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 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
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, 4-6, 8, 10, 13, 15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Camp (US 20070274531 A1), and further in view of Cassidy (US 20210208842 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 13, Camp discloses a method and apparatus for outputting a sound source by a sound source (Camp, Fig. 2, item 132) output apparatus (Camp, Fig. 2, item 112), the method comprising:
a volume level sensing step of sensing a volume level by sensing a
change in the volume (Camp, Fig. 2, item 114; ¶ [0015]: “Transducer 114 senses these pressure deviations, and converts the sensed pressure deviations to an electrical signal”) according to a manipulation or an input of a user (Camp, ¶ [0003]: “To maintain the projected sound at the desired volume, the user must repeatedly manually adjust the volume”);
a control step of generating a voltage control signal by determining an amplification power voltage for an amplification operation based on the sensed volume level (Camp, Fig. 2, item 139; ¶ [0020]: “controller 130 may generate an analog control signal 139 that controls the amplitude of the projected audible signals by controlling the gain of amplifier 128.…control signal 139 may universally control the amplifier gain for all input audio signals”);
a power applying step of applying the adjusted amplification power voltage based on the voltage control signal (Camp, Fig. 2; ¶ [0021]: “controller 130 controls
the amplitude of projected audio signals by applying the digital control signal 138 to audio processor 134 and analog control signal 139 to amplifier to adjust …the
amplifier gain”);
an audio signal generating step of generating an audio signal (Camp, Fig. 2, item 116) by performing an amplifying operation of the sound signal (Camp, Fig. 2, item 128, analog input signal of amplifier 128) which is converted based on the amplification power voltage (Camp, Fig. 2, item 128); and
an audio output step of outputting the audio signal (Camp, Fig. 2, items 116 and 112), wherein the control step includes:
a voltage determining step of determining the amplification power voltage for the amplifying operation by comparing the sensed volume level with a predetermined volume table (threshold, database, or memory storage) (Camp, Fig. 4; ¶ [0017]: “the comparison between the SPL value and the threshold.”); and
a voltage control signal generating step of generating the voltage control signal for power source control with the determined amplification power voltage (Camp, Fig. 4; ¶ [0017]: “DSP 124 generates volume control signal 136 to adjust the volume”); and
the voltage determining step, the amplification power voltage is determined by further considering the sound source analysis information (Camp, Fig. 5; ¶ [0024]: “DSP 124 that includes different analysis paths 150, 160, 170 for different frequency bands… Combiner 180 combines the frequency-specific volume control signals 158, 168, 178 into the single volume control signal 136 supplied to controller 130. Controller 130 uses the resulting volume control signal 136”).
However, Camp fails to disclose a sound source analysis step of analyzing the sound source signal to extract sound source analysis information including at least one or both of genre information of the sound source signal and sound wave analysis information on a sound wave of the sound source signal.
In an analogous field of endeavor, Cassidy (US 20210208842 A1) discloses a sound source analysis step of analyzing the sound source signal to extract sound source analysis information including at least one or both of genre information of the sound source signal and sound wave analysis information on a sound wave of the sound source signal (Cassidy, ¶ [0173]: “the analysis, information related to…melodic features, tempo regions, amplitudes, beats per minute (BPM), … dominant frequency ranges, structure, beat positions, onsets, harmonics,
… energy level, pitch, silence rates, duration, sonic genre classification (multiple classifications with or without weights), loudness, key, meter, gender of vocals (male or female), … and/or any other acoustic or DSP metric”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of a sound source analysis step of analyzing the sound source signal to extract sound source analysis information including at least one or both of genre information of the sound source signal and sound wave analysis information on a sound wave of the sound source signal as taught by Cassidy in Camp invention. The motivation is to characterize the sound source and identify the power requirements according to the input signal behavior.
Regarding claim 4 and 15, the combination of Camp and Cassidy discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and 13 respectively.
Camp further discloses, wherein in the voltage determining step, a predicted amplification power voltage derived by comparing the sensed volume level with the predetermined volume table is compared with a predetermined reference amplification power voltage and an amplification power voltage is determined based on a comparison result (Camp, Figs. 2, 3 and 4; ¶ [0017-0018], and ¶ [0019]: “Audio processor 134 … apply the digital control signal 138 to the retrieved audio signals by digitally multiplying the retrieved audio signals by an appropriate digital scaling factor… This scaling factor may scale the amplitude of all audio signals by the same amount… the drive signal 116 provided by amplifier 128, speaker 112 projects audible signals at a desired volume.”).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Camp and Cassidy discloses all the limitations of claim 4.
Camp further discloses, wherein in the voltage determining step, when the predicted amplification power voltage is equal to or lower than the reference amplification power voltage, the reference amplification power voltage is determined as the amplification power voltage (Camp, Fig. 2; 1 [0017]: “The predetermined threshold may represent any desired SPL limit, and may be set by a manufacturer or user of the electronic device 120. Based on the comparison between the SPL value and the threshold, DSP 124 generates volume control signal 136 to adjust the volume of the projected audible signals.").
