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 .
Response to Amendment
The Office Action is responsive to amendments filed for application 18/330,720 filed on 02/18/2026. Please note claims 1-5, 7-14, and 16-20 remain in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 12 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.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-8, 12-14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Linsky et al (US-20220385748-A1, previously cited, hereinafter Linsky) in view of Veltman, US Patent No. 5,481,543 and Wu et al (hereinafter Wu) US Patent No. 7,664,057.
Regarding claim 1, Linsky teaches, as shown in Fig. 1, a first device (102), comprising:
an audio source configured to generate audio data (The processor (120) receives audio data (123) from an audio source, (122) which may be a game engine generating said audio…..¶ [0056], lines 4-11);
a sensor configured to capture sensor data (Sensors (140) are configured to generate (capture) motion sensor data (144) of the first device…..¶ [0055], lines 1-3); and
a processor (Processor (120) encodes and decodes media packets…..¶ [0056], lines 1-3) configured to:
generate a data packet, wherein the data packet includes an audio data set generated
by the audio source and a sensor data set captured by the sensor (The first device multiplexes a set of audio and motion data into a media data packet (170)…..¶ [0066], lines 5-10), and time offset data corresponding to the media packet containing audio and sensor data (A timestamp to enable ordered reconstruction of the multiplexed data (offset data).....¶[0074], lines 1-3); and
transmit the data packet to a second device (The packet is transmitted to a second device…..¶ [0066], lines 1-7), wherein the second device is configured to reconstruct the audio data set and the sensor data set by demultiplexing the data packet (The second device receives the media packet and extracts (reconstructs) the audio data and motion data, demultiplexing it from the previously multiplexed set…..¶ [0096], lines 1-3).
Linsky fails to explicitly* teach both time offset data comprising separate audio time offset data corresponding to when the audio source generated the audio data set, and sensor time offset data corresponding to when the sensor captured the sensor data set, instead teaching one time offset value (the timestamp) applied to the set of data as a whole.
Veltman teaches, as shown in Fig. 2, an analogous data packet (A pack comprising a multiplexed audio packet and video packet) structure comprising separate audio time offset (time stamp “ats”) data corresponding to an audio data set (audio stream data), and video (analogous to the sensor data of Veltman) time offset data (time stamp “vts”) corresponding to the video data set (video stream data).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Linsky by Veltman to provide the benefit of synchronized decoding of the audio and sensor data by the receiving device (Veltman, Col. 5, lines 17-20). Such modification would make obvious the feature wherein time offset data comprises separate audio time offset data corresponding to the audio data set, and sensor time offset data corresponding to the sensor data set.
This combination fails to explicitly teach wherein the audio time offset data and sensor time offset data correspond to when the audio data was generated and when the sensor data was captured.
Wu teaches a method of generating audio (recorded microphone input…..Col. 7, lines 38-39) and sensor (recorded video input…..Col. 7, lines 38-39) data packets with time offset data (The captured data is timestamped…..Col. 7, lines 38-41), wherein the time offset data corresponds to when the audio data was generated (Timestamps are attached to audio data packets as the audio data sets are generated from microphone input…..Col. 7, lines 48-51) and the sensor data was captured (Timestamps are attached to sensor data packets as the audio and sensor data sets are captured at the terminal by the camera, respectively.....Col. 7, lines 44-48).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Linsky and Veltman by Wu to provide the benefit of wherein a network clock is not required to synchronize data streams (Wu, Col. 3, lines 23-25). Such modification would make obvious the feature wherein time offset data comprises separate audio time offset data corresponding to when the audio source generated the audio data set, and sensor time offset data corresponding to when the sensor captured the sensor data set.
*The examiner notes that Linsky may be considered to implicitly teach wherein the timestamps correspond to when the data was captured. As the system of Linsky may be used for live VR streaming applications (¶[0083]), one skilled in the art would recognize that captured data sets would be timestamped on a first-in-first-out basis by (in one implementation) the Bluetooth AVDTP layer(¶[0076), therefore timestamps would correspond to when the data set was captured, at least relative to previous and subsequent data sets.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Linsky, Veltman, and Wu, as explained above disclose the limitations of claim 1.
Linsky additionally discloses wherein the first device (creating and transmitting packets) is a wearable audio device (Fig. 8 depicts device (804), a wearable headset, transmitting the data packet (808)…..¶ [0103], lines 1 - ¶ [0104], line 6) and wherein the second device (receiving the packets) is a central device (Fig. 8 depicts device (802), a handset, receiving the data packet (808)…..¶ [0103], lines 1 - ¶ [0104], line 6).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Linsky, Veltman, and Wu, as explained above disclose the limitations of claim 1.
