DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-4, 7-10, 13-19 and 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Spittle (US 20250094211 A1) in view of Kannan et al (US 20210127221 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Spittle discloses a method for calibrating an audio system, comprising:
subsequent to an initial use of a first audio device (fig.59 #5812A,B), docking the first audio device in a first cavity of an audio device case (fig.59 #5804)(Par.[1118-1119][1124] Right and Left Ear Pieces #5812A,B may be docked within a cavity of charging pod #5804 at regular intervals, where an audio system calibration is performed during a docked state, therefor the calibration is performed after an initial use of the device);
emitting a test audio signal from a first speaker of the first audio device into the audio device case (Par.[1120] “The calibration test may include playing a test signal using the speakers in the ear pieces and using the ear piece's microphones to capture the played signal”);
receiving, in response to the test audio signal, a first received signal at a first sensor of the first audio device or at a first sensor of a second audio device docked inside the audio device case (Par.[1120] “The calibration test may include playing a test signal using the speakers in the ear pieces and using the ear piece's microphones to capture the played signal”);
obtaining a first correction for the first audio device based on the first received signal (Par.[1120] “Additional processing parameters such as crossover filters, fractional delays and level controls may be adjusted based on analysis of the captured signals”. Each of the “processing parameters” are considered as at least first correction (i.e. calibration information));
during operation outside the audio device case, emitting a corrected output signal into a user's ear canal as part of an audiometry test, the corrected output signal being compensated using the first correction (Par.[1025] the ear device may contain plugins for performing a binaural hearing test with is an audiometry test, wherein calibration information of each earpiece may be used to present to each ear of the listener); and
collecting test results and transmitting an audiogram based on the collected test results (Par.[1025] the binaural hearing test includes sharing information securely with other connected device thereby including a transmission of test results (i.e. audiogram) to the other connected devices).
Spittle does not disclose expressly detecting that the first audio device is docked in an audio device case and a lid of the audio device case is in a closed position prior to performing the audio system calibration.
Kannan discloses a method for calibrating an audio system, comprising: subsequent to an initial use of a first audio device, detecting that the first audio device (#214) is docked in an audio device case (#200) and a lid (#204) of the audio device case is in a closed position, wherein the first audio device is positioned in a first cavity (#222) of the audio device case (Par.[0049] the calibration process may be initiated upon detection of earphone #214 being inserted in the case #200 and the cover #204 being closed); emitting a test audio signal (#514) from a first speaker (#228) of a first audio device into the audio device case (Par.[0050] at step #512 of figure 5B; a calibration noise #514 is emitted from a first speaker #228 of earphone #214); receiving, in response to the test audio signal, a first received signal at a first sensor inside the audio device case (Par.[0050] at step #514 of figure 5B; the calibration noise #514 is received by a first microphone sensor #208 within the case #200); and obtaining a first correction for the first audio device based on the first received signal and based at least in part on the determined fault (Par.[0050] at step #518 of figure 5B, a first correction in the form of a earphone speaker gain is obtained based on the received calibration noise signal from sensor #208 as compared to the reference noise #516).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the present invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use the lid and detection methods of Kannan in the audio device case of Spittle. The motivation for doing so would have been to acoustically isolate the audio devices during the calibration process with a lid, and to prevent the initiation of the calibration process until it is determined that the audio devices are properly docked within the audio device case.
With respect to claim 2, Spittle discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: transmitting the first received signal to a computing system that is paired with the audio system; and receiving, from the computing system, the first correction derived in part from the first received signal (Par.[1125] “the measurement, analysis, and calibration data discussed above may be transmitted to the audio system, an electronic device, or a cloud based analysis system, or all of the above”).
With respect to claim 3, Spittle discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the audio device case includes a processor (fig.59 #5810), and the method is further comprising: transmitting the first received signal to the audio device case; and receiving, from the audio device case, the first correction derived by the processor in part from the first received signal (Par.[1118][1124] the calibration process is performed by the processor #5810 of the charging pod #5804 (“audio device case”)).
