states includes determining the distance between a user’s emotional state vector and a region associated with a discrete state and determining if the distance is within the bounds of a region (i.e., less than a threshold distance) or outside the bounds of a region (i.e., more than a threshold distance). If the user’s current state is not within a threshold distance of any defined region, the system determines that the user’s current emotional state is between two defined states. See id. at ¶¶ 198–200, 211, FIG.9C, 9D. Grace’s system then generates music reflective of the user’s position between two states by interpolating generation parameters corresponding to the two states. Id.
“based on the first signal, the second signal, the third signal, and the difference between the determined expected emotional state, for the current time, of at least one of the first user and the second user and the updated emotional state of at least one of the first user and the second user, adjusting one or more audio characteristics of the generative audio.”
Based on all the user’s current states and desired states, as well as whether the users are in a defined state or between two defined states, the generative audio is adjusted in various ways, such as temporal, melodic and timbre to influence the users’ emotional states. Id. at ¶¶ 193–195, FIG.9A.
Table 3
The table above shows that the Grace reference describes a media that corresponds closely to the claimed media. Grace does not anticipate the claimed invention, however, because Grace does not describe the determination of an expected emotional state for a current time and then comparing the difference between the expected emotional state and a user’s updated emotional state to a threshold.
The differences between the Grace reference and the claimed invention are such that the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this Application was effectively filed. Grace describes several features that together suggest modifying Grace to implement the specific method reflected in the claim. Grace describes gradually moving a user from a first emotional state to a second emotional state in a step-by-step manner based on feedback from a sensor. Grace at ¶ 232. This description is consistent with Grace's additional description of moving a user along a path that traces multiple states. Id. at ¶ 108, FIG.2C. Grace further describes that when moving between multiple stages, playing generative audio for a predetermined period of time, creating a lagging effect to prevent jarringly rapid switching of states. Id. at ¶ 109.
These teachings reasonably suggest modifying Grace's system to track a user's emotions at every time step in order to move the user from a starting emotional state to a desired emotional state on a step-by-step basis—namely, along a plurality of sequential steps, or expected states. Each expected state would correspond to a position in a sequence of emotional states, such that at any point in time, there will be one active expected state to be achieved during the current time period. After reaching an expected state, the expected state would be updated to the next expected state in the sequence, up to and including the final desired emotional state. If the user is moving towards the next expected state at a particular time, the system will adjust audio in order to bring the user closer to the expected state. See id. at ¶¶ 198, 232, FIGs.2C, 9C. Once the expected state is reached, audio will be maintained for a predetermined time until the system determines to move the user along to the next expected state, or the final desired state. See id. at ¶¶ 108, 109. This would prevent jarring transitions. See id. For example, if sensor values indicate that a user's emotional state is outside of an expected state (i.e., greater than a threshold distance from the expected state on an XY space), and has moved between the expected state and another state, the system will adjust generative audio parameters as seen in FIG.9C in order to move the user towards the expected state, possibly weighing the parameters of the expected state more heavily in order to encourage movement in that direction. See id. at ¶ 198, FIG.9C. For the foregoing reasons, the Grace reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 40 depends on claim 39 and further requires the following:
“wherein the operations further comprise receiving a fourth signal from a third sensor worn by a third user, wherein adjusting one or more audio characteristics of the generative audio is based on the received fourth signal from the third sensor.”
Grace describes receiving user-generated or automatically-generated goal emotional states for a plurality of users at various times. Grace at ¶¶ 62, 216, 229, 230, 486, 527, 530, 775. Grace describes creating generative audio that reflects all the users, such as through statistical mapping of each user to a common emotional state and creating generative audio that moves the group of users towards a common emotional goal state. Id. For the foregoing reasons, the Grace reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 41 depends on claim 39 and further requires the following:
“wherein receiving the first signal comprises receiving a plurality of first signals from multiple sensors, at least one of the first signals being indicative of the current emotional state of the first user.”
