DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to communications filed 2/12/2026:
Claims 1-8 are pending
35 USC 112b rejections are withdrawn
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 with respect to claim(s) 1-8 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.
Response to Amendment
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, there appears to be an extra “of” in reciting “…on a basis of of the first position….”
Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1-3 and 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terentiv et al (US20210092546, hereinafter “Terentiv”) in view of Villmer (US20150077416).
Regarding claim 1, Terentiv teaches a sound generation device (¶130, system for rendering audio signals) comprising:
an acquisition section that acquires a first position and a first rotation of a head portion of a user at a first time and second positions and second rotations of the head portion of the user at times after the first time (¶40, capturing a user’s position in the environment at various times);
a sound source data generation section that generates, on a basis of the first position and the first rotation, sound source data indicating three-dimensional coordinates of a virtual sound source arranged in a virtual space while a predetermined position of the user is set as an origin of a three-dimensional coordinate system of the virtual space (¶40, Fig. 1B, audio is generated for a listener at a first listening position wherein the audio generated is based on a listener-centric sound field);
a correction processing section that receives, from the acquisition section, the second positions and the second rotations and applies correction to the sound source data to generate corrected sound source data, the correction including at least one of a translation and a rotation of the virtual sound source in the virtual space based on at least one of differences between the first position and the second positions and differences between the first rotation and the second rotations (¶12, 102, 105, an updated rendering of the audio is generated if/when the user moves about the listening environment wherein the movement of the user can include a translational movement as well as rotational movement (6DOF)); and
a sound generation section that generates a sound to be rendered based on the corrected sound source data (¶12, an audio renderer capable of rendering modified audio for the user based on their updated position in the listening environment).
Terentiv fails to explicitly teach applies more than one correction to the sound source data to generated corrected sound source data, the more than one correction including….
Villmer teaches applies more than one correction to the sound source data to generated corrected sound source data, the more than one correction including (¶103, rendering of multimedia data causes continual updates to be applied to both the image data and audio data such that the rendering (and thus correcting) is continually looped multiple times per second to provide a fast response to any input received (i.e. user movement))….
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the rendering process (as taught by Villmer) to the audio processing method (as taught by Terentiv). The rationale to do so is to apply a known technique to improve similar methods in the same way to achieve the predictable result of reducing delay in output of audio/visual data given a changed input (such as a user input) as this results in real-time rendering and optimal audiovisual output to the user (Villmer, ¶103).
Regarding claim 2, Terentiv in view of Villmer teaches wherein the correction processing section applies the more than one correction including at least one of a translation and a rotation of each of multiple virtual sound sources arranged in the virtual space on a basis of differences for each of the multiple virtual sound sources (applying the multiple corrections per second to providing a fast response to any input received (Villmer, ¶103) to one or more virtual sound sources that can be affected by the movement of the user in the listening environment results in outputting modified audio that includes corrected processing being applied to the one or more sound sources (Terentiv, Fig. 1C, ¶41)).
Regarding claim 3, Terentiv in view of Villmer teaches a sound generation device (Terentiv, ¶130, system for rendering audio signals) comprising:
an acquisition section that acquires a first position and a first rotation of a head portion of a user at a first time and second positions and second rotations of the head portion of the user at times after the first time (Terentiv, ¶40, capturing a user’s position in the environment at various times);
a sound source data generation section that generates, on a basis of the first position and the first rotation, sound source data being ambisonics data (Terentiv, ¶35, sound source data can be of the higher-order ambisonics format) in which a virtual sound source is represented through use of a spherical harmonic function in a virtual space having a predetermined position of the user as a center (Terentiv, ¶40, Fig. 1B, audio is generated for a listener at a first listening position wherein the audio generated is based on a listener-centric sound field);
a correction processing section that receives, from the acquisition section, the second positions and the second rotations and applies more than one correction to the sound source data (Villmer, ¶103, rendering of multimedia data causes continual updates to be applied to both the image data and audio data such that the rendering (and thus correcting) is continually looped multiple times per second to provide a fast response to any input received (i.e. user movement)) to generated corrected sound source data, the more than one correction including at least one of a translation and a rotation of the virtual sound source in the virtual space based on at least one of differences between the first position and the second positions and differences between the first rotation and the second rotations (Terentiv, ¶12, 102, 105, an updated rendering of the audio is generated if/when the user moves about the listening environment wherein the movement of the user can include a translational movement as well as rotational movement (6DOF)); and
a sound generation section that generates a sound to be rendered based on the corrected sound source data (Terentiv, ¶12, an audio renderer capable of rendering modified audio for the user based on their updated position in the listening environment).
Regarding claim 5, it is rejected similarly as claim 1. The method can be found in Terentiv (abstract, method).
Regarding claim 6, it is rejected similarly as claim 1. The storage medium can be found in Terentiv (¶14, storage medium).
Regarding claim 7, it is rejected similarly as claim 3. The method can be found in Terentiv (abstract, method).
Regarding claim 8, it is rejected similarly as claim 3. The storage medium can be found in Terentiv (¶14, storage medium).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Terentiv et al (US20210092546, hereinafter “Terentiv”) in view of Villmer (US20150077416) in further view of Oto et al (US20190049728, hereinafter “Oto”).
Regarding claim 4, Terentiv in view of Villmer fail to explicitly teach wherein:
the sound generation section generates the sound to be rendered at a first frequency, and
the correction processing section receives the second positions and the second rotations from the acquisition section at a second frequency that is higher than the first frequency.
Oto teaches wherein:
the sound generation section generates the sound to be rendered at a first frequency, and
the correction processing section receives the second positions and the second rotations from the acquisition section at a second frequency that is higher than the first frequency (abstract, the correcting includes multiple times of correction of the image generated in the first frequency using a plurality of the updated information in the second frequency, which is higher than the first frequency; Terentiv in view of Villmer acknowledges the use of a renderer that continually update both the visual and audio content presented to the user (Villmer, ¶103)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the correction technique at varying frequencies (rates) (as taught by Oto) on the audio rendering apparatus (as taught by Terentiv). The rationale to do so is to use a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way to yield the predictable result of resolving a possible mismatch in the output of visual or audio content if the user wanders about in the environment.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to PTO-892, Notice of References Cited for a listing of analogous art.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QIN ZHU whose telephone number is (571)270-1304. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 6AM-4PM 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, Duc Nguyen can be reached on 571-272-7503. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/QIN ZHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2691