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 Amendment
2. Applicant has corrected Claim 16, thus the objection of the claim is withdrawn.
3. Applicant has amended the claims to recite at least a mixed audio signal and first and second signals having different content. Applicant is directed to the disclosure of U.S. Pat. No. 9,675,871 to Jetter for his consideration.
Claim Objections
4. Claims 1 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
a. Claim 1, Line 11: Change “mixed audio” to – a mixed audio --.
b. Claim 19, Line 1: Remove “the device and”.
c. Claim 19, Line 2: Change “are” to – is --.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §§ 102/103
5. 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.
6. Claims 1-2, 8, 11-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1, a2) as anticipated
by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over U.S. Pat. No. 9,675,871 to Jetter
further in view of U.S. Pat. No. 2021/0249758 to van Erven.
In Reference to Claim 1 and 11
Jetter discloses a head-wearable listening device (“During game play, a user wants a better audio experience without the need to be physically tethered to a gaming device. Moreover, serious gamers require the ability to converse with other gamers at remote locations and listen to game audio simultaneously through the use of a headset.” Col. 1, ll. 5-12, Col. 1, ll. 19-22), comprising:
a left {right} speaker assembly configured to engage a left {right} ear (Fig. 1 wireless headphones 160, “speakers of the headset” Col. 4, ll. 64-65, Fig. 2 speakers 295);
a wireless receiver configured to receive first wireless signals from a first source of audio and configured to operate at a frequency and/or protocol (Fig. 1 wireless headset 160/Fig. 2 headset 260, receiving with transceiver 285 game audio A {first wireless signals} via a transceiver 130 from a video game application {first source} on a PC 120 Col. 5, ll. 33-44, Col. 6, ll. 1-7, see also “game audio” Col. 4, ll. 1-8 and prior art Col. 2, LL. 7-11, where “The transceiver 285 of the headset 260 may be capable of both receiving and transmitting audio signals (digital or analog) at any {first} frequency known in the art, but should be compatible with the PC transceiver 130. Col. 8, ll. 42-47);
the first wireless receiver configured to receive second wireless signals from a second source of audio, different from the first source of audio, the second wireless signals having content different from the first wireless signals, and configured to operate at a second frequency and/or second protocol (Fig. 1 wireless headset 160/Fig. 2 headset 260, receiving with transceiver 285 chat audio B {second wireless signals} via the transceiver 130 from a network 110 source {second source of audio different from the first source of audio, where the second signals having content different from the first signals, see “network chat” Col. 4, ll. 14-25 and Col. 6, ll. 8-19, see also prior art where “Thus, when a user plays a video game on a PC, the video game software outputs the video game audio stream including music, sound effects, and the like associated with the game itself, and the communication program outputs the network chat audio stream (e.g., from a teammate or opponent using the same communication program).” Col. 2, ll. 11-25, where “The transceiver 285 of the headset 260 may be capable of both receiving and transmitting audio signals (digital or analog) at any {second} frequency known in the art, but should be compatible with the PC transceiver 130. Col. 8, ll. 42-47);
a processor assembly configured to mix the first wireless signals and the second wireless signals to establish a mixed audio signal at least in part according to information from a computer simulation {game program}(Fig. 2 Audio Mixing Module 280, where “the two streams/signals are mixed together by audio mixing model 280” to transmit a blended audio output signal A+B Col. 6, ll. 34-45, the information for game audio A coming from a communication program running on a gaming device 120 Col. 5, ll. 37-38, based on “game audio A may originate from a video game software/program running on the gaming device 120 when a user 100 launches the video game program.” {computer simulation} Col. 6, ll. 1-7, Col. 8, LL. 29-47, Col. 8, ll. 57-62); and
provide the mixed audio signal to the speak assemblies for transducing the mixed audio signals (“The mixing module 280 generates a blended audio signal incorporating any modifications to the game audio and network chat signals received from the transceiver 285, and the blended audio signal is then sent to the speakers 295, which reproduce the signals as audible sound to the user.” Col. 8, ll. 57-62).
Jetter discloses in Figs. 1 and 2, a system with a single transceiver 285 {wireless receiver} which operate on any frequency but also discloses “It will be appreciated that the game audio A and network chat B may be sent and received by individual components of the exemplary system both independently of each other and/or simultaneously.” Col. 6, ll. 41-45). Examiner interprets this as disclosing first and second wireless receivers operating at respective {first, second} frequencies.
If Applicant disagrees with Examiner’s understanding of Jetter as to first and second transceivers and first and second frequencies, Applicant is directed to the teachings of van Erven.