With respect to claim 4, Spitttle discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, by the first audio device, an output signal; applying the first correction to the output signal to produce a second corrected output signal; and while the first audio device is not docked in the audio device case, emitting the corrected output signal by the first speaker of the first audio device (Par.[0881] the audio system may receive an output signal wirelessly from a connected device such as mobile phone; wherein the first correction, or calibration information is used to correct the received output signal as a second corrected output signal).
With respect to claim 7, Spittle discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving by the first audio device, an output signal (Par.[0881] see rejection of claim 4); applying a hearing compensation correction for a human ear to the output signal based on the first correction to produce a second corrected output signall and while the first audio device is not docked in the audio device case, emitting the second corrected output signal by the first speaker of the first audio device (Par.[1023-1025] results from the binaural hearing test are used to compensate for characteristic of the human ear, thereby by providing a second corrected output signal from received content signals,).
With respect to claim 8, Spittle discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: analyzing the first received signal; identifying a type of fault in first the audio system based on the analyzing, wherein the type of fault corresponds to a partial or complete blocking of an audio port or vent of the first speaker or damage to circuitry of the first audio device (Par.[1123] “the calibration test may be used to determine if the output channels of the ear pieces are blocked or occluded (e.g., by wax/cerumen)”); and selecting the first correction based on the identified type of fault (Par.[1123] “In some embodiments, this calibration test can also be used to determine any compensation processing parameters for the audio system”).
With respect to claim 9, Spittle discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: comparing the first received signal to a corresponding reference signal; and wherein the first correction is determined based on the comparing to the corresponding reference signal (Par.[1124] “The sound signals can be analyzed and compared to ensure they are meeting the binaural matching necessary for the target use cases of the audio system.”).
With respect to claim 10, Spittle discloses the method of claim 9, wherein the corresponding reference signal was previously captured from sensors in an acoustic cavity of a test environment different from the acoustic cavity of the audio device case or wherein the corresponding reference signal was previously captured from sensors in an acoustic cavity of the audio device case, the acoustic cavity including the first cavity (Par.[1117] an internal memory of the charging pod may be updated by the manufacturer with calibration specific audio files, therefor reference parameters can be determined in a test environment at the manufacturer).
With respect to claim 13, Spittle discloses the method of claim 1, however does not disclose expressly wherein the first sensor of the audio system is an accelerometer.
Official Notice is taken that accelerometers are well-known in the art to sense vibrational waves. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the present invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use an accelerometer as the first sensor in the invention Kannan. The motivation for doing so would have been to use a known sensor for detecting vibrational waves generating during the calibration process.
With respect to claim 14, Spittle discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first sensor of the audio system is an audio sensor of the first audio device, and further comprising: receiving, in response to the test audio signal, a second received signal at a second sensor of the first audio device; receiving, in response to the test audio signal, a third received signal at a first sensor of a second audio device docked in the audio device case; and receiving, in response to the test audio signal, a fourth received signal at a second sensor of the second audio device; wherein the first correction is determined based on the first, second, third, and fourth received signals (Par.[1120] As shown in figure 59 each earpiece comprises at least a first and second sensor, wherein at least a first and second signal are received by microphones of the left ear piece, and third and fourth signals are received by microphones of the right ear piece during the calibration process).
With respect to claim 15, Spittle discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: emitting a second test audio signal into the audio device case from a first speaker of a second audio device docked in the audio device case; receiving, in response to the second test audio signal, a second received signal at the first sensor of the first audio device; and determining a second correction for the second audio device based on the second received signal (Par.[1120][1124] the calibration process is performed on both a first left ear piece comprising a first speaker, and a second right ear piece comprising a second speaker, wherein respective calibration test signals are received by microphones of the respective earpieces).
With respect to claim 16, Spittle discloses the method of claim 1, however does not disclose expressly further comprising: prior to emitting the test audio signal, measuring an ambient noise; and confirming a magnitude of the ambient noise is below a threshold.
