Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/605,906

PORTABLE SPEAKER GROUPING WITH CONTROL FEATURE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Mar 15, 2024
Examiner
HOQUE, NAFIZ E
Art Unit
2694
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
BOSE CORPORATION
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
11m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allowance Rate
461 granted / 613 resolved
+13.2% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+23.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
632
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.2%
-35.8% vs TC avg
§103
70.9%
+30.9% vs TC avg
§102
14.8%
-25.2% vs TC avg
§112
5.3%
-34.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 613 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 12 recites “wherein the plurality of additional audio devices”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as claim 1 only mentions “at least one additional audio device”. Furthermore, it is not clear what happens where there is only one additional device and not plurality of additional device. Or perhaps claim 12 should depend from claim 11? Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claims 1-7, 9-14, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sony (“Help Guide Wireless Speaker SRS-XB31”). Regarding claim 1, Sony discloses an audio device, comprising: a body housing an electro-acoustic transducer (see images of page 1 and 4); a controller for controlling the electro-acoustic transducer (see images of page 4); and an actuatable control feature on the body (see page 4, button 9) configured to control audio output from an audio source at the electro-acoustic transducer in a plurality of modes (page 43 – “Switching between double mode and stereo mode”), wherein, in a first of the plurality of modes, the audio output includes a subset of channels of the audio source, output in coordination with at least one additional audio device (pages 43-44 – such as stereo mode), and in a second of the plurality of modes, the audio output includes an entirety of the channels of the audio source, output in synchrony with the at least one additional audio device (pages 43-44 – such as double mode). Regarding claim 2, Sony discloses wherein in a third of the plurality of modes, the audio output includes the entirety of the channels of the audio source, output independently of the at least one additional audio device (see page 45). Regarding claim 3, Sony discloses wherein the first mode includes a stereo mode, wherein in the stereo mode, the audio device outputs one of a left channel or a right channel of the audio source (see page 40, stereo mode). Regarding claim 4, Sony discloses wherein the second mode includes a party mode, and wherein the audio output in the second mode is spatially independent of the synchronized output at the at least one additional audio device (see page 40, double mode). Regarding claim 5, Sony discloses wherein the controller is configured to provide feedback at the audio device about operation in the plurality of modes, wherein the feedback includes at least one of visual feedback, audible feedback, or haptic feedback (see page 43). Regarding claim 6, Sony discloses wherein the controller is configured to provide a series of voice prompts in response to actuation of the actuatable control feature, the series of voice prompts indicating a distinction between the plurality of modes, wherein in the first mode the series of voice prompts indicate which of the subset of channels of the audio source are associated with the audio device, and wherein in the second mode the series of voice prompts indicate the output is in synchrony with the at least one additional audio device (see pages 40-44 – voice guidance outputs). Regarding claim 7, Sony discloses wherein the controller is further configured, in response to a first actuation of the control feature, to default to the first mode when the at least one additional audio device is acoustically similar to the audio device (see page 40 – “Double mode is the initial setting” and “To use the Speaker Add function, two SRS-XB31 speakers are required”). Regarding claim 9, Sony discloses wherein the controller is further configured to disconnect the audio device and the at least one additional audio device in response to a press-and-hold command at the control feature (page 45). Regarding claim 10, Sony discloses wherein the control feature enables switching between the plurality of operating modes without disconnecting the audio device and the at least one additional audio device (pages 43-44). Regarding claim 11, Sony discloses wherein in the second mode the audio is output in synchrony with at least two additional audio devices (see page 46). Regarding claim 12, Sony discloses wherein the plurality of additional audio devices each include a control feature, and in response to actuation of the control feature at the audio device, the controller is configured to select, among the audio device and the plurality of additional audio devices, a controlling paired device list (PDL) for the audio output, wherein selecting the controlling PDL is based on at least one of, primacy of actuation of the respective control features among the audio device and the plurality of additional audio devices, or primacy of connection with the audio source, wherein a PDL for each additional speaker defers to the controlling PDL until an override command is received, and wherein the override command in the first mode is distinct from the override command in the second mode (see pages 43-44 – whichever speaker presses the ADD button becomes the controlling one and becomes the right channel and overrides when ADD button is pressed on the second speaker). Regarding claim 13, Sony discloses wherein the at least one additional audio device is selected for control by the audio device based on at least one of, proximity to the audio device or acoustic similarity between the audio device and the at least one additional audio device (page 40). Regarding claim 14, Sony discloses wherein the actuatable control feature includes a fixture on the body, wherein the fixture includes at least one of a button, a dial, or a slider, and wherein the fixture includes a visual feedback element for indicating a distinction between operation in the plurality of modes (see page 4 and 44 –ADD button with indicator). Regarding claim 16, see rejection of claim 1. Regarding claim 17, see rejection of claim 2. Regarding claim 18, Sony discloses wherein, the first mode includes a stereo mode, and wherein in the stereo mode, the audio device outputs one of a left channel or a right channel of the audio source, and the second mode includes a party mode, and wherein the audio output in the second mode is spatially independent of the synchronized output at the at least one additional audio device (see pages 40, 43-44 – double mode and stereo mode). Regarding claim 19, see rejection of claim 5. Regarding claim 20, see rejection of claim 7. 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 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sony (“Help Guide Wireless Speaker SRS-XB31”) in view of Bose (“Soundlink Flex”). Regarding claim 15, Sony discloses a portable speaker comprising the audio device of claim 1. Sony does not disclose wherein the housing includes a carrying strap Bose does not disclose wherein the housing includes a carrying strap (page 12) Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sony with the teachings of Bose in order to use the strap as a finger loop to easily carry the speaker (Bose, page 12). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 8 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 NAFIZ E HOQUE whose telephone number is (571)270-1811. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5. 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, Ahmad Matar can be reached at (571)272-7488. 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. /NAFIZ E HOQUE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 15, 2024
Application Filed
May 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12639866
PIPELINE FOR GENERATING EDITABLE GRAPHIC DESIGNS FROM NATURAL LANGUAGE PROMPTS
2y 7m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12620393
TECHNOLOGIES FOR LEVERAGING MACHINE LEARNING TO PREDICT EMPATHY FOR IMPROVED CONTACT CENTER INTERACTIONS
2y 7m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12619830
OPTIMIZING PERFORMANCE OF CONVERSATIONAL INTERFACE APPLICATIONS USING EXAMPLE FORGETTING
2y 0m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12621386
INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, AND PROGRAM
2y 1m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12614041
NONVERBAL MESSAGE EXTRACTION AND GENERATION
2y 6m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+23.4%)
3y 1m (~11m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 613 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month