DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the correspondence filed by the applicant on 2/22/2026.
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 rejections have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. Applicant assert a microphone is not a sound-induced vibration sensing element. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. One of ordinary skill in the art would know a microphone senses vibration of a diaphragm caused by a sound wave. Thus, the microphone is a sound-induced vibration sensing element.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 7, 9, 11, 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by FREUND (US 2023/0182686 A1) in further view of MESITER (US 2021/0020024 A1).
REGARDING CLAIM 1, FREUND discloses a system for sound-activated remote control of vehicle functions for a vehicle having a remote-control system, the remote-control system has a key fob and at least one vehicle control module, the system for remote control of vehicle functions comprising:
a smart sound sensor module at the vehicle (FREUND Par 11 – “In still another embodiment, microphones may be installed in both the vehicle and the fob in order to provide increased speech coverage.”) having a sound-induced vibration sensing element (FREUND Par 14 – “The key fob includes a microphone detecting audible speech from a user and transmitting a signal based on the detected speech to an automatic speech recognition system such that the automatic speech recognition system can recognize in the signal a request that the motor vehicle perform the predetermined operation.”) and a processor for detecting and processing a set of sound events (FREUND Fig. 13 – “ASR”; Par 42 – “Next, in step 1110, a signal from the microphone is passed to the ASR system, which may be embedded in the fob, in the vehicle, or disposed in the cloud.”; Par 8 – “In another embodiment, the present invention may provide a speech recognition system housed within a vehicle key fob. The speech recognition system may include one or more microphones and a speech recognition library. This system may communicate user issued voice commands, such as “open trunk” or “lock doors”.”);
a sound event in a set of sound events, each sound event in the set of sound events is correlated with a code recognized by the at least one vehicle control module (FREUND Par 14 – “The key fob includes a microphone detecting audible speech from a user and transmitting a signal based on the detected speech to an automatic speech recognition system such that the automatic speech recognition system can recognize in the signal a request that the motor vehicle perform the predetermined operation.”; Par 44 – “In step 1114, the ASR system interprets the spoken command into a vehicle action. For example, the ASR system may interpret the spoken command as a command to open the rear gate.”; Par 45 – “Next, in step 1116, the fob or the cloud communicates a requested action to the vehicle. For example, if the ASR system is located in the fob or the cloud, the ASR system transmits a wireless signal to the vehicle requesting that the rear gate be opened.”; Par 51 – “Automatic speech recognition system 1354 may then send a signal to actuator 1356 to cause actuator 1356 to unlock the vehicle door.”); and
[an RF transmitter] a communication module on the smart sound sensor module (FREUND Fig. 13 1350; Par 47 – “System 1300 includes a key fob 1346 having a pushbutton 1324, a microphone 1330, an electronic processor 1348, and a transmitter 1350.”) for transmitting the code from the smart sound sensor module to the remote-control system, wherein the at least one vehicle control module activates a function on the vehicle that is associated with the code (FREUND Par 44 – “In step 1114, the ASR system interprets the spoken command into a vehicle action. For example, the ASR system may interpret the spoken command as a command to open the rear gate.”; Par 45 – “Next, in step 1116, the fob or the cloud communicates a requested action to the vehicle. For example, if the ASR system is located in the fob or the cloud, the ASR system transmits a wireless signal to the vehicle requesting that the rear gate be opened.”; Par 51 – “Automatic speech recognition system 1354 may then send a signal to actuator 1356 to cause actuator 1356 to unlock the vehicle door.”).
FREUND does not explicitly teach the [square-bracketed] limitations. In other words, FREUND teaches wireless communication between a key fob and a vehicle, but does not explicitly teach wireless communication within the vehicle.
MESITER discloses a method/system for analyzing sensed data inside a vehicle comprising both wired and wireless communication within the vehicle (MESITER Par 16 – “The sensors 106, 108, a scene estimator 110, a virtual assistant 112, and an actuator 114 are communicatively coupled to one another via a plurality of communication buses 116, which may be wireless or wired.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method/system of FREUND to include a wireless communication within a vehicle, as taught by MESITER.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to include a wireless communication within a vehicle, in order to provide more flexible communication among the components.
REGARDING CLAIM 7, FREUND in view of MESITER discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the smart sound sensor module is installed on an outer surface of the vehicle (FREUND Figs. 8 and 10; Par 36 – “A suitable location for a pushbutton/microphone combo system in a single microphone scenario is shown at 34. Suitable locations for two pushbutton/microphone combo systems in a double microphone scenario are shown at 36.”; Par 37 – “FIG. 9 illustrates the possible placement of a of the present invention on motor vehicle 32. As shown in the enlarged view of FIG. 10 , pushbutton/microphone combo system 910 includes a tactile switch 924, a wire harness 938, and a microphone assembly 940 behind a license plate applique 942.”).
