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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 7/10/24 has been considered.
Drawings
The drawings filed 3/29/24 are acceptable to the examiner
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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) 1-3, 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lehnert et al. (US 2021/0067892 A1) in view of Mulvey et al. (US 2010/0054519 A1).
Re claim 1: Lehnert et al. teaches a playback device (see figure 1C) that includes one or more speakers (114), one or more amplifiers (112h) a line-in port (111), paragraph [0039] which can also be wireless connection, at least one processor (112a) and a medium storing instructions (112b), paragraph [0043] and a display (paragraph [0041]).
Lehnert et al. however does not teach that the display is used to display, for a time period, via the at least one visual context indicator, visual feedback based on the playback device being coupled to an audio source via the line-in connector and the line-in port, and output, via the one or more amplifiers and the one or more speakers, audio feedback based on the playback device being coupled to the audio source via the line-in connector and the line-in port.
Mulvey et al. teaches in a similar environment of playback devices that visual and audio indicators (paragraph [0025] informing a user of connecting states of an audio source with the playback device) with the visual indicator being for a time period (see discussion in paragraphs [0017-0019] for time periods of the visual indicator for each of the connection states; thereby providing a visual and audible status of such connections to a user of the device.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to incorporate such features taught by Mulvey et al. into the device arrangement of Lehnert et al. to predictably provide a visual and audible status of such connections to a user of the device. Therefor the claimed subject matter would have been obvious before the filing of the invention.
Re claim 2: the claimed initialization time period corresponds to the “connecting” time period as discussed in paragraph [0018] of Mulvey et al. after which the visual feedback for the period is stopped and replaced by indication of connection as discussed in paragraph [0019] with playback control being taught in Lehnert et al. discussed with respect to claim 1.
Re claim 3: note the visual indicators used in Mulvey et al. are comprised of at least the illumination of one light emitting diode (LED), paragraph [0017] satisfying the alternatively claimed language as set forth
Re claim 6: note the at least one processor (112a) and a medium storing instructions (112b), paragraph [0043] taught in Lehnert et al. to provide overall control of audio playback would when combined with the teaching of Mulvey et al. as applied allow the playback of audio at the end of the end of a time period and while in the connected state as discussed by Mulvey et al.
Re claim 7: the claimed one or more audible tones is deemed taught in Mulvey et al. when providing audio feedback with various sounds as taught in paragraph [0025]
Re claim 8: note the playback device (s) used in Lehnert et al. are portable as set forth (paragraph [0037], can be positioned in different rooms
Claim(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lehnert et al. (US 2021/0067892 A1) in view of Mulvey et al. (US 2010/0054519 A1) as applied to claims 1-3 and 6-8 above, and further in view of Li (US2019/0286593 A1).
Re claims 4-5: the teaching of Lehnert et al. (US 2021/0067892 A1) in view of Mulvey et al. (US 2010/0054519 A1) is discussed above and incorporated herein. This combination does not teach that the line-in port is a type-C (USB-C) port (claim 4) or the use of this connector with a 3.5 mm connector (claim 5). Li et al. teaches in a similar environment of audio devices that a connector cable assembly includes a universal serial bus type-C (USB-C) connection at one end and a 3.5 mm connection at another end, paragraph [0030] are used to establish connections between devices having different types of connector plugs. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to incorporate such a cable connector as taught by Li into the arrangement of Lehnert et al. in view of Mulvey et al. as applied to predictably provide connections between devices having different types of connector plugs. Therefor the claimed subject matter would have been obvious before the filing of the invention.
Claim(s) 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lehnert et al. (US 2021/0067892 A1) in view of Mulvey et al. (US 2010/0054519 A1) and further in view of Li (US2019/0286593 A1).
