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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on December 17, 2023 are being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed August 05, 2025 has been entered. Claims 2-3 and 12-13 have been cancelled by the applicant. Claims 1, 4-11 and 14-18 are currently pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Claims have overcome each and every objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed May 19, 2025.
Response to Applicant Remarks/Arguments
With respect to Applicant's remarks filed August 05, 2025:
Receipt is acknowledged for authorization to communicate with applicant concerning any subject matter of this application by electronic mail
Please see the amended claims 1, 6, 8, 11, 14, 16 and 18, as well as the explanations for the respective claim rejections, under the section heading Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103.
Please note the prior art made of record listed under the section heading Conclusion.
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 of this title, 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 1, 4-7, 10-11 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cullison (U.S. Patent No. 4296278 A) in view of Nishimura (U.S. Patent No. 7800440 B2) and in further view of Wolf (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0216049 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Cullison teaches: An electronic device with speaker protection mechanism (Col 1, Lines 5-6, “This invention relates to a circuit for protecting loudspeakers...“), comprising: a speaker (Fig.3, 23, ‘Speaker Driver’) configured to operate according to a driving signal (Fig.3, 11, ‘Audio Amp Output’); a level shift circuit (Fig.3, 30) configured to provide an adjusted output signal (Fig.3, Output of 30) by adjusting the output signal (Fig.3, 11); a switch (Fig.3, 19) coupled between the amplifier circuit (Fig.3, 11) and the speaker (Fig.3, 23) and configured to selectively transmit the output signal (Fig.3, 11) to the speaker (Fig.3, 23) according to an activation signal (Fig.2, from 17, ‘Switch Control Circuit’) for providing the driving signal (Fig.3, from 11, ‘Audio Amp Output’); provide the input signal (Fig.2, from 11, ‘Audio Amp Output’) and comprising: a judging circuit (Fig.2, 36, ‘Threshold Circuit’) coupled to the level shift circuit (Fig.3, 30) for receiving the adjusted output signal (Fig.3, Output from 30), and configured to detect a real-time characteristic (Fig.3, 36) of the adjusted output signal (Fig.3, Output of 30); and output a first characteristic signal (Fig.3, Output from 36 to comparator 40) based on the real-time characteristic (Fig.3, Detecting voltage characteristic in 36) of the adjusted output signal (Fig.3, Output from 30); and a switch control circuit (Fig.3, 40 coupled to 17 ‘Switch Control Circuit’) coupled to the judging circuit (Fig.3, 36) for receiving the first characteristic signal (Fig.3, Signal from 36 to 40/17) and configured to: output the activation signal (Fig.3, 40/17 activates 19 ‘Switching Device’) having an enable level for turning on the switch (Fig.3, Reference Input (bottom) of comparator 40) when a value of the first characteristic signal is within a first predetermined range (Fig.3, Input (top) to 40 is greater than Reference Input (bottom) of 40); and output the activation signal (Fig.3, 40/17 activates 19 ‘Switching Device’) having a disable level for turning off the switch (Fig.3, Reference Input (bottom) of comparator 40) when the value of the first characteristic signal (Fig.3, Signal from 36 to 40/17) is not within the first predetermined range (Fig.3, Input (top) to 40 is less than Reference Input (bottom) to 40) wherein the first characteristic signal (Fig.3, Signal from 36 to 40/17) includes a voltage value (Fig.3, Signal from 36 into the voltage comparator 40 is a voltage.).
Cullison is not relied upon herein to teach: an amplifier circuit configured to receive an input signal and provide an output signal by adjusting the input signal; and a processor configured to.
Nishimura teaches: an amplifier circuit (Fig.5, 500) configured to receive an input signal (Fig.5, 502, ‘Input’) and provide an output signal (Fig.5, 515, ‘Output’) by adjusting the input signal (Fig.1, 505, ‘Programmed Gain Amplifier’); and a processor configured to. (Col 9, Lines 11-18, ““...the invention may ...be embodied in part or in whole using software, firmware and/or hardware components, such as combinatorial logic, Application Specific Integrated Circuits (ASICs), Field-Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs) or other hardware or some combination of hardware, software and/or firmware components.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘an amplifier circuit configured to receive an input signal and provide an output signal by adjusting the input signal; and a processor configured to:’ in Cullison’s invention as taught by Nishimura’s invention.
