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 1-16, 18 filed 03/04/2026 regarding the argument that combination of Carlsson in view of Raghuvanshi does not suggests the limitation "producing a map of a room, wherein one or more sound sources are located, which comprises a fixed position of each sound source and a position of walls of the room performing a simulation, by using the map and the acoustic features of the walls, to simulate a propagation in the room of sounds emitted by the sound sources". have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
First the examiner argues that the references separately do not each teach each and every limitation of claim 1 but the combination of Carlsson in view of Raghuvanshi suggests the limitation "producing a map of a room, wherein one or more sound sources are located, which comprises a fixed position of each sound source and a position of walls of the room performing a simulation, by using the map and the acoustic features of the walls, to simulate a propagation in the room of sounds emitted by the sound sources".
Regarding the argument that the applied references, alone or in combination, fail to teach or suggest each and every feature of the claimed invention. That is, the applied references fail to teach or suggest "producing a map of a room, wherein one or more sound sources are located, which comprises a fixed position of each sound source and a position of walls of the room performing a simulation, by using the map and the acoustic features of the walls, to simulate a propagation in the room of sounds emitted by the sound sources" as recited in exemplary independent claim 1, the examiner argues that reference Carlsson disclose in Fig 9, producing a map of a room, wherein one or more sound sources are located, which comprises a fixed position of each sound source . (Carlsson discloses in Para [0065] enclosure 70 with location 200 of the speaker).
Also, the examiner argues that Raghu disclose the feature “performing a simulation, by using the map and the acoustic features of the walls, to simulate a propagation in the room of sounds emitted by the sound sources”
Raghuvanshi disclose in Para [0006] that a 3D virtual environment is generated, the 3D virtual environment is interpreted as the mapping of the environment and the type of material for the wall is interpreted as acoustic features of the walls. Raghuvanshi also disclose in Para [0034] numerical simulation of the environment based on 3D environment including geometry of the 3D environment (or mapping) and absorption parameters.
Further, the applicant argues that Raghu takes place in a virtual world (of a video game) (Raghuvanshi Para [0001]). The examiner argues that Raghuvanshi disclose the virtual environment embodiment in Para [0001] but also discloses other embodiment in Para [0028]. The other embodiment comprises a stereo sound playback in a room.
Moreover, in response to the applicant’s argument that Raghuvanshi does not teach or suggest the feature “to simulate a propagation in the room of sounds emitted by the sound sources”, the examiner argues that Raghuvanshi disclose an embodiment wherein the virtual space is a representation of real world situation and the simulation in the virtual space is therefore a simulation of the representation of the real world situations.
Regarding the argument that the position of the user in the real world is not taken into account in Raghuvanshi, the examiner argues that Raghuvanshi disclose another embodiment where the virtual space is a representation of a real world environment and the position of a listener is determined using a sensor located on the listener (Raghuvanshi Para [0001]). Therefore Raghuvanshi disclose virtual environment based on real world situation and the sound source is a loudspeaker outputting sound.
Finally, in response to the applicant’s argument that Raghuvanshi does not teach or suggest acquiring acoustic features of the walls and the features acquired by Raghuvanshi are not features of the walls of the room in which are located real sound sources, but are features of virtual walls in the virtual world of the video game, the examiner argues that Carlsson is the reference used to read on the feature of a acquiring acoustic features of the walls. Carlsson disclose acquiring acoustic features of real world environment where sound is played back. Raghuvanshi discloses using the acquired room geometry and wall acoustic features to perform the simulation for optimized parameters determination.
Regarding the applicant’s argument that a modelling of a virtual space cannot be analogous to a modelling of a real space, the examiner argues that reference Murphy (US 2012/0016640 A1) disclose in Para [0028] using the same modelling for a virtual space and real space. Therefore one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application could have been motivated to combine the Carlsson and the Raghuvanshi to read on the limitation of claim 1.
