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 .
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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, 8-12, 16, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Thyssen et al. (US 2011/0095875 A1 and hereafter Thyssen).
Regarding claim 1, Thyssen anticipates:
“A method comprising:
receiving audio content” (see Thyssen, figure 3, units 316 and 318, and ¶ 0049-0050, where audio content is received locally and/or over a network);
“playing back the audio content through a speaker at a first volume setting of a volume control, wherein the volume control comprises a plurality of sequential volume settings” (see Thyssen, figure 3, units 310, 312, 314, 318 and 320, and ¶ 0033, 0050-0052, 0056, and 0058, where received audio content is played back at a base volume that is manually adjusted by a user through a user interface, such as a mechanical interface comprising buttons, dials, or the like);
“determining a noise level within an ambient environment captured by a microphone” (see Thyssen, figure 3, units 302 and 304, figure 4, and ¶ 0054 and 0064, where a microphone captures the environmental noise and a sensor data module determines the noise level);
“receiving a single adjustment to the volume control to change the first volume setting by one volume setting” (see Thyssen, figure 3, units 310, 312, and 314, and ¶ 0033, 0056, and 0058, where a user manually adjusts the volume through the user interface via buttons, dials, or the like);
“responsive to receiving the single adjustment, determining a second volume setting based on at least one of the noise level, a content level of the audio content, and historical data indicating past adjustments to the volume control, wherein the second volume setting is either greater than or less than the first volume setting by more than one volume setting” (see Thyssen, figure 3, units 306, 308, 312, 314, and 318, figure 4, and ¶ 0059-0064, where manually adjusting the volume causes the automatic volume adjustment module to determine a gain value to apply to the audio content, and the automatic volume adjustment module uses historical manual volume adjustment data, the current audio content level, and the current ambient noise level to determine the second volume setting); and
“changing the first volume setting of the volume control to the second volume setting” (see Thyssen, figure 4, figure 6, steps 608 and 610, and ¶ 0057, 0063, and 0073-0074, where the automatic volume adjustment module changes the manual volume setting to the second volume setting based on user preferences, the current audio content level, and the current ambient noise level).
Regarding claim 3, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. Thyssen anticipates the “method of claim 1, wherein the volume control comprises a volume up and a volume down, wherein receiving the single adjustment comprises receiving one user selection of either the volume up or the volume down” (see Thyssen, ¶ 0033, 0051, 0056, and 0058, where the user adjusts the volume using buttons, or the like, to increase or reduce the volume teaches that a volume up and down comprises a single, or discrete, adjustment).
Regarding claim 8, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. Thyssen anticipates the “method of claim 1 further comprising determining whether the noise level within the ambient environment has increased above a threshold since a previous adjustment to the volume control has been received, wherein the second volume setting is determined responsive to determining that the noise level has increased above the threshold and responsive to receiving the single adjustment” (see Thyssen, ¶ 0064, where the ambient background level and current audio level are used to determine if a target SNR is reached, such that gradual adjustments are applied when the noise level increases above a threshold).
