DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 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 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.
Applicant’s submission filed on 03/03/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 5, 8, 12, 15, and 19 were amended. Claims 1-20 are pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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, 8, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grossinger et al. (US 2024/0290020) in view of Vilermo et al. (US 2019/0306651) and Lu et al. (US 2021/0074266).
Regarding claim 1, Grossinger teaches/suggests: A method of audio-signal processing by a network device, comprising:
obtaining, by a processor of the network device (Grossinger Fig. 2: audio system 200), an audio portion associated with a sound field of an avatar at an initial position in a virtual experience at a first time (Grossinger [0061] “The audio system generates 320 an audio signal (e.g., via the controller) for presentation to a remote user within a virtual representation of the local area based in part on a location of the remote user within the virtual representation of the local area relative to a virtual representation of the human sound source within the virtual representation of the local area” [The audio at the location of the remote avatar within the virtual representation meets the audio portion.]);
an audio mix (Grossinger [0026] “the audio controller 130 may include within the audio signal other sounds from the room”); and
transmitting, by the processor, an audio packet associated with the audio mix to a client device (Grossinger [0062] “The audio system provides 330 (e.g., via the controller) the audio signal to a headset of the remote user” [0026] “the audio controller 130 may include within the audio signal other sounds from the room” [The audio packet is an inherent and/or implicit feature of the audio signal.]).
Grossinger is silent regarding:
identifying, by the processor, at least one interpolation region of the virtual experience associated with the avatar at the initial position in the virtual experience at the first time or associated with the avatar at one or more subsequent positions in the virtual experience at a second time, the second time being later than the first time;
Vilermo, however, teaches/suggests at least one interpolation region (Vilermo [0002] “With regard to spatial audio for recorded 6dof content, 3dof content may be recorded in several locations and then interpolated between those location”). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the audio portion of Grossinger to be interpolated as taught/suggested by Vilermo for spatial audio. As such, Grossinger as modified by Vilermo teaches/suggests:
identifying, by the processor, at least one interpolation region of the virtual experience associated with the avatar at the initial position in the virtual experience at the first time (Grossinger [0061] “The audio system generates 320 an audio signal (e.g., via the controller) for presentation to a remote user within a virtual representation of the local area based in part on a location of the remote user within the virtual representation of the local area relative to a virtual representation of the human sound source within the virtual representation of the local area” Vilermo [0002] “With regard to spatial audio for recorded 6dof content, 3dof content may be recorded in several locations and then interpolated between those location” [In view of Grossinger and Vilermo, the location of the remote avatar within the virtual representation meets the at least one interpolation region.]);
Grossinger and Vilermo are silent regarding:
sampling, by the processor, an audio mix for a plurality of points of the at least one interpolation region of the virtual experience based on the audio portion associated with the sound field of the avatar at the initial position in the virtual experience at the first time or associated with the sound field of the avatar at the one or more subsequent positions in the virtual experience at the second time;
Lu, however, teaches/suggests sampling an audio mix for a plurality of points (Lu [0041] “each mixed audio data frame may have a predetermined frame length (for example, 1 to 50 milliseconds, preferably 10 milliseconds), and include a plurality of sampling data points that are chronologically distributed over the predetermined frame length”). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the audio portion of Grossinger as modified by Vilermo to be sampled as taught/suggested by Lu to generate the audio signal. As such, Grossinger as modified by Vilermo and Lu teaches/suggests:
sampling, by the processor, an audio mix for a plurality of points of the at least one interpolation region of the virtual experience based on the audio portion associated with the sound field of the avatar at the initial position in the virtual experience at the first time (Grossinger [0061] “The audio system generates 320 an audio signal (e.g., via the controller) for presentation to a remote user within a virtual representation of the local area based in part on a location of the remote user within the virtual representation of the local area relative to a virtual representation of the human sound source within the virtual representation of the local area” Vilermo [0002] “With regard to spatial audio for recorded 6dof content, 3dof content may be recorded in several locations and then interpolated between those location” Lu [0041] “each mixed audio data frame may have a predetermined frame length (for example, 1 to 50 milliseconds, preferably 10 milliseconds), and include a plurality of sampling data points that are chronologically distributed over the predetermined frame length”);
Claim 8 recites limitation(s) similar in scope to those of claim 1, and is rejected for the same reason(s). Grossinger as modified by Vilermo and Lu further teaches/suggests a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions (Grossinger [0102] “a software module is implemented with a computer program product comprising a computer-readable medium containing computer program code, which can be executed by a computer processor”).
Claim 15 recites limitation(s) similar in scope to those of claim 1, and is rejected for the same reason(s). Grossinger as modified by Vilermo and Lu further teaches/suggests a processor; and a memory coupled to the processor and storing instructions (Grossinger [0102] “a software module is implemented with a computer program product comprising a computer-readable medium containing computer program code, which can be executed by a computer processor”).