Applicant’s arguments filed 03/04/2026 with respect to claim(s) 1-16, 18 regarding performing simulation using fixed sound sources 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 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, 4-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carlsson et al (US 2015/0208188 A1) in view of Raghuvanshi et al (US 2011/0081023 A1) and further in view of Murphy (US 2012/0016640 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Carlsson et al disclose an audio playback method, implemented by one or more pieces of master equipment (Carlsson et al; Fig 1; Para [0033] audio playback of sound from consumer electronic by speakers), and comprising a preliminary phase comprising the steps of: producing a map of a room, wherein one or more sound sources are located, which comprises a fixed position of each sound source and a position of walls of the room (Carlsson et al; Fig 9; map of room with loudspeaker locations; Para [0057][0062][0065]; speakers at location in enclosure 70); but do not expressly disclose acquiring acoustic features of the walls; performing a simulation, by using the map and the acoustic features of the walls, to simulate a propagation in the room of sounds emitted by the sound sources; and from results of the simulation, producing, for each reference position of a plurality of reference positions defined in the room, and for each sound source, reference audio parameters making it possible to optimize an audio playback of said sound source in said reference position; and an operational phase comprising the steps, and carried out in real time, of: determining a current position of a user in the room; and playing an audio signal back by the sound sources by applying current audio parameters obtained from reference audio parameters, and which depend on the current position. However, in the same field of endeavor, Raghuvanshi et al disclose a method comprising acquiring acoustic features of the walls (Raghuvanshi et al; Para [0031][0062]); performing a simulation, by using the map and the acoustic features of the walls, to simulate a propagation in the room of sounds emitted by the sound sources (Raghuvanshi et al; Para [0031]-[0032] simulate acoustic signal receives at each receivers point in the enclosure); from results of the simulation, producing, for each reference position of a plurality of reference positions defined in the room, and for each sound source, reference audio parameters making it possible to optimize an audio playback of said sound source in said reference position (Raghuvanshi et al; Para [0022]; [0031]-[0032] receivers point in the enclosure are interpreted as reference point; Para [0034]; produce response signals for each receivers point in the environment); the audio playback method further comprising an operational phase comprising the steps, and carried out in real time, of: determining a current position of a user in the room (Raghuvanshi et al; Para [0052][0028]); and playing an audio signal back by the sound sources by applying current audio parameters obtained from reference audio parameters, and which depend on the current position (Raghuvanshi et al; Para [0058]). 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 real-time sound optimization taught by Raghuvanshi et al as the real-time sound optimization in the method taught by Carlsson et al. The motivation to do so would have been to effectively reduce computation time utilized to generate the data file (Raghuvanshi et al; Para [0035]). Furthermore, in the same field of endeavor, Murphy discloses a method comprising performing a simulation, to simulate a propagation in the room of sounds emitted by the fixed sound sources (Murphy; Para [0078]; Fig 12; loudspeaker S at a fixed location in the room for modelling). 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 room acoustic simulation taught by Murphy as the real-time sound optimization in the method taught by Carlsson et al in view of Raghuvanshi et al. The motivation to do so would have been to provide quicker detection of valid source-receiver paths (Murphy; Para [0005]).
Regarding claim 4, Carlsson et al in view of Raghuvanshi et al and further in view of Murphy disclose the audio playback method according to claim 1, wherein the reference audio parameters comprise, for each reference position and for each sound source, gain and phase shift values for different frequencies, associated with said sound source (Carlsson et al; Fig 8; Para [0039]; volume and delay interpreted as gain and phase shift).
Regarding claim 5, Carlsson et al in view of Raghuvanshi et al and further in view of Murphy disclose the audio playback method according to claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein the reference positions of the plurality of reference positions are nodes of a grid having a predefined grid cell length. However, in the same field of endeavor, Raghuvanshi et al disclose a method wherein the reference positions of the plurality of reference positions are nodes of a grid having a predefined grid cell length (Raghuvanshi et al; Para [0037]). 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 real-time sound optimization taught by Raghuvanshi et al as the real-time sound optimization in the method taught by Carlsson et al. The motivation to do so would have been to effectively reduce computation time utilized to generate the data file (Raghuvanshi et al; Para [0035]).
