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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see p. 8, filed 11/12/2025, with respect to claim 20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 USC 101 rejection of 8/12/25 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 11/12/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The examiner respectfully disagrees with applicant, and the Dochow reference does teach modulation with a carrier frequency. Specifically, Dochow illustrates well-known amplitude modulation with a cosine function, or a carrier frequency (see Dochow, figure 2, multiplication block and cos ωt). Dochow states that the cosine function (i.e., cos ωt) provides a spectral shift (see Dochow, ¶ 0056), and multiplying a signal by a cosine function is well-known to be equivalent to amplitude modulation, where the modulated signal is shifted to a frequency range centered around the carrier frequency (i.e., the carrier frequency is expressed in radians, ω). Therefore, Dochow anticipates claims 1, 3-4, 7-8, 10, 12-13, 16-17, and 20, and the combination of Dochow and Moses makes obvious claims 5-6, 9, 14-15, and 18-19.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 7-8, 10, 12-13, 16-17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Dochow et al. (US 2022/0342961 A1, previously cited and hereafter Dochow)
Regarding claim 1, Dochow discloses a method for operating a functionally secure audio output system, such as a vehicle audio output system (see Dochow, abstract and ¶ 0004).
Therein, Dochow anticipates:
“A system for playback and monitoring of playback of audio signals, the system comprising:
an audio signal generating module configured to generate an audio signal” by teaching a complex node (B) in an audio output system (X), where the complex node includes a computing process (B1) that generates a warning signal (S) to be output when it receives a code (A1) associated to a specific warning code (R) (see Dochow, figure 1, units, X, R, A1, B, B1, and S, and ¶ 0049);
“an identification signal generating module configured to generate an identification signal associated with the audio signal” by teaching a digital signal processing node (C) in the computing process (B1) that generates an acoustic watermark signal (W) to be output when it receives the associated specific warning code (A1) (see Dochow, figure 1, units, A1, B1, C, and W, and ¶ 0049);
“a combining module configured to combine the audio signal and the identification signal into a combined audio signal” by teaching an adding node to combine the warning signal (S) and the acoustic watermark signal (W) to generate the output signal (Y) (see Dochow, figure 1, units S, W, and Y, and ¶ 0050);
“a playback module configured to play back a sound based on the combined audio signal” by teaching an amplifier (V) to output the combined audio signal (Y) to loudspeakers (LS) (see Dochow, figure 1, units Y, V, and LS, and ¶ 0050); and
“a verifying module configured to process the played back sound in order to verify that the played back sound contains the identification signal” by teaching a statistical processing (H) in a sequence controller (K) of a computing node (A) and signal processing (D) in a computing process (B2), where the signal processing receives a signal stream (Z) from a microphone (MIC) that senses the acoustic output (Z1) of the loudspeakers, the signal processing determines the most likely code (A2) contained in the signal stream and sends the most likely code to the statistical processing to determine if the most likely code (A2) matches the code (A1) (see Dochow, figure 1, units Z1, MIC, Z, B2, D, A2, H, K, A1, and A, and ¶ 0050);
“wherein the identification signal generating module is further configured to modulate at least one carrier frequency using a first identification code” because the code (A1) is modulated, or shifted in frequency, by a cosine function (i.e., cos ωt) in the encoder block (see Dochow, ¶ 0049 and 0056, and figure 2, units A1, g[n], d[n], the multiplication blocks, and cos ωt).
Regarding claim 3, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. Dochow anticipates the “system of claim 1, wherein a warning indication is provided responsive to the verification indicating that the played back sound contains the identification signal fails” by teaching that an alternative audio output (BZ) is used to output an audible warning when the detected code does not match the original identifier (see Dochow, ¶ 0050), and further teaches that failure of different components, such as one or more loudspeakers or microphones can be mitigated by using a visual output when the acoustic transmission path to the driver is no longer ensured (see Dochow, ¶ 0053).
Regarding claim 4, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. Dochow anticipates the “system of claim 1, wherein one or more redundant bits are added to the first identification code” by teaching convolutional coding that modifies the code to be encoded in the acoustic watermark, where convolutional coding adds bits to avoid transmission errors (see Dochow, ¶ 0056).
