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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
1.Claims 8-13 and 21 are allowed.
Claim 7 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2.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.
3.Claim(s) 1-2, 4-6, 15-16 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nicol et al. (US 20080137870) in view of Faller et al. (WO 2016/023581).
Regarding claims 1 and 15, Nicole discloses a computer implemented method for generating a personalized sound signal transfer function (Paragraphs: 0038-0039: Nicol discusses a head-related transfer functions HRTFS specific to an individual), the method comprising: receiving, by a sound receiver, a sound signal at or in an ear of a user (Paragraphs: 0040-0041 and 0136: Nicol discusses how the system measuring transfer functions representative of HRTFs in a set of chosen directions);
Nicol discloses the invention set forth above but does not specifically point out “determining, based on the received sound signal, first data, representing a near field sound signal transfer function associated with the ear of the user; determining, based on the first data, second data, representing one of a far field sound signal transfer function associated with the ear of the user or a free field sound transfer function associated with the ear of the user”
Faller however discloses determining, based on the received sound signal, first data, representing a near field sound signal transfer function associated with the ear of the user (abstract and Page.2 lines 20-24: Faller discusses how the first output audio signal (i.e. an audio signal of first data) to be transmitted over a first acoustic near-field propagation channel between a first loudspeaker and a left ear of a listener); determining, based on the first data, second data, representing one of a far field sound signal transfer function associated with the ear of the user or a free field sound transfer function associated with the ear of the user (Page.4 lines 18-31: Faller discusses how the system filter a source audio signal (i.e. to determine the data) upon the basis of a first acoustic far-field transfer function to obtain the first input audio signal, and to filter the source audio signal upon the basis of a second acoustic far-field transfer function to obtain the second input audio signal; and how the system determine the second acoustic far-field transfer function upon the basis of the location of the spatial audio source within the spatial audio scenario and a location of the right ear of the listener).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention of Nicol, and modify to determine, based on the first data, second data, wherein the second data represents a second sound signal transfer function associated with the ear of the user, as taught by Faller, thus allowing an adequate audio quality to reduced listening comfort, as discussed by Faller.
Considering claims 2 and 16, Faller discloses the computer implemented method of claims 1 and 15, comprising receiving the sound signal from a sound transmitter within a near field relative to the ear of the user (Page.2 lines 12-15 and Page.7 lines 6-10, Faller discusses how a first acoustic near-field propagation channel between a first loudspeaker and a left ear of a listener).
Considering claims 4 and 18, Nicol discloses the computer implemented method of claims 1 and 15, further comprising at least one of: prior to receiving the sound signal, transmitting, by a sound transmitter, the sound signal; determining, based on the second data, a filter function for modifying at least one of the sound signal or a subsequent sound signal; or transmitting, by the sound transmitter, at least one of the modified sound signal or the modified subsequent sound signal (Paragraphs: 0003, 0008 and 0021: Nicol discusses how the system modify the acoustic wave in its path between the source and the ears of the listener; and how any individual predict his HRTFS based on the statistical model obtained).
Considering claims 5 and 19, Nicol in view of Faller discloses the computer implemented method of claims 1 and 15, wherein: the far field or free field sound signal transfer function is associated with a sound signal direction; and the method further comprises determining third data, wherein the third data is indicative of the sound signal direction, and wherein determining the second data is further based on the third data (Paragraphs: 0044 and 0066-0068: Nicol discusses directions, based on a series of measurements performed on that individual, representative of HRTFS,).
Considering claims 6 and 20, Nicol discloses the computer implemented method of claims 5 and 19, wherein: the second data is determined using a regression algorithm, wherein the regression algorithm is an artificial intelligence-based, machine learning- based, or neural network-based regression algorithm; and at least one of the first data or the third data are used as inputs of the regression algorithm (Paragraphs: 0039-0042, 0071 and 0091: Nicol discusses how the artificial neural networks define a particular category of these algorithms as s the modeling tool for calculating the HRTFs).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-13 and 15-21 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.
Applicants argued, the amended claims 1 and 15 further recites the limitations of “determining, based on the first data, second data representing one of a far field sound signal transfer function associated with the ear of the user, or a free field sound transfer function associated with the ear of the user”. None of the cited references teaches or suggests these particular limitations. Therefore, the combination of references fails to teach or suggest each and every limitation of amended claims 1 and 15.
Examiner respectfully. The newly introduce prior art discloses how the system filter a source audio signal upon the basis of a first acoustic far-field transfer function to obtain the first input audio signal, and to filter the source audio signal upon the basis of a second acoustic far-field transfer function to obtain the second input audio signal; and how the system determine the
second acoustic far-field transfer function upon the basis of the location of the spatial audio source within the spatial audio scenario and a location of the right ear of the listener (Faller: abstract and Page.4 lines 18-31). Therefore, the prior arts of the record disclosed the argued claims limitations.
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 YOSEF K LAEKEMARIAM whose telephone number is (571)270-5149. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-6:30 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, 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.
/YOSEF K LAEKEMARIAM/ Examiner, Art Unit 2691 10/21/2025