Upon reconsideration of the finality of the rejection of the last Office action by Examiner, the finality of that action is withdrawn. Accordingly this action is a Non-Final Rejection.
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 .
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-9, 11-13 and 64-66 are pending.
Claims 3, 6, 10 and 14-63 are cancelled.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every objections previously set forth. The objections of the claims have been withdrawn.
Applicant remarks that the pending claims were discussed during the interview on January 7, 2026. Examiner respectfully submits that there was no interview conducted for this application to date. Applicant is encouraged to request an interview with Examiner to discuss the 101 rejections of the claims.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-9, 11-13 and 64-66 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception without significantly more.
(Step 2A, Prong One)
Independent claim 1 recites, “determining a second acoustic map; and … when a difference between the second acoustic map and the first acoustic map is greater than a threshold”
Under its broadest reasonable interpretation, if a claim limitation covers performance that can be executed in the human mind, but for the recitation of generic electronic devices or generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Under their broadest reasonable interpretation and based on the description provided in the Specification, such as paragraph [0008], for instance, the determining function and the difference comparing function are mental processes that can be performed through observation, evaluation and judgement based on an acquired sensor data in response to an emitted acoustic signal. That is, a person may perform, through observation, evaluation and judgement, the features enunciated above.
Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
(Step 2A, Prong Two)
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim recites the additional limitations of, “using an emitter to emit a first acoustic test signal, which the emitter is disposed at a first location in an enclosure; using a sensor to measure a first acoustic response corresponding to the first acoustic test signal, wherein the sensor is disposed at a second location; storing a first acoustic map indicative of an acoustic transfer function between the first location and the second location; using the emitter to emit a second acoustic test signal; measuring a second acoustic response corresponding to the second acoustic test signal; generating a notification and/or a report … ; wherein the emitter is a speaker or a buzzer, and wherein at least one of the first acoustic test signal or the second acoustic test signal is a frequency sweeping signal that is swept through a plurality of frequencies over a testing interval.”
The additional limitations “using an emitter to emit a first acoustic test signal, which the emitter is disposed at a first location in an enclosure; using the emitter to emit a second acoustic test signal; … wherein the emitter is a speaker or a buzzer, and wherein at least one of the first acoustic test signal or the second acoustic test signal is a frequency sweeping signal that is swept through a plurality of frequencies over a testing interval” as recited in the claim that are configured to carry out the additional and abstract idea limitations may be tools that are used to determine and compare as recited in the claim, but recited so generically that they represent no more than mere instructions “to apply” the judicial exceptions on or using generic electronic or computer components. Implementing an abstract idea on generic electronic or computer components as tools to perform an abstract idea is not indicative of integration into a practical application. see MPEP 2106.05(f)
The additional limitations of “using a sensor to measure a first acoustic response corresponding to the first acoustic test signal, wherein the sensor is disposed at a second location; storing a first acoustic map indicative of an acoustic transfer function between the first location and the second location; measuring a second acoustic response corresponding to the second acoustic test signal; generating a notification and/or a report …” are insignificant extra-solution activities under MPEP 2106.05(g), without imposing meaningful limits. The measuring limitations amount to necessary data gathering, and the storing and the generating limitations amounts to necessary data output. (i.e., all uses of the recited judicial exception require such data gathering or data output).
The claim does not recite an improvement in a technology as set forth in MPEP 2106.04(d) and MPEP 2106.05(a). Accordingly, the additional limitations recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
In view of the foregoing, the additional limitations are not sufficient to demonstrate integration of a judicial exception into a practical application.
(Step 2B)
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
The additional features including “using an emitter to emit a first acoustic test signal, which the emitter is disposed at a first location in an enclosure; using a sensor to measure a first acoustic response corresponding to the first acoustic test signal, wherein the sensor is disposed at a second location; storing a first acoustic map indicative of an acoustic transfer function between the first location and the second location; using the emitter to emit a second acoustic test signal; measuring a second acoustic response corresponding to the second acoustic test signal; generating a notification and/or a report … ; wherein the emitter is a speaker or a buzzer, and wherein at least one of the first acoustic test signal or the second acoustic test signal is a frequency sweeping signal that is swept through a plurality of frequencies over a testing interval”, as recited in the claim that are configured to carry out the additional and abstract idea limitation may be tools that are used for the functions recited in the claim, but recited so generically that they represent no more than mere instructions “to apply” the judicial exceptions on or using a generic electronic or computer component. Implementing an abstract idea on generic electronic or computer components as tools to perform an abstract idea does not amount to significantly more. See Elec. Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (“Nothing in the claims, understood in light of the specification, requires anything other than off-the-shelf, conventional computer, network, and display technology for gathering, sending, and presenting the desired information.”)