Claim(s) 2-3, 9-10, and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grossinger et al. (US 2024/0290020) in view of Vilermo et al. (US 2019/0306651) and Lu et al. (US 2021/0074266) as applied to claims 1, 8, and 15 above, and further in view of Thagadur Shivappa (US 2017/0295446).
Regarding claim 2, Grossinger as modified by Vilermo and Lu does not teach/suggest: The method of claim 1, further comprising:
predicting, by the processor, the one or more subsequent positions of the avatar in the virtual experience at the second time.
Thagadur Shivappa, however, teaches/suggests:
predicting, by the processor, the one or more subsequent positions of the avatar in the virtual experience at the second time (Thagadur Shivappa [0096] “determining a predicted position of the user based on the position and the latency”).
Thagadur Shivappa further discloses in [0003]: “Performing spatialized audio processing may take a discernable amount of time, resulting in audio latency.” Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the location of the remote avatar of Grossinger as modified by Vilermo and Lu to be predicted as taught/suggested by Thagadur Shivappa to reduce audio latency.
Regarding claim 3, Grossinger as modified by Vilermo, Lu, and Thagadur Shivappa teach/suggest: The method of claim 2, wherein predicting the one or more subsequent positions of the avatar is performed based on at least one of: a dead-reckoning operation, an input-based prediction operation, a game-logic based operation, a Kalman filter, a linear extrapolation, or a machine-learning model (Thagadur Shivappa [0023] “The predicted trajectory may be determined based on a velocity, based on an acceleration, using Kalman filtering”). The same rationale to combine as set forth in the rejection of claim 2 is incorporated herein.
Claims 9 and 10 recite limitation(s) similar in scope to those of claims 2 and 3, respectively, and are rejected for the same reason(s).
Claims 16 and 17 recite limitation(s) similar in scope to those of claims 2 and 3, respectively, and are rejected for the same reason(s).
Claim(s) 4-7, 11-14, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grossinger et al. (US 2024/0290020) in view of Vilermo et al. (US 2019/0306651), Lu et al. (US 2021/0074266), and Thagadur Shivappa (US 2017/0295446) as applied to claims 2, 9, and 16 above, and further in view of Lovitt et al. (US 2013/0053054).
Regarding claim 4, Grossinger as modified by Vilermo, Lu, and Thagadur Shivappa does not teach/suggest: The method of claim 2, wherein:
the one or more subsequent positions includes a first subsequent position and a second subsequent position both associated with the second time, and
the at least one interpolation region includes a first interpolation region associated with the first subsequent position and a second interpolation region associated with the second subsequent position.
Lovitt, however, teaches/suggests:
the one or more subsequent positions includes a first subsequent position and a second subsequent position both associated with the second time (Lovitt [0057] “predicting is performed to cause a setting to be selected balancing geospatial coverage with user movement uncertainty. In particular, an exact future location may not be known, but rather predicting can include predicting a plurality of possible locations”),
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the predicted location of the remote avatar of Vilermo, Lu, and Thagadur Shivappa to include a plurality of possible locations as taught/suggested by Lovitt because of user movement uncertainty. As such, Grossinger as modified by Vilermo, Lu, Thagadur Shivappa, and Lovitt teach/suggest:
the at least one interpolation region includes a first interpolation region associated with the first subsequent position and a second interpolation region associated with the second subsequent position (Grossinger [0061] “The audio system generates 320 an audio signal (e.g., via the controller) for presentation to a remote user within a virtual representation of the local area based in part on a location of the remote user within the virtual representation of the local area relative to a virtual representation of the human sound source within the virtual representation of the local area” Vilermo [0002] “With regard to spatial audio for recorded 6dof content, 3dof content may be recorded in several locations and then interpolated between those location” Thagadur Shivappa [0096] “determining a predicted position of the user based on the position and the latency” Lovitt [0057] “an exact future location may not be known, but rather predicting can include predicting a plurality of possible locations”).
Regarding claim 5, Grossinger as modified by Vilermo, Lu, Thagadur Shivappa, and Lovitt teach/suggest: The method of claim 4, wherein sampling the audio mix for the plurality of points of the at least one interpolation region based on the audio portion associated with the sound field of the avatar at the initial position in the virtual experience at the first time or associated with the sound field of the avatar at the one or more subsequent positions at the second time comprises:
sampling, by the processor, a first regional audio mix for the plurality of points based on the first interpolation region associated with the first subsequent position (Grossinger [0061] “The audio system generates 320 an audio signal (e.g., via the controller) for presentation to a remote user within a virtual representation of the local area based in part on a location of the remote user within the virtual representation of the local area relative to a virtual representation of the human sound source within the virtual representation of the local area” Vilermo [0002] “With regard to spatial audio for recorded 6dof content, 3dof content may be recorded in several locations and then interpolated between those location” Lu [0041] “each mixed audio data frame may have a predetermined frame length (for example, 1 to 50 milliseconds, preferably 10 milliseconds), and include a plurality of sampling data points that are chronologically distributed over the predetermined frame length” Thagadur Shivappa [0096] “determining a predicted position of the user based on the position and the latency”); and
sampling, by the processor, a second regional audio mix for the plurality of points based on the second interpolation region associated with the second subsequent position (Grossinger [0061] “The audio system generates 320 an audio signal (e.g., via the controller) for presentation to a remote user within a virtual representation of the local area based in part on a location of the remote user within the virtual representation of the local area relative to a virtual representation of the human sound source within the virtual representation of the local area” Vilermo [0002] “With regard to spatial audio for recorded 6dof content, 3dof content may be recorded in several locations and then interpolated between those location” Lu [0041] “each mixed audio data frame may have a predetermined frame length (for example, 1 to 50 milliseconds, preferably 10 milliseconds), and include a plurality of sampling data points that are chronologically distributed over the predetermined frame length” Thagadur Shivappa [0096] “determining a predicted position of the user based on the position and the latency” Lovitt [0057] “an exact future location may not be known, but rather predicting can include predicting a plurality of possible locations”).
