DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to communications filed 9/18/2025:
Claims 1-5 are pending
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-5 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.
Response to Amendment
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) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lovitt (US20210405959) in view of Munoz et al (US20210006918, hereinafter “Munoz”).
Regarding claim 1, Lovitt teaches a method for simulating spatial sound in augmented reality (AR) executable by an AR device (abstract, method of producing spatial audio from AR environment), comprising:
emitting multiple sound packets by a Four-dimensional (4D) object located on an anchor device in an AR scene (Fig. 5B, ¶102-104, one or more virtual objects can be placed on an anchor device (e.g. window) and the one or more virtual objects can produce one or more sounds (wherein the one or more sounds are considered to be 4D because they vary with time));
calculating a distance, an angle, and spatial relationship between the AR device and the anchor device (¶71-72, mapping out the AR scene using parameters such as distance and angle to determine the spatial relationships between the AR device 106 and various anchors); and
converting the sound packets into 6 degrees of freedom (DoF) sound signals according to the calculated distance, the calculated angle, the calculated spatial relationship, an original sound source, and user volume settings using a sound positioning algorithm, and sending the 6DoF sound signals to a playback device of the AR device (Fig. 3B, ¶76, 107, audio output is modified in accordance with the position of the user (wearing the AR device) and the one or more virtual objects (placed at the anchor points in the AR scene)).
Lovitt fails to explicitly teach comprising a first transmitter of the anchor device sending a plurality of first spatial information packets via a first communication technology; and a second transmitter of the anchor device sending a plurality of second spatial information packets via a second communication technology to the AR device; and obtaining the spatial relationship according to packet contents of the first spatial information packets and the second spatial information packets;
Munoz teaches comprising a first transmitter of the anchor device sending a plurality of first spatial information packets via a first communication technology (Fig. 1B, a source device (such as the window capable of emitting a sound as taught by Lovitt) can transmit a bitstream to a target device (such as the AR device worn by the user in Lovitt)); and a second transmitter of the anchor device sending a plurality of second spatial information packets via a second communication technology to the AR device; and obtaining the spatial relationship according to packet contents of the first spatial information packets and the second spatial information packets (¶44, 53, the bitstream can comprise of data that can be used to reconstruct the playback scene and can be transmitted by wireless (such as RF means) or wired means);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the AR playback device (as taught by Lovitt) with the adaptive playback technology (as taught by Munoz). The rationale to do so is to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of improving playback according to potential rendering constraints (Munoz, ¶76).
Regarding claim 2, Lovitt in view of Munoz teaches wherein the sound positioning algorithm is head Related Transfer Functions (HRTF) (Lovitt, ¶75, HRTFs can be used to represent the modified audio output).
Regarding claims 3-4, they are rejected similarly as claims 1-2, respectively. The system can be found in Lovitt (abstract, systems).
Regarding claim 5, it is rejected similarly as claim 1. The medium can be found in Lovitt (abstract, medium).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to PTO-892, Notice of References Cited for a listing of analogous art.
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 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 QIN ZHU whose telephone number is (571)270-1304. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 6AM-4PM EST.
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, Duc Nguyen can be reached on 571-272-7503. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/QIN ZHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2691