Regarding claim 9, Thyssen anticipates:
“An electronic device comprising:
a speaker” (see Thyssen, figure 3, unit 320 and ¶ 0048);
“at least one processor” (see Thyssen, figure 3, unit 304, figure 9, unit 904, and ¶ 0048 and 0098-0099, where the device has one or more processors);
“a volume control” (see Thyssen, figure 3, unit 310, and ¶ 0033, 0056, and 0058, where a user manually adjusts the volume through the user interface via buttons, dials, or the like); and
“memory having instructions stored therein which when executed by the at least one processor causes the electronic device to:
drive the speaker with an audio signal at a volume setting of the volume control, wherein the volume control comprises a series of incremental volume settings, each volume setting associated with a different volume level of the electronic device” (see Thyssen, Thyssen, figure 3, units 310, 312, 314, 318 and 320, figure 9, unit 900, and ¶ 0033, 0048, 0050-0052, 0056, 0058, 0098-0100, and 0104, where the device executes software to perform operations where received audio content is played back at a base volume that is manually adjusted by a user through a user interface, such as a mechanical interface comprising buttons, dials, or the like),
“determine a noise level within an ambient environment in which the electronic device is located” (see Thyssen, figure 3, units 302 and 304, figure 4, and ¶ 0054 and 0064, where a microphone captures the environmental noise and a sensor data module determines the noise level),
“receive an adjustment to the volume control to increase the volume setting” (see Thyssen, figure 3, units 310, 312, and 314, and ¶ 0033, 0056, and 0058, where a user manually adjusts the volume through the user interface via buttons, dials, or the like),
“determine a new volume setting based on the noise level and historical behavior data indicating past adjustments to the volume control, wherein the new volume setting is higher than the volume setting in the series by at least two volume settings” (see Thyssen, figure 3, units 306, 308, 312, 314, and 318, figure 4, and ¶ 0059-0064, where manually adjusting the volume causes the automatic volume adjustment module to determine a gain value to apply to the audio content, and the automatic volume adjustment module uses historical manual volume adjustment data, the current audio content level, and the current ambient noise level to determine the second volume setting), and
“responsive to determining the new volume setting, drive the speaker with the audio signal at the new volume setting” (see Thyssen, figure 4, figure 6, steps 608 and 610, and ¶ 0057, 0063, and 0073-0074, where the automatic volume adjustment module changes the manual volume setting to the second volume setting based on user preferences, the current audio content level, and the current ambient noise level).
Regarding claim 10, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 9 above. Thyssen anticipates the “electronic device of claim 9, wherein the electronic device is a headset” (see Thyssen, ¶ 0048, wherein the device is a BLUETOOTH headset).
Regarding claim 11, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 9 above. Thyssen anticipates the “electronic device of claim 9, wherein the electronic device does not include a touch-sensitive display screen that is arranged to display a user interface” (see Thyssen, figure 3, unit 310, and ¶ 0033, 0048, 0056, and 0058, where the device, such as a BLUETOOTH headset, includes a mechanical user interface and does not have a display screen for a graphical user interface).
Regarding claim 12, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 9 above. Thyssen anticipates the “electronic device of claim 9, wherein the memory has further instructions to retrieve, from the memory, the historical behavior that indicates past volume settings of the volume control with respect to one or more contexts in which a user used the electronic device” (see Thyssen, ¶ 0059, 0063, and 0065-0066, where manual volume adjustments under a variety of different environmental noise conditions are accumulated as historical data to create user preference data, and target signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) are adjusted by user preferences and stored in memory; Therefore, settings based on historical behavior that indicates past volume settings under a variety of different environmental noise conditions or ranges of ambient noise levels are stored, wherein the different environmental noise conditions or ranges of ambient noise levels read on ‘one or more contexts in which as user used the electronic device’).
Regarding claim 16, Thyssen anticipates:
“A non-transitory machine-readable medium having instructions which when executed by at least one processor of a headset” (see Thyssen, figure 3, unit 300, figure 9, ¶ 0048, 0098-0100, and 0104),
“causes the headset to:
receive audio content” (see Thyssen, figure 3, units 316 and 318, and ¶ 0049-0050, where audio content is received locally and/or over a network);
“play back the audio content through a speaker at a first volume setting of a volume control, wherein the volume control comprises a plurality of sequential volume settings” (see Thyssen, figure 3, units 310, 312, 314, 318 and 320, and ¶ 0033, 0050-0052, 0056, and 0058, where received audio content is played back at a base volume that is manually adjusted by a user through a user interface, such as a mechanical interface comprising buttons, dials, or the like);
“determine a noise level within an ambient environment captured by a microphone” (see Thyssen, figure 3, units 302 and 304, figure 4, and ¶ 0054 and 0064, where a microphone captures the environmental noise and a sensor data module determines the noise level);
“receive a single adjustment to the volume control to change the first volume setting by one volume setting” (see Thyssen, figure 3, units 310, 312, and 314, and ¶ 0033, 0056, and 0058, where a user manually adjusts the volume through the user interface via buttons, dials, or the like);
“responsive to receiving the single adjustment, determine a second volume setting based on at least one of the noise level, a content level of the audio content, and historical data indicating past adjustments to the volume control, wherein the second volume setting is either greater than or less than the first volume setting by more than one volume setting” (see Thyssen, figure 3, units 306, 308, 312, 314, and 318, figure 4, and ¶ 0059-0064, where manually adjusting the volume causes the automatic volume adjustment module to determine a gain value to apply to the audio content, and the automatic volume adjustment module uses historical manual volume adjustment data, the current audio content level, and the current ambient noise level to determine the second volume setting); and
“change the first volume setting of the volume control to the second volume setting” (see Thyssen, figure 4, figure 6, steps 608 and 610, and ¶ 0057, 0063, and 0073-0074, where the automatic volume adjustment module changes the manual volume setting to the second volume setting based on user preferences, the current audio content level, and the current ambient noise level).
