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
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8-14, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laaksonen (KR 20210024598 A, hereinafter “Laaksonen”, claim rejections refers to the translated document) in view of Edwards (US 20230421984, hereinafter “Edwards”).
Regarding claim 1, Laaksonen teaches a method for relocating a sound component in a sound field of spatial audio content, comprising: identifying the sound component for relocation, comprising determining that the sound component is located within a center region in the sound field; (see [0009]-[0010], [0028]-[0029]: receiving, which is identifying, relocation signaling from a remote user. Spatial audio effect for relocating the peripheral perceptual direction based on the relocation signaling. Performing the rotation of one of the peripheral perception direction and speech perception direction around the center. Laaksonen shows supporting details about the above summary statement by providing additional description in [0125]-[0129]: Audio content may be rendered as spatial audio from perceived locations that lie on a notional circle or sphere around the user 200, as shown by circle 500. In other examples, in which the directional information includes distance information, then the perceived locations may be rendered from locations located at different distances.)
separating the sound component from one or more non-central sound components in the spatial audio content; (see [0049]: separation between the speech perception direction and peripheral perception, or in other words, the center region and non-central sound components.)
processing the sound component to relocate the sound component to a location in the sound field outside the center region in the sound field; (see [0049], [0094]-[0096]: spatial audio processing. Relocating peripheral perception, which is the surrounding perception of the center region)
and integrating the relocated sound component with the one or more non-central sound components to provide integrated spatial audio content. (see Claim 1, Fig. 11: provide presentation, which is an integration, of audio content using modification of spatial audio effect for relocating speech perceptual direction to the reference position based on signaling. Non-central sound components such as 1105 are integrated to spatial audio content.)
Laaksonen does not explicitly teach the center region forming an area within a predefined distance of a center of the sound field and defining a threshold for determining whether to relocate the sound component;
However, Edwards teaches the center region forming an area within a predefined distance of a center of the sound field and defining a threshold for determining whether to relocate the sound component; (see Fig. 5, [0054]-[0055]: separates objects based on objects position and relative position to user. “Center region” represents any distance from the center in which objects 504-508 represent a threshold distance to a gaze direction 510 of the user. A threshold angle may be set to encompass all sound objects that fall within an area of the content item that fills within a portion of the user's visual field corresponding to the threshold angle)
Laaksonen and Edwards are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of relocation of sound components in spatial audio content. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have chosen to apply the broad teachings of the center region of a sound field and a threshold to relocate from Edwards to Laaksonen in order to prevent sounds recorded within the center region from being perceived as being unpleasantly close to a user when replayed.
Regarding claim 2, Laaksonen teaches identifying the sound component for relocation further comprises determining that the sound component corresponds to a voice. (see [0038]-[0040]: user audio content for presentation of relocation signaling includes user voice audio )
Regarding claim 3, Laaksonen teaches identifying the sound component for relocation further comprises determining that the sound component is a voice of a predetermined user. (see [0038]-[0040], [0044]: including audio of the user's voice or remote user, which is already a predetermined user)
Regarding claim 4, Laaksonen teaches identifying the sound component for relocation further comprises matching one or more characteristics of the sound component to one or more predetermined criteria. (see [0144]-[0145]: user relocation signaling based on a predetermined type of user input. "Based on" meaning that criteria must be matched.)
Regarding claim 5, Laaksonen teaches the spatial audio content is a binaural audio recording. (see [0094], [0111]: spatial audio content includes head tracking binaural audio)
Regarding claim 6, Laaksonen teaches identifying an additional sound component for relocation, comprising determining that the additional sound component is located within the center region in the sound field; separating the additional sound component from the sound component and the one or more non-central sound components; processing the additional sound component to relocate the additional sound component to an additional location in the sound field outside the center region in the sound field; and integrating the additional sound component with the sound component and the one or more non-central sound components to provide the integrated spatial audio content. (see [0026], [0030], [0047]-[0049], [0095]-[0098]: secondary, or 'additional' sound component which is "ambient" audio that is determined and separated for rearranging speech perceptual direction, then integrating to be presented of audio content in one)
Regarding claim 8, Laaksonen teaches the location in the sound field outside the center region is in front of a center location in the sound field. (see [0117], [0147]: audio content associated with direction information with respect to a reference point, that being in a direction towards the user device maintained in front of it)
Regarding claims 9-14, the claimed limitations are claims directly corresponding to the method claims 1-6; therefore, is rejected for the significant similar reasons as claim 1-6 as discussed above.
Regarding claim 17, Laaksonen teaches determining audio context information is based on analyzing one or more control signals to generate the noise information or the voice information. (see [0096]: audio analysis techniques to include secondary audio including ambient audio including audio other than audio determined to have been generated by the voice of one or more remote users)
Regarding claim 18, the claimed limitations are a method claim directly corresponding to the system claim 1; therefore, is rejected for the significant similar reasons as claim 1 as discussed above.