Linsky additionally discloses wherein the first device is a central device (Fig. 6 depicts device (602), a handset, transmitting the data packet (614)…..¶ [0094], lines 1-4), and wherein the second device is a wearable audio device (Fig. 6 depicts the packet being received by device (604) (e.g. a headset) with audio outputs (490, 492)…..¶ [0094], lines 1-4).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Linsky, Veltman, and Wu, as explained above disclose the limitations of claim 1.
Linsky additionally discloses wherein the data packet further comprises audio payload length data (Packet metadata indicates audio length in the media payload…..¶ [0075], lines 17-23).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Linsky, Veltman, and Wu, as explained above disclose the limitations of claim 1.
Linsky additionally discloses wherein the data packet further comprises audio channel identification data (The data packet has flags identifying which data channels are present…..¶ [0061], lines 7-19).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Linsky, Veltman, and Wu, as explained above disclose the limitations of claim 1.
Linsky additionally discloses wherein the sensor is an inertial measurement unit (IMU), and wherein the sensor data is motion data (¶ [0081], lines 1-3).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Linsky, Veltman, and Wu, as explained above disclose the limitations of claim 1.
Linsky additionally discloses wherein the data packet is transmitted via a Bluetooth Connected Isochronous Stream (CIS) (Fig. 2C shows bluetooth transmission implementation 260, which may be sent via CIS…..¶ [0077], line 6 – ¶ [0078], line 3).
Regarding claim 12, Linsky discloses, as shown in Fig. 1, a method for transmitting data, comprising:
generating, via an audio source of a first device, an audio data set (A first device (102) receives audio data (123) from an audio source, (122) which may be a game engine generating said audio…..¶ [0056], lines 4-11); capturing, via a sensor of the first device, a sensor data set (Sensors (140) are configured to generate (capture) motion sensor data (144) of the first device…..¶ [0055], lines 1-3); generating, via a processor of the first device (Processor (120) encodes and decodes media packets…..¶ [0056], lines 1-3), a data packet, wherein the data packet includes the audio data set and the sensor data set (The first device embeds both the audio and motion data into a media data packet (170)…..¶ [0066], lines 5-10), and time offset data corresponding to the media packet containing audio and sensor data (A timestamp to enable ordered reconstruction of the multiplexed data (offset data).....¶[0074], lines 1-3); transmitting, via a transceiver of the first device (modem (132)), the data packet to a second device (The packet is transmitted to a second device…..¶ [0066], lines 1-7); receiving, via a transceiver of the second device (The second device can both receive and transmit data, requiring a transceiver…..¶ [0061], lines 1-3), the data packet; and reconstructing, via a processor of the second device, the audio data set and the sensor data set by demultiplexing the data packet (The second device receives the media packet and extracts (reconstructs) the audio data and motion data, demultiplexing it from the previously multiplexed set…..¶ [0096], lines 1-3).
Linsky fails to explicitly* teach both time offset data comprising separate audio time offset data corresponding to when the audio source generated the audio data set, and sensor time offset data corresponding to when the sensor captured the sensor data set, instead teaching one time offset value (the timestamp) applied to the set of data as a whole.
Veltman teaches, as shown in Fig. 2, an analogous data packet (A pack comprising a multiplexed audio packet and video packet) structure comprising separate audio time offset (time stamp “ats”) data corresponding to an audio data set (audio stream data), and video (analogous to the sensor data of Veltman) time offset data (time stamp “vts”) corresponding to the video data set (video stream data).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Linsky by Veltman to provide the benefit of synchronized decoding of the audio and sensor data by the receiving device (Veltman, Col. 5, lines 17-20). Such modification would make obvious the feature wherein time offset data comprises separate audio time offset data corresponding to the audio data set, and sensor time offset data corresponding to the sensor data set.
This combination fails to explicitly teach wherein the audio time offset data and sensor time offset data correspond to when the audio data was generated and when the sensor data was captured.
