DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/01/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. On Page 8 of 12, Applicant states that Haila is only teaching that there is a cross-fade at a single trigger threshold of 110dB, while their invention has two threshold. However, Fig. 11B and [0058] is teaching a different embodiment, in which system uses the amplitude of the audio signal crossing over a bottom threshold of 90dBSPL and being lower than a upper threshold of 110dBSPL. When the audio signal is within this two threshold it will cross-fade the two microphone signal with a K coefficient that changes bases on how close it the two threshold, with mixing of 50% being at the middle of the two threshold (100dBSPL).
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 1-4 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haila US PG-Pub 2012/0321100 in view of Belov US PG-Pub 2011/0248846.
Regarding claim 1, Haila teaches a digital signal microprocessor ([0048] & [0083]: digital signal processor to store threshold and monitor signal); a first microphone to receive voice input from a user at a first speech decibel range (Fig. 3-302, Fig. 5-302 & [0084]: human voice); a second microphone to receive voice input from a user at a second speech decibel range (Fig. 3-303, Fig. 5-303 & [0084]: human voice); the digital signal microprocessor to generate an audio stream output from the voice input including a mixed audio output, where the digital signal processor executes computer-readable program code of a dual microphone audio mixing module to mix portions of voice input from each of the first microphone and second microphone to the mixed audio output when the voice input detected at the first microphone exceeds a low decibel range threshold for the first microphone and the audio detected at the second microphone falls below a high decibel range threshold for the second microphone (Fig. 5 & Fig. 6 & Fig. 11B & [0058]: when the audio signal is between 90dBSPL (exceeded low decibel range threshold) and 110 dBSPL (falls below a high decibel range threshold) it will mix both microphone audio signal using a variable K where both microphone provide 50% of their output when within the middle of the two range [100dBSPL]).
Haila failed to teach a microphone system power management unit (PMU) to provide power to the digital signal microprocessor.
However, Belov teaches a microphone system power management unit (PMU) to provide power to the digital signal microprocessor (Fig. 1 & [0102]: PMU to power micro-controller and sensors).
Haila and Belov are analogous art because they are both in the same field of endeavor, namely microphone devices. Therefore, 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, because a PMU allows for better management of power in any system which leads to saving power.
Regarding claim 2, Haila teaches a high gain amplifier operatively coupled to the first microphone to increase the amplitude of the signal received at the first microphone to receive the voice input in a lower decibel range than the second microphone ([0009] & [0061] & [0068]: having amplifiers to amplify the output signal coming from the microphones to make the outputs approximately the same amplitude; meaning the low amplitude signal will need to get amplify a lot).
While Haila failed to explicitly teach and a first dynamic range controller operatively coupled to the high gain amplifier to set the low decibel range threshold for the first microphone.
However, Haila teaches the processor setting the thresholds ([0048]: threshold value are store and set by the digital signal processor). Therefore, 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, because as in an inventor choice to select what part of a circuit will set the threshold but no unexpected result will arise.
Regarding claim 3, Haila taches a low gain amplifier operatively coupled to the second microphone to increase the amplitude of the signal received at the second microphone to receive the voice input in a higher decibel range than the first microphone ([0009] & [0061] & [0068]: having amplifiers to amplify the output signal coming from the microphones to make the outputs approximately the same amplitude; meaning the high amplitude signal will get amplify a little).
While, Haila failed to explicitly teaches and a second dynamic range controller operatively coupled to the low gain amplifier to set the high decibel range threshold for the second microphone.
However, Haila teaches the processor setting the thresholds ([0048]: threshold value are store and set by the digital signal processor). Therefore, 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, because as in an inventor choice to select what part of a circuit will set the threshold but no unexpected result will arise.
Regarding claim 4, Haila teaches wherein the high decibel range threshold is 110 decibels and the low decibel range threshold is 90 decibels ([0058]: Upper threshold is 110 dBSPL and lower threshold is 90 dBSPL).
While, Haila failed to explicitly teach high is 90 decibels and low is 90 decibels. However, Haila does teach that the threshold can be change from 100 dBSPL to 90 dBSPL for the upper threshold ([0050] & [0087]). Therefore, 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, because both ranges is 20dBSPL wide and having the specific threshold value has to do with the microphones clipping/distortion characteristic.
