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 filed 03/16/2026 with respect to claim(s) 1-15, 22 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 6-8, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Regan (US 2016/0316422 A1) in view of Stezskal et al (US 2023/0292135 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Regan et al disclose a wireless receiver or receiver module in a sound recording system (Regan et al; Fig 13; Para [0069]), comprising: at least one antenna that receives RF signals over a wide frequency range and outputs an antenna signal (Regan et al; Fig 13; antenna 1305; Para [0069]); a display screen (Regan et al; Fig 13; display 1301); and a real-time spectrum analyzer (RTSA) in the wireless receiver or receiver module that generates an RTSA trace from the antenna signal (Regan et al; Fig 13; RTSA 1303); wherein the RTSA trace is displayed dynamically in real time on the display screen for the user to view when configuring the wireless receiver or receiver module and the paired microphone transmitter to the selected channel frequency band (Regan et al; Fig 13; trace 1311); but do not expressly disclose means for configuring the wireless receiver or receiver module and a paired microphone transmitter to a selected channel frequency band within the wide frequency band such that the wireless receiver or receiver module receives modulated digital audio data transmitted from the paired microphone transmitter in the selected channel frequency band via the at least one antenna and outputs demodulated digital audio data for use by the sound recording system. However, in the same field of endeavor, Stezskal et al disclose a wireless receiver comprising means for configuring the wireless receiver or receiver module and a paired microphone transmitter (Stezskal et al; Para [0021]) to a selected channel frequency band within the wide frequency band such that the wireless receiver or receiver module receives modulated digital audio data transmitted from the paired microphone transmitter in the selected channel frequency band via the at least one antenna and outputs demodulated digital audio data for use by the sound recording system (Stezskal et al; Para [0021][0029]-[0030]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the channel allocation taught by Stezskal et al as channel selection in the device taught by Regan. The motivation to do so would have been to eliminate interference from adjacent signals (Stezskal et al; Para [0035]).
Regarding claim 6, Regan in view of Stezskal et al disclose the wireless receiver or receiver module according to claim 1, wherein the portion of the RTSA trace corresponding to the selected channel frequency band is displayed to be distinct from a remainder of the RTSA trace (Regan; Para [0057]; [0059] [0084] [0088]).
Regarding claim 7, Regan in view of Stezskal et al disclose the wireless receiver or receiver module according to claim 1, wherein the portion of the RTSA trace corresponding to the selected channel frequency band is displayed in a color distinct from the color of a remainder of the RTSA trace (Regan; Para [0057]; [0059] [0084] [0088]).
Regarding claim 8, Regan in view of Stezskal et al disclose the wireless receiver or receiver module according to claim 6, comprising means to name the portion of the RTSA trace corresponding to the selected channel frequency band and label the portion of the RTSA trace corresponding to the selected channel frequency band with the name when displayed (Regan; Para [0057]; [0059] [0084] [0088]).
Regarding claim 10, Regan in view of Stezskal et al disclose the wireless receiver or receiver module according to claim 1, wherein the RTSA trace for either or both antenna is displayed (Regan; Para [0044]; [0052][0088]; display the RTSA analysis overlaid for multiple antennas).
Claim(s) 2-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Regan (US 2016/0316422 A1) in view of Stezskal et al (US 2023/0292135 A1) and further in view of Barsumian et al (US 2016/0013875 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Regan in view of Stezskal et al disclose the wireless receiver or receiver module according to claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein the wireless receiver or receiver module further comprises a touch screen and the RTSA trace is displayed on the touch screen. However, in the same field of endeavor, Barsumian et al disclose a wireless receiver wherein the wireless receiver or receiver module further comprises a touch screen and the RTSA trace is displayed on the touch screen (Barsumian et al; Para [0010][0032][0029]; displayed spectral data interpreted as RTSA trace). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the signal processing taught by Barsumian et al as signal processing in the device taught by Regan. The motivation to do so would have been to enhance viewing of densely populated areas of the spectrum (Barsumian et al; Para [0029]).
Regarding claim 3, Regan in view of Stezskal et al disclose the wireless receiver or receiver module according to claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein the RTSA comprises an analog circuit that receives the antenna signal and filters, amplifies and down converts an analog signal, an analog-to-digital converter that receives the analog signal from the analog circuit and outputs a digital input signal, and a processor that receives the digital input signal and outputs values representing decibels for a given frequency. However, in the same field of endeavor, Barsumian et al disclose a wireless receiver wherein the RTSA comprises an analog circuit that receives the antenna signal and filters, amplifies and down converts an analog signal (Barsumian et al; Para [0029][0033]; Rf frequency spectrum trace is interpreted as RTSA trace), an analog-to-digital converter that receives the analog signal from the analog circuit and outputs a digital input signal (Barsumian et al; Para [0029]), and a processor that receives the digital input signal and outputs values representing decibels for a given frequency (Barsumian et al; Para [0029]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the signal processing taught by Barsumian et al as signal processing in the device taught by Regan. The motivation to do so would have been to enhance viewing of densely populated areas of the spectrum (Barsumian et al; Para [0029]).