The motivation for doing this would be to avoid noise, reduce variations in audio signal levels and improve perceived quality (Nishimura, Col 1, Lines 51-57, “To avoid noise and distortion, and to reduce unnatural and annoying variations in audio signal levels, many systems use conditioning circuits... Such signal conditioning improves the perceived quality or clarity of the signal.”).
Cullison is also not relied upon herein to teach: and at least one of a current value, a power, a frequency response and a gradient variation associated with the adjusted output signal.
However Wolfe teaches: and at least one of a current value, a power, a frequency response and a gradient variation associated with the adjusted output signal (Wolfe, Fig.3 shows voltage U, current I and power P being monitored for the signal characteristics. Par 0024 indicates frequency and other criteria for monitored signal characteristics: “The decision to whether to use fixed or adaptive gain control in the attack state is taken in step 14, for example, in accordance with the extent to which the threshold level T.sub.2 is exceeded by the output signal level or on the basis of the frequency spectrum of the input signal, but is not restricted to these two criteria.” It is worth noting here also that a gradient is rate of change, which includes a frequency value, as it has units of cycles per second. And a variation of a gradient includes a frequency spectrum, as a spectrum of frequencies is a variation of the frequency values.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘and at least one of a current value, a power, a frequency response and a gradient variation associated with the adjusted output signal’ in Cullison’s invention as taught by Wolfe’s invention.
The motivation for doing this would be to avoid irritating the listener and destabilizing the system (Wolfe, Par 0025: “This prevents the feedback network in the timing unit 9 from switching between attack and release modes too often, which is irritating for the listener and would destabilize the overall system.”).
Regarding claim 4, Cullison in view of Nishimura teaches: The electronic device of claim 1.
Cullison teaches: coupled between the speaker (Fig.3, 23) and the switch (Fig.3, 19)
Cullison is not relied upon herein to teach: wherein the amplifier circuit comprises: a detecting circuit... for receiving the driving signal, and configured to detect a real-time characteristic of the driving signal and output a second characteristic signal based on the real time characteristic of the driving signal; and a gain control circuit coupled to the processor for receiving the input signal and coupled to the detecting circuit for receiving the second characteristic signal, and configured to adjust a gain for amplifying the input signal according to the second characteristic signal.
Nishimura teaches: wherein the amplifier circuit (Fig.5, 500) comprises: a detecting circuit (Fig.5, 520, ‘Level Detector’)... for receiving the driving signal (Fig.5, 515, ‘Output’), and configured to detect a real-time characteristic of the driving signal (Fig.5, 520, ‘Level Detector’) and output a second characteristic signal (Fig.5, 525, ‘Out Level’) based on the real-time characteristic of the driving signal (Fig.5, 515, ‘Output’); and a gain control circuit (Fig.5, 540 to 550 to 505, ‘Programmed Gain Amplifier’) coupled to the processor (Col 9, Lines 11-18, “...the functions necessary to implement the invention may ...be embodied in part or in whole using software, firmware and/or hardware components, such as combinatorial logic, Application Specific Integrated Circuits (ASICs), Field-Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs) or other hardware or some combination of hardware, software and/or firmware components.”) for receiving the input signal (Fig.5, 502, ‘Input’) and coupled to the detecting circuit (Fig.5, 520, ‘Level Detector’) for receiving the second characteristic signal, and (Fig.5, 525, ‘Out Level’) configured to adjust a gain for amplifying the input signal (Fig.5, 510, ‘Gain Control Signal’) according to the second characteristic signal (Fig.5, 525, ‘Out Level’).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘wherein the amplifier circuit comprises: a detecting circuit... for receiving the driving signal, and configured to detect a real-time characteristic of the driving signal and output a second characteristic signal based on the real time characteristic of the driving signal; and a gain control circuit coupled to the processor for receiving the input signal and coupled to the detecting circuit for receiving the second characteristic signal, and configured to adjust a gain for amplifying the input signal according to the second characteristic signal.’ in Cullison’s invention as taught by Nishimura’s invention.
The motivation for doing this would be to avoid noise, reduce variations in audio signal levels and improve perceived quality (Nishimura, Col 1, Lines 51-57, “To avoid noise and distortion, and to reduce unnatural and annoying variations in audio signal levels, many systems use conditioning circuits... Such signal conditioning improves the perceived quality or clarity of the signal.”).
