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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/10/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments 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
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, 3-6, 8-12, 14-17 and 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fadell (US 10013999 B1), and further in view of Lerner (US 20230215415 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 12 and 17, Fadell discloses a method, a system and a non-transitory computer-readable medium for managing ambient noise in a wearable device (Abstract), the method comprising:
one or more processors of a wearable device (Fadell, col. 2, ln. 28: “a processor”);
one or more microphones configured to measure ambient sound (Fadell, col. 2, ln. 27-28: “at least one microphone”);
determining that a first event comprises sound in an environment where the wearable device is located (Fadell, Fig. 3, item 300, col. 13, ln. 30-44);
ducking an audio level of the wearable device from a first level to a second level based on the determination that the first event comprises the sound in the environment, wherein the second level is different from the first second level (Fadell, Abstract: “the determination that the second ambient noise is indicative of ambient speech, the device may continue the ducking of the first audio signal (is indicative of user speech).”; Fig. 3, item 300; col. 13, ln 59-62: “the device may be configured to initiate ducking of the first audio signal in response to a determination that the first ambient noise is indicative of speech by the user”; and col. 13, ln 30-35: “ while driving the audio output device with the first audio signal, the device may receive, via at least one microphone of the wearable device, a second audio signal. The second audio signal may include first ambient noise, such as the noise in the user's environment.”) and
ducking the audio level of the wearable device to a third level in response to detecting the second event, wherein the third level is different from the first level and different from the second level (Fadell, Abstract: “driving an audio output module of a wearable device with a first audio (second audio) signal and then receiving, via at least one microphone of wearable device, a second audio (third audio) signal comprising first ambient noise.” And col. 2, ln. 1-7: in general, “a wearable device that may, while playing back audio content, automatically recognize when a user is engaging in a conversation, and then duck the audio content playback accordingly, in real-time.” This principle is implicit, it can be applied to a third level and fourth level, etc.).
However, Fadell is silent in regard to monitoring, while continuing to duck the audio level at the second level, for a second event different from the first event, wherein
the second event comprises at least one of speech from a user of the wearable device or an action of the user.
In an analogous field of endeavor, Lerner (US 20230215415 A1) discloses monitoring, while continuing to duck the audio level at the second level, for a second event different from the first event (Lerner, ¶ [0208]: “the output level (first level) of the provided audio content is reduced relative to the detected sound from the physical environment (second level) gradually (e.g., the audio content gradually
fades away)”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lerner with Fadell to prevent a stepwise attenuation and instead provide a smooth level transition.
Regarding claims 3, 14 and 19, the combination Fadell and Lerner discloses all the limitations of claims 1, 12 and 17 respectively.
Fadell further discloses wherein ducking the audio level of the wearable device comprises at least one of:
decreasing an audio volume of the wearable device; decreasing a noise cancellation of the wearable device; increasing a transparency of the wearable device (Fadell, col. 16, ln. 11-38 and col. 17, ln. 11-16);
pausing an audio output of the wearable device (Fadell, col. 14, ln. 58-60: “ducking the first audio signal may involve pausing playback”); or outputting a notification sound from the wearable device.
Regarding claims 4, the combination Fadell and Lerner l discloses all the limitations of claims 1.
Fadell further discloses, wherein at least one of the second level or the third level adjusted by a user input (Fadell, col. 16, In. 39 to 44, further discloses that "the device's determination to duck the first audio signal may also have a contextual component", whereby it detects "via at least one sensor of the device 300, a contextual indication of a user activity (user input)".
Regarding claims 5, 15 and 20, the combination Fadell and Lerner discloses all the limitations of claims 1, 12 and 17 respectively.
Fadell further discloses determining a first confidence level associated with the first event, and wherein adjusting the second level using the first confidence level (Fadell, col. 13, In. 30 to 44, discloses that "the device may determine that a signal- to-noise ratio of the first ambient noise is above a threshold ratio, which may indicate that the noise is likely to be speech" implying or suggesting the determination of a first confidence level.)
