DETAILED ACTION
In the response to this office action, the examiner respectfully requests that support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line numbers in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the examiner in prosecuting this application.
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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
Figure 5 shows item 404 which appears should be item 406, an error mic output, as found in figure 4.
Paragraph [0055] states “moves to step 724 and aborts” which should be “moves to step 723 and aborts”.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description:
Paragraph [0043] refers to diagram 400 not found in the figures.
Paragraph [0043] refers to white noise generator output signal 404 with respect to figure 4, but not found in figure 4.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 8-19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 13 states “generating a shaped noise signal in the cabin of the vehicle with a shaped noise generator, the shaped noise signal”. The last portion appears to be a typo, perhaps from earlier versions of the claim. It is suggested that this last portion be removed to make this indent state “generating a shaped noise signal in the cabin of the vehicle with a shaped noise generator”
Claims 14-19 are objected as inheriting the problems as above.
Claim 8 state “The system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the linear predictive coding component further comprises:
a white noise generator; and
a linear predictive coding component” which does not make sense.
Most likely the first “wherein” portion is a typo and should be “wherein the shaped noise generator further comprises”. This would match the wording of claim 7.
Claims 9-12 are objected as inheriting the problems as above.
Claim 11 states "the LPC filters" which would be clearer as “the LPC synthesis filters”, since that is what they were introduced as.
Claim 12 is objected as inheriting the problems as above.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chirstoph (US 20080181422 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Chirstoph discloses a system (see at least figures 13A and 13B) for generating a stimulus signal (y_sum(n)) for an adaptive secondary path of an active noise cancellation (ANC) system in a vehicle, the system comprising:
at least one audio signal source (1344 of figure 13B) to provide an audio signal in a cabin of the vehicle (see paragraphs [0043], [0002], and [0005] for vehicle cabin);
a shaped noise generator (portions providing “FilteredWhiteNoise(n)” such as 1340, 1342 and 1338) to provide a shaped noise signal in the cabin of the vehicle (“FilteredWhiteNoise(n)”);
at least one controller (described in paragraph [0097] and [0035]) programmed to activate the shaped noise generator (at least via 1336 and 1338) and add the shaped noise signal to the audio signal to generate a stimulus signal (via lowest adder of figure 13B); and
at least one loudspeaker (1312) to project the stimulus signal within the cabin of the vehicle for the ANC system to generate an anti-noise signal (paragraph [0081]).
Regarding claim 6, Chirstoph discloses wherein the shaped noise generator further comprises an active sound design (ASD) system (used in general to enhance the sound delivered to the user which meets ASD criteria, see explanation in the rejection of claim 1, [0097], [0035], [0081] and abstract).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 3-5, 7, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chirstoph (US 20080181422 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Chirstoph discloses wherein the shaped noise generator further comprises a continuous sound generator (“a source of white noise 1342”, paragraphs [0083] to [0084]).
Although Chirstoph is silent on the implementation of the white noise generator, the examiner takes official notice that providing sound generators via pre-recorded signals was well known in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further comprise wherein in wherein the shaped noise generator further comprises a pre-recorded signal the system of Chirstoph for the benefit of implementing the white noise generator in low complexity manner, thereby saving on engineering costs.
Regarding claim 4, the invention of claim 3 as above discloses wherein the pre-recorded signal is a looping (since there are finite choices that the pre-recorded signals can be formatted in and looping format is one of the well known formats, therefore it would have been obvious for the designer to try to use looping format to store the pre-recorded signals so that known technology can be used to effectively store the pre-recorded signals in a cost effective way) masked signal (since the output signal is a white noise signal, any information that may have existed has been masked).
Regarding claim 5, although Chirstoph does not expressly disclose wherein the masking signal is a chime of the vehicle, it would have been obvious to the designer that the masking signal may have any content, at their preference, as long it is more prevalent to the user than the noise it is trying to mask. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further comprise wherein the pre-recorded signal is a chime of the vehicle in the invention of claim 3 for the benefit of using recorded samples that already exist on the vehicle, thereby reducing storage requirements.
Regarding claim 7, Chirstoph discloses wherein the shaped noise generator works along with the ASD (as above) and further comprises:
a white noise generator (1342).
Although Chirstoph does not expressly disclose linear predictive coding components, the examiner takes official notice that using LPC components in audio processing was well known in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further comprise a linear predictive coding component in the system of Chirstoph for the benefit of allowing LPC processing such as responding to voice commands via the error microphone of the ANC.
Claim 8 is rejected in an analogous manner to claim 7.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 is 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.
Claims 9-12 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the claim objections set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 13-19 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the claim objections set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding independent claim 13, none of the closest prior art, such as Chirstoph (US 20080181422 A1), expressly teaches or reasonably suggests, “a method for generating a stimulus signal for an adaptive secondary path of an active noise cancellation (ANC) system in a vehicle, the system comprising:
…
generating a shaped noise signal in the cabin of the vehicle with a shaped noise generator, the shaped noise signal;
masking the shaped noise signal;
adding the masked shaped noise signal to the audio signal to generate a stimulus signal; and
projecting the stimulus signal within the cabin of the vehicle for the ANC system to generate an anti-noise signal“, in combination with the rest of the limitations of the claim, in a manner as claimed.
Dependent claims 14-19 are allowed because they contain all the limitations of their independent claim as above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS JOHN SUTHERS whose telephone number is (571)272-0563. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8 am -5 pm.
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.
/DOUGLAS J SUTHERS/ Examiner, Art Unit 2695
/VIVIAN C CHIN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2695