Regarding claim 6, Carlsson et al in view of Raghuvanshi et al and further in view of Murphy disclose the audio playback method according to claim 5, but do not expressly disclose wherein, during the operational phase, the current audio parameters which are applied are the reference audio parameters of a node closest to the current position. However, in the same field of endeavor, Raghuvanshi et al disclose a method wherein, during the operational phase, the current audio parameters which are applied are the reference audio parameters of a node closest to the current position (Raghuvanshi et al; Para [0057]). 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 real-time sound optimization taught by Raghuvanshi et al as the real-time sound optimization in the method taught by Carlsson et al. The motivation to do so would have been to effectively reduce computation time utilized to generate the data file (Raghuvanshi et al; Para [0035]).
Regarding claim 7, Carlsson et al in view of Raghuvanshi et al and further in view of Murphy disclose the audio playback method according to claim 5, but do not expressly disclose wherein, during the operational phase, the current audio parameters which are applied are obtained by averaging the reference audio parameters of several nodes closest to the current position. However, in the same field of endeavor, Raghuvanshi et al disclose a method wherein, during the operational phase, the current audio parameters which are applied are obtained by averaging the reference audio parameters of several nodes closest to the current position (Raghuvanshi et al; Para [0057]; interpolating response parameters between two receivers positions interpreted as averaging response parameters). 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 real-time sound optimization taught by Raghuvanshi et al as the real-time sound optimization in the method taught by Carlsson et al. The motivation to do so would have been to effectively reduce computation time utilized to generate the data file (Raghuvanshi et al; Para [0035]).
Regarding claim 8, Carlsson et al in view of Raghuvanshi et al and further in view of Murphy disclose the audio playback method according to claim 1, wherein at least one of the pieces of master equipment comprises a first UWB module, and wherein the production of the map and/or the detection of the current position of the user are implemented by using the first UWB module (Carlsson et al; Fig 9; Para [0059]).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carlsson et al (US 2015/0208188 A1) in view of Raghuvanshi et al (US 2011/0081023 A1) and further in view of Murphy (US 2012/0016640 A1) and further in view of Schroeder et al (US 11,170,139 B1).
Regarding claim 2, Carlsson et al in view of Raghuvanshi et al and further in view of Murphy disclose the audio playback method according to claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein the simulation uses a ray tracing technique. However, in the same field of endeavor, Schroeder et al disclose a method wherein the simulation uses a ray tracing technique (Schroeder et al; col 8; lines 20-30). 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 propagation simulation taught by Schroeder et al as the propagation simulation in the method taught by Carlsson et al. The motivation to do so would have been boosts the performance (Schroeder et al; col 2; lines 55-60).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carlsson et al (US 2015/0208188 A1) in view of Raghuvanshi et al (US 2011/0081023 A1) and further in view of Murphy (US 2012/0016640 A1) and further in view of De Sena et al (US 2013/0202125 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Carlsson et al in view of Raghuvanshi et al and further in view of Murphy disclose the audio playback method according to claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein the acoustic features of the walls comprise, for each wall, values for different frequencies of an absorption coefficient of a material of the wall or of a category of materials including said material. However, in the same field of endeavor, De Sena et al disclose a method wherein the acoustic features of the walls comprise, for each wall, values for different frequencies of an absorption coefficient of a material of the wall or of a category of materials including said material (De Sena et al; Para [0049]; [0055]). 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 acoustic features taught by De Sena et al as acoustic features in the method taught by Carlsson et al. The motivation to do so would have been improving the realism for the user (De Sena et al; Para [0016]).