Regarding claim 5, Cullison in view of Nishimura teaches: The electronic device of claim 4.
Cullison is not relied upon herein to teach: wherein the second characteristic signal includes a voltage value, a current value, a power, a frequency response and/or a gradient variation associated with the driving signal.
Nishimura teaches: wherein the second characteristic signal (Nishimura, Fig.5, 525) includes a voltage value (Nishimura, Fig.5, 525; Col 5, Line 59, “...signal 525 may be... DC voltage...”), a current value, a power, a frequency response and/or a gradient variation associated with the driving signal (Nishimura, Fig.5, 515, ‘Output’).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘wherein the second characteristic signal includes a voltage value, a current value, a power, a frequency response and/or a gradient variation associated with the driving signal.’ in Cullison’s invention as taught by Nishimura’s invention.
The motivation for doing this would be to avoid noise, reduce variations in audio signal levels and improve perceived quality (Nishimura, Col 1, Lines 51-57, “To avoid noise and distortion, and to reduce unnatural and annoying variations in audio signal levels, many systems use conditioning circuits... Such signal conditioning improves the perceived quality or clarity of the signal.”).
Regarding claim 6, Cullison in view of Nishimura teaches: The electronic device of claim 4.
Cullison teaches: wherein the switch control circuit (Fig.3, 40 and 17) and is further configured to: output the activation signal (Fig.3, Activation signal output from 17) having the enable level (Fig.3, Reference Input (bottom) to comparator 40) for turning on the switch (Fig.3, 19) when the value of the first characteristic signal (Fig.3, output from 36) is within the first predetermined range (Fig.3, Input (top) to 40 is greater than Reference Input (bottom) of 40) and output the activation signal (Fig.3, Activation signal output from 17) having the disable level (Fig.3, Reference Input (bottom) to comparator 40) for turning off the switch (Fig.3, 19) when the value of the first characteristic signal (Fig.3, output from 36) is not within the first predetermined range (Fig.3, Input (top) to 40 is less than Reference Input (bottom) of 40).
Cullison is not relied upon herein to teach: and coupled to the detecting circuit for receiving the second characteristic signal, and a value of the second characteristic signal is within a second predetermined range; or the value of the second characteristic signal is not within the second predetermined range.
Nishimura teaches: coupled to the detecting circuit (Fig.5, Comparator 540) for receiving the second characteristic signal (Fig.5, 525, ‘Out Level’), and a value of the second characteristic signal (Fig.5, 525, ‘Out Level’) is within a second predetermined range (Fig.5, Input (top) to 540 is greater than Reference Input (bottom) of 540); or the value of the second characteristic signal (Fig.5, 525, ‘Out Level’) is not within the second predetermined range (Fig.5, Input (top) to 540 is greater than Reference Input (bottom) of 540).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘and coupled to the detecting circuit for receiving the second characteristic signal, and a value of the second characteristic signal is within a second predetermined range; or the value of the second characteristic signal is not within the second predetermined range.’ in Cullison’s invention as taught by Nishimura’s invention.
The motivation for integrating Nishimura’s invention into Cullison’s invention would be to avoid noise, reduce variations in audio signal levels and improve perceived quality (Nishimura, Col 1, Lines 51-57, “To avoid noise and distortion, and to reduce unnatural and annoying variations in audio signal levels, many systems use conditioning circuits... Such signal conditioning improves the perceived quality or clarity of the signal.”).
Regarding claim 7, Cullison in view of Nishimura teaches: The electronic device of claim 1.
Cullison teaches: wherein the level shift circuit (Fig.3, 30) is further configured to adjust a level of the output signal (Fig.3, 11) for providing the adjusted output signal (Fig.3, output from 30).
Regarding claim 10, Cullison in view of Nishimura teaches: The electronic device of claim 1.
Cullison is not relied upon herein to teach: wherein the processor is platform controller hub (PCH) or a digital signal processor (DSP).
Nishimura teaches: wherein the processor is platform controller hub (PCH) or a digital signal processor (DSP) (Col 9, Lines 11-18, ““...the invention may ...be embodied in part or in whole using software, firmware and/or hardware components, such as combinatorial logic, Application Specific Integrated Circuits (ASICs), Field-Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs) or other hardware or some combination of hardware, software and/or firmware components.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘wherein the processor is platform controller hub (PCH) or a digital signal processor (DSP)’ in Cullison’s invention as taught by Nishimura’s invention.