REGARDING CLAIM 9, FREUND in view of MESITER discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the key fob further comprises a microphone (FREUND Par 8 – “In another embodiment, the present invention may provide a speech recognition system housed within a vehicle key fob. The speech recognition system may include one or more microphones and a speech recognition library.”) and the smart sound sensor module further comprises a processor capable of performing voice recognition (FREUND Par 42 – “Next, in step 1110, a signal from the microphone is passed to the ASR system, which may be embedded in the fob, in the vehicle, or disposed in the cloud. For example, the microphone may convert the audible speed into an electronic signal. The electronic signal may be transmitted to an ASR system in the fob.”).
REGARDING CLAIM 11, FREUND in view of MESITER discloses a method for sound-activated remote control of vehicle functions for a vehicle having a remote-control system, the remote-control system has a key fob and at least one vehicle control module, the method for sound-activated remote control of vehicle functions comprises the steps of:
detecting, at a sound sensor on a smart sound sensor module mounted at the vehicle (FREUND Fig. 8 – “ASR”; Par 8 – “In another embodiment, the present invention may provide a speech recognition system housed within a vehicle key fob. The speech recognition system may include one or more microphones and a speech recognition library. This system may communicate user issued voice commands, such as “open trunk” or “lock doors”.”; Par 11 – “In still another embodiment, microphones may be installed in both the vehicle and the fob in order to provide increased speech coverage.”), sound-induced vibrations caused by a sound event (FREUND Par 14 – “The key fob includes a microphone detecting audible speech from a user and transmitting a signal based on the detected speech to an automatic speech recognition system such that the automatic speech recognition system can recognize in the signal a request that the motor vehicle perform the predetermined operation.”);
correlating, at a processor on the smart sound sensor module (FREUND Fig. 13 – “ASR”; Par 42 – “Next, in step 1110, a signal from the microphone is passed to the ASR system, which may be embedded in the fob, in the vehicle, or disposed in the cloud.”), the sound event with a code recognized by the at least one vehicle control module (FREUND Par 8 – “In another embodiment, the present invention may provide a speech recognition system housed within a vehicle key fob. The speech recognition system may include one or more microphones and a speech recognition library. This system may communicate user issued voice commands, such as “open trunk” or “lock doors”.”; Par 14 – “The key fob includes a microphone detecting audible speech from a user and transmitting a signal based on the detected speech to an automatic speech recognition system such that the automatic speech recognition system can recognize in the signal a request that the motor vehicle perform the predetermined operation.”; Par 44 – “In step 1114, the ASR system interprets the spoken command into a vehicle action. For example, the ASR system may interpret the spoken command as a command to open the rear gate.”; Par 45 – “Next, in step 1116, the fob or the cloud communicates a requested action to the vehicle. For example, if the ASR system is located in the fob or the cloud, the ASR system transmits a wireless signal to the vehicle requesting that the rear gate be opened.”; Par 51 – “Automatic speech recognition system 1354 may then send a signal to actuator 1356 to cause actuator 1356 to unlock the vehicle door.”); and
transmitting, from [an RF transmitter] a communication module on the smart sound sensor module (FREUND Fig. 13 1350; Par 47 – “System 1300 includes a key fob 1346 having a pushbutton 1324, a microphone 1330, an electronic processor 1348, and a transmitter 1350.”), the code to the remote-control system, wherein the at least one vehicle control module activates a function on the vehicle that is associated with the code (FREUND Par 44 – “In step 1114, the ASR system interprets the spoken command into a vehicle action. For example, the ASR system may interpret the spoken command as a command to open the rear gate.”; Par 45 – “Next, in step 1116, the fob or the cloud communicates a requested action to the vehicle. For example, if the ASR system is located in the fob or the cloud, the ASR system transmits a wireless signal to the vehicle requesting that the rear gate be opened.”; Par 51 – “Automatic speech recognition system 1354 may then send a signal to actuator 1356 to cause actuator 1356 to unlock the vehicle door.”).
FREUND does not explicitly teach the [square-bracketed] limitations. In other words, FREUND teaches wireless communication between a key fob and a vehicle, but does not explicitly teach wireless communication within the vehicle.