Claim(s) 9, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carlsson et al (US 2015/0208188 A1) in view of Raghuvanshi et al (US 2011/0081023 A1) and further in view of Murphy (US 2012/0016640 A1) and further in view of Flint et al (US 2018/0283877 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Carlsson et al in view of Raghuvanshi et al and further in view of Murphy disclose the audio playback method according to claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein the preliminary phase comprises the steps, to determine the position of the wall, of: emitting a first message intended for the user to request them to perform a route along the walls closest to these; determining the position, in real time, of the user when they perform said route, and determining the position of the walls from this position in real time. However, in the same field of endeavor, Flint et al disclose a method wherein the preliminary phase comprises the steps, to determine the position of the wall, of: emitting a first message intended for the user to request them to perform a route along the walls closest to these (Flint et al; Para [0012];[0045]-[0046]); determining the position, in real time, of the user when they perform said route, and determining the position of the walls from this position in real time (Flint et al; Para [0048]-[0051]). 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 location detection taught by Flint et al as location detection in the method taught by Carlsson et al. The motivation to do so would have been for providing the user with the location-based content (Flint et al; Para [0035]).
Regarding claim 13, Carlsson et al in view of Raghuvanshi et al and further in view of Murphy disclose the audio playback method according to claim 8, but do not expressly disclose wherein the user, during the preliminary phase, is provided with a piece of mobile equipment comprising a second UWB module, the preliminary phase comprising the step, for at least one sound source, of emitting a second message intended for the user to request them to position the mobile equipment in the immediate proximity of the sound source, the position of said sound source thus being assimilated to the position of the mobile equipment, which is determined by a UWB geolocation technique by using the first UWB module and the second UWB module. However, in the same field of endeavor, Flint et al disclose a method wherein the user, during the preliminary phase, is provided with a piece of mobile equipment comprising a second UWB module, the preliminary phase comprising the step, for at least one sound source, of emitting a second message intended for the user to request them to position the mobile equipment in the immediate proximity of the sound source (Flint et al; Para [0012];[0045]-[0046]), the position of said sound source thus being assimilated to the position of the mobile equipment, which is determined by a UWB geolocation technique by using the first UWB module and the second UWB module (Flint et al; Para [0048]-[0051]). 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 location detection taught by Flint et al as location detection in the method taught by Carlsson et al. The motivation to do so would have been for providing the user with the location-based content (Flint et al; Para [0035]).
Claim(s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carlsson et al (US 2015/0208188 A1) in view of Raghuvanshi et al (US 2011/0081023 A1) and further in view of Murphy (US 2012/0016640 A1) and further in view of Hertzog et al (US 2010/0225541 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Carlsson et al in view of Raghuvanshi et al and further in view of Murphy disclose the audio playback method according to claim 8, but do not expressly disclose wherein the user is provided, when they perform said route, with a piece of mobile equipment comprising a second UWB module, the determination of the position in real time of the user being made by a UWB geolocation technique, by using the first UWB module and the second UWB module. However, in the same field of endeavor, Hertzog et al disclose a method wherein the user is provided, when they perform said route, with a piece of mobile equipment comprising a second UWB module (Hertzog et al; Para [0072]), the determination of the position in real time of the user being made by a UWB geolocation technique, by using the first UWB module and the second UWB module (Hertzog et al; Para [0057][0072]). 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 location detection taught by Hertzog et al as location detection in the method taught by Carlsson et al. The motivation to do so would have been to eliminate ambiguity in the position estimation (Hertzog et al; Para [0034]).
Regarding claim 11, Carlsson et al in view of Raghuvanshi et al and further in view of Murphy disclose the audio playback method according to claim 8, but do not expressly disclose wherein, during the operational phase, the user is provided with a piece of mobile equipment comprising a second UWB module, the determination of the current position of the user being made by a UWB geolocation technique made by using the first UWB module and the second UWB module. However, in the same field of endeavor, Hertzog et al disclose a method wherein, during the operational phase, the user is provided with a piece of mobile equipment comprising a second UWB module (Hertzog et al; Para [0072]), the determination of the current position of the user being made by a UWB geolocation technique made by using the first UWB module and the second UWB module (Hertzog et al; Para [0057][0072]). 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 location detection taught by Hertzog et al as location detection in the method taught by Carlsson et al. The motivation to do so would have been to eliminate ambiguity in the position estimation (Hertzog et al; Para [0034]).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carlsson et al (US 2015/0208188 A1) in view of Raghuvanshi et al (US 2011/0081023 A1) and further in view of Murphy (US 2012/0016640 A1) and further in view of Chen (US 2017/0086202 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Carlsson et al in view of Raghuvanshi et al and further in view of Murphy disclose the audio playback method according to claim 8, but do not expressly disclose wherein the first UWB module is arranged to implement a UWB radar technology, the determination of the position of the walls of the room being made by the master equipment by using said UWB radar technology. However, in the same field of endeavor, Chen disclose a method wherein the first UWB module is arranged to implement a UWB radar technology (Chen; Para [0047][0084]), the determination of the position of the walls of the room being made by the master equipment by using said UWB radar technology (Chen; Para [0060][0084]). 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 location detection taught by Chen et al as location detection in the method taught by Carlsson et al. The motivation to do so would have been to detect stationary and/or slow-moving objects (Chen; Para [0060]).