The motivation for integrating Nishimura’s invention into Cullison’s invention would be to avoid noise, reduce variations in audio signal levels and improve perceived quality (Nishimura, Col 1, Lines 51-57, “To avoid noise and distortion, and to reduce unnatural and annoying variations in audio signal levels, many systems use conditioning circuits... Such signal conditioning improves the perceived quality or clarity of the signal.”).
Regarding claim 11, Cullison teaches: A method of providing speaker protection mechanism in an electronic device (Col 1, Lines 5-6, “This invention relates to a circuit for protecting loudspeakers...”), comprising: operating a speaker (Fig.3, 23, ‘Speaker Driver’) in the electronic device according to a driving signal (Fig.3, 11, ‘Audio Amp Output’); providing an adjusted output signal (Fig.3, Output from 30) by adjusting the output signal (Fig.3, 11) using a level shift circuit in the electronic device (Fig.3, 30); selectively transmitting the output signal (Fig.3, 11) to the speaker (Fig.3, 23) according to an activation signal (Fig.3, From 17) for providing the driving signal (Fig.3, 23) using a switch (Fig.3, 19) in the electronic device which is coupled between the amplifier circuit and the speaker (Fig.3, 11 to 19 to 23); detecting a real-time characteristic of the adjusted output signal (Fig.3, 36) outputting a first characteristic signal (Fig.3, Output from 36) based on the real-time characteristic of the adjusted output signal (Fig.3, Output from 30) using a judging circuit (Fig.3, 30); outputting the activation signal (Fig.3, Output from 17) having an enable level (Fig.3, Reference Input (bottom) to comparator 40) for turning on the switch (Fig.3, 19) when a value of the first characteristic signal (Fig.3, Output from 36) is within a first predetermined range (Fig.3, Input (top) to 40 is greater than Reference Input (bottom) of 40) using a switch control circuit (Fig.3, 40 to 17 to 19); and outputting the activation signal (Fig.3, Output from 17) having a disable level (Fig.3, Reference Input (bottom) to comparator 40) for turning off the switch (Fig.3, 19) when the value of the first characteristic signal (Fig.3, Output from 36) is not within the first predetermined range (Fig.3, Input (top) to 40 is less than Reference Input (bottom) of 40), wherein the first characteristic signal (Fig.3, Signal from 36 to 40/17) includes a voltage value (Fig.3, Signal from 36 into the voltage comparator 40 is a voltage.).
Cullison is not relied upon herein to teach: providing an input signal associated with an audio signal to be played by the speaker using a processor in the electronic device; providing an output signal by adjusting the input signal using an amplifier circuit in the electronic device; using the processor; using the processor.
Nishimura teaches: providing an input signal (Fig.5, 502, ‘Input’) associated with an audio signal (Col 8, Lines 55-56, “... circuits... have been described in the context of conditioning audio signals...” ) to be played by the speaker (Col 1, Lines 27-31, “...circuit is used to dynamically adjust the level of a signal... For example, loudspeakers...”) using a processor in the electronic device (Col 9, Lines 11-18, “...the functions necessary to implement the invention may ...be embodied in part or in whole using software, firmware and/or hardware components, such as combinatorial logic, Application Specific Integrated Circuits (ASICs), Field-Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs) or other hardware or some combination of hardware, software and/or firmware components.); providing an output signal (Fig.5, 515) by adjusting the input signal (Fig.5, 502) using an amplifier circuit in the electronic device (Fig.5, 505); using the processor (Col 9, Lines 11-18); using the processor (Col 9, Lines 11-18).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘providing an input signal associated with an audio signal to be played by the speaker using a processor in the electronic device; providing an output signal by adjusting the input signal using an amplifier circuit in the electronic device; using the processor; using the processor’ in Cullison’s invention as taught by Nishimura’s invention.
The motivation for integrating Nishimura’s invention into Cullison’s invention would be to avoid noise, reduce variations in audio signal levels and improve perceived quality (Nishimura, Col 1, Lines 51-57, “To avoid noise and distortion, and to reduce unnatural and annoying variations in audio signal levels, many systems use conditioning circuits... Such signal conditioning improves the perceived quality or clarity of the signal.”).