Wu teaches a method of generating audio (recorded microphone input…..Col. 7, lines 38-39) and sensor (recorded video input…..Col. 7, lines 38-39) data packets with time offset data (The captured data is timestamped…..Col. 7, lines 38-41), wherein the time offset data corresponds to when the audio data was generated (Timestamps are attached to audio data packets as the audio data sets are generated from microphone input…..Col. 7, lines 48-51) and the sensor data was captured (Timestamps are attached to sensor data packets as the audio and sensor data sets are captured at the terminal by the camera, respectively.....Col. 7, lines 44-48).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Linsky and Veltman by Wu to provide the benefit of wherein a network clock is not required to synchronize data streams (Wu, Col. 3, lines 23-25). Such modification would make obvious the feature wherein time offset data comprises separate audio time offset data corresponding to when the audio source generated the audio data set, and sensor time offset data corresponding to when the sensor captured the sensor data set.
*The examiner notes that Linsky may be considered to implicitly teach wherein the timestamps correspond to when the data was captured. As the system of Linsky may be used for live VR streaming applications (¶[0083]), one skilled in the art would recognize that captured data sets would be timestamped on a first-in-first-out basis by (in one implementation) the Bluetooth AVDTP layer of (¶[0076), therefore timestamps would correspond to when the data set was captured, at least relative to previous and subsequent data sets.
Claim 13 is rejected under the same grounds as claim 4.
Claim 14 is rejected under the same grounds as claim 5.
Claim 16 is rejected under the same grounds as claim 8.
Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Linsky in view of Veltman and Wu, in further view of Towards Data Aggregation…[online], (previously cited, hereinafter Mitterer) and Nakashima (US-20070162813-A1, previously cited).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Linsky, Veltman, and Wu, as explained above disclose the limitations of claim 1.
This combination fails to explicitly teach different lifetimes for different data sets, receipt of data acknowledgement, or the generation of subsequent data packets.
However, Mitterer teaches a multi-sensor system wherein sensor 2 data (analogous to the audio data) has a first lifetime and sensor 3 data (analogous to the sensor data) has a second lifetime longer than the first lifetime (Pg 3 Fig. 7 shows data from multiple sensors, each generating outputs at pre-defined rates, wherein a faster rate results in a shorter data lifetime as it is replaced more frequently…..Pg. 2, Col. 1, ¶ 2, lines 1-3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Linsky, Veltman, and Wu, to incorporate the teachings of Mitterer, and provide wherein the audio data and sensor data have different lifetimes, providing the benefit where the packet samples may be used to calculate transmission latency (Mitterer, Pg. 2, Col. 1, ¶ 2, lines 9-10).
This further combination fails to teach receipt of data acknowledgement, or the generation of subsequent data packets.
Nakashima teaches wherein a transmitting station is configured to receive acknowledgment for multiple simultaneous data frames (e.g. both audio and sensor frames). (The receiving station transmits a BlockAck (acknowledgement) frame, indicating which data has been received….. ¶ [0035], lines 1-5) prior to the first lifetime expiring (Based on the BlockAck frame, unexpired packets are re-sent, and expired packets are not…..¶ [0041], lines 10-14); generate a second data packet including the sensor data set (Unacknowledged frames are re-sent along with new data…..¶ [0036], lines 1-4); and transmit the second data packet to the second device (¶ [0036], lines 1-4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the disclosures of Linsky, Veltman, Wu,, and Mitterer to incorporate the teachings of Nakashima, and provide wherein the processor of Linsky is further configured to: receive an audio data acknowledgment prior to the first lifetime expiring; and generate a second data packet including the sensor data set; and transmit the second data packet to the second device. This would provide a benefit of allowing greater freedom in which dropped information is retransmitted (Nakashima, ¶[0036], lines 6-8).
Claim 18 is rejected under the same grounds as claim 9.
Claims 10-11, 17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Linsky in view of Veltman and Wu, in further view of Mitterer.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Linsky, Veltman, and Wu, as explained above disclose the limitations of claim 1.
This combination fails to explicitly teach different data lifetimes, or the generation of subsequent packets.
Mitterer teaches a multi-sensor system wherein sensor 2 data (analogous to the audio data) has a first lifetime and sensor 3 data (analogous to the sensor data) has a second lifetime longer than the first lifetime (Pg 3 Fig. 7 shows data from multiple sensors, each generating outputs at pre-defined rates, wherein a faster rate results in a shorter data lifetime as it is replaced more frequently…..Pg. 2, Col. 1, ¶ 2, lines 1-3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the disclosure of Linsky, Veltman, and Wu, to incorporate the teachings of Mitterer, and provide wherein the audio data and sensor data have different lifetimes, providing the benefit where the packet samples may be used to calculate transmission latency (Mitterer, Pg. 2, Col. 1, ¶ 2, lines 9-10).