Claim(s) 14-16, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carlsson et al (US 2015/0208188 A1) in view of Raghuvanshi et al (US 2011/0081023 A1) and further in view of Murphy (US 2012/0016640 A1) and further in view of Sabatier et al (US 2021/0185445 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Carlsson et al in view of Raghuvanshi et al and further in view of Murphy disclose the audio playback method according to claim 8, but do not expressly disclose wherein at least one sound source comprises a UWB tag, the master equipment being arranged to determine the position of said sound source by using a UWB geolocation technique made by using the first UWB module (10) and the UWB tag. However, in the same field of endeavor, Sabatier et al disclose a method wherein at least one sound source comprises a UWB tag (Sabatier et al; Para [0057]-[0058]), the master equipment being arranged to determine the position of said sound source by using a UWB geolocation technique made by using the first UWB module (10) and the UWB tag (Sabatier et al; Para [0057]-[0058]). 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 location detection taught by Sabatier et al as location detection in the method taught by Carlsson et al. The motivation to do so would have been to obtain optimized audio broadcast (Sabatier et al; Para [0012]).
Regarding claim 15, Carlsson et al in view of Raghuvanshi et al and further in view of Murphy disclose a processing unit arranged to implement the audio playback method according to claim 1 (Carlsson et al in view of Raghuvanshi et al); but do not expressly disclose master equipment comprising a first UWB module arranged to perform a geolocation. However, in the same field of endeavor, Sabatier et al disclose a method comprising a master equipment comprising a first UWB module arranged to perform a geolocation (Sabatier et al; Para [0156][0188]). 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 location detection taught by Sabatier et al as location detection in the method taught by Carlsson et al. The motivation to do so would have been to obtain optimized audio broadcast (Sabatier et al; Para [0012]).
Regarding claim 16, Carlsson et al in view of Raghuvanshi et al and further in view of Murphy disclose the master equipment according to claim 15, but do not expressly disclose the master equipment being a set-top box. However, in the same field of endeavor, Sabatier et al disclose a method comprising the master equipment being a set-top box (Sabatier et al; Para [0208]). 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 location detection taught by Sabatier et al as location detection in the method taught by Carlsson et al. The motivation to do so would have been to obtain optimized audio broadcast (Sabatier et al; Para [0012]).
Regarding claim 18, Carlsson et al a non-transitory recording medium which can be read by a computer, on which a computer program is recorded, wherein the computer program comprising instructions which make a processing unit of a master equipment execute steps of the audio playback method (Carlsson et al; Para [0008]) according claim 1 (Carlsson et al in view of Raghuvanshi et al and further in view of Murphy), but do not expressly disclose wherein the master equipment comprising a first UWB module arranged to perform a geolocation, and the processing unit is arranged to implement the audio playback method. However, in the same field of endeavor, Sabatier et al disclose a method wherein the master equipment comprising a first UWB module arranged to perform a geolocation, and the processing unit is arranged to implement the audio playback method (Sabatier et al; Para [0156] [0188]). 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 location detection taught by Sabatier et al as location detection in the method taught by Carlsson et al. The motivation to do so would have been to obtain optimized audio broadcast (Sabatier et al; Para [0012]).
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, Davetta Goins can be reached at 5712722957. 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