Regarding claim 7, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. Dochow anticipates the “system of one claim 1, wherein the combining module is further configured to add the audio signal and the identification signal” by teaching the adding node to combine the warning signal (S) and the acoustic watermark signal (W) to generate the output signal (Y) (see Dochow, figure 1, units S, W, and Y, and ¶ 0050).
Regarding claim 8, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. Dochow anticipates the “system of claim 1, wherein at least one of:
the audio signal and the identification signal differ in frequency, or
a power of the identification signal is below a power of the audio signal” by teaching that the watermark is added to the signal based on a perceptual masking according to a psychoacoustic model of humans hearing, such that the watermark is added at power levels below the masking signal, where the masking signal is the audio warning signal (see Dochow, ¶ 0049-0050 and 0056).
Regarding claim 10, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. Dochow anticipates the system of claim 1, and likewise anticipates:
“A method for playback and monitoring of playback of audio signals, the method comprising:
generating an audio signal” by teaching the generation of a warning signal (S) in a complex node (B) of an audio output system (X), where the complex node includes a computing process (B1) that generates the warning signal to be output when it receives a code (A1) associated with a specific warning code (R) (see Dochow, figure 1, units, X, R, A1, B, B1, and S, and ¶ 0049);
“generating an identification signal associated with the audio signal” by teaching the generation of an acoustic watermark signal (W) using a digital signal processing node (C) in the computing process (B1) such that the acoustic watermark signal (W) is generated according to the associated specific warning code (A1) (see Dochow, figure 1, units, A1, B1, C, and W, and ¶ 0049);
“combining the audio signal and the identification signal into a combined audio signal” by teaching an adding node to combine the warning signal (S) and the acoustic watermark signal (W) to generate the output signal (Y) (see Dochow, figure 1, units S, W, and Y, and ¶ 0050);
“playing back a sound based on the combined audio signal” by teaching an amplifier (V) to output the combined audio signal (Y) to loudspeakers (LS) (see Dochow, figure 1, units Y, V, and LS, and ¶ 0050); and
“processing the played back sound in order to verify that the played back sound contains the identification signal” by teaching processing with a signal processing (D) node in a computing process (B2), where the signal processing node receives a signal stream (Z) from a microphone (MIC) that senses the acoustic output (Z1) of the loudspeakers, the signal processing node processes the signal stream to determine the most likely code (A2) contained therein, and sends the most likely code to the statistical processing to determine if the most likely code (A2) matches the code (A1) (see Dochow, figure 1, units Z1, MIC, Z, B2, D, A2, H, K, A1, and A, and ¶ 0050);
“wherein generating the identification signal further comprises modulating at least one carrier frequency using a first identification code” because the code (A1) is modulated, or shifted in frequency, by a cosine function (i.e., cos ωt) in the encoder block (see Dochow, ¶ 0049 and 0056, and figure 2, units A1, g[n], d[n], the multiplication blocks, and cos ωt).
Regarding claim 12, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 10 above. Dochow anticipates the “method of claim 10, wherein a warning indication is provided responsive to the verification indicating that the played back sound contains the identification signal fails” by teaching that an alternative audio output (BZ) is used to output an audible warning when the detected code does not match the original identifier (see Dochow, ¶ 0050), and further teaches that failure of different components, such as one or more loudspeakers or microphones can be mitigated by using a visual output when the acoustic transmission path to the driver is no longer ensured (see Dochow, ¶ 0053).
Regarding claim 13, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 10 above. Dochow anticipates the “method of claim 10, wherein one or more redundant bits are added to the first identification code” by teaching convolutional coding that modifies the code to be encoded in the acoustic watermark, where convolutional coding adds bits to avoid transmission errors (see Dochow, ¶ 0056).
Regarding claim 16, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 10 above. Dochow anticipates the “method of claim 10, wherein combining the audio signal and the identification signal into a combined audio signal further comprises:
adding the audio signal and the identification signal” by teaching the adding node to combine the warning signal (S) and the acoustic watermark signal (W) to generate the output signal (Y) (see Dochow, figure 1, units S, W, and Y, and ¶ 0050).