Regarding claim 4, Regan in view of Stezskal et al and further in view of Barsumian et al disclose the wireless receiver or receiver module according to claim 3, but do not expressly disclose wherein the processor comprises one or more field programmable gate arrays. However, in the same field of endeavor, Barsumian et al disclose a wireless receiver wherein the processor comprises one or more field programmable gate arrays (Barsumian et al; Para [0027]-[0028]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the signal processing taught by Barsumian et al as signal processing in the device taught by Regan. The motivation to do so would have been to enhance viewing of densely populated areas of the spectrum (Barsumian et al; Para [0029]).
Regarding claim 5, Regan in view of Stezskal et al and further in view of Barsumian et al disclose the wireless receiver or receiver module according to claim 4, but do not expressly disclose wherein one or more field programmable gate arrays are programmed to comprise a sample buffer, a Fast Fourier Transform, and means for calculating decibel levels from an output of the Fast Fourier Transform. However, in the same field of endeavor, Barsumian et al disclose a wireless receiver wherein one or more field programmable gate arrays are programmed to comprise a sample buffer, a Fast Fourier Transform, and means for calculating decibel levels from an output of the Fast Fourier Transform (Barsumian et al; Para [0027]-[0029]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the signal processing taught by Barsumian et al as signal processing in the device taught by Regan. The motivation to do so would have been to enhance viewing of densely populated areas of the spectrum (Barsumian et al; Para [0029]).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Regan (US 2016/0316422 A1) in view of Stezskal et al (US 2023/0292135 A1) and further in view of Bergamann et al (EP 3101915A1).
Regarding claim 9, Regan in view of Stezskal et al disclose the wireless receiver or receiver module according to claim 1, and signal is used to determine an SNR for the selected channel frequency band by comparing RF energy levels when the paired microphone transmitter is off to when the paired microphone transmitter is on (Bryant; Fig 1; Para [0023]) but do not expressly disclose the RTSA and further comprising a backlink communication connection to a paired microphone transmitter, wherein the paired microphone transmitter receives a command from the wireless receiver or receiver module over the backlink communication connection to turn off the paired microphone transmitter for a preselected period of time. However, in the same field of endeavor, Barsumian et al disclose a wireless receiver comprising an RTSA trace from the antenna signal (Barsumian et al; Para [0024][0043][0011];[0033] spectrum trace of the Rf signal is interpreted as RTSA; displayed spectral data also interpreted as RTSA). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the signal processing taught by Barsumian et al as signal processing in the device taught by Regan. The motivation to do so would have been to enhance viewing of densely populated areas of the spectrum (Barsumian et al; Para [0029]). Moreover, in the same field of endeavor, Bergamann et al discloses a wireless receiver further comprising a backlink communication connection to a paired microphone transmitter, wherein the paired microphone transmitter receives a command from the wireless receiver or receiver module over the backlink communication connection to turn off the paired microphone transmitter for a preselected period of time (Bergamann et al; Para [0032]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the backling taught by Bergamann et al as control channel in the device taught by Regan. The motivation to do so would have been to reduce system complexity (Bergamann et al; Para [0006]).
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Regan (US 2016/0316422 A1) in view of Stezskal et al (US 2023/0292135 A1) and further in view of Woodings et al (US 2013/0100154 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Regan in view of Stezskal et al disclose the wireless receiver or receiver module according to claim 1, but do not expressly disclose further comprising several additional antennas and several addition RTSAs, wherein the RTSA trace for any and all of the antennas can be displayed. However, in the same field of endeavor, Woodings et al discloses a wireless receiver further comprising several additional antennas and several addition RTSAs, wherein the RTSA trace for any and all of the antennas can be displayed (Woodings et al; Fig 10; Para [0073][0027]-[0029] spectrum analyzer interpreted as RTSA; display the RTSA analysis multiple antennas). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the signal processing taught by Woodings et al as signal analyzer in the device taught by Regan. The motivation to do so would have been to allow for spectral view scrolling (Woodings et al; Para [0055]).
Regarding claim 12, Regan in view of Stezskal et al disclose the wireless receiver or receiver module according to claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein the wireless receiver or receiver module also includes an audio output port to enable a user to listen to a given channel while viewing an RTSA trace. However, in the same field of endeavor, Barsumian et al disclose a wireless receiver wherein the wireless receiver or receiver module also includes an audio output port to enable a user to listen to a given channel while viewing an RTSA trace (Barsumian et al; Para [0027]-[0029]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the signal processing taught by Barsumian et al as signal processing in the device taught by Regan. The motivation to do so would have been to enhance viewing of densely populated areas of the spectrum (Barsumian et al; Para [0029]).
Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Regan (US 2016/0316422 A1) in view of Stezskal et al (US 2023/0292135 A1) and further in view of Bryant (US 2021/0195321 A1) and further in view of Abe (US 2009/0052713 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Regan in view of Stezskal et al disclose the wireless receiver or receiver module according to claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein the audio level is displayed simultaneously with the RTSA trace for the user view; wherein the wireless receiver or receiver module also includes means for receiving audio level input from an audio meter. However, in the same field of endeavor, Bryant discloses the wireless receiver or receiver wherein the audio level is displayed simultaneously with the RTSA trace for the user view (Bryant; Fig 3; Para [0029] audio meter 312 display simultaneously with RF meter). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the audio level display taught by Bryant to display audio level in the device taught by Regan. The motivation to do so would have been to improve the user experience. Moreover, in the same field of endeavor, Abe discloses the wireless receiver or receiver wherein the wireless receiver or receiver module also includes means for receiving audio level input from an audio meter (Abe; Fig 1; Para [0052]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the audio level extraction taught by Abe as audio level in the device taught by Regan. The motivation to do so would have been to instantaneously recognize abnormality (Abe; Para [0087]).
Regarding claim 14, Regan in view of Stezskal et al disclose the wireless receiver or receiver module according to claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein the audio level is displayed simultaneously with the RTSA trace for the user view; wherein the wireless receiver or receiver module also includes means for determining audio level from the antenna signal. However, in the same field of endeavor, Bryant discloses the wireless receiver or receiver wherein the audio level is displayed simultaneously with the RTSA trace for the user view (Bryant; Fig 3; Para [0029] audio meter 312 display simultaneously with RF meter). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the audio level display taught by Bryant to display audio level in the device taught by Regan. Moreover, in the same field of endeavor, Abe discloses a wireless receiver wherein the wireless receiver or receiver module also includes means for determining audio level from the antenna signal (Abe; Fig 1; Para [0052]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the audio level extraction taught by Abe as audio level in the device taught by Regan. The motivation to do so would have been to instantaneously recognize abnormality (Abe; Para [0087]).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Regan (US 2016/0316422 A1) in view of Stezskal et al (US 2023/0292135 A1) and further in view of Statham et al (US 2010/0189273 A1) and further in view of Prothero et al (US 2022/0077941 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Regan in view of Stezskal et al disclose a system including multiple wireless receivers or receiver modules according to claim 1, but do not expressly disclose and each wireless receiver or receiver module is connected to the other receivers or receiver modules or to a hub or a computer via an Ethernet connection, thereby enabling the RTSA traces generated by one of the wireless receivers or receiver modules to viewed on another device. However, in the same field of endeavor, Statham et al discloses a wireless receiver further comprising and each wireless receiver or receiver module is connected to the other receivers or receiver modules or to a hub or a computer via an Ethernet connection (Statham et al; Fig 6; Para [0011]; connection 608 and master receiver interpreted as hub). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the receiver taught by Statham et al as signal analyzer in the device taught by Regan. The motivation to do so would have been to use robust web-based technologies to monitor and control the plurality of enumerated functions of the wireless audio system in real time (Statham et al; Para [0027]). Moreover, in the same field of endeavor, Prothero et al disclose a wireless receiver further comprising thereby enabling the RTSA traces generated by one of the wireless receivers or receiver modules to viewed on another device (Prothero et al; Para [0048]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the spectrum analyzer taught by Prothero et al as signal analyzer in the device taught by Regan. The motivation to do so would have been to detect and identify the properties of a signal (Prothero et al; Para [0005]).
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Regan (US 2016/0316422 A1) in view of Stezskal et al (US 2023/0292135 A1) and further in view of Jost et al (US 2012/0288128 A1).
Regarding claim 22, Regan in view of Stezskal et al disclose the wireless receiver or receiver module according to claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein the modulation used for transmitting the modulated wireless audio data from the microphone transmitter comprises one of phase shift keying (PSK), quadrature phase shift keying (QPSK), frequency modulation (FM), frequency shift keying (FSK) and amplitude shift keying (ASK). However, in the same field of endeavor, Jost et al disclose a wireless receiver wherein the modulation used for transmitting the modulated wireless audio data from the microphone transmitter comprises one of phase shift keying (PSK), quadrature phase shift keying (QPSK), frequency modulation (FM), frequency shift keying (FSK) and amplitude shift keying (ASK) (Jost et al; Para [0024]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the modulation scheme taught by Jost et al as modulation scheme in the device taught by Regan. The motivation to do so would have been to increase signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) (Jost et al; Para [0004]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 KUASSI A GANMAVO whose telephone number is (571)270-5761. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 AM-5PM.
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, Carolyn Edwards can be reached at 5712707136. 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.
/KUASSI A GANMAVO/Examiner, Art Unit 2692
/CAROLYN R EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2692
Prosecution Insights