Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/340,431

ACOUSTIC SIGNATURES IN A PLAYBACK SYSTEM

Final Rejection §DP
Filed
Jun 23, 2023
Priority
Aug 07, 2012 — continuation of 8930005 +3 more
Examiner
GAUTHIER, GERALD
Art Unit
2692
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Sonos Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
91%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 91% — above average
91%
Career Allowance Rate
1654 granted / 1816 resolved
+29.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
1835
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.6%
-35.4% vs TC avg
§103
41.6%
+1.6% vs TC avg
§102
28.2%
-11.8% vs TC avg
§112
2.2%
-37.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1816 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-3, 5, 7-12, 14-23 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,729,568 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because at least one claim of the instant application is being taught by the claims of the U.S. Patent. Patented claim 16 recites a first computing device which perform the feature of based on the received indication, begin transmitting the audio tone comprising modulated frequencies that encode identifying information for the first computing device. The pending claim 1 recites a playback device which perform the similar feature of based on the received indication, begin transmitting the audio tone that encodes identifying information for the playback device. Therefore, the patented claim 16 anticipates the pending 1. Pending claims Patented claims 1. A playback device comprising: a network interface; at least one first processor; data storage comprising at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium; and program instructions stored on the data storage that are executable by the at least one processor such that the playback device is configured to: establish, via the network interface, a communication path with a computing device; receive, from the computing device over the communication path, an indication to begin transmitting an audio tone that encodes identifying information for the playback device, wherein the identifying information, when detected in the audio tone by the computing device, causes the computing device to update a graphical user interface of the computing device to include a representation of the playback device; and based on the received indication, begin transmitting the audio tone that encodes identifying information for the playback device. 16. A first computing device comprising: a network interface that is configured to communicatively couple the first computing device to a second computing device; at least one processor; a tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium; and program instructions stored on the tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium that are executable by the at least one processor such that the first computing device is configured to: establish, via the network interface, a communication path with the second computing device; receive, from the second computing device over the communication path, an indication to begin transmitting an audio tone comprising modulated frequencies that encode identifying information for the first computing device, wherein the identifying information, when detected in the audio tone by the second computing device, causes the second computing device to update a graphical user interface of the second computing device, wherein the updated graphical user interface of the second computing device includes a representation of the first computing device; and based on the received indication, begin transmitting the audio tone comprising modulated frequencies that encode identifying information for the first computing device. . Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-3, 5, 7-12, 14-23 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 THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 GERALD GAUTHIER whose telephone number is (571)272-7539. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM. 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, CAROLYN R EDWARDS can be reached at (571) 270-7136. 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. /GERALD GAUTHIER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2692 June 17, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 23, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP
Apr 08, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 08, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 16, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 23, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12681540
ELECTRONIC DEVICE COMPRISING MICROPHONE MODULE
2y 11m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12684190
METHOD FOR SIMULTANEOUSLY SENDING DIFFERENT MEDIA INPUTS TO DIFFERENT USERS
2y 3m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12676944
VIDEOCONFERENCE IMAGE ENHANCEMENT BASED ON SCENE MODELS
2y 6m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12671369
REDUCTION OF ARTEFACTS IN MULTI-CHANNEL SYSTEMS
2y 9m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12670642
METHOD, APPARATUS, DEVICE AND STORAGE MEDIUM FOR VIDEO RECORDING
2y 3m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
91%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+6.5%)
2y 7m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1816 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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