The same rationales to combine as set forth in the rejection of claims 1 and 4 are incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 6, Grossinger as modified by Vilermo, Lu, Thagadur Shivappa, and Lovitt teach/suggest: The method of claim 5, wherein:
the first regional audio mix includes a first plurality of audio channels associated with the first subsequent position (Grossinger [0061] “The audio system generates 320 an audio signal (e.g., via the controller) for presentation to a remote user within a virtual representation of the local area based in part on a location of the remote user within the virtual representation of the local area relative to a virtual representation of the human sound source within the virtual representation of the local area” [0012] “The artificial reality content may include video, audio, haptic feedback, or some combination thereof, and any of which may be presented in a single channel or in multiple channels” Thagadur Shivappa [0096] “determining a predicted position of the user based on the position and the latency”), and
the second regional audio mix includes a second plurality of audio channels associated with the second subsequent position (Grossinger [0061] “The audio system generates 320 an audio signal (e.g., via the controller) for presentation to a remote user within a virtual representation of the local area based in part on a location of the remote user within the virtual representation of the local area relative to a virtual representation of the human sound source within the virtual representation of the local area” [0012] “The artificial reality content may include video, audio, haptic feedback, or some combination thereof, and any of which may be presented in a single channel or in multiple channels” Thagadur Shivappa [0096] “determining a predicted position of the user based on the position and the latency” Lovitt [0057] “an exact future location may not be known, but rather predicting can include predicting a plurality of possible locations”).
The same rationales to combine as set forth in the rejection of claims 1 and 4 are incorporated herein.
Regarding claim 7, Grossinger as modified by Vilermo, Lu, Thagadur Shivappa, and Lovitt teach/suggest: The method of claim 5, further comprising:
generating, by the processor, the audio packet based on the first regional audio mix and the second regional audio mix (Grossinger [0061] “The audio system generates 320 an audio signal (e.g., via the controller) for presentation to a remote user within a virtual representation of the local area based in part on a location of the remote user within the virtual representation of the local area relative to a virtual representation of the human sound source within the virtual representation of the local area” Thagadur Shivappa [0096] “determining a predicted position of the user based on the position and the latency” Lovitt [0057] “an exact future location may not be known, but rather predicting can include predicting a plurality of possible locations”).
The same rationales to combine as set forth in the rejection of claims 1 and 4 are incorporated herein.
Claims 11-14 recite limitation(s) similar in scope to those of claims 4-7, respectively, and are rejected for the same reason(s).
Claims 18-20 recite limitation(s) similar in scope to those of claims 4-6, respectively, and are rejected for the same reason(s).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 03/03/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues “Lu's sampling is strictly temporal and conventional … Lu provides no suggestion to modify temporal sampling to perform spatial interpolation.” See Remarks, pp. 10-11.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Lu was cited for sampling a mix of speech and non-speech signals to generate the resulting audio, not for performing spatial interpolation. Vilermo was cited for performing spatial interpolation.
Applicant further argues “Lu does not teach or suggest the claimed spatial feature of sampling an audio mix at a plurality of spatial points within an interpolation region tied to an avatar's sound field in a virtual experience.” See Remarks, p. 11.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Grossinger teaches/suggests a mix of sounds tied to an avatar's sound field in a virtual experience (paras. 0061 and 0026). Vilermo teaches/suggests an interpolation region for spatial audio (para. 0002). In view of Grossinger, Vilermo, and Lu, it would have been obvious to sample the mix of sounds within the interpolation region tied to the avatar's sound field in the virtual experience to generate the resulting audio as set forth in the rejection above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 2010/0162119 – immersive audio
US 2019/0289417 – synchronized spatial audio
US 2020/0228911 – audio spatialization
US 2022/0086203 – mixing of spatial audio
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 ANH-TUAN V NGUYEN whose telephone number is 571-270-7513. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9AM-5PM ET. 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, JASON CHAN can be reached on 571-272-3022. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/ANH-TUAN V NGUYEN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2619
Prosecution Insights