MESITER discloses a method/system for analyzing sensed data inside a vehicle comprising both wired and wireless communication within the vehicle (MESITER Par 16 – “The sensors 106, 108, a scene estimator 110, a virtual assistant 112, and an actuator 114 are communicatively coupled to one another via a plurality of communication buses 116, which may be wireless or wired.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method/system of FREUND to include a wireless communication within a vehicle, as taught by MESITER.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to include a wireless communication within a vehicle, in order to provide more flexible communication among the components.
REGARDING CLAIM 15, FREUND in view of MESITER discloses the method as claimed in claim 11, wherein the step of transmitting the code further comprises the step of confirming the sound event originated from an authorized user (FREUND Par 43 – “In a next step 1112, the system uses voice biometrics to confirm that the spoken command is from an authorized user. For example, a biometric system in the fob, in the vehicle, or at a remote location may determine and/or confirm that the voice spoken into the fob is the voice of a user who has permission to issue commands.”).
REGARDING CLAIM 16, FREUND in view of MESITER discloses the method as claimed in claim 12, wherein the step of transmitting the code further comprises the step of confirming the sound event originated from an authorized user (FREUND Par 43 – “In a next step 1112, the system uses voice biometrics to confirm that the spoken command is from an authorized user. For example, a biometric system in the fob, in the vehicle, or at a remote location may determine and/or confirm that the voice spoken into the fob is the voice of a user who has permission to issue commands.”), and wherein the step of confirming the sound event originated from the authorized user further comprises the step of performing voice recognition (FREUND Par 43 – “In a next step 1112, the system uses voice biometrics to confirm that the spoken command is from an authorized user. For example, a biometric system in the fob, in the vehicle, or at a remote location may determine and/or confirm that the voice spoken into the fob is the voice of a user who has permission to issue commands.”).
REGARDING CLAIM 17, FREUND in view of MESITER discloses the method as claimed in claim 15, wherein the step of confirming the sound event originated from the authorized user (FREUND Par 43 – “In a next step 1112, the system uses voice biometrics to confirm that the spoken command is from an authorized user. For example, a biometric system in the fob, in the vehicle, or at a remote location may determine and/or confirm that the voice spoken into the fob is the voice of a user who has permission to issue commands.”) further comprises detecting the key fob to be within a predetermined proximity of the vehicle (FREUND Fig. 11; Par 38 – “FIG. 11 is a flow chart of one embodiment of a method 1100 of the present invention for opening and/or closing a lift gate of a motor vehicle. In a first step 1102, a vehicle detects a fob in close proximity. For example, a user may press a pushbutton on his fob, which causes a wireless signal to be transmitted to the vehicle. By virtue of receiving the wireless signal, the vehicle may detect that a fob is nearby.”).
Claims 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FREUND in view of MESITER, and in further view of SHARIFI (US 2022/0139371 A1).
REGARDING CLAIM 5, FREUND in view of MESITER discloses the system of claim 1.
FREUND does not explicitly teach sound event not initiated by a user.
SHARIFI discloses a method/system for monitoring sound events, wherein at least one sound event is initiated by an event external to the vehicle, not initiated by a user, and is selected from the group consisting of: breaking glass, knocking, and impact noise (SHARIFI Par 24 – “The acoustic event detected by the acoustic event model(s) can include, for example, detecting a hotword that invokes an automated assistant included in a spoken utterance using hotword detection model(s), detecting ambient noise in the ecosystem (and optionally while speech reception is active at a given one of the assistant devices) in the ecosystem using ambient noise detection model(s), detecting a particular sound (e.g., glass breaking, a dog barking, a cat meowing, a doorbell ringing, a smoke alarm sounding, a carbon monoxide detector sounding, a baby crying, knocking on a door, and/or other acoustic events) in the ecosystem using sound detection model(s), and/or other acoustic-related events that can be detected using respective acoustic event detection model(s).”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method/system of FREUND to include detecting sound events not initiated by a user, as taught by SHARIFI.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to include detecting sound events not initiated by a user, in order to prevent an emergency situation and notify a user regarding the potential emergency situation.
REGARDING CLAIM 14, FREUND in view of MESITER discloses the method as claimed in claim 13, wherein detecting sound induced vibration further comprises detecting, a key word (FREUND Par 8 – “In another embodiment, the present invention may provide a speech recognition system housed within a vehicle key fob. The speech recognition system may include one or more microphones and a speech recognition library. This system may communicate user issued voice commands, such as “open trunk” or “lock doors”.”), [breaking glass, knocking, and impact noise].
