DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 (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 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.
Claims 4 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Horie (US 2015/0049877 A1 – cited in IDS).
As to claim 4, Horie discloses an electric device (Fig. 1.) comprising:
a sounding body configured to generate sound (¶0030, Fig. 1. “This external sound output part 910 includes a speaker SP that outputs external sound to the exterior of the vehicle.”);
a sound source storing unit storing an actual use sound source (¶0042, Fig. 1. “Sound data corresponding to externally outputted sound is stored in the sound source part 750.”);
a correction value storing unit storing a correction value for correcting the actual use sound source so that a sound pressure of the actual use sound source reproduced from the sounding body is brought close to a target value when the actual use sound source is reproduced by the sounding body (¶0032-0035, Fig. 1. “The storage part 710 stores information of various types for use by the acoustic device 700. Speaker characteristic information and a sound pressure adjustment table are included in this information.”);
a sound pressure correction unit configured to obtain a corrected actual use sound source by correcting the actual use sound source with the correction value (¶0057-0058, Fig. 1. “And the control part 740A performs control of the sound signal generation part 760 by taking the adjustment value corresponding to an adjustment subject frequency that is registered in the individual table referred to as being the gain value for the component of that adjustment subject frequency. As a result, externally outputted sound is outputted from the external sound output part 910 whose output sound volume has been minimized while still satisfying the conditions for required sound pressure level that have been specified by the user.”); and
a control unit configured to control the sounding body to reproduce the corrected actual use sound source from the sounding body (¶0057-0058, Fig. 1. “And the control part 740A performs control of the sound signal generation part 760 by taking the adjustment value corresponding to an adjustment subject frequency that is registered in the individual table referred to as being the gain value for the component of that adjustment subject frequency. As a result, externally outputted sound is outputted from the external sound output part 910 whose output sound volume has been minimized while still satisfying the conditions for required sound pressure level that have been specified by the user.”).
As to claim 8, Horie discloses a manufacturing method for an electric device (¶0045), comprising:
preparing a workpiece of the electric device that includes a sounding body (¶0030-0031, Fig. 1. External sound output part 910.),
a control unit configured to control the sounding body (¶0031, Fig. 1. Control part 740A.), and
a sound source storing unit storing an actual use sound source (¶0031, Fig. 1. Sound source part 750.);
controlling the sounding body by a controller via the control unit to cause the sounding body to generate an inspection sound of a frequency band including a frequency band of the actual use sound source (¶0050. “Upon receipt of this generation command for the test sound signal, the sound signal generation part 760 reads in from the sound source part 750 sound data corresponding to a test sound at the measurement subject frequency that has been designated.”);
causing a sound pressure inspection device to detect a sound pressure of the inspection sound generated by the sounding body (¶0051. “During this type of test sound output, the control part 740A receives the results of sound pickup by the sound pickup 950 via the acquisition part 730. And, on the basis of these sound pickup results sent from the sound pickup part 950, the control part 740A calculates the difference between the sound pressure level of the test sound at the sound pickup position, and the target sound pressure level.”);
calculating, by the controller, a correction value for bringing a sound pressure of the actual use sound source generated from the sounding body to a target value when the actual use sound source is reproduced by the sounding body, based on the sound pressure that is detected by the sound pressure inspection device (¶0050-0053. “Subsequently, on the basis of the calculated difference and the gain value at the present time point, the control part 740A derives a gain value.”); and
storing the correction value that is calculated by the controller on the workpiece (¶0054 and 0056. “Adjustment values that satisfy the target sound pressure specifications in the measurement conditions are registered in the sound pressure adjustment table in the storage part 710.”).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horie.
As to claim 1, Horie discloses an electric device (Fig. 1) comprising:
a sounding body configured to generate sound (¶0030, Fig. 1. “This external sound output part 910 includes a speaker SP that outputs external sound to the exterior of the vehicle.”);
a sound source storing unit storing an actual use sound source (¶0042, Fig. 1. “Sound data corresponding to externally outputted sound is stored in the sound source part 750.”);
a correction value storing unit storing a correction value for correcting the actual use sound source, respectively, so that respective sound pressures of the actual use sound source reproduced from the sounding body are brought close to respective target values when the actual use sound source is reproduced by the sounding body (¶0032-0035, Fig. 1. “The storage part 710 stores information of various types for use by the acoustic device 700. Speaker characteristic information and a sound pressure adjustment table are included in this information.”);
a sound pressure correction unit configured to obtain a corrected actual use sound sources by correcting the actual use sound source with the correction value (¶0057-0058, Fig. 1. “And the control part 740A performs control of the sound signal generation part 760 by taking the adjustment value corresponding to an adjustment subject frequency that is registered in the individual table referred to as being the gain value for the component of that adjustment subject frequency. As a result, externally outputted sound is outputted from the external sound output part 910 whose output sound volume has been minimized while still satisfying the conditions for required sound pressure level that have been specified by the user.”); and
a control unit configured to synthesize the corrected actual use sound source to obtain a synthesized actual use sound source and control the sounding body to reproduce the synthesized actual use sound source from the sounding body (¶0057-0058, Fig. 1. “And the control part 740A performs control of the sound signal generation part 760 by taking the adjustment value corresponding to an adjustment subject frequency that is registered in the individual table referred to as being the gain value for the component of that adjustment subject frequency. As a result, externally outputted sound is outputted from the external sound output part 910 whose output sound volume has been minimized while still satisfying the conditions for required sound pressure level that have been specified by the user.”).