Cullison is also not relied upon herein to teach: and at least one of a current value, a power, a frequency response and a gradient variation associated with the adjusted output signal.
However Wolfe teaches: and at least one of a current value, a power, a frequency response and a gradient variation associated with the adjusted output signal (Wolfe, Fig.3 shows voltage U, current I and power P being monitored for the signal characteristics. Par 0024 indicates frequency and other criteria for monitored signal characteristics: “The decision to whether to use fixed or adaptive gain control in the attack state is taken in step 14, for example, in accordance with the extent to which the threshold level T.sub.2 is exceeded by the output signal level or on the basis of the frequency spectrum of the input signal, but is not restricted to these two criteria.” It is worth noting here also that a gradient is rate of change, which includes a frequency value, as it has units of cycles per second. And a variation of a gradient includes a frequency spectrum, as a spectrum of frequencies is a variation of the frequency values.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘and at least one of a current value, a power, a frequency response and a gradient variation associated with the adjusted output signal’ in Cullison’s invention as taught by Wolfe’s invention.
The motivation for doing this would be to avoid irritating the listener and destabilizing the system (Wolfe, Par 0025: “This prevents the feedback network in the timing unit 9 from switching between attack and release modes too often, which is irritating for the listener and would destabilize the overall system.”).
Regarding claim 14, Cullison in view of Nishimura teaches: The method of claim 11.
Cullison is not relied upon herein to teach: further comprising: outputting a second characteristic signal based on the real-time characteristic of the driving signal using a judging circuit in the amplifier circuit; adjust a gain for amplifying the input signal according to the second characteristic signal using a gain control circuit in the amplifier circuit.
Nishimura teaches: further comprising: outputting a second characteristic signal (Fig.5, 525) based on the real-time characteristic of the driving signal (Fig.5, 515) using a judging circuit (Fig.5, 520) in the amplifier circuit (Fig.5, 500); adjusting a gain (Fig.5, 510) for amplifying (Fig.5, 505) the input signal (Fig.5, 502) according to the second characteristic signal (Fig.5, 525) using a gain control circuit (Fig.5, 540 to 550 to 505) in the amplifier circuit (Fig.5, 500).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘further comprising: outputting a second characteristic signal based on the real-time characteristic of the driving signal using a judging circuit in the amplifier circuit; adjust a gain for amplifying the input signal according to the second characteristic signal using a gain control circuit in the amplifier circuit..’ in Cullison’s invention as taught by Nishimura’s invention.
The motivation for integrating Nishimura’s invention into Cullison’s invention would be to avoid noise, reduce variations in audio signal levels and improve perceived quality (Nishimura, Col 1, Lines 51-57, “To avoid noise and distortion, and to reduce unnatural and annoying variations in audio signal levels, many systems use conditioning circuits... Such signal conditioning improves the perceived quality or clarity of the signal.”).
Regarding claim 15, Cullison in view of Nishimura teaches: The method of claim 14.
Cullison is not relied upon herein to teach: wherein the second characteristic signal includes a voltage value, a current value, a power, a frequency response and/or a gradient variation associated with the driving signal.
Nishimura teaches: wherein the second characteristic signal (Nishimura, Fig.5, 525) includes a voltage value (Nishimura, Fig.5, 525; Col 5, Line 59, “...signal 525 may be... DC voltage...”), a current value, a power, a frequency response and/or a gradient variation associated with the driving signal (Nishimura, Fig.5, 515, ‘Output’).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘wherein the second characteristic signal includes a voltage value, a current value, a power, a frequency response and/or a gradient variation associated with the driving signal.’ in Cullison’s invention as taught by Nishimura’s invention.
The motivation for integrating Nishimura’s invention into Cullison’s invention would be to avoid noise, reduce variations in audio signal levels and improve perceived quality (Nishimura, Col 1, Lines 51-57, “To avoid noise and distortion, and to reduce unnatural and annoying variations in audio signal levels, many systems use conditioning circuits... Such signal conditioning improves the perceived quality or clarity of the signal.”).
Regarding claim 16, Cullison in view of Nishimura teaches: The method of claim 14.