Regarding claim 21, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 16 above. Thyssen anticipates the “non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 16 comprises further instructions to determine whether the noise level within the ambient environment has increased above a threshold since a previous adjustment to the volume control has been received, wherein the second volume setting is determined responsive to determining that the noise level has increased above the threshold and responsive to receiving the single adjustment” (see Thyssen, ¶ 0064, where the ambient background level and current audio level are used to determine if a target SNR is reached, such that gradual adjustments are applied when the noise level increases above a threshold).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2, 13-15, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thyssen as applied to claims 1, 9, 12, and 16 above, and further in view of Rodgers (US 2020/0110577 A1).
Regarding claim 2, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. Thyssen teaches the method of claim 1, wherein determining the second volume setting comprises using at least one or the noise level, the content level, and historical behavior data as input into a user preference learning module (see Thyssen, ¶ 0059 and 0073). Thyssen does not appear to teach that the user preference learning module is a machine learning module.
Rodgers teaches a user-adaptive volume selection for a virtual assistant (see Rodgers, abstract and ¶ 0003), where the user-adaptive volume selection is applied to audio responses generated from the virtual assistant (see Rodgers, ¶ 0006 and 0027). Rodgers teaches machine learning features for generating the user-adaptive volume selection (see Rodgers, figure 2, units 200 and 204, and ¶ 0040-0041). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify Thyssen with the teachings of Rodgers for the purpose of improving automatic volume control in various different contexts (see Rodgers, ¶ 0006 and 0027).
Therefore, the combination of Thyssen and Rodgers makes obvious the “method of claim 1, wherein determining the second volume setting comprises using at least one or the noise level, the content level, and historical behavior data as input into a machine learning model that produces the second volume setting as output” (see Thyssen, ¶ 0059 and 0073 in view of Rodgers, ¶ 0041, 0043-0044, and 0054, makes obvious that a machine learning model is used to determine the second volume level based on one or more of the ambient noise or audio level, the current audio level, and/or historical user volume adjustments).
Regarding claim 13, see the preceding rejection with respect to claims 2 and 12 above. Thyssen anticipates the electronic device of claim 12, but does not appear to teach that the user preference learning module is a machine learning module. For the same reasons as stated above with respect to claim 2, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify Thyssen with the teachings of Rodgers for the purpose of improving automatic volume control in various different contexts (see Rodgers, ¶ 0006 and 0027).
Therefore, the combination of Thyssen and Rodgers makes obvious the “electronic device of claim 12, wherein the instructions to determine the new volume setting includes instructions to:
determine a context in which the user is currently using the electronic device” (see Thyssen, ¶ 0059, 0063, and 0065-0066, in view of Rodgers, ¶ 0041, 0043-0044, 0049-0051, and 0054, where it is obvious to determine a context for the volume output, such as determining a context based on one or more of noise levels, time of day, ambient lighting conditions, and/or user’s location); and
“produce the new volume setting as output of a machine learning model in response to input that is based on the historical behavior that indicates past volume settings of the volume control with respect to the context and the noise level” (see Rodgers, ¶ 0027 and 0040, where the machine learning output is used to produce a new volume setting).
Regarding claim 14, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 13 above. The combination makes obvious the “electronic device of claim 13, wherein the memory has further instructions to:
receive sensor data from one or more sensors of the electronic device” (see Rodgers, ¶ 0041, 0043, and 0050-0051, where it is obvious to receive sensor data from one or more of an ambient microphone, a voice microphone, a light sensor, and/or a location sensor); and
“determine one or more characteristics of the electronic device based on the sensor data and the noise level, wherein the context is determined based on the one or more characteristics” (see Rodgers, ¶ 0040, where the machine learning module determines the context of the device, such as determining a context based on one or more of speech levels, noise levels, ambient lighting conditions, and/or the user’s location).