Regarding claim 17, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 10 above. Dochow anticipates the “method of claim 10, wherein at least one of:
the audio signal and the identification signal differ in frequency, or
a power of the identification signal is below a power of the audio signal” by teaching that the watermark is added to the signal based on a perceptual masking according to a psychoacoustic model of humans hearing, such that the watermark is added at power levels below the masking signal, where the masking signal is the audio warning signal (see Dochow, ¶ 0049-0050 and 0056).
Regarding claim 20, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. Dochow anticipates the system of claim 1, and likewise anticipates:
“A non-transitory memory storing a computer program comprising computer executable instructions which, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to perform a method for playback and monitoring of playback of audio signals, the method comprising:
generating an audio signal” by teaching the generation of a warning signal (S) in a complex node (B) of an audio output system (X), where the complex node includes a computing process (B1) that generates the warning signal to be output when it receives a code (A1) associated with a specific warning code (R) (see Dochow, figure 1, units, X, R, A1, B, B1, and S, and ¶ 0049);
“generating an identification signal associated with the audio signal” by teaching the generation of an acoustic watermark signal (W) using a digital signal processing node (C) in the computing process (B1) such that the acoustic watermark signal (W) is generated according to the associated specific warning code (A1) (see Dochow, figure 1, units, A1, B1, C, and W, and ¶ 0049);
“combining the audio signal and the identification signal into a combined audio signal” by teaching an adding node to combine the warning signal (S) and the acoustic watermark signal (W) to generate the output signal (Y) (see Dochow, figure 1, units S, W, and Y, and ¶ 0050);
“playing back a sound based on the combined audio signal” by teaching an amplifier (V) to output the combined audio signal (Y) to loudspeakers (LS) (see Dochow, figure 1, units Y, V, and LS, and ¶ 0050); and
“processing the played back sound in order to verify that the played back sound contains the identification signal” by teaching processing with a signal processing (D) node in a computing process (B2), where the signal processing node receives a signal stream (Z) from a microphone (MIC) that senses the acoustic output (Z1) of the loudspeakers, the signal processing node processes the signal stream to determine the most likely code (A2) contained therein, and sends the most likely code to the statistical processing to determine if the most likely code (A2) matches the code (A1) (see Dochow, figure 1, units Z1, MIC, Z, B2, D, A2, H, K, A1, and A, and ¶ 0050);
“wherein generating the identification signal further comprises modulating at least one carrier frequency using a first identification code” because the code (A1) is modulated, or shifted in frequency, by a cosine function (i.e., cos ωt) in the encoder block (see Dochow, ¶ 0049 and 0056, and figure 2, units A1, g[n], d[n], the multiplication blocks, and cos ωt).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 5-6, 9, 14-15, and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dochow as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of Moses et al. (US 6,571,144 B1, previously cited and hereafter Moses).
Regarding claim 5, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. Dochow anticipates the system of claim 1, where the watermark is modulated with binary phase shift keying (BPSK) and modulated to a different frequency by a cosine function, but does not appear to teach or suggest demodulation to extract a second identification code.
Moses discloses a system for providing a digital watermark in an audio signal (see Moses, abstract, column 1, lines 50-53, and column 2, lines 16-47). Herein, Moses teaches Gaussian Minimal Shift Keying (GMSK) modulation to incorporate the watermark data into an audio signal according to when and where an encoder determines that an opportunity to incorporate the watermark exists according to a just-noticeable distortion figure (e.g., the perceptual entropy envelope (PEE)) (see Moses, column 2, lines 48-58 and column 3, lines 3-29). Moses also teaches that the watermark encoding uses multiple critical bands to redundantly encode a watermark in the audio signal (see Moses, column 2, lines 48-58, and column 4, lines 35-53).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the teachings of Dochow with Moses for the purpose of providing redundancy with the watermark placed in one or more critical bands (see Moses, column 2, lines 16-31 and lines 48-58, and column 4, lines 35-53).
Therefore, the combination of Dochow and Moses makes obvious the “system of claim 1, wherein the verifying module is further configured to demodulate the played back sound using the at least one carrier frequency to extract a second identification code” because Moses makes obvious the GMSK modulation to incorporate the watermark, or identification code, into one or more critical bands and further makes obvious the decoder using GMSK demodulation to decode, or extract, the a second identification code (see Dochow, ¶ 0050 in view of Moses, column 4, lines 11-14).