Cullison teaches: further comprising: outputting the activation signal (Fig.3, Output from 17) having the enable level (Fig.3, Reference Input (bottom) to comparator 40) using the switch control circuit (Fig.3, 17) for turning on the switch (Fig.3, 19) when the value of the first characteristic signal (Fig.3, Output from 36) is within a first predetermined range (Fig.3, Input (top) to 40 is greater than Reference Input (bottom) to 40) and outputting the activation signal (Fig.3, From 17) having the disable level (Fig.3, Reference Input (bottom) to comparator 40) using the switch control circuit (Fig.3, 17) for turning off the switch (Fig.3, 19) when the value of the first characteristic signal (Fig.3, Output from 36) is not within the first predetermined range (Fig.3, Input (top) to 40 is less than Reference Input (bottom) to 40).
Cullison is not relied upon herein to teach: in the processor; in the processor... and a value of the second characteristic signal is within a second predetermined range; or the value of the second characteristic signal is not within the second predetermined range.
Nishimura teaches: in the processor (Col 9, Lines 11-18, “...the functions necessary to implement the invention may ...be embodied in part or in whole using software, firmware and/or hardware components, such as combinatorial logic, Application Specific Integrated Circuits (ASICs), Field-Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs) or other hardware or some combination of hardware, software and/or firmware components.”); in the processor (Col 9, Lines 11-18) and a value of the second characteristic signal (Fig.5, 525) is within a second predetermined range (Fig.5, Input (top) to 540 is greater than Reference Input (bottom) of 540); or the value of the second characteristic signal (Fig.5, 525) is not within the second predetermined range (Fig.5, Input (top) to 540 is less than Reference Input (bottom) of 540).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘in the processor; in the processor... and a value of the second characteristic signal is within a second predetermined range; or the value of the second characteristic signal is not within the second predetermined range.’ in Cullison’s invention as taught by Nishimura’s invention.
The motivation for integrating Nishimura’s invention into Cullison’s invention would be to avoid noise, reduce variations in audio signal levels and improve perceived quality (Nishimura, Col 1, Lines 51-57, “To avoid noise and distortion, and to reduce unnatural and annoying variations in audio signal levels, many systems use conditioning circuits... Such signal conditioning improves the perceived quality or clarity of the signal.”).
Regarding claim 17, Cullison in view of Nishimura teaches: The method of claim 11.
Cullison teaches: further comprising: adjusting a level of the output signal (Fig.3, 11 ‘Audio Amp Output’) for providing the adjusted output signal (Fig.3, Output from 30) using the level shift circuit (Fig.3, 30).
Claims 8, 9, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cullison (U.S. Patent No. 4296278 A) in view of Nishimura (U.S. Patent No. 7800440 B2) in further view of Ikarashi (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2002/0125946 A1) and in further view of Diddens (U.S. Patent No. 3758872).
Regarding claim 8, Cullison in view of Nishimura teaches: The electronic device of claim 7.
Cullison is not relied upon herein to teach: wherein the level shift circuit is further configured to block a direct-current (DC) component in the output signal for providing the adjusted output signal which only includes an alternating-current (AC) component.
However, Ikarashi teaches: wherein the level shift circuit (Fig.1, Voltage divider 4) is further configured to block a direct-current (DC) component (Fig.1, Capacitor 5) in the output signal for providing the adjusted output signal (Fig.1, Output 6) which only includes an alternating-current (AC) component (Par 0005, “The resistance attenuator 25 is connected to an output terminal 27 through a DC-blocking capacitor 26.”).
Cullison, Nishimura, Ikarashi and Diddens are all considered to be analogous to the claimed inventions because they are all in the field of electronic circuits.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘wherein the level shift circuit is further configured to block a direct-current (DC) component in the output signal for providing the adjusted output signal which only includes an alternating-current (AC) component’ in Cullison’s modified invention as taught by Ikarashi.
The motivation for integrating Ikarashi’s teachings into Cullison’s modified invention would be to prevent the undesirable DC components of the signal from going into the next stage of signal processing (Diddens, Col 3, Lines 2-3, “The capacitor 13 serves to block the unwanted DC component of the input signal.”)
Regarding claim 9, Cullison in view of Nishimura teaches: The electronic device of claim 1.
