Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/252,109

AUDIO DEVICE, CONTROL METHOD FOR AUDIO DEVICE, AND PROGRAM

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 08, 2023
Examiner
BEKEE, CHIMEZIE EZERIWE
Art Unit
2691
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
AlphaTheta Corporation
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allow Rate
11 granted / 16 resolved
+6.8% vs TC avg
Strong +33% interview lift
Without
With
+33.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
43
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.6%
-38.4% vs TC avg
§103
67.7%
+27.7% vs TC avg
§102
18.2%
-21.8% vs TC avg
§112
6.8%
-33.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 16 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 1. 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. 2. Claims 1-4, 8, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugawara (WIPO Pub. No. WO 2013/121579 A1) in view of Terauchi et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2009/0088877 A1, hereinafter "Terauchi"), and further in view of Abanami (U.S. Pat. No. 7,889,173 B2). Regarding Claim 1, Sugawara teaches an audio device configured to play back music data (music player 1, Fig. 1, Para. [0021]), the audio device comprising a first playback controller (control unit 9, Fig. 2, Para. [0025]) configured: in a case where a user performs an ON operation during playback of first music, to perform application of a first effect to the first music (user performs ON operation using input unit 3 and an effect is applied to the piece of music being played, Paras. [0024], [0025] and [0029]), the first effect being set in association with the first music (effect amount is predetermined based on the beats or the like of the piece of music included in the analysis data 4b and also may be set based on information relating to a piece of music, Para. [0038]; therefore the effect can be set in association with the first music); and in a case where the user performs an OFF operation after the application of the first effect, to stop the application of the first effect (after the application of the first effect user performs an OFF operation by releasing finger on the input unit 3 to gradually stop the application of the first effect and switching to a release effect to reduce an uncomfortable feeling in terms of hearing, Paras. [0046] and [0047]). Sugawara fails to explicitly teach the first effect being set in association with the first music; and in a case where the user performs an OFF operation after the application of the first effect, to stop the application of the first effect and to perform playback of a sampling sound. However, Terauchi teaches effect being set in association with the first music (recommended effect information can be incorporated in the attribute information associated with a particular piece of music, Paras. [0105]-[0108]; during playback of music, when the attribute information includes effect information indicating a recommended effect, the recommended effect is applied to the music being played, Para. [0226]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the audio device (as taught by Sugawara) to include the effect being set in association with the first music (as taught by Terauchi). Doing so, automatic reconstruction may be performed to present the music in a form expected to be liked by the listener (Terauchi Para. [0225]). However, Abanami teaches in a case where the user performs an OFF operation and to perform playback of a sampling sound (user performs a forward function [Off operation] which allows user to stop playing a first music file and start playing a second music file [a sampling sound], Claim 2, col. 5, lines 14-34). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the audio device (as taught by Sugawara in view of Terauchi) to include the playback of a sampling sound after the first effect is stopped (as taught by Abanami). Doing so improves user convenience and usability. Regarding Claim 2, Sugawara in view of Terauchi, and further in view of Abanami teaches wherein the first playback controller is configured to play back an effect sound related to the first effect in synchronization with a beat position of the first music (Sugawara, effect amount playback of the first effect can be in synchronization with beat position, Para. [0038]). Regarding Claim 3, Sugawara in view of Terauchi, and further in view of Abanami teaches wherein, in a case where the OFF operation is performed, the first playback controller is configured to perform the playback of the sampling sound after application of a second effect to the first music, or to perform the application of the second effect to the first music after the playback of the sampling sound, the second effect being different from the first effect. However, Sugawara teaches wherein, in a case where the OFF operation is performed, the first playback controller is configured to perform the playback of a second effect to the first music, the second effect being different from the first effect (after the application of the first effect user performs an OFF operation by releasing finger on the input unit 3 to gradually stop the application of the first effect and switching to a release effect [second effect], Paras. [0046] and [0047]). However, Abanami teaches playback of sampling sound