This further combination as applied above does not explicitly teach wherein audio data sets are updated over time, and the updated audio is sent via a second packet.
However, Mitterer additionally teaches generating, via a sensor (e.g. sensor 2 of pg. 3 fig. 7) after the sensor data set expires, a second sensor data set (Seen in fig. 7, the sensor 2 data is updated every other frame);
and generating a second data packet including the second data set of sensor 2 and the first data set of a different sensor (e.g. sensor 3) (All sensor channels may be measured at the same rate, with the most recent (live) sensor values included in each transmitted frame packet. Referring again to fig. 7, if this occurred in the third frame, the second sensor 2 and first sensor 3 data would be used…..Pg 1, Col 1, Introduction, lines 5-6); and transmit the second data packet to the second device (Pg 1, Col 1, Introduction, lines 5-6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the disclosures of Linsky, Veltman, Wu, and Mitterer and further incorporate the teachings of Mitterer, and provide the creation of a second data packet using a second audio data set and the first sensor data set. This would provide the benefit of energy consumption reduction, as fewer packets total are being generated than if the data was sent un-aggregated (Mitterer, Pg. 1, Col 2, P1, lines 6-8, Mitterer, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Linsky, Veltman, Wu, and Mitterer teach the limitations of claim 10 as explained above.
This combination does not explicitly teach wherein subsequent packets are generated using a second sensor data, or where a second sensor data may be transmitted the same time as a second audio data.
However, Mitterer further teaches capturing, via a sensor (e.g. sensor 3) of the first device after the sensor data set expires, a second sensor data set (Shown in Pg. 3 Fig. 7, sensor 3 data is updated every third frame);
and generating a third data packet including the second audio data set and the second sensor data set (All sensor channels may be measured at the same rate, with all most recent (live) sensor values included in each transmitted frame packet. Referring again to fig. 7, if this occurred in the fourth frame, the second sensor 2 and second sensor 3 data would be used…..Pg 1, Col 1, Introduction, lines 5-6); and transmit the third data packet to the second device (Pg 1, Col 1, Introduction, lines 5-6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the disclosures of Linsky, Veltman, Wu, and Mitterer and further incorporate the teachings of Mitterer, and provide capturing second sensor data, and using it along with a second audio data in the creation and transmission of a third data packet. This would provide the benefit of energy consumption reduction, as fewer packets total are being generated than if the data was sent un-aggregated (Mitterer, Pg. 1, Col 2, P1, lines 6-8, Mitterer, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Linsky, Veltman, and Wu teach the limitations of claim 10 as explained above.
This combination fails to explicitly teach wherein the audio data set has a first lifetime and the sensor data set has a second lifetime longer than the first lifetime.
Mitterer teaches a multi-sensor system wherein sensor 2 data (analogous to the audio data of claim 12) has a first lifetime and sensor 3 data (analogous to the sensor data of claim 12) has a second lifetime longer than the first lifetime (Pg 3 Fig. 7 shows data from multiple sensors, each generating outputs at pre-defined rates, wherein a faster rate results in a shorter data lifetime as it is replaced more frequently…..Pg. 2, Col. 1, ¶ 2, lines 1-3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the disclosure of Linsky, Veltman, and Wu, to incorporate the teachings of Mitterer, and provide wherein the audio data and sensor data have different lifetimes, respective to the audio generator and sensor’s internal polling rates, providing the benefit where the packet samples may be used to calculate transmission latency (Mitterer, Pg. 2, Col. 1, ¶ 2, lines 9-10).
Claim 19 is rejected under the same grounds as claim 10.
Claim 20 is rejected under the same grounds as claim 11.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
BLUETOOTH CORE SPECIFICATION Version 5.3 [online]. Bluetooth SIG Proprietary, 2021 (previously cited) teaches wherein multiple SDU payloads of a PDU may have individual time_offset values, derived from a time_stamp received from a higher layer.
Chung et al, US-PG-PUB No. 2019/0110264 teaches a method of SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR ACCURATE TIMESTAMPING OF VIRTUAL REALITY CONTROLLER DATA over Bluetooth.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN RINEHART whose telephone number is (571)272-2778. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6 6:00 PM ET.
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, Ahmad Matar can be reached on (571) 272-7488. 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.
/SEAN M RINEHART/Examiner, Art Unit 2694
/ALEXANDER KRZYSTAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2694
Prosecution Insights