The using a sensor to measure and measuring functions represent functions that are recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional, for instance, as Salonidis et al. (US 9,892,744 B1) (“Salonidis”) describes in Column 9 lines 33-44 (“Data collection module 242 receives acoustic signal reading data from sensing unit 220, for example, in the form of data packets received from sensing unit 220 over network 210, and stores each acoustic reading in data storage 250 in the form of, for example, separate data files. Generally, each acoustic reading data file contains signal data, as well as corresponding metadata, as previously described. For example, data collection module 242 may receive and store sixty individual acoustic readings, corresponding to sixty readings taken by the sensing unit 220 at sixty distinct data collection points 190 and orientations within machine room enclosure 101.”), Trayhan, JR. et al. (US 2018/0011059 A1) (“Trayhan”) describes in Paragraph [0005] (“A second aspect of the disclosure provides a method for evaluating components in an industrial plant, the method including: detecting an acoustic signature of a component in the industrial plant with a first acoustic sensor included within a first lighting device of industrial plant; determining a difference between a baseline acoustic signature and an acoustic signature of a component in the industrial plant; identifying the component from a plurality of components based on at least the acoustic signature and a position of the first lighting device; and evaluating a condition of the component based on the position of the component and the difference between the acoustic signature the baseline acoustic signature.”), and Rabinowitz et al. (US 2017/0086003 A1) (“Rabinowitz”) describes in paragraph [0004] (“According to the invention, an audio system includes a source of audio signals; signal processing circuitry coupled to the source for processing the audio signals to produce processed audio signals; a plurality of loudspeaker units, coupled to the signal processing circuitry, designed and constructed to be deployed about a room, for radiating sound waves responsive to the processed audio signals; a microphone unit, for receiving the sound waves and for transducing the sound waves to electrical signals; acoustic measuring circuitry, for receiving the transduced sound waves and calculating frequency response measurements; a memory, coupled to the acoustic measuring circuitry, for storing characteristic data of the loudspeaker units and further for storing the frequency response measurements; and equalization calculation circuitry, coupled to the memory, for calculating an equalization pattern responsive to the digital data and responsive to the characteristic data of the plurality of loudspeaker units.”)
The storing function represents a function that is recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional, for instance, as Salonidis describes in Column 9 lines 33-44 (“Data collection module 242 receives acoustic signal reading data from sensing unit 220, for example, in the form of data packets received from sensing unit 220 over network 210, and stores each acoustic reading in data storage 250 in the form of, for example, separate data files. Generally, each acoustic reading data file contains signal data, as well as corresponding metadata, as previously described. For example, data collection module 242 may receive and store sixty individual acoustic readings, corresponding to sixty readings taken by the sensing unit 220 at sixty distinct data collection points 190 and orientations within machine room enclosure 101.”) Trayhan describes in Paragraph [0034] (“Data 300 can also be subject to preliminary processing by modules of acoustic analysis program 220 before being recorded in one or more of fields 302, 304, 306, 308. For example, acoustic interpreter 228 can apply a set of rules to interpret the anomalous sounds of acoustic signatures) 166 from components 102, 104, 110, 126, 128. Such rules and/or other criteria may be generated from the manufacturer's design analysis of these components. For example, compressor 102 may generate acoustical energy particularly related to the number of rotating blades of various stages. In the case of combustor 110, the possible resonant frequencies, as related to the type and geometry of combustor 110, operating conditions, type of fuels combusted, etc., may be analyzed in design stage. Such analyses can determine criteria such as the amplitude limits associated with each frequency for acoustic signatures 166 to be stored in data 300.”), and Rabinowitz describes in paragraph [0004] (“According to the invention, an audio system includes a source of audio signals; signal processing circuitry coupled to the source for processing the audio signals to produce processed audio signals; a plurality of loudspeaker units, coupled to the signal processing circuitry, designed and constructed to be deployed about a room, for radiating sound waves responsive to the processed audio signals; a microphone unit, for receiving the sound waves and for transducing the sound waves to electrical signals; acoustic measuring circuitry, for receiving the transduced sound waves and calculating frequency response measurements; a memory, coupled to the acoustic measuring circuitry, for storing characteristic data of the loudspeaker units and further for storing the frequency response measurements; and equalization calculation circuitry, coupled to the memory, for calculating an equalization pattern responsive to the digital data and responsive to the characteristic data of the plurality of loudspeaker units.”)
The generating function represents a function that is recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional, for instance, as Salonidis describes in Column 1, lines 18-23 (“Some machines may include integrated instrumentation and network communications capability, allowing them to self-monitor and identify conditions relating to their operation performance, such as, for example, conditions relating to degradation or impending issues, and to report out such conditions.”), Trayhan describes in Paragraph [0026] (“In one example, computing device 200 can determine whether component(s) 102, 104, 110, 126, 128 require servicing, replacement, etc., based on whether an amplitude of acoustic signature(s) 166 exceed a baseline acoustic signature for component(s) 102, 104, 110, 126, 128 by a predetermined number of dB. In another embodiment, computing device 200 can determine whether component(s) 102, 104, 110, 126, 128, are possibly defective or at risk of failure, e.g., based on whether acoustic signatures 166 include wavelengths which exceed the tolerance window of one or more wavelengths in a baseline acoustic signature, thereby indicating that unusual sounds have been produced regardless of their volume.”), and Rabinowitz describes in paragraph [0008] (“In another aspect of the invention, a process for generating an equalization pattern in an audio system having a first microphone and a loudspeaker unit, includes testing, by the audio system, the microphone to determine if the microphone is functional over a frequency range; and in the event the microphone is not functional over the frequency range, generating a message to a user.”)
Therefore, the additional claimed features do not amount to significantly more and the claim is not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2, 4-5, 7-8 and 64-66 are directed to further defining the tools that are used for the functions recited in the claim.
Dependent claim 9 is directed to further defining the extra solution activities in the claim.
Dependent claims 11 and 13 are directed to further defining the abstract idea and the extra solution activities in the claim.
Dependent claim 12 is directed to further defining the abstract idea, the tool, and the extra solution activities in the claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL W CHOI whose telephone number is (571)270-5069. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 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, Kenneth Lo can be reached at (571) 272-9774. 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.
/MICHAEL W CHOI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116
Prosecution Insights