Claim(s) 7, 15-16, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Laaksonen (KR 20210024598 A, hereinafter “Laaksonen”, claim rejections refers to the translated document) in view of Edwards (US 20230421984, hereinafter “Edwards”) and Kratz (US 20200236487 A1, hereinafter “Kratz”).
Regarding claim 7, Laaksonen in view of Edwards fail to teach determining motion information about a user; and causing an audio output device to output the integrated spatial audio content such that a sound field of the integrated spatial audio content is moved with respect to the user based on the motion information.
However, Kratz teaches determining motion information about a user; and causing an audio output device to output the integrated spatial audio content such that a sound field of the integrated spatial audio content is moved with respect to the user based on the motion information. (see [0084]-[0085]: spatial audio panorama 520 according to the movements of the user 510 as well as movements recorded in activity)
Laaksonen and Kratz are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of spatial audio signal processing and immersive sound reproduction. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have chosen to apply the broad teachings of Kratz of determining motion information about a user to Laaksonen leading to a more enhanced and realistic experience with audio presentation.
Regarding claim 15, Laaksonen in view of Edwards fails to teach motion tracking circuitry communicably coupled to the processor and configured to determine motion information about the user, wherein the processor is further configured to output the relocated sound component and the non-central sound components via the audio output device such that the sound field is moved with respect to the user based on the motion information.
However, Kratz teaches motion tracking circuitry communicably coupled to the processor and configured to determine motion information about the user, wherein the processor is further configured to output the relocated sound component and the non-central sound components via the audio output device such that the sound field is moved with respect to the user based on the motion information. (see [0085], [0093]: processing system 104 tracks user 610 and user movement in sound field environment)
Laaksonen and Kratz are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of spatial audio signal processing and immersive sound reproduction. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have chosen to apply the broad teachings of Kratz to identify a sound component output location in an image frame captured from a camera to Laaksonen in order to provide an extended reality experience to a user.
Regarding claim 16, Laaksonen in view of Edwards fails to teach a camera communicably coupled to the processor, wherein the processor is further configured to: identify a sound component output location in an image frame captured from the camera; and identify the location in the sound field outside the center region in the sound field based on a relationship between the sound component output location and the sound field.
However, Kratz teaches a camera communicably coupled to the processor, wherein the processor is further configured to: identify a sound component output location in an image frame captured from the camera; and identify the location in the sound field outside the center region in the sound field based on a relationship between the sound component output location and the sound field. (see [0084]: 360° camera mounted on helmet - camera including directional microphone system that record a spatial audio panorama based on direction of user)
Laaksonen and Kratz are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of spatial audio signal processing and immersive sound reproduction. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have chosen to apply the broad teachings of Kratz of determining motion information about a user to Laaksonen leading to a more enhanced and realistic experience with audio presentation.
Regarding claim 19, Laaksonen in view of Edwards fails to teach determining motion information about a user; and outputting the sound component and the non-central sound components via the audio output device such that the sound field is moved with respect to the user based on the motion information.
However, Kratz teaches teach determining motion information about a user; and outputting the sound component and the non-central sound components via the audio output device such that the sound field is moved with respect to the user based on the motion information. (see [0084]-[0085]: spatial audio panorama 520 according to the movements of the user 510 as well as movements recorded in activity)
Laaksonen and Kratz are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of spatial audio signal processing and immersive sound reproduction. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have chosen to apply the broad teachings of Kim to Kang in order to [in order to what].
Regarding claim 20, Laaksonen in view of Edwards fails to teach processing the sound component based on the motion information such that the sound component is moved with respect to the user independently from the sound field.
However, Kratz teaches teach processing the sound component based on the motion information such that the sound component is moved with respect to the user independently from the sound field. (see [0084]-[0085]: spatial audio panorama 520 according to the movements of the user 510 as well as movements recorded in activity, which is respect to the user)
Laaksonen and Kratz are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because both are in the field of spatial audio signal processing and immersive sound reproduction. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have chosen to apply the broad teachings of Kratz of determining motion information about a user to Laaksonen leading to a more enhanced and realistic experience with audio presentation.
Response to Argument
Applicant's arguments filed May 4, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. On page 6-7 of applicant’s remarks, applicant argues that the art of record fails to disclose the center region forming an area within a predefined distance of a center of the sound field and defining a threshold for determining whether to relocate the sound component.
While the currently amended claim language overcome Laaksonen, after further search and consideration, as pointed out in the rejection above, Laaksonen in view of Edwards teaches the center region forming an area within a predefined distance of a center of the sound field and defining a threshold for determining whether to relocate the sound component; (see Fig. 5, [0054]-[0055]: separates objects based on objects position and relative position to user. “Center region” represents any distance from the center in which objects 504-508 represent a threshold distance to a gaze direction 510 of the user. A threshold angle may be set to encompass all sound objects that fall within an area of the content item that fills within a portion of the user's visual field corresponding to the threshold angle)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANNABELLE KANG whose telephone number is (571)270-3403. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00-5:00.
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, Vivian Chin can be reached at 571-272-7848. 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.
/ANNABELLE KANG/ Examiner, Art Unit 2695
/VIVIAN C CHIN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2695
Prosecution Insights