Regarding claim 6, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 5 above. The combination makes obvious the “system of claim 5, wherein the verifying module is further configured to compare the first identification code to the second identification code” where Dochow teaches the statistical processing to determine if the decoded most likely code (A2) matches the code (A1), such that it is obvious to compare the demodulated watermark, or second identification code, to the original watermark to see if the codes match (see Dochow, figure 1, units B2, D, A2, H, K, and A1, and ¶ 0050, in view of Moses, column 4, lines 11-14).
Regarding claim 9, see the preceding rejection with respect to claims 1 and 5 above. Dochow anticipates the system of claim 1, where the watermark, or identification signal is combined with the audio signal in the combined audio signal. However, Dochow does not appear to teach that the identification signal is preceded by a preamble or succeeded by a postamble.
Moses, as cited above with respect to claim 5, discloses a system for providing a digital watermark in an audio signal (see Moses, abstract, column 1, lines 50-53, and column 2, lines 16-47). Therein, Moses teaches that the watermark encoding uses multiple critical bands to redundantly encode a watermark in the audio signal (see Moses, column 2, lines 48-58, and column 4, lines 35-53). Additionally Moses teaches that a 4-bit index preamble precedes the watermark in order to mark the start of the watermark in the audio stream (see Moses, column 3, lines 29-46).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the teachings of Dochow with Moses for the purpose of providing redundancy with the watermark placed in one or more critical bands (see Moses, column 2, lines 16-31 and lines 48-58, and column 4, lines 35-53).
Therefore, the combination of Dochow and Moses makes obvious the “system of claim 1, wherein at least one of:
the identification signal is preceded by a preamble, or
the identification signal is succeeded by a postamble” by making it obvious to include a preamble to mark the start of identification signal (see Moses, column 3, lines 29-46).
Regarding claim 14, see the preceding rejection with respect to claims 5 and 10 above. Dochow anticipates the method of claim 10, where the watermark is modulated with binary phase shift keying (BPSK) and modulated to a different frequency by a cosine function, but does not appear to teach demodulation to extract a second identification code, and Moses, as cited above with respect to claim 5, makes obvious watermark encoding uses multiple critical bands to redundantly encode a watermark in the audio signal (see Moses, column 2, lines 48-58, and column 4, lines 35-53), where the watermark is encoded using GMSK modulation and decoded using GMSK demodulation in the multiple critical bands (see Moses, figure 6, column 2, lines 48-58, and column 3, lines 3-29).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the teachings of Dochow with Moses for the purpose of providing redundancy with the watermark placed in one or more critical bands (see Moses, column 2, lines 16-31 and lines 48-58, and column 4, lines 35-53).
Therefore, the combination of Dochow and Moses makes obvious the “method of claim 10, wherein processing the played back sound in order to verify that the played back sound contains the identification signal further comprises:
demodulating the played back sound using the at least one carrier frequency to extract a second identification code” because Moses makes obvious the GMSK modulation to incorporate the watermark, or identification code, into one or more critical bands and further makes obvious the decoder using GMSK demodulation to decode, or extract, the a second identification code (see Dochow, ¶ 0050 in view of Moses, column 4, lines 11-14).
Regarding claim 15, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 14 above. The combination makes obvious the “method of claim 14, wherein processing the played back sound in order to verify that the played back sound contains the identification signal further comprises:
comparing the first identification code to the second identification code” where Dochow teaches the statistical processing to determine if the decoded most likely code (A2) matches the code (A1), such that it is obvious to compare the demodulated watermark, or second identification code, to the original watermark to see if the codes match (see Dochow, figure 1, units B2, D, A2, H, K, and A1, and ¶ 0050, in view of Moses, column 4, lines 11-14).
Regarding claim 18, see the preceding rejection with respect to claims 10 and 5 above. Dochow anticipates the method of claim 10, where the watermark, or identification signal is combined with the audio signal in the combined audio signal. However, Dochow does not appear to teach that the identification signal is preceded by a preamble or succeeded by a postamble.
