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 5-6 and 24-26 are 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) 1-4, 20-23 and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KOPPENS et al. (WO 2021259829) in view of Schuijers et al. (WO 2014091375).
Regarding claims 1 and 20, KOPPENS discloses a method of rendering an audio source (Page.8 lines 8-9: KOPPENS discusses rendering sound from a first audio source), the method comprising: receiving an input audio signal corresponding to the audio source (Page.12 lines 36-37, Page.13 lines 1-2 and Page.14 lines 3-5: KOPPENS discusses receive the audio scene data from any suitable source); receiving a reverberation parameter indicating a target energy ratio with respect to a reverberant sound component of audio for the audio source (Page.6 lines 5-7 and Page.8 lines 24-37: KOPPENS discusses how signal to total signal ratio is indicative of an energy of reverberation sound relative to an energy of total emitted sound in the environment wherein the energy of reverberation sound is determined by room response contributions occurring at least a certain delay after emission of the corresponding sound at an audio source); obtaining a directivity pattern of the audio source (Page.6 lines 30-33 and Page.13 lines 5-8: KOPPENS discusses integrating a directivity pattern of the sound source represented by the first audio signal); deriving a relative gain for the audio source based on the obtained directivity pattern, wherein the relative gain is relative to an omnidirectional audio source (Page.11 lines 25-29 and Page.20 lines 25-30: KOPPENS discusses how the audio source depending on relative gain for the audio source in the specific direction to the user; and how an omnidirectional directivity is considered);
KOPPENS discloses the invention set forth above but does not specifically point out “generating an adjusted audio signal using the received input audio signal, the reverberation parameter, and the derived relative gain”
Schuijers however discloses generating an adjusted audio signal using the received input audio signal, the reverberation parameter, and the derived relative gain (Page.5 lines 26-34, Page.10 lines 17-24 and Page.21 lines 17-21: Schuijers discusses generating a set of output audio signals for a set of audio transducers by processing the set of input audio signals; wherein the audio processor arranged to modify reverberation for the set of input audio signals when generating the set of output audio signals, the modification being dependent on the environment reverberation and the reference reverberation; and how the system adjusting the gain/level of the audio signals based on the reference reverberation and the environment reverberation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the invention of KOPPENS, and modify a system to generate an adjusted audio signal using the received input audio signal, the reverberation parameter, and the derived relative gain, as taught by Schuijers, thus facilitate adaptability to different rendering configuration and improve user experience, and/or performance, as discussed by Schuijers.
Considering claims 2 and 21, KOPPENS discloses the method of claims 1 and 20, wherein the target energy ratio is between a direct sound component of the audio for the audio source and the reverberant sound component of the audio for the audio source or between a total energy emitted by the audio source and an energy corresponding to the reverberant sound component of the audio for the audio source (Page.3 lines 8-11, Page.7 lines 14-16 and Page.13 lines 10-14: KOPPENS discusses how the energy of the reverberant (i.e. an energy corresponding to the reverberant sound) in relation to that of the anechoic portion largely determines the perceived distance of the sound source; and how reverberation signal to total signal relationship is indicative of an energy of diffuse reverberation sound relative to an energy of total emitted sound in the environment).
Considering claims 3 and 22, KOPPENS discloses the method of claims 1 and 20, wherein the audio source is a non-omni directional audio source and/or a non-point source (Page.11 lines 28-29: non-omnidirectional sources).
Considering claims 4 and 23, KOPPENS discloses the method of claims 1 and 20, wherein the directivity pattern indicates an amplitude or a magnitude of sound radiated by the audio source in each of a plurality of directions around the audio source (Page.5 lines 22-24 and Page.13 lines 1-8: signal level indication for the audio source wherein the signal level indication may be indicative of a level/ energy/ amplitude of the sound source represented by the audio signal; and how directivity data for an audio signal may for example describe a gain pattern for the audio source in different directions from the position of the audio source).
Considering claim 27, KOPPENS further discloses the method of claim 1, wherein deriving a relative gain for the audio source based on the obtained directivity pattern comprises: deriving a relative power level for the audio source based on the obtained directivity pattern; and deriving a relative gain for the audio source based on the derived relative power level (Col.11 lines 25-29, Col.13 lines 5-8 and Col.16 lines 5-8: KOPPENS discusses how the directivity data for an audio signal describes a gain pattern and may specifically describe the relative gain/ energy density for the audio source in different directions from the position of the audio source).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/08/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicants argued, the prior arts of the record (Koppens et al.) is silent with respect to how the “relative gain for the audio source” is derived. Accordingly, there is no teaching or suggestion that Koppens derives or determines the relative gain for the audio source based on the obtained directivity pattern of the audio source, as required by claims 1 and 20.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The prior arts of the record (Koppens et al.) discloses how the directivity data for an audio signal describe a gain pattern and specifically describe the relative gain/ energy density for the audio source in different directions from the position of the audio source; and how the directivity data provide individual gain values for a range of different direction intervals, i.e. driving “relative gain for the audio source” based on directivity data of different directional intervals (Koppens: Col.13 lines 5-8 and Col.16 lines 10-20). Therefore, the prior arts of the record disclosed the argued claims limitations.
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 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
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2651
/YOSEF K LAEKEMARIAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2691
Prosecution Insights