Regarding claim 15, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 9 above. Thyssen teaches the electronic device of claim 9, but does not appear to teach the feature to “determine whether a noise of the ambient environment that is captured by a microphone comprises speech or an ambient sound”. For the same reasons as stated above with respect to claim 2, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify Thyssen with the teachings of Rodgers for the purpose of improving automatic volume control in various different contexts (see Rodgers, ¶ 0006 and 0027).
Therefore, the combination of Thyssen and Rodgers makes obvious the “electronic device of claim 9, wherein the adjustment is a first adjustment and the new volume setting is a first new volume setting, wherein the memory has further instructions to:
receive a second adjustment to the volume control to decrease the first new volume setting” (see Thyssen, ¶ 0056 and 0059, where it is obvious that a user adjusts the volume up and down to a desired playback level in the presence of different noise situations, and see Rodgers, ¶ 0068);
“determine whether a noise of the ambient environment that is captured by a microphone comprises speech or an ambient sound” (see Thyssen, ¶ 0062 in view of Rodgers, ¶ 0043-0044 and 0074-0075, where it is obvious to detect what type of noise is captured by the microphone to determine the system’s response);
“responsive to determining that the noise includes the ambient sound, determine a second new volume setting that is less than the first new volume setting” (see Thyssen, ¶ 0062-0063 and 0066-0067 in view of Rodgers, ¶ 0043, where it is obvious that when a user decreases the desired volume and when the amount of ambient noise decreases, the automatic adjustment determines a second volume setting that is less than the first volume setting); and
“responsive to determining that the noise includes speech, determine a third new volume setting that is less than the first and second new volume settings” (see Rodgers, ¶ 0041 and 0043-0044, makes it obvious that when a user’s voice is detected at a whisper, the system further reduces the audio volume to a third volume setting).
Regarding claim 17, see the preceding rejection with respect to claims 2 and 16 above. Thyssen teaches the non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 16, but does not appear to teach that the user preference learning module is a machine learning module. For the same reasons as stated above with respect to claim 2, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify Thyssen with the teachings of Rodgers for the purpose of improving automatic volume control in various different contexts (see Rodgers, ¶ 0006 and 0027).
Therefore, the combination of Thyssen and Rodgers makes obvious the “non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 16, wherein the instructions to determine the second volume setting includes using at least one of the noise level, the content level, and historical behavior data as input into a machine learning model that produces the second volume setting as output” (see Thyssen, ¶ 0059 and 0073 in view of Rodgers, ¶ 0041, 0043-0044, and 0054, makes obvious that a machine learning model is used to determine the second volume level based on one or more of the ambient noise or audio level, the current audio level, and/or historical user volume adjustments).
Claim(s) 5-7 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thyssen as applied to claims 1 and 16 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (US 2022/0294405 A1 and hereafter Lee).
Regarding claim 5, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. Thyssen teaches the method of claim 1, but does not appear to explicitly teach a second value where the second value causes the second volume setting to be greater than the first volume when a single adjustment increases the first volume by a first value that separates each pair of adjacent volume settings and where the second value is different than the first value.
Lee teaches automatic volume adaptation to environmental noise using both analog and digital gain values (see Lee, abstract and figures 1A-1C). Lee teaches that adjacent volume levels are separated by a first value (see Lee, abstract, figure 1B, and ¶ 0028), and teaches that the volume automatically changes by a second value when background noise is increased (see Lee, figures 2A-2C and ¶ 0031-0033). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify Thyssen with the teachings of Lee to improve the automatic volume adjustments based on the detected environmental noise (see Thyssen, ¶ 0059-0060 in view of Lee, ¶ 0019).