Regarding claim 7, Haila teaches wherein the execution of the computer-readable program code of the dual microphone audio mixing module by the digital signal microprocessor outputs the audio stream output, including a first audio stream from the first microphone when the voice input falls below the low decibel range threshold and a second audio stream from the second microphone when the voice input exceeds the high decibel range threshold to an information handling system (Fig. 11B & [0058] & [0083] & [0085]: the audio stream will be just one microphone when the audio signal goes below 90dBSPL and when it goes above 100dBSPL it will use only the second microphone, the output audio streams are used with processors on mobile telephone to be able to do difference processes with the audio signal).
Claim 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haila US PG-Pub 2012/0321100 in combination with Belov US PG-Pub 2011/0248846 in view of Brennan US PG-Pub 2003/0108214.
Regarding claim 5, the combination teaches the digital signal microprocessor executing computer-readable program code for mixing first microphone and second microphone audio output (Haila, Fig. 6 & Claim 1 & [0084]: summing both microphones using different coefficient once the audio signal is within the lower and upper thresholds).
The combination failed to teach anti-echo cancelation and noise reduction module to process the audio stream output from the first microphone or the second microphone including the mixed audio output.
However, Brennan teaches anti-echo cancelation and noise reduction module to process the audio stream output from the first microphone or the second microphone including the mixed audio output (Fig. 2 & [0040]: using two microphones and also the combined signal to then use LMS algorithm for noise cancellation and can also do echo cancellation).
The combination and Brennan are analogous art because they are both in the same field of endeavor, namely audio processing. Therefore, 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, because performing any noise or echo cancellation well-known techniques in the audio art, to microphone signals helps to eliminate unwanted noise.
Claim 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haila US PG-Pub 2012/0321100 in combination with Belov US PG-Pub 2011/0248846 in view of Brennan US PG-Pub 2003/0108214 and further in view of Ramakrishnan US PG-Pub 2011/0081026.
Regarding claim 6, the combination teaches the digital signal microprocessor to execute computer readable program code (Haila, Fig. 6 & Claim 1 & [0084]: summing both microphones using different coefficient once the audio signal is within the lower and upper thresholds) to maintain the audio stream output from an anti-echo cancelation and noise reduction (Fig. 2 & [0040]: using two microphones and also the combined signal to then use LMS algorithm for noise cancellation and can also do echo cancellation).
The combination failed to teach automatic gain control module to an operatively coupled information handling system.
However, Ramakrishnan teaches automatic gain control module to an operatively coupled information handling system (Fig. 4 & [0053]: having a AGC after the echo canceller and Noise canceller, so adjust magnitude of signal to be pass to the next section).
The combination and Ramakrishnan are analogous art because they are both in the same field of endeavor, namely audio processing. Therefore, 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, because AGC are commonly used to adjust the magnitude or volume of noise suppressed audio signal as Ramakrishnan teaches on [0055].
Claim 8-11 and 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haila US PG-Pub 2012/0321100 in view of Olsson US PG-Pub 2016/0105755.
Regarding claim 8 and 15, Haila teaches a digital signal microprocessor ([0048] & [0083]: digital signal processor to store threshold and monitor signal) and at least one speaker ([0085]: speaker phone, has loudspeaker); a first microphone to receive voice input from a user at a first speech decibel range (Fig. 3-302, Fig. 5-302 & [0084]: human voice) and a second microphone to receive the voice input from the user at a second speech decibel range Fig. 3-303, Fig. 5-303 & [0084]: human voice); and the digital signal microprocessor to execute computer-readable program code of a dual microphone audio mixing module to mix portions of voice input from each of the first microphone and second microphone into a mixed audio output when the voice input detected at the first microphone exceeds a low decibel range threshold for the first microphone and the voice detected at the second microphone falls below a high decibel range threshold for the second microphone (Fig. 5 & Fig. 6 & Fig. 11B & [0058]: when the audio signal is between 90dBSPL (exceeded low decibel range threshold) and 110 dBSPL (falls below a high decibel range threshold) it will mix both microphone audio signal using a variable K where both microphone provide 50% of their output when within the middle of the two range [100dBSPL]).
Haila failed to teach headset and microphones mounted to boom of the headset.
However, Olsson teaches headset and microphones mounted to boom of the headset (Fig. 3a & [0177]: a headset with two microphone on the boom, with one closer to user mouth and another farther from user mouth).