Horie does not expressly disclose a plurality of actual use sound sources and a plurality of correction values.
However, having a plurality of sound source and correction values instead of a single sound source and single correction value is an obvious duplication of parts, which would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation would have been to provide the user with multiple options for a sound source.
As to claim 7, Horie discloses a manufacturing method for an electric device (¶0045), comprising:
preparing a workpiece of the electric device that includes a sounding body (¶0030-0031, Fig. 1. External sound output part 910.),
a control unit configured to control the sounding body (¶0031, Fig. 1. Control part 740A.), and
a sound source storing unit storing an actual use sound source (¶0031, Fig. 1. Sound source part 750.);
controlling the sounding body by a controller via the control unit to cause the sounding body to generate an inspection sound of a frequency band including respective frequency bands of the actual use sound source (¶0050. “Upon receipt of this generation command for the test sound signal, the sound signal generation part 760 reads in from the sound source part 750 sound data corresponding to a test sound at the measurement subject frequency that has been designated.”);
causing a sound pressure inspection device to detect a sound pressure of the inspection sound generated by the sounding body (¶0051. “During this type of test sound output, the control part 740A receives the results of sound pickup by the sound pickup 950 via the acquisition part 730. And, on the basis of these sound pickup results sent from the sound pickup part 950, the control part 740A calculates the difference between the sound pressure level of the test sound at the sound pickup position, and the target sound pressure level.”);
calculating, by the controller, a correction value for bringing respective sound pressures of the actual use sound source generated from the sounding body to respective target values when the actual use sound source is reproduced by the sounding body, based on the sound pressure that is detected by the sound pressure inspection device (¶0050-0053. “Subsequently, on the basis of the calculated difference and the gain value at the present time point, the control part 740A derives a gain value.”); and
storing the correction value that is calculated by the controller on the workpiece (¶0054 and 0056. “Adjustment values that satisfy the target sound pressure specifications in the measurement conditions are registered in the sound pressure adjustment table in the storage part 710.”).
Horie does not expressly disclose a plurality of actual use sound sources and a plurality of correction values.
However, having a plurality of sound source and correction values instead of a single sound source and single correction value is an obvious duplication of parts, which would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. The motivation would have been to provide the user with multiple options for a sound source.
Claims 2-3 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Horie, as applied to claims 1 and 7 above, in view of Sakakibara et al. (US 2015/0035660 A1 - cited in IDS), hereinafter “Sakakibara.”
As to claim 5, Horie discloses wherein the sound source storing unit, the correction value storing unit, the sound pressure correction unit, the control unit, and the sounding body are configured to be mounted on a vehicle (¶0029-0030, Fig. 1. “This acoustic device 700 is mounted to a vehicle CR.” “An external sound output part 910 is installed within the vehicle CR.”),
the correction value storing unit is a first correction value storing unit, and the correction value is a sub correction value (¶0120-0121, Fig. 4. Individual tables with various adjustment values for sub frequencies.).
Horie does not expressly disclose a second correction value storing unit configured to store a candidate value group of a main correction value for correcting the sound pressure of the actual use sound source reproduced from the sounding body when the actual use sound source is reproduced by the sounding body; and
a correction value selection unit configured to select, as the main correction value, a candidate value for the actual use sound source that match information of the vehicle that is provided from an external electronic control unit, from the candidate value group of the main correction value, wherein the sound pressure correction unit is configured to obtain the corrected actual use sound source by correcting the actual use sound source with the main correction value and the sub correction value.
Sakakibara discloses a second correction value storing unit configured to store a candidate value group of a main correction value for correcting the sound pressure of the actual use sound source reproduced from the sounding body when the actual use sound source is reproduced by the sounding body (Sakakibara, ¶0056, ¶0062 and ¶0068, Figs. 3 and 7. SPL of adjusted based on travel speed of vehicle.); and
a correction value selection unit configured to select, as the main correction value, a candidate value for the actual use sound source that match information of the vehicle that is provided from an external electronic control unit, from the candidate value group of the main correction value, wherein the sound pressure correction unit is configured to obtain the corrected actual use sound source by correcting the actual use sound source with the main correction value and the sub correction value (Sakakibara, ¶0056, ¶0062 and ¶0062, Figs. 3 and 7. “The microcomputer 21 of the vehicle approach warning apparatus 2 maintains the sound pressure level of the warning sound in a predetermined range as a whole, adjusts the level of the signal of the low frequency component and the level of the signal of a high frequency component, and causes the speaker 3 to output the warning sound so that recognition to a pedestrian around the vehicle is improved according to increase of the travel speed.”).
Horie and Sakakibara are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to vehicle warning sounds.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to adjust warning sound pressure level based on vehicle travel speed, as taught by Sakakibara. The motivation would have been for improved pedestrian recognition without causing the user to feel uncomfortable (Sakakibara, ¶0007).
As to claim 6, Horie in view of Sakakibara does not expressly disclose wherein a circuit board on which the sound source storing unit, the correction value storing unit, the sound pressure correction unit, and the control unit are mounted; and a housing that accommodates the sounding body and the circuit board (Horie, ¶0031, ¶0102, Fig. 1. Implicit that the components would be mounted on a circuity board and in a housing. Further, mounting audio processing components on a circuit board and accommodating said circuit board and a speaker in a housing is well known routine and conventional in the art and would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. ).
Claims 2-3 are rejected under claim 1 using the same motivation as claims 5-6 above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES K MOONEY whose telephone number is (571)272-2412. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 8:30-6:30 EST.
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 5712727848. 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.
/JAMES K MOONEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695