Re claim 14: Lehnert et al. teaches a playback device (see figure 1C) that includes one or more speakers (114), one or more amplifiers (112h), a line-in port (111), paragraph [0039] which can also be wireless connection, at least one processor (112a) and a medium storing instructions (112b), paragraph [0043] and a display (paragraph [0041]). Lehnert et al. however does not teach that the display is used to display with at least on light emitting diode (LED), for a time period, via the at least one visual context indicator, visual feedback based on the playback device being coupled to an audio source via the line-in connector and the line-in port, and output, via the one or more amplifiers and the one or more speakers, audio feedback based on the playback device being coupled to the audio source via the line-in connector and the line-in port. Mulvey et al. teaches in a similar environment of playback devices that visual and audio indicators (paragraph [0025] informing a user of connecting states of an audio source with the playback device) with the visual indicator using at least one LED being for a time period (see discussion in paragraphs [0017-0019] for time periods of the visual indicator for each of the connection states; thereby providing a visual and audible status of such connections to a user of the device). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to incorporate such features taught by Mulvey et al. into the device arrangement of Lehnert et al. to predictably provide a visual and audible status of such connections to a user of the device. Therefor the claimed subject matter would have been obvious before the filing of the invention. This combination however does not teach that the connector includes a universal serial bus type-C (USB-C) connector and a 3.5 mm connector as set forth. Li et al. teaches in a similar environment of audio devices that a connector cable assembly includes a universal serial bus type-C (USB-C) connection at one end and a 3.5 mm connection at another end, paragraph [0030] are used to establish connections between devices having different types of connector plugs. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to incorporate such a cable connector as taught by Li into the arrangement of Lehnert et al. in view of Mulvey et al. as applied to predictably provide connections between devices having different types of connector plugs. Therefor the claimed subject matter would have been obvious before the filing of the invention.
Re claim 15: note the at least one processor (112a) and a medium storing instructions (112b), paragraph [0043] taught in Lehnert et al. to provide overall control of audio playback would when combined with the teaching of Mulvey et al. as applied allow the playback of audio at the end of the end of a time period and while in the connected state as discussed by Mulvey et al.
Re claim 16: note the visual indicators used in Mulvey et al. are comprised of at least the illumination of one light emitting diode (LED), paragraph [0017] satisfying the alternatively claimed language as set forth
Re claim 17: the claimed one or more audible tones is deemed taught in Mulvey et al. when providing audio feedback with various sounds as taught in paragraph [0025]
Re claim 18: note the at least one processor (112a) and a medium storing instructions (112b), paragraph [0043] taught in Lehnert et al. provides overall control of audio playback would when combined with the teaching of Mulvey et al. as applied allow the playback of audio at the end of the end of a time period and while in the connected state as discussed by Mulvey et al. including USB-C connections taught by Li as discussed with respect to claim 14
Re claim 19: note in Lehnert et al. audio can be received using an ethernet connector (paragraph [0046-0047])
Re claim 20: note the at least one processor (112a) and a medium storing instructions (112b), paragraph [0043] taught in Lehnert et al. provides overall control of audio playback would when combined with the teaching of Mulvey et al. as applied allow the playback of audio at the end of the end of a time period and while establishing connection, i.e. in the connecting state as discussed by Mulvey et al. including ethernet connections taught by Lehnert et al.
Claim(s) 9-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mulvey et al. in view of Lehnert et al.
Re claim 9: Mulvey et al. teaches a method of providing information to a user of a playback device comprising: detecting connection (connecting state i.e. transitioning from a connecting state to a connected state, paragraph [0025] of an audio source (28) to the playback device (20) to obtain audio, allowing the playback device to obtain audio content during initialization, i.e. a connecting state; during this initialization period provide audio and visual feedback (see discussion in paragraph [0018] along with paragraph [0025] teaching both visual and audio feedback; and after completing of the initialization period playback audio, i.e. after transitioning to a connected state, paragraph [0019]. In Mulvey et al. connection between the audio source and playback device is through a wireless connection and not a line-in connector as set forth. Lehnert et al. teaches in a similar environment that connectors (111) used to obtain audio from a source can include both wireless and line-in connectors providing alternative means for obtaining audio. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to incorporate this teaching of Lehnert et al. into the arrangement of Mulvey et al. to predictably provide alternative means for obtaining audio. Therefor the claimed subject matter would have been obvious before the filing of the invention.
Re claim 10: note in Mulvey et al. the audio feedback includes one or more audible tones (various sounds can be produced, paragraph [0025])
Re claim 11: see teaching in Mulvey et al. of the use of at least one LED is used by oscillating is illumination (paragraph [0017] satisfying the alternative languge of flashing the LED as set forth
Re claim 12: note the visual indication in Mulvey et al. occurs for a duration of time as discussed in paragraphs [0017-0018] depending on the connection state.
Re claim 13: the claimed initialization time period corresponds to the “connecting” time period as discussed in paragraph [0018] of Mulvey et al. after which the visual feedback for the period is stopped and replaced by indication of connection as discussed in paragraph [0019]
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW SNIEZEK whose telephone number is (571)272-7563. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00 AM-3:30 PM EST.
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.
/ANDREW SNIEZEK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
/A.S./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693 2/18/26