Kannan discloses a method comprising prior to emitting a test audio signal, measuring an ambient noise; and confirming a magnitude of the ambient noise is below a threshold (Par.[0049] fig.5B step #508 the device verifies that an ambient noise is below a threshold before performing the calibration process).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the present invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to measure ambient noise prior to performing the calibration process of Spittle as performed by Kannan. The motivation for doing so would have been to prevent ambient noise from affecting the results of the calibration test.
With respect to claim 17, Spittle discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: evaluating a plurality of acoustic components of the audio system based on the first received signal; and identifying an acoustic component of the plurality of acoustic components as having a failure state; wherein the first correction includes a correction for the failure state of the identified acoustic component (Par. [1121] “The calibration test may also be used to determine if there is a major fault, such as one of the microphones or loudspeakers not working”).
With respect to claim 18, Spittle discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first sensor is part of the first audio device, and further comprising: while the first audio device is not docked in the audio device case, receiving a first input signal at the first sensor; applying the first correction to the first input signal to create a corrected input signal; and transmitting the corrected input signal to a paired device (Par.[1118] the calibration process may result in a both the loudspeakers and microphones of the earpieces being tuned, therefor input audio signals via the microphone of the earpieces are corrected via the tuning, Par.[0836] the earpieces support bi-directional communication with an electronic device, such as a mobile device, therefor corrected input signal are transmitted via a wireless link to a paired device).
With respect to claim 19, Spittle discloses an audio system comprising:
an audio device case a first cavity, and a second cavity (fig.59 #5804; Par.[1124]);
a first audio device (fig.59 #5812A) capable of docking in the first cavity of the audio device case and including a first speaker and a first sensor (see fig.59 for unlabeled speaker and microphone sensor of device #5812A);
a second audio device (fig.59 #5812B) capable of docking in the second cavity of the audio device case and including a first speaker and a first sensor (see fig.59 for unlabeled speaker and microphone sensor of device #5812B); and
a processor (fig.59 #5810) configured to execute instructions that cause:
subsequent to an initial use of a first audio device (fig.59 #5812A,B), docking the first audio device in a first cavity of an audio device case (fig.59 #5804)(Par.[1118-1119][1124] Right and Left Ear Pieces #5812A,B may be docked within a cavity of charging pod #5804 at regular intervals, where an audio system calibration is performed during a docked state, therefor the calibration is performed after an initial use of the device);
emitting a test audio signal from the first speaker of the first audio device into the audio device case (Par.[1120] “The calibration test may include playing a test signal using the speakers in the ear pieces and using the ear piece's microphones to capture the played signal”);
receiving, in response to the test audio signal, a first received signal at the first sensor of the first audio device or the first sensor of the second audio device inside the audio device case (Par.[1120] “The calibration test may include playing a test signal using the speakers in the ear pieces and using the ear piece's microphones to capture the played signal”);
obtaining a first correction for the first audio device based on the first received signal (Par.[1120] “Additional processing parameters such as crossover filters, fractional delays and level controls may be adjusted based on analysis of the captured signals”. Each of the “processing parameters” are considered as at least first correction (i.e. calibration information)), and
while the first audio device is not docked in the audio device case:
applying the first correction to an input sensor path of the first audio device to produce a corrected input signal, and send the corrected input signal to a paired device (Par.[1118] the calibration process may result in a both the loudspeakers and microphones of the earpieces being tuned, therefor input audio signals via the microphone of the earpieces are corrected via the tuning, Par.[0836] the earpieces support bi-directional communication with an electronic device, such as a mobile device, therefor corrected input signal are transmitted via a wireless link to a paired device), or
receiving an output signal from the paired device, applying the first correction to the output signal to produce a corrected output signal, and outputting the corrected output signal on the first speaker of the first audio device.
Spittle does not disclose expressly wherein the audio device case comprises a base and a lid, and detecting that the first audio device is docked in an audio device case and a lid of the audio device case is in a closed position prior to performing the audio system calibration.