after an Off operation (user performs a forward function [Off operation] which allows user to stop playing a first music file and start playing a second music file [a sampling sound], Claim 2). Regarding Claim 4, Sugawara in view of Terauchi, and further in view of Abanami teaches further comprising a storage unit in which setting information is stored, the setting information comprising a combination of the first effect (Sugawara, music player program to add effects can be stored in a computer-readable recording medium, Paras. [0019] and [0020]; also the effects added by the effect unit 6 is preset, Para. [0029]), and the sampling sound (Abanami, second music [sampling sound] is stored in memory, Claim 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the audio device with storage for storing sound effects (as taught by Sugawara in view of Terauchi) to include storing the sampling sound (as taught by Abanami). Doing so provides creative control over transitions between music tracks for a more comfortable and memorable listening experience. Regarding Claim 8, it is similarly rejected as Claim 1. The method can be found in Sugawara (Fig. 3, Paras. [0033], [0034], [0035], [0036], [0037], [0038], [0039], [0040], [0041], and [0042]). Regarding Claim 9, it is similarly rejected as Claim 1. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium can be found in Sugawara (Paras. [0019] and [0020]). 3. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugawara (WIPO Pub. No. WO 2013/121579 A1) in view of Terauchi et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2009/0088877 A1, hereinafter "Terauchi") in view of Abanami (U.S. Pat. No. 7,889,173 B2), and further in view of Carrier (U.S. Pub. No. 2013/0131850 A1). Regarding Claim 5, Sugawara in view of Terauchi, and further in view of Abanami fails to explicitly teach wherein the first effect comprises multiple effects. However, Carrier teaches wherein the first effect comprises multiple effects (one or more effects may be applied to audio data by playback engine, Para. [0019]). 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 audio device (as taught by Sugawara in view of Terauchi, and further in view of Abanami) to include the first effect comprising multiple effects (as taught by Carrier). Doing so, enables the creation of richer, more dynamic and creative soundscapes. 4. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugawara (WIPO Pub. No. WO 2013/121579 A1) in view of Terauchi et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2009/0088877 A1, hereinafter "Terauchi") in view of Abanami (U.S. Pat. No. 7,889,173 B2), and further in view of O'Donnell et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0334001 A1, hereinafter "O'Donnell"). Regarding Claim 6, Sugawara in view of Terauchi, and further in view of Abanami fails to explicitly teach further comprising a second playback controller configured to perform playback of second music after the playback of the sampling sound, the second music being different from the first music. However, O'Donnell teaches a second playback controller (channel control sets 21A-D [multiple playback controllers] to control the playback of tracks assigned to deck 1 through 4, Fig. 1, Para. [0026]). 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 audio device (as taught by Sugawara in view of Terauchi, and further in view of Abanami) to include a second playback controller (as taught by O'Donnell). Doing so, data associated with one or more tracks may be used to control effects applied to other tracks (O'Donnell Para. [0026]). 5. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugawara (WIPO Pub. No. WO 2013/121579 A1) in view of Terauchi et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2009/0088877 A1, hereinafter "Terauchi") in view of Abanami (U.S. Pat. No. 7,889,173 B2), and further in view of Nagayama (WIPO Pub. No. WO 2010/053208 A1). Regarding Claim 7, Sugawara in view of Terauchi, and further in view of Abanami fails to explicitly teach further comprising: one operation element configured to receive a rotating operation and a switching operation; and a parameter setting unit configured to set a parameter related to the first effect in response to the rotating operation, wherein the ON operation comprises the switching operation. However, Nagayama teaches further comprising: one operation element configured to receive a rotating operation and a switching operation (rotation switch 30 is pivoted so as to be operable in a forward and reverse manner by a finger, and turns an initial position to an off state, and turns the rotation switch 30 to an on state, Fig. 1, Para. [0010]); and a parameter setting unit configured to set a parameter related to the first effect in response to the rotating operation (when the rotation switch 30 or the push switch 31, which is the sound effect switch 3, is operated while the music piece of the audio player 10 is in a playback state, the controller 40 [mapped as the parameter setting unit] is configured to control the operation of the rotation switch 30 or the push switch 31, sound effect data corresponding to the operated sound effect switch 3 is read out from a ROM42 serving as a storage unit, music data input from an audio player 10 and the sound effect data are synthesized, and the synthesized data is amplified by a mini-amplifier 45 to drive the mini-speaker 4, Fig. 1, Para. [0010]), wherein the ON operation comprises the switching operation (rotation switch 30 is pivoted so as to be operable in a forward and reverse manner by a finger, and turns an initial position to an off state, and turns the rotation switch 30 to an on state, Fig. 1, Para. [0010]). 