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
Applicants’ amendment filed on 11/26/24 has been entered. Claims 18-19 have been amended. No claims have been canceled. No new claims have been added. Claims 1-20 are still pending in this application, with claims 1, 11, 18 being independent.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4-7, 9, 11, 14, 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20080069367 to Gerrard et al. (“Gerrard”).
As to claims 1, 11 and 18, Gerrard discloses a method performed by a processor of a playback device, a method performed by a processor of a server and a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium [paragraph 0010], the method comprising: obtaining a location of a user [paragraphs 0038, 0053 (“position of a listener”), 0056 (“listener position”)]; obtaining a virtual playback format based on the location of the user, wherein the virtual playback format includes a position of a virtual speaker that is fixed in an environment of the user [paragraphs 0004-0005, 0038, 0053 (“ location and power of one or more acoustic sources”), 0056 (“Sources and the listener position”)]; obtaining an acoustic model based on the location of the user [paragraphs 0038, 0056-0057 (“Acoustic modeling processor 410 processes the sounds from the sources based on the location of the sources relative to the listener as well as the objects in the acoustic environment”), paragraphs 0066]; and rendering audio at the playback device based on the acoustic model and the virtual playback format [paragraphs 0038, 0057-0059: “Acoustic rendering system 414 may render the sound in a location relative to the listener using various techniques including panning and HRTF filters”].
As to claim 4, Gerrard discloses in response to detecting a change in the location of the user, obtaining a second virtual playback format that includes a second position of a second virtual speaker that is fixed in the environment of the user [paragraphs 0038, 0058-0059].
As to claim 5, Gerrard discloses wherein obtaining the acoustic model includes obtaining a reverberation model that is associated with the location of the user and rendering the audio is based at least on the reverberation model [paragraph 0009, 0011-0012, 0045-0047, 0058, 0062].
As to claim 6, Gerrard discloses wherein the reverberation model is generated remotely based on an acoustic simulation with three-dimensional information that is associated with the location of the user [paragraphs 0009, 0035].
As to claim 7, Gerrard discloses wherein obtaining the acoustic model includes obtaining an early reflections model based on a position of the user and the three dimensional information that is associated with the location of the user, and rendering the audio is based at least on the early reflections model and the reverberation model [paragraphs 0009, 0011-0012, 0035, 0045-0047, 0058, 0062].
As to claim 9, Gerrard discloses wherein obtaining the acoustic model includes obtaining a direct path model based on a position of the user and a position of the virtual speaker, and updating the direct path model responsive to an update in the position of the user [paragraphs 0058, 0086].
As to claim 14, Gerrard discloses maintaining a plurality of virtual playback formats wherein each of the virtual playback formats are associated with a respective location [paragraphs 0050-0053, 0057].
As to claim 17, Gerrard discloses wherein the playback device determines a remaining portion of the acoustic model [paragraph 0009, 0011-0012, 0045-0047, 0058, 0062].
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 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 of this title, 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 2, 12, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20080069367 to Gerrard et al. (“Gerrard”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20170142498 to Blong et al. (“Blong”).
As to claims 2, 12 and 19, Gerrard discloses the method of claim 1, 11 and the non-transitory machine-readable storage medium of claim 18 [see rejection of claims 1, 11 and 18].
Gerrard does not expressly disclose wherein the audio includes a crowd-sourced audio that is determined based on input obtained from a plurality of users that are associated with the location of the user, and the crowd-sourced audio is provided to the playback device based on the location of the user.
In the same or similar field of invention, Blong discloses wherein the audio includes a crowd-sourced audio that is determined based on input obtained from a plurality of users that are associated with the location of the user [Blong paragraphs 0045-0047: “outputting (at 630) the captured audio and time location, associated with the local audio event, to crowdsourced audio engine 310..”], and the crowd-sourced audio is provided to the playback device based on the location of the user [Blong paragraphs 0047-0053, also see paragraphs 0054-59].