Moses, as cited above with respect to claim 5, discloses a system for providing a digital watermark in an audio signal (see Moses, abstract, column 1, lines 50-53, and column 2, lines 16-47). Therein, Moses teaches that the watermark encoding uses multiple critical bands to redundantly encode a watermark in the audio signal (see Moses, column 2, lines 48-58, and column 4, lines 35-53). Additionally Moses teaches that a 4-bit index preamble precedes the watermark in order to mark the start of the watermark in the audio stream (see Moses, column 3, lines 29-46).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the teachings of Dochow with Moses for the purpose of providing redundancy with the watermark placed in one or more critical bands (see Moses, column 2, lines 16-31 and lines 48-58, and column 4, lines 35-53).
Therefore, the combination of Dochow and Moses makes obvious the “method of claim 10, wherein at least one of:
the identification signal is preceded by a preamble, or
the identification signal is succeeded by a postamble” by making it obvious to include a preamble to mark the start of identification signal (see Moses, column 3, lines 29-46).
Regarding claim 19, see the preceding rejection with respect to claims 10 and 14 above. Dochow anticipates the method of claim 10, where the watermark is modulated with binary phase shift keying (BPSK), but does not appear to teach demodulation to extract a second identification code. For the same reasoning as claim 14 above, the combination of Dochow and Moses makes obvious the “method of claim 10,
wherein generating the identification signal further comprises:
modulating at least one carrier frequency using a first identification code” where Dochow teaches that the assigned code (A1) is modulated to generate the acoustic watermark (W), where BPSK and frequency shifting using a cosine function so that the acoustic watermark is placed in one or more frequencies that it are perceptually masked by a psychoacoustic model of humans hearing (see Dochow, ¶ 0049 and 0056), and Moses makes obvious the use of GMSK modulation to place the watermark in one or more critical bands (see Moses, column 2, lines 48-58, and column 4, lines 35-53),
“wherein a warning indication is provided responsive to the verification indicating that the played back sound contains the identification signal fails” where Dochow teaches that an alternative audio output (BZ) is used to output an audible warning when the detected code does not match the original identifier (see Dochow, ¶ 0050), and further teaches that failure of different components, such as one or more loudspeakers or microphones can be mitigated by using a visual output when the acoustic transmission path to the driver is no longer ensured (see Dochow, ¶ 0053),
“wherein processing the played back sound in order to verify that the played back sound contains the identification signal further comprises:
demodulating the played back sound using the at least one carrier frequency to extract a second identification code” because Moses makes obvious the GMSK modulation to incorporate the watermark, or identification code, into one or more critical bands and further makes obvious the decoder using GMSK demodulation to decode, or extract, the a second identification code (see Dochow, ¶ 0050 in view of Moses, column 4, lines 11-14); and
“comparing the first identification code to the second identification code” where Dochow teaches the statistical processing to determine if the decoded most likely code (A2) matches the code (A1), such that it is obvious to compare the demodulated watermark, or second identification code, to the original watermark to see if the codes match (see Dochow, figure 1, units B2, D, A2, H, K, and A1, and ¶ 0050, in view of Moses, column 4, lines 11-14), and
“wherein combining the audio signal and the identification signal into a combined audio signal further comprises:
adding the audio signal and the identification signal” where Dochow teaches the adding node to combine the warning signal (S) and the acoustic watermark signal (W) to generate the output signal (Y) (see Dochow, figure 1, units S, W, and Y, and ¶ 0050).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wabnik et al. (US 2013/0218314 A1, previously cited and hereafter Wabnik) teaches a watermark signal suitable for being hidden an audio signal (see Wabnik, abstract, figures 1-4, 10A, 12D-G, and 19-25, and ¶ 0013-0018); and
Lehomme et al. (US 2019/0286407 A1, previously cited and hereafter Lehomme), discloses an infotainment system including audio safety sound and safety telltale confirmation (see Lehomme, abstract), where a signature for one of the safety sounds is generated, output to the signature buffer (see Lehomme, figure 2, units 28 and 48, and ¶ 0019), and mixed into the lower bits of the mixed audio stream so that the safety sound is mixed and output with the media audio (i.e., the signature is mixed into the lower bits of the safety sound plus any music) (see Lehomme, figure 2, units 32, 34, 36, 38, 42, and 46, and ¶ 0019).
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 Daniel R Sellers whose telephone number is (571)272-7528. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 10:00-4:00.
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, Fan S Tsang can be reached at (571)272-7547. 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.
/Daniel R Sellers/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2694