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 audio device (as taught by Sugawara in view of Terauchi, and further in view of Abanami) to include the rotating operation element (as taught by Nagayama). Doing so enables switching between sound effects such as a scratch sound when forward rotated or a siren sound when reverse rotated (Nagayama Para. [0010]). Response to Arguments 6. Applicant’s arguments, see applicant’s remark pages 4-7, filed December 26, 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of independent claim(s) 1, 8 and 9 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugawara in view of Terauchi and further in view of Koizumi have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugawara in view of Terauchi, and further in view of Abanami. Sugawara teaches an audio device configured to play back music data (Fig. 1, Para. [0021]), the audio device comprising a first playback controller (Fig. 2, Para. [0025]) configured: in a case where a user performs an ON operation during playback of first music, to perform application of a first effect to the first music (Paras. [0024], [0025] and [0029]); and in a case where the user performs an OFF operation after the application of the first effect, to stop the application of the first effect (Paras. [0046] and [0047]). Terauchi teaches effect being set in association with the first music (Paras. [0105]-[0108] and [0226]). Abanami teaches in a case where the user performs an OFF operation and to perform playback of a sampling sound (Claim 2). The combination of the teachings of Sugawara in view of Terauchi, and further in view of Abanami render independent Claims 1, 8, and 9 obvious. The rejections of Claims 1, 8, and 9 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugawara in view of Terauchi, and further in view of Abanami are maintained. Regarding dependent Claims 2-7. Dependent Claims 2-4 are rejected on a new ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugawara in view of Terauchi, and further in view of Abanami. The rejections of Claims 2-4 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugawara in view of Terauchi, and further in view of Abanami are maintained. Dependent Claim 5 is rejected on a new ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugawara in view of Terauchi in view of Abanami, and further in view of Carrier. The rejection of Claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugawara in view of Terauchi in view of Abanami, and further in view of Carrier is maintained. Dependent Claim 6 is rejected on a new ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugawara in view of Terauchi in view of Abanami, and further in view of O’Donnell. The rejection of Claim 6 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugawara in view of Terauchi in view of Abanami, and further in view of O’Donnell is maintained. Dependent Claim 7 is rejected on a new ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugawara in view of Terauchi in view of Abanami, and further in view of Nagayama. The rejection of Claim 7 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugawara in view of Sugawara in view of Terauchi in view of Abanami, and further in view of Nagayama is maintained. Conclusion 7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHIMEZIE E BEKEE whose telephone number is (571)272-0202. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7.30-5. 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, Duc Nguyen can be reached at 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 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. /CHIMEZIE EZERIWE BEKEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2691 /DUC NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2691
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 08, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jul 23, 2025
Response Filed
Sep 24, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Dec 05, 2025
Interview Requested
Dec 11, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 11, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 26, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 13, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Mar 17, 2026
Interview Requested

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602426
RECORDLESS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604146
BEAMFORMING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12586595
APPARATUS, METHOD AND COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR ENCODING AN AUDIO SIGNAL OR FOR DECODING AN ENCODED AUDIO SCENE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585145
SMART WEARABLE GLASSES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587798
Headphones with Sound-Enhancement and Integrated Self-Administered Hearing Test
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
69%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+33.3%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 16 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month