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Gerrard to have features of wherein the audio includes a crowd-sourced audio that is determined based on input obtained from a plurality of users that are associated with the location of the user, and the crowd-sourced audio is provided to the playback device based on the location of the user as taught by Blong. The suggestion/motivation would have been to provide crowdsourcing techniques to enhance the experience of users viewing and/or listening to content [Blong Abstract].
Claims 3, 10, 13, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20080069367 to Gerrard et al. (“Gerrard”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20190333488 to Wakayama (“Wakayama”).
As to claims 3, 13 and 20, Gerrard discloses the method of claim 1, 11 and the non-transitory machine-readable storage medium of claim 18 [see rejection of claims 1, 11 and 18].
Gerrard does not expressly disclose wherein the virtual playback format includes a musical instrument type to render the audio in, the musical instrument type being associated with the location of the user.
In the same or similar field of invention, Wakayama discloses wherein the virtual playback format includes a musical instrument type to render the audio in, the musical instrument type being associated with the location of the user [Wakayama paragraphs 0022, 0084].
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Gerrard to have features of wherein the virtual playback format includes a musical instrument type to render the audio in, the musical instrument type being associated with the location of the user as taught by Wakayama. The suggestion/motivation would have been to provide a sound generation device and a sound generation system which can make it easy to apply setting data to a musical instrument [Wakayama paragraph 0019].
As to claim 10, Wakayama discloses wherein the position of the user is determined based on at least one of: an accelerometer, an inertial measurement unit (IMU), a simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) algorithm, camera images [paragraph 0084], or global positioning system (GPS). In addition, the same motivation is used as the rejection of claim 1.
Claims 8, 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20080069367 to Gerrard et al. (“Gerrard”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0174738 to Pratt et al. (“Pratt”).
As to claim 8, Gerrard discloses the method of claim 7 [see rejection of claim 7].
Gerrard does not expressly disclose wherein the obtaining the early reflections model includes updating the early reflections model responsive to a global positioning system (GPS) update of the playback device.
In the same or similar field of invention, Pratt discloses wherein the obtaining the early reflections model includes updating the early reflections model responsive to a global positioning system (GPS) update of the playback device [Pratt paragraphs 0018, 0025-26, 0051].
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Gerrard to have features of wherein the obtaining the early reflections model includes updating the early reflections model responsive to a global positioning system (GPS) update of the playback device as taught by Pratt. The suggestion/motivation would have been to facilitate a system for improving and achieving an audio environment (sound influence zone) and an intuitive way to understand where sounds will be heard [Pratt Abstract].
As to claim 15, Gerrard discloses the method of claim 11 [see rejection of claim 11]. Gerrard further discloses wherein providing the at least a portion of the acoustic model includes providing, to the playback device [paragraph 0009, 0011-0012, 0045-0047, 0058, 0062].
Gerrard does not expressly disclose a reverberation model that is associated with the location of the user based on a GPS location of the playback device.
In the same or similar field of invention, Pratt discloses a reverberation model that is associated with the location of the user based on a GPS location of the playback device [Pratt paragraphs 0018, 0025-26, 0051].
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify Gerrard to have features of having a reverberation model that is associated with the location of the user based on a GPS location of the playback device as taught by Pratt. The suggestion/motivation would have been to facilitate a system for improving and achieving an audio environment (sound influence zone) and an intuitive way to understand where sounds will be heard [Pratt Abstract].
As to claim 16, Gerrard discloses generating the reverberation model based on performing an acoustic simulation with three-dimensional information that is associated with the location of the user, and providing the reverberation model to the playback device based on the location of the user and the playback device [paragraphs 0009, 0035].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20150223002 to Mehta et al. (Figs. 1, 2, 14-15 and corresponding paragraphs).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANTIM G SHAH whose telephone number is (571)270-5214. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30am-4pm.
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 at 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.
/ANTIM G SHAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693