Grace describes receiving input communications from multiple sensors indicative of a user’s current emotional state. Grace at ¶¶ 60, 138, 140, 167, 169. For the foregoing reasons, the Grace reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 42 depends on claim 39 and further requires the following:
“wherein the generative audio comprises algorithmically generated audio based on one or more dynamically varying input parameter(s).”
Grace describes producing generative audio created by models that procedurally generate audio in real time based on feedback from one or more sensors and user interaction. Grace at ¶ 34. For the foregoing reasons, the Grace reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23–30 and 39–43 are allowable. Claims 23 and 39 are independent. Claims 24–30 and 40–43 depend on one of claims 23 and 39, and are allowable for the same reasons as their base claim.
Applicant’s Reply has substantively amended claims 23 and 39 to now require determining and using a dynamic threshold that is not fairly described, taught or suggested by the cited references.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s Reply (21 January 2026) has substantively amended claims 23–30 and 39–43. This Office action has been updated accordingly.
Applicant’s Reply at 9–12 further includes comments pertaining to the rejections included in the Non-Final Rejection (22 September 2025). Those comments have been considered, but are not persuasive.
Applicant’s comments concerning claims 21–30 and 39–43 are moot. Claims 21–30 and 39–43 are allowable over the cited prior art.
Concerning claim 31, Applicant comments that the Boulanger reference does not describe, teach or suggest the idea of playing back generative audio after determining that an audio content source does not include audio content item corresponding to the current emotional state of a user. Applicant cites Boulanger at ¶ 61 to illustrate a case where that Boulanger determines that a source song exists that corresponds to a current emotional state, but still generates music.
Boulanger describes optimizing a problem with two constraints: establishing a target mood and respecting the user's preference for a particular prerecorded song whose characteristics conflict with establishing the target mood. In other words, a user may specify a subset of audio content items that does not include any items capable of mediating the user’s mood as desired. In that case, the system will be unable to comply with the user’s request for a specific content item while simultaneously achieving the goal of influencing a user’s mood towards a desired goal. To resolve this problem, Boulanger teaches and suggests that instead of playing the requested prerecorded song, the system should generate a new version of the prerecorded song that aligns with the target mood. The rejection takes this concept and applies it in the context of the Grace reference. This combination fairly suggests reproducing generative audio any time prerecorded audio does not exist that conforms to a target mood which may correspond to the user's current mood when the mood is optimal or) or another target mood that is different than the user’s current mood. Grace at ¶¶ 9, 239, 465. In the case of moving towards a different target mood, Grace describes gradually moving a user’s emotional state in a step-by-step manner. Id. at ¶ 232. This gradual transition reasonably suggests substantially matching songs at each step to the user’s current state, but tuned to encourage movement towards a target state. In other words, the songs at each step should correspond (i.e., are within a threshold distance) to both a user’s current state at each step and to a next state that is closer to a final target state than the user’s current state. See id. at ¶¶ 203, 204, FIG.9D (describing the determination of a distance between moods and parameterizing that distance into different audio characteristics).
Applicant comments that Boulanger does not teach or suggest generating music when there is no prerecorded audio corresponding to the user’s current mood. This comment is unpersuasive because, as shown above, Grace provides the motivation to maintain a current, optimal mood, or in the case of moving from a current mood to a target mood in a step-by-step manner, substantially matching audio at each step to a user’s current mood. But even if Grace did not already address this limitation, the Boulanger reference further teaches that if the user’s current mood is optimal for well-being, then the current mood is used as a target mood. Boulanger at ¶¶ 48, 59. In that use case, the Grace-Boulanger system will determine the user’s current mood. Id. If it is optimal for well-being, then the system will evaluate the availability of prerecorded music with respect to a user’s current mood. Id.
For the foregoing reasons, Applicant has not persuasively demonstrated any error in the Office action. All the rejections will be maintained.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 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 C.F.R. § 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 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 WALTER F BRINEY III whose telephone number is (571)272-7513. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-4:30 pm.
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, Carolyn Edwards can be reached on 571-270-7136. 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.
/Walter F Briney III/
Walter F Briney IIIPrimary ExaminerArt Unit 2692
3/5/2026