Haila and Olsson are analogous art because they are both in the same field of endeavor, namely microphone devices. Therefore, 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, because mounting microphones on a headset and having them in the boom allows for better capture of a user’s voice.
Regarding claim 9, Haila teaches with a high gain amplifier operatively coupled to the first microphone, increasing the amplitude of the signal received at the first microphone to receive the voice input in a lower decibel range than the second microphone ([0009] & [0061] & [0068]: having amplifiers to amplify the output signal coming from the microphones to make the outputs approximately the same amplitude; meaning the low amplitude signal will need to get amplify a lot).
While Haila failed to explicitly teach setting the low decibel range threshold for the first microphone at a first dynamic range controller operatively coupled to the high gain amplifier.
However, Haila teaches the processor setting the thresholds ([0048]: threshold value are store and set by the digital signal processor). Therefore, 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, because as in an inventor choice to select what part of a circuit will set the threshold but no unexpected result will arise.
Regarding claim 10, Haila teaches with a low gain amplifier operatively coupled to the second microphone, increasing the amplitude of the signal received at the second microphone to receive the voice input in a higher decibel range than the first microphone ([0009] & [0061] & [0068]: having amplifiers to amplify the output signal coming from the microphones to make the outputs approximately the same amplitude; meaning the high amplitude signal will get amplify a little).
While, Haila failed to explicitly teach setting the high decibel range threshold for the second microphone at a second dynamic range controller operatively coupled to the low gain amplifier.
However, Haila teaches the processor setting the thresholds ([0048]: threshold value are store and set by the digital signal processor). Therefore, 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, because as in an inventor choice to select what part of a circuit will set the threshold but no unexpected result will arise.
Regarding claim 11, Haila teaches executing computer-readable program code, via the digital signal microprocessor, of a low and high threshold detection module to detect when the voice input detected at the first microphone exceeds a low decibel range threshold and the voice input detected at the second microphone falls below a high decibel range and cause the dual microphone audio mixing module to mix the voice input from each of the first microphone and second microphone for further signal processing by the digital signal processor (Fig. 6 & Claim 1 & [0084]: summing both microphones using different coefficient once the audio signal is within the lower and upper thresholds; [0085]: using it the microphone system in a phone so it can be further process by other applications).
Regarding claim 16, Haila teaches a high gain amplifier operatively coupled to the first microphone to increase the amplitude of the signal received at the first microphone ([0009] & [0061] & [0068]: having amplifiers to amplify the output signal coming from the microphones to make the outputs approximately the same amplitude; meaning the low amplitude signal will need to get amplify a lot).
While Haila failed to explicitly teach and a first dynamic range controller operatively coupled to the high gain amplifier to set the low decibel range threshold for the first microphone.
However, Haila teaches the processor setting the thresholds ([0048]: threshold value are store and set by the digital signal processor). Therefore, 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, because as in an inventor choice to select what part of a circuit will set the threshold but no unexpected result will arise.
Regarding claim 17, Haila taches a low gain amplifier operatively coupled to the second microphone to increase the amplitude of the signal received at the second ([0009] & [0061] & [0068]: having amplifiers to amplify the output signal coming from the microphones to make the outputs approximately the same amplitude; meaning the high amplitude signal will get amplify a little).
While, Haila failed to explicitly teaches and a second dynamic range controller operatively coupled to the low gain amplifier to set the high decibel range threshold for the second microphone.
However, Haila teaches the processor setting the thresholds ([0048]: threshold value are store and set by the digital signal processor). Therefore, 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, because as in an inventor choice to select what part of a circuit will set the threshold but no unexpected result will arise.
Regarding claim 18, Haila teaches wherein the execution of the computer-readable program code of the dual microphone audio mixing module by the digital signal microprocessor outputs a first audio stream from the first microphone when the voice input that falls below the low decibel range threshold and second audio stream from the second microphone when the voice input exceeds the high decibel range threshold to the information handling system (Fig. 6 & Claim 1 & [0084]: summing both microphones using different coefficient once the audio signal is within the lower and upper thresholds, but if sound falls below lower threshold only use 1st mic signal and if sound is above upper threshold only use 2nd mic signal).
Regarding claim 19, Haila teaches the digital signal microprocessor to execute computer-readable program code of a low and high threshold detection module to detect when the voice input detected at the first microphone exceeds a low decibel range threshold and when the voice input detected at the second microphone falls below a high decibel range and cause the dual microphone audio mixing module to mix the voice input from each of the first microphone and second microphone into the mixed audio output (Fig. 6 & Claim 1 & [0084]: summing both microphones using different coefficient once the audio signal is within the lower and upper thresholds).