Therefore, the combination of Thyssen and Lee makes obvious the “method of claim 1, wherein each pair of adjacent volume settings is separated by a first value, wherein the single adjustment is to increase the first volume setting by the first value” (see Thyssen, ¶ 0056 in view of Lee, ¶ 0021 and 0028, where the user manually controls the volume in incremental steps), “and the second volume setting is greater than the first volume setting by a second value that is different than the first value” (see Lee, figures 2A-2C, and ¶ 0019 and 0031-0033, where it is obvious to increase the first volume to a second volume setting by different steps in the presence of increased environmental noise).
Regarding claim 6, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 5 above. The combination makes obvious the “method of claim 5, wherein the second value is greater than the first value, wherein the method further comprises:
receiving another single adjustment to the volume control to decrease the second volume setting by the first value” (see Thyssen, ¶ 0056 and 0066-0067 in view of Lee, figures 4C and 5C, and ¶ 0040 and 0045, where the user increases or decreases the volume according to their desire); and
“determining, based at least in part on the historical data and the second volume setting, a third volume setting that is less than the second volume setting by a third value that is less than the second value” (see Thyssen, ¶ 0066-0067 in view of Lee, figures 4D and 5D, and ¶ 0041 and 0046, where it is obvious that the historical volume data and the ambient noise levels are used to determine a third volume that is less than the second).
Regarding claim 7, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 6 above. The combination makes obvious the “method of claim 6 further comprising determining that the noise level within the ambient environment has not increased above a threshold since a previous adjustment to the volume control has been received, wherein responsive to determining that the noise level has not increased, the third value is determined to be less than the first value” (see Thyssen, ¶ 0066-0067 in view of Lee, figures 3A-3C and 5C-5D, and ¶ 0035-0036 and 0045-0046, where it is obvious to decrease the volume as the SNR increases).
Regarding claim 18, see the preceding rejection with respect to claims 5 and 16 above. Thyssen teaches the non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 16, but does not appear to explicitly teach a second value where the second value causes the second volume setting to be greater than the first volume when a single adjustment increases the first volume by a first value that separates each pair of adjacent volume settings and where the second value is different than the first value. For the same reasons as stated above with respect to claim 5, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify Thyssen with the teachings of Lee to improve the automatic volume adjustments based on the detected environmental noise (see Thyssen, ¶ 0059-0060 in view of Lee, ¶ 0019).
Therefore, the combination of Thyssen and Lee makes obvious the “non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 16, wherein each pair of adjacent volume settings in the plurality of sequential volume settings is separated by a first value, wherein the single adjustment is to increase the first volume setting by the first value” (see Thyssen, ¶ 0056 in view of Lee, ¶ 0021 and 0028, where the user manually controls the volume in incremental steps), “and the second volume setting is greater than the first volume setting by a second value that is different than the first value” (see Lee, figures 2A-2C, and ¶ 0019 and 0031-0033, where it is obvious to increase the first volume to a second volume setting by different steps in the presence of increased environmental noise).
Regarding claim 19, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 18 above. The combination makes obvious the “non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 18, wherein the second value is greater than the first value, wherein the non-transitory machine-readable medium includes further instructions to:
receive another single adjustment to the volume control to decrease the second volume setting by the first value” (see Thyssen, ¶ 0056 and 0066-0067 in view of Lee, figures 4C and 5C, and ¶ 0040 and 0045, where the user increases or decreases the volume according to their desire); and
“determine, based at least in part on the historical data and the second volume setting, a third volume setting that is less than the second volume setting by a third value that is less than the second value” (see Thyssen, ¶ 0066-0067 in view of Lee, figures 4D and 5D, and ¶ 0041 and 0046, where it is obvious that the historical volume data and the ambient noise levels are used to determine a third volume that is less than the second).
Regarding claim 20, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 19 above. The combination makes obvious the “non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 19 comprises further instructions to determine that the noise level within the ambient environment has not increased above a threshold since a previous adjustment to the volume control has been received, wherein responsive to determining that the noise level has not increased, the third value is determined to be less than the first value” (see Thyssen, ¶ 0066-0067 in view of Lee, figures 3A-3C and 5C-5D, and ¶ 0035-0036 and 0045-0046, where it is obvious to decrease the volume as the SNR increases).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is 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
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel R Sellers whose telephone number is (571)272-7528. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 10:00-4:00.
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, Fan S Tsang can be reached at (571)272-7547. 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.
/Daniel R Sellers/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2694