Kannan discloses a method for calibrating an audio system, comprising: subsequent to an initial use of a first audio device, detecting that the first audio device (#214) is docked in an audio device case (#200) with a base (#202) and a lid (#204) of the audio device case is in a closed position, wherein the first audio device is positioned in a first cavity (#222) of the audio device case (Par.[0049] the calibration process may be initiated upon detection of earphone #214 being inserted in the case #200 and the cover #204 being closed); emitting a test audio signal (#514) from a first speaker (#228) of a first audio device into the audio device case (Par.[0050] at step #512 of figure 5B; a calibration noise #514 is emitted from a first speaker #228 of earphone #214); receiving, in response to the test audio signal, a first received signal at a first sensor inside the audio device case (Par.[0050] at step #514 of figure 5B; the calibration noise #514 is received by a first microphone sensor #208 within the case #200); and obtaining a first correction for the first audio device based on the first received signal and based at least in part on the determined fault (Par.[0050] at step #518 of figure 5B, a first correction in the form of a earphone speaker gain is obtained based on the received calibration noise signal from sensor #208 as compared to the reference noise #516).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the present invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use a case with a base and lid and detection methods provided by Kannan in the audio device case of Spittle. The motivation for doing so would have been to acoustically isolate the audio devices during the calibration process with a lid, and to prevent the initiation of the calibration process until it is determined that the audio devices are properly docked within the audio device case.
With respect to claim 21, Spittle discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first correction amplifies a frequency range that exhibits a reduced frequency response in the first received signal (Par.[1119] “The audio system may analyze the captured sounds to determine whether one or more settings (e.g., frequency response) should be adjusted”).
With respect to claim 22, Spittle discloses the method of claim 1,further comprising: determining, based on the first received signal, a type of fault with the first speaker, the first sensor of the first audio device, or the first sensor of the second audio device, wherein the type of fault comprises at least one of: a partial or complete blocking of an audio port or vent of the first speaker or damage to circuitry of the first audio device; and obtaining the first correction for the first audio device further based on the type of fault (Par.[1123] “the calibration test may be used to determine if the output channels of the ear pieces are blocked or occluded (e.g., by wax/cerumen)”); and selecting the first correction based on the identified type of fault (Par.[1123] “In some embodiments, this calibration test can also be used to determine any compensation processing parameters for the audio system”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 20 and 23-24 are allowed.
Claim 12 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Reasons for Allowance
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding independent claim 20, the closest prior art such as Spittle (US 20250094211 A1) in view of Kannan et al (US 20210127221 A1) teaches the general concept of a computer-readable medium storing instructions thereon which when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to: subsequent to an initial use of a first audio device, detect that the first audio device is docked in an audio device case and a lid of the audio device case is in a closed position, wherein the first audio device is positioned in a first cavity of the audio device case; emit a test audio signal from a first speaker of the first audio device into the audio device case, the test audio signal causing a first received signal to be received at a first sensor of the first audio device or at a second sensor of a second audio device docked in the audio device case (See claim rejection under 35 USC 103 above for citations).
However, none of the closest prior art of record, alone or in combination, teaches
“estimate a transfer function for at least one speaker-to-microphone path within the audio device case and compare the estimated transfer function to a corresponding reference transfer function previously estimated in the same audio device case; and obtain a first correction for the first audio device based on the estimated transfer function and the corresponding reference transfer function” in combination with the rest of the limitations as recited in independent claim 20.
Other prior art has been cited herein regarding calibration of audio devices while docked in audio device cases, however the other prior art of record also fails to teach or provide suggestion to arrive the combination of the elements and steps presented in the independent claims, again when said elements or steps are collectively considered in regards to each claim. For at least the reasons listed above, dependent claims 23 and 24 are also allowed in view of their respective dependencies upon the independent claims.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON R KURR whose telephone number is (571)270-5981. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9-5.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Vivian Chin can be reached on (571-272-7848. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
JASON R. KURR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2695
/JASON R KURR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695
Prosecution Insights