FREUND does not explicitly teach the [square-bracketed] limitations.
SHARIFI discloses the [square-bracketed] limitations. SHARIFI discloses a method/system for monitoring sound events, wherein detecting sound induced vibration further comprises detecting, a key word (SHARIFI Par 40 – “For example, the event processing engine 150 can process the audio data to determine whether the audio data captures a spoken utterance of a user that includes “Assistant”, “Hey assistant”, “Okay, assistant”, and/or any other word or phrase that invokes the automated assistant.”; Par 70 – “For example, the coreference resolver may be utilized to resolve the term “it” to “front door lock” in the natural language input “lock it”, based on “front door lock” being mentioned in a client device notification rendered immediately prior to receiving the natural language input “lock it”.”), [breaking glass, knocking, and impact noise] (SHARIFI Par 24 – “The acoustic event detected by the acoustic event model(s) can include, for example, detecting a hotword that invokes an automated assistant included in a spoken utterance using hotword detection model(s), detecting ambient noise in the ecosystem (and optionally while speech reception is active at a given one of the assistant devices) in the ecosystem using ambient noise detection model(s), detecting a particular sound (e.g., glass breaking, a dog barking, a cat meowing, a doorbell ringing, a smoke alarm sounding, a carbon monoxide detector sounding, a baby crying, knocking on a door, and/or other acoustic events) in the ecosystem using sound detection model(s), and/or other acoustic-related events that can be detected using respective acoustic event detection model(s).”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method/system of FREUND to include detecting sound events not initiated by a user, as taught by SHARIFI.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to include detecting sound events not initiated by a user, in order to prevent an emergency situation and notify a user regarding the potential emergency situation.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FREUND in view of MESITER, and in further view of VISSER (US 20230036986 A1).
REGARDING CLAIM 10, FREUND discloses the system of claim 1.
FREUND does not explicitly teach updating the set of sound events.
VISSER discloses a method/system for sound event detection, wherein the set of sound events is updatable (VISSER Par 98 – “For example the audio event processing unit 134 may prioritize searching of sound event models that are more likely to occur in the particular environment, which may result in increased accuracy, reduced latency, or both. As another example, the audio event processing unit 134 may adjust weighting factors for one or more sound event models, based on the environment, to increase or reduce the likelihood that the sound 182 is determined to match those sound event models. In some implementations, the environmental information 146 can be sent to the device 120 and used to improve performance of the audio event processing unit 154 in a similar manner.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method/system of FREUND to include updating sound events, as taught by VISSER.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to include updating sound events, in order to improve performance of the audio event processing by adapting the detection model to a particular environment so that the detection error rate would be reduced.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over FREUND in view of MESITER, and in further view of YAMAMOTO (US 20020038215 A1).
REGARDING CLAIM 12, FREUND in view of MESITER discloses the method as claimed in claim 11, wherein the key fob has a microphone (FREUND Par 8 – “In another embodiment, the present invention may provide a speech recognition system housed within a vehicle key fob. The speech recognition system may include one or more microphones and a speech recognition library.”) and the step of detecting the sound event further comprises the steps of detecting a voice command (Par 41 – “In step 1108, a microphone in the fob hears the command. For example, there may be a microphone on the fob that detects the audible speech from the user.”), [removing noise], and performing voice recognition (Par 44 – “In step 1114, the ASR system interprets the spoken command into a vehicle action. For example, the ASR system may interpret the spoken command as a command to open the rear gate.”).
FREUND does fails to teach the [square-bracketed] limitation. In other words, FREUND fails to teach removing noise for voice recognition.
YAMAMOTO discloses the [square-bracketed] limitation. YAMAMOTO discloses a method/system for speech recognition comprises the steps of detecting a voice command, [removing noise], and performing voice recognition (YAMAMOTO Fig. 3 – “Noise reducing process …. Speech Recognition”; Par 44 – “That is, the input speech signal is converted from an analog value to a digital value. A noise reducing process and then a sound analysis are applied to the converted speech signal. In the noise reducing process, a known method can be employed. In the sound analysis, the features of the speech are extracted. Thereafter, the speech recognition is performed by comparing these extracted features and a standard pattern. The recognition result is displayed on the monitor 6.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method/system of FREUND to include a noise removing process, as taught by YAMAMOTO.
One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to include a noise removing process, in order to improve speech recognition performance by providing clean signals.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JONATHAN C KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-3327. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8:00 AM thru 4:00 PM 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, Andrew C Flanders can be reached at 571-272-7516. 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.
/JONATHAN C KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2655