Cullison teaches: wherein the level shift circuit (Fig.3, 30) comprises: a first resistor (Fig.3, 61) including: a first end coupled between the amplifier circuit (Fig.3, 11) and the switch (Fig.3, 19) for receiving the output signal (Fig.3, 11); and a second end (Fig.3, 61); a second resistor (Fig.3, 62) including: a first end coupled to the second end of the first resistor (Fig.3, 62 to 61); and a second end coupled to a ground level (Fig.3, 62 to Ground);
Cullison is not relied upon herein to teach: and a capacitor including: a first end coupled to the second end of the first resistor and the first end of the second resistor; and a second end coupled to the processor for outputting the adjusted output signal.
However, Ikarashi teaches: ‘ and a capacitor (Fig.1, Capacitor 5) including: a first end (Fig.1, Left terminal of capacitor 5) coupled to the second end of the first resistor (Fig.1, Right terminal of resistor 4a) and the first end of the second resistor (Fig.1, Bottom terminal of resistor 4b); and a second end (Fig.1, Right terminal of capacitor 5) coupled to the processor for outputting the adjusted output signal (Fig.1, Output terminal 6).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘and a capacitor including: a first end coupled to the second end of the first resistor and the first end of the second resistor; and a second end coupled to the processor for outputting the adjusted output signal.’ in Cullison’s modified invention as taught by Ikarashi.
The motivation for integrating Ikarashi’s teachings into Cullison’s modified invention would be to prevent the undesirable DC components of the signal from going into the next stage of signal processing (Diddens, Col 3, Lines 2-3, “The capacitor 13 serves to block the unwanted DC component of the input signal.”).
Regarding claim 18, Cullison in view of Nishimura teaches: The method of claim 17.
Cullison is not relied upon herein to teach: further comprising: blocking a direct-current (DC) component in the output signal using the level shift circuit for providing the adjusted output signal which only includes an alternating-current (AC) component.
However, Ikarashi teaches: further comprising: blocking a direct-current (DC) component (Fig.1, Capacitor 5) in the output signal using the level shift circuit (Fig.1, Voltage Divider 4) for providing the adjusted output signal (Fig.1, Terminal 6) which only includes an alternating-current (AC) component (Par 0005, “The resistance attenuator 25 is connected to an output terminal 27 through a DC-blocking capacitor 26.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teaching of ‘further comprising: blocking a direct-current (DC) component in the output signal using the level shift circuit for providing the adjusted output signal which only includes an alternating-current (AC) component’ in Cullison’s modified invention as taught by Ikarashi.
The motivation for integrating Ikarashi’s teachings into Cullison’s modified invention would be to prevent the undesirable DC components of the signal from going into the next stage of signal processing (Diddens, Col 3, Lines 2-3, “The capacitor 13 serves to block the unwanted DC component of the input signal.”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Witt (US Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0036334 A1) discloses monitoring signals (Witt, Pars 0021-0024: “...the monitoring unit is adapted to monitor at the signal input of the broadband high power amplifier at least one of the following signal characteristics of the received input signal: [0022] an average input power of the input signal, [0023] a peak input power of the input signal, [0024] a frequency of the input signal and [0025] a bandwidth of the input signal.”; Note that power signals are necessarily composed of voltage and current. Power is measured by way of the signal’s voltage and current. Therefore monitoring power includes monitoring the voltage and current. Furthermore, a gradient is rate of change, which includes a frequency value, as it has units of cycles per second. And a variation of a gradient includes a frequency bandwidth, as a bandwidth of frequencies is a variation of the frequency values.).
Cheng (US Patent No. 10589987 B2) discloses monitoring of signal characteristics within a circuit (Cheng, Col 9, Ln 9-11: “...to enable monitoring signal characteristics (e.g., power/voltage levels) at multiple points within a complex tuning circuit.”. Note that power signals are necessarily composed of voltage and current. Power is measured by way of the signal’s voltage and current. Therefore monitoring power includes monitoring the voltage and current.).
Espen (US Patent No. 3548284 A) discloses a gradient detector responsive to gradient variations (Espen, Col 5, Ln 16-20: “...gradient detector means connected to said transmitter means and responsive to said gradient variations for providing a first detector signal in response to said high gradient conditions and a second detector signal in response to said low gradient conditions...”)
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Andres Lavin whose telephone number is 571-272-7628. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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.
/Andres Lavin/
Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2692
/CAROLYN R EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2692