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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on May 8th, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-3, 5, 6, 8-12, 14, and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 states “An information processing method apparatus, comprising:
controlling to obtain user operation information;
controlling to correct audio information…”.
This would be better as “An information processing method apparatus, comprising:
obtaining user operation information;
correcting audio information…”. This wording is more direct and less wordy, while in the current language it is not clear what is being controlled.
Claims 14 and 15 are objected in an analogous manner.
Claims 2, 3, 5, 6, 8-12 are objected as inheriting the problems as above.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-3, 5, 6, and 8-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the obtained audio information" in the ninth indent. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The “audio information” is not recited as “obtained”, however the “corrected audio information” is obtained. It is unclear which is intended.
NOTE: It is suggested that applicant check any instances of “audio information” stated after the correction step to make sure it should not be “corrected audio information”.
Claims 13-15 are rejected in an analogous manner.
Claims 2, 3, 5, 6, 8-12 are rejected as inheriting the problems as above.
Claim 14 states “the least one of the signal level…” in the last indent which should be “the at least one of the signal level…”.
Claim 15 are rejected in an analogous manner.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 6, 8-10, and 12-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Suyama et al. (US 20220030374 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Suyama discloses an information processing method (see at least figure 5) comprising:
controlling to obtain user operation information (via 3 of figure 1 and interface 20 of figure 4, see at least paragraphs [0047] to [0049]);
controlling to correct audio information, wherein the correction is based on the user operation information (via 172 of figure 4, see at least paragraphs [0042] to [0047]);
controlling to obtain the corrected audio information (output of 172 of figure 4), wherein
the audio information (position information included in object information) is associated with sound of audio content (paragraphs [0036], [0037], [0039], [0043], [0047], [0049], [0056], [0057], and [0120]),
the audio information is object-based 3D audio (see figures 2, 6, 7, 10-14, 17 and 18),
the audio information includes metadata (at least input to 171, in “object information”, paragraph [0043]), and
the metadata includes at least one of a signal level of the sound, a position of the sound (input to 171, paragraph [0043]), or a type of the sound; and
controlling, based on the obtained audio information and the metadata, a display device (21 of figure 3) to display visual information (paragraph [0056], “The display processor displays the position of a sound source as shown in FIG. 6 and FIG. 7, for example, on the display 21”, see figures 6 and 7, paragraphs [0034] and [0061]), wherein
the visual information is for visualization of the audio information (see paragraph [0056]), and
a change in an image in the visual information is based on the at least one of the signal level of the sound, the position of the sound (see figures 6 and 7, paragraphs [0048]-[0049] and [0061]), or the type of the sound.
Claim 13 is rejected in an analogous manner to claim 1 given the hardware embodiment of Suyama paragraph [0041] and connecting wire network of figures 3 and 4.
Claim 14 is rejected in an analogous manner to claim 1.
Claim 15 is rejected in an analogous manner to claim 1 given the software embodiment of Suyama paragraph [0041].
Regarding claim 2, Suyama discloses further comprising controlling to obtain, in real time, the audio information at a time of reproduction of the audio content (paragraph [0056], “a user can grasp the current localization position of the sound source”).
Regarding claim 3, although Suyama does not expressly disclose using connectionless network communication, the examiner takes official notice that connectionless network communication (such as Internet protocol) was well known in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further comprise using a connectionless network communication to receive the audio information in the system of Suyama for the benefit of allowing the user to get music or sounds from the internet.
Note: The applicant has not adequately traversed the examiner’s official notice, therefore the common knowledge or well-known in the art statement is taken to be admitted prior art.
Regarding claim 5, Suyama discloses wherein reproduction of the object-based 3D audio (paragraph [0037]) is based on the metadata (just another name for the audio information, paragraphs [0031], [0036] to [0037], “the object information includes position information of each sound source and information such as a level”).
Regarding claim 6, Suyama discloses wherein the metadata includes the position of the sound (paragraphs [0031], [0036] to [0037], “the object information includes position information of each sound source and information such as a level”).
Regarding claim 8, Suyama discloses wherein the metadata includes the type of the sound (at least loud vs quiet, left versus right, or front versus rear, paragraphs [0031], [0036] to [0037], “the object information includes position information of each sound source and information such as a level”).
Regarding claim 9, Suyama discloses comprising:
controlling to execute a process for reproduction of the audio content (via amp 16 and speakers SP1-SP8 of figure 1), and
controlling to transmit the audio information via a network (via buss of figure 3, or internal buss of item 17), wherein the audio information is transmitted at a time of reproduction the audio content (paragraph [0056], “a user can grasp the current localization position of the sound source”, paragraphs [0036], [0037], [0039], [0043], [0047], [0049], [0056], [0057], and [0120]).
Regarding claim 10, Suyama discloses further comprising:
controlling to obtain motion information of a user (user hand motion of trackball, via 3 of figure 1 and interface 20 of figure 4, see at least paragraphs [0047] to [0049]);
controlling to correct the audio information based on the obtained motion information (via 172 of figure 4, see at least paragraphs [0042] to [0047]); and
controlling to transmit the corrected audio information via the network (from 172 for rendering via wire networks of figures 3 and 4).
Regarding claim 12, Suyama discloses further comprising controlling to transmit the corrected audio information via the network (from 172 for rendering via wire networks of figures 3 and 4).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the claim objections and the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 8th, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In general applicant argues “Suyama does not describe controlling to obtain user operation information. Further, Suyama does not describe controlling to correct the content data, where the correction is based on the user operation information. Furthermore, Suyama does not describe obtaining the corrected content data” (see applicant’s arguments dated May 8th, 2026, page 10).
The examiner disagrees and a new ground of rejection has been established as above in reconsideration of the prior art. Namely Suyama teaches a user inputting user operation information (input via at least 3 of figure 1 and interface 20 of figure 4, see at least paragraphs [0047] to [0049]), and controlling to correct audio information, wherein the correction is based on the user operation information (via 172 of figure 4, see at least paragraphs [0042] to [0047]).
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
/PAUL KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695
Prosecution Insights