Regarding claim 6, the combination Fadell and Lerner discloses all the limitations of claim 5.
Fadell further discloses, wherein a duration of the ducking the audio level of the wearable device from the first level to the second level is adjusted by the first confidence level (Fadell, col. 15, ln. 58-67, and col. 16, In. 6-11: "the device 300 may increase the predetermined length of time that ducking will last in the absence of ambient speech, for instance, from five seconds to ten seconds, to allow for longer pauses in the conversation" if ln. 2-4: "the device 300 determines enough ambient speech such that the first audio signal remains ducked for a threshold duration"
Regarding claims 8 and 16, the combination Fadell and Lerner discloses all the limitations of claims 5 and 15 respectively.
Fadell further discloses wherein the first confidence level is based, at least in part, on one or more of: a type of the first event; a user input; or a user profile (Fadell, col. 13, ln. 30-44: “signal-to-noise ratio of the first ambient noise,” is inherently dependent on a type of event.).
Regarding claim 9, the combination Fadell and Lerner discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Fadell further discloses, wherein the first event and the second event each comprise at least one of: a user speech vocalization; a non-speech vocalization; an environmental sound; or a user action (Fadell, col. 13, In. 30 to 44, discloses that the first event comprises user speech (and non-speech) vocalization and environmental sound, and col. 16, In. 39 to 44, further discloses that the first event may involve a user action).
Regarding claim 10, the combination Fadell and Lerner discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Fadell further discloses, wherein at least one of determining the first event or monitoring for the second event comprises:
measuring a sound using one or more microphones coupled to the wearable device; and detecting a physical action using one or more sensors (Fadell, col. 1, ln 61-63: “the user may select a manual switch”) coupled to the wearable device (Fadell, col. 13, In. 30 to 44 and col. 16, In. 39 to 55, further discloses the use of microphones and sensors).
Regarding claim 11, the combination Fadell and Lerner discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Fadell further discloses comprising: determining that the first event is not continuing; and returning the audio level of the wearable device to the first level based on determining that the first event is not continuing (Fadell, col. 14, In. 61 to col. 15, In. 3, also discloses "discontinue ducking of the first audio signal" when a "predetermined time elapses").
Regarding claim 21, the combination Fadell and Lerner discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Fadell further discloses, wherein the sound comprises at least one of a non-speech vocalization or an environmental sound (Fadell, col. 3, ln. 59-61: “The wearable device may distinguish speech from other environmental sounds based on an analysis of the frequency and timing of the ambient noise.” and col. 16, ln. 63-65: “the device may detect in the second audio signal an indication of an emergency siren, such as the siren of an ambulance or fire truck”, which is considered non-speech).
Claim(s) 2, 13 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fadell (US 10013999 B1), in view of Lerner (US 20230215415 A1) and further in view of Muraoka (US 20100260355 A1).
Regarding claim 2, 13 and 18, the combination Fadell and Lerner discloses all the limitations of claim 1, 12 and 17 respectively.
However, the combination Fadell and Lerner fails to discloses, wherein ducking the audio level of the wearable device from the first level to the second level comprises gradually ducking the audio level of the wearable device from the first level to the second level over a first period of time;
or ducking the audio level of the wearable device from the second level to the third level comprises gradually ducking the audio level of the wearable device from the second level to the third level over a second period of time.
In an analogous field of endeavor, Muraoka (US 20100260355 A1) discloses wherein ducking the audio level of the wearable device from the first level to the second level comprises gradually ducking the audio level of the wearable device from the first level to the second level over a first period of time ( Muraoka, Fig. 5, ¶ [0141 & 0162]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add Muraoka to the combination Fadell and Lerner to provide a smooth linear attenuation from a second level to a first level as a function of time and distance of the sound source to the wearable device.
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 FRIEDRICH FAHNERT whose telephone number is (571)270-7797. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 am-4:00 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 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.
/CAROLYN R EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2692
/FRIEDRICH FAHNERT/
Examiner
Art Unit 2692