Claim 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haila US PG-Pub 2012/0321100 in combination with Olsson US PG-Pub 2016/0105755 in view of Brennan US PG-Pub 2003/0108214.
Regarding claim 12, the combination teaches the digital signal microprocessor executing computer-readable program code for mixing first microphone and second microphone audio output (Haila, Fig. 6 & Claim 1 & [0084]: summing both microphones using different coefficient once the audio signal is within the lower and upper thresholds).
The combination failed to teach anti-echo cancelation and noise reduction module to process the mixed audio stream output from the dual microphone audio mixing module to reduce echo and noise present in the audio stream from the first microphone and second microphone.
However, Brennan teaches anti-echo cancelation and noise reduction module to process the audio stream output from the first microphone and/or the second microphone including the mixed audio output (Fig. 2 & [0040]: using two microphones and also the combined signal to then use LMS algorithm for noise cancellation and can also do echo cancellation).
The combination and Brennan are analogous art because they are both in the same field of endeavor, namely audio processing. Therefore, 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, because performing any noise or echo cancellation well-known techniques in the audio art, to microphone signals helps to eliminate unwanted noise.
Claim 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haila US PG-Pub 2012/0321100 in combination with Olsson US PG-Pub 2016/0105755 in view of Ramakrishnan US PG-Pub 2011/0081026.
Regarding claim 13, the combination teaches the digital signal microprocessor to execute computer readable program code to output audio signal to an information handling system (Haila, Fig. 6 & Fig. 11B & [0058]: summing both microphones using different coefficient once the audio signal is within the lower and upper thresholds, the output audio streams are used with processors on mobile telephone to be able to do difference processes with the audio signal).
The combination failed to teach automatic gain control module to maintain a signal output from the anti-echo cancelation and noise reduction module.
However, Ramakrishnan teaches automatic gain control module to maintain a signal output from the anti-echo cancelation and noise reduction module (Fig. 4 & [0053]: having a AGC after the echo canceller and Noise canceller, so adjust magnitude of signal to be pass to the next section).
The combination and Ramakrishnan are analogous art because they are both in the same field of endeavor, namely audio processing. Therefore, 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, because AGC are commonly used to adjust the magnitude or volume of noise suppressed audio signal as Ramakrishnan teaches on [0055].
Regarding claim 14, Haila teaches wherein the executing of the computer- readable program code of the dual microphone audio mixing module by the digital signal microprocessor generates a first audio stream from a first microphone when the voice input falls below the low decibel range threshold and a second audio stream from the second microphone when the voice input exceeds the high decibel range threshold for transmission to the an information handling system (Fig. 11B & [0058] & [0083] & [0085]: the audio stream will be just one microphone when the audio signal goes below 90dBSPL and when it goes above 100dBSPL it will use only the second microphone, the output audio streams are used with processors on mobile telephone to be able to do difference processes with the audio signal).
Claim 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haila US PG-Pub 2012/0321100 in combination with Olsson US PG-Pub 2016/0105755 in view of Stearns US Pat 4,310,732.
Regarding claim 20, the combination teaches a headband operatively coupled to a first earpiece and a second earpiece; and the boom including a mouthpiece operatively coupled to the first earpiece at a first end of the mouthpiece, wherein the mouthpiece orients the first microphone and second the microphone a locations in front of the user’s mouth (Olsson, Fig 3a: the headband with two earpieces with the boom having two microphone in front of user’s mouth).
The combination failed to teach the mouthpiece operatively coupled to the second earpiece at a second end of the mouthpiece.
However, Stearns teaches the mouthpiece operatively coupled to the second earpiece at a second end of the mouthpiece (Fig. 1: having a mouthpiece that coupled to both the first and second earpiece).
The combination and Stearns are analogous art because they are both in the same field of endeavor, namely microphone devices. Therefore, 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, because coupling the mouthpiece to both earpiece provide a more secure connection.
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 WILLIAM A JEREZ LORA whose telephone number is (571)270-5519. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am-9am and 11am-6pm.
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, Vivian Chin can be reached at 571-272-7848. 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.
/WILLIAM A JEREZ LORA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695
Prosecution Insights