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Camp and Cassidy discloses all the limitations of claim 4.
Camp further discloses, wherein in the voltage determining step, when the predicted amplification power voltage exceeds the reference amplification power voltage, the predicted amplification power voltage is determined as the amplification power voltage (Camp, Fig. 3, ¶ [0017]).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Camp and Cassidy discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Camp further discloses, wherein, in the voltage determining step, the amplification power voltage is further adjusted according to a sound width (sound field) of the sound source signal, based on the sound wave analysis information to finally determine the amplification power voltage (Camp, Figs. 2, 5, ¶ [0026]: “Amplifier 128 then modifies the gain applied to the frequency-specific audio signals based on the frequency-specific analog control signals 139 supplied by controller 130.”).
Regarding claims 10 and 17, Camp discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and 13 respectively.
Camp further discloses, wherein the power applying step includes:
a voltage adjusting step of adjusting a predetermined voltage (Camp, Fig. 3) with the amplification power voltage based on the voltage control signal (Camp, Fig. 2, items 124, 136; ¶ [0016]: “DSP processes the digital SPL to generate a volume control signal”) and
a voltage applying step of applying the adjusted amplification power voltage for the amplifying operation (Camp, Fig. 2, item 139; ¶ [0020]: “controller may generate an analog control signal that controls the amplitude of the projected audible
signals by controlling the gain of amplifier”).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Camp (US 20070274531 A1), in view of Cassidy (US 20210208842 A1) and further in view of Hartung (US 20170026015 A1).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Camp and Cassidy discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
However, the combination of Camp and Cassidy fails to disclose, wherein, in the voltage determining step, the amplification power voltage is further adjusted based on a predetermined sound width (stereo field) used for each genre, according to the genre information, to finally determine the amplification power voltage.
In an analogous field of endeavor Hartung (US 20170026015 A1) discloses wherein, in the voltage determining step, the amplification power voltage is further adjusted based on a predetermined sound width (stereo or sound field) used for each genre according to the genre information, to finally determine the amplification power voltage. (Hartung, Fig. 2, item 200; ¶ [0083]: “the playback device may decrease the loudness adjustment factor based on similar reasoning if the media's metadata indicates genre of music that is relatively quieter, such as classical music… the loudness determination model, modifications may also be made to the loudness adjustment factor based on media source, or the model and power
output of the particular playback device.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of a voltage is further adjusted based on a predetermined sound width (stereo or sound field) used for each genre according to the genre information, to finally determine the amplification power voltage as taught by Hartung in Camp’s and Cassidy’s inventions. The motivation being to dynamically adjusting de power according to the genre.
Claim(s) 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Camp (US 20070274531 A1), and further in view of Perrott (US 20200059214 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Camp discloses all the limitations of claim 10.
However, Camp fails to disclose wherein in the voltage adjusting step, the predetermined voltage is adjusted as the amplification power voltage by means of at least one switching of the plurality of resistors.
In an analogous field of endeavor, Perrott (US 20200059214 A1) discloses the amplification power voltage by means of at least one switching of the plurality of resistors (Perrott, Fig. 3, ¶ [0035]: “preamp, which gain can be adjusted, in a non-limiting example by varying the resistance (e.g., of a switched resistor network (not shown) variable resistor R2 304.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of a predetermined voltage is adjusted as the amplification power voltage by means of at least one switching of the plurality of resistors as taught by Perrott in Camp’s and Cassidy’s inventions. The motivation being to control and adjust the amplification stage.
Regarding claim 12, Camp discloses all the limitations of claim 10.
However, Camp fails to disclose wherein in the voltage adjusting step, the amplification power voltage is adjusted in the range of a first input voltage (v+) and a second input voltage (v-) and the range of the first input voltage and the second input voltage is equal to or larger than a magnitude of the predetermined reference amplification power voltage.
In an analogous field of endeavor, Perrott discloses wherein in the voltage adjusting step, the amplification power voltage is adjusted in the range of a first input voltage (v+) and a second input voltage (v-) (Perrott, Fig. 3, items Vin-, Vin+) and the range of the first input voltage and the second input voltage is equal to or larger than a magnitude of the predetermined reference amplification power voltage (Perrott, ¶ [0048]: “The limiting factor for setting the switching threshold can be understood to be the difference in noise levels between the two signal paths (e.g., Low SPL path and High SPL path)”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used the teachings of an amplification power voltage is adjusted in the range of a first input voltage (v+) and a second input voltage (v-) (Perrott, Fig. 3, items Vin-, Vin+) and the range of the first input voltage and the second input voltage is equal to or larger than a magnitude of the predetermined reference amplification power voltage as taught by Perrott in Camp’s and Cassidy’s inventions. The motivation being to control and adjust the amplification stage.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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 FRIEDRICH FAHNERT whose telephone number is (571)270-7797. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 am-4:00 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, CAROLYN EDWARDS can be reached at (571)270-7136. 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.
/CAROLYN R EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2692
/FRIEDRICH FAHNERT/
Examiner
Art Unit 2692
Prosecution Insights