Van Erven teaches of headphone devices with multiple operational modes and diverse antenna switching policies (Abstr.). Figs. 2A and 5 teach of communication circuitry 247 within a headphone device [0019] including separate antenna receivers 244a and 244b. According to van Erven, “In some embodiments, the antennas 244a and 244b are multi-band antennas configured to operate on several frequency bands (e.g., the 2.4 GHz band and the 5 GHz band), such as a dual-band inverted-F antenna (IFA). Further, in some examples, one or more of the antennas 244a and 244b may be passive multi-band antennas. In other examples, one or more of the antennas 244a and 244b may be active multi-band antennas. Still yet further, one of antennas 244a and 244b may be an active multi-band antenna while the other antenna may be a passive multi-band antenna. In other embodiments, one or more of antennas 244a and 244b may be single-band antennas configured to operate on a single frequency band (e.g., the 2.4 GHz band and the 5 GHz band.” [0085]). Van Erven invents this device to because “One approach to improve the wireless performance of headphones is to integrate multiple antennas into the headphone including at least one antenna in each earpiece to provide spatial and pattern diversity.” [0031] and “It should be appreciated that the antenna switching techniques described herein to, for example, provide improved Wi-Fi performance that meets (or exceeds) user expectations may be readily applied to other wireless communication schemes to further enhance wireless performance (e.g., to substantially exceed user expectations).” [0033]).
The Supreme Court in KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) identified a number of rationales to support a conclusion of obviousness
(A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results;
(B) Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results;
(C) Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; and
(D) Applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Here, it would require only routine skill in the art to duplicate receiver parts and frequencies of Jetter with the individual receivers and frequencies of van Erwen to achieve the predictable result of improving wireless performance of headphones. The Courts have held that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results to be indicia of obviousness.
In Reference to Claim 2
Jetter discloses individual receivers can operate at any frequencies Col. 6, ll. 41-45). Further, van Erwen teaches that first and second wireless receivers can be assigned first and second frequencies where the first received is at the 2.4 GHz band and the second receiver is at the 5 GHz band. [0085]).
In Reference to Claim 8
Jetter discloses that the processor is configured establish the mixed audio signal at least in part according to a mix established by a user of the device where ”Moreover, the present invention may allow a gamer to adjust the volume and balance of one or more audio streams received at a headset through the use of one or more controls.” Col. 2, ll. 52-55. See also, Col. 8, ll. 13-19 and “9) The user may adjust the balance between both the network chat and game audio streams, along with the volume of the blended audio output stream. For example, the user may adjust the balance such that only network chat is audible, only game audio is audible, or such that any combination of network chat and game audio is audible. The blended audio output stream may be output to a user's speakers 295 as-is or may be amplified first.” Col. 8, ll. 63-67 and Col. 9, ll. 1-3).
In Reference to Claims 12-15
Examiner deems the limitations referring to a game scenario, state, pixel data, and audio data to be non-functional descriptive matter as whether or not the data is any of the above there is no change to the operation of the claims or result in new functions or properties. Nonetheless, Jetter discloses known video game software that outputs video as well as “music, sound effects and the like associated with the game itself” Col. 2, ll. 19-22 which are a game scenario, state, pixel data, and audio data. Van Erwen also discloses video content [0049].
In Reference to Claim 16
Jetter discloses an apparatus and method (“During game play, a user wants a better audio experience without the need to be physically tethered to a gaming device. Moreover, serious gamers require the ability to converse with other gamers at remote locations and listen to game audio simultaneously through the use of a headset.” Col. 1, ll. 5-12, Col. 1, ll. 19-22), comprising:
at least one non-transitory computer-readable computer storage that comprises instructions executable by at least one processor (According to Jetter, there is not explicit mention of computer storage of instructions for the audio mixing module {processor}. However, Examiner deems that the module necessarily must have storage and instructions because it performs a function to mix the audio signals where as in Fig. 2, Audio Mixing Module 280, “the two streams/signals are mixed together by audio mixing model 280” to transmit a blended audio output signal A+B Col. 6, ll. 34-45);
receiving first signals from a first wireless receiver on a listening device (Fig. 1 wireless headset 160/Fig. 2 headset 260, receiving game audio A {first signals} via a transceiver 285 {first wireless receiver} Col. 5, ll. 33-44, Col. 6, ll. 1-7, see also “game audio” Col. 4, ll. 1-8 and prior art Col. 2, LL. 7-11, where “The transceiver 285 of the headset 260 may be capable of both receiving and transmitting audio signals (digital or analog) at any {first} frequency known in the art, but should be compatible with the PC transceiver 130. Col. 8, ll. 42-47);
receiving second signals from the first wireless receiver on the listening device (Fig. 1 headset 160/Fig. 2 headset 260, receiving chat audio B {second signals} via transceiver 285, see “network chat” Col. 4, LL. 14-25 and Col. 6, LL. 8-19);
mix the first and second signals to generate a mixed audio signal according to information from a computer simulation {game program}(Fig. 2 Audio Mixing Module 280, where “the two streams/signals are mixed together by audio mixing model 280” to transmit a blended audio output signal A+B Col. 6, ll. 34-45, the information for game audio A coming from a communication program running on a gaming device 120 Col. 5, ll. 37-38, based on “game audio A may originate from a video game software/program running on the gaming device 120 when a user 100 launches the video game program.” {computer simulation} Col. 6, ll. 1-7, Col. 8, ll. 29-47, Col. 8, ll. 57-62); and
provide the mixed audio signal to first and second speakers of the listening device (“The mixing module 280 generates a blended audio signal incorporating any modifications to the game audio and network chat signals received from the transceiver 285, and the blended audio signal is then sent to the speakers 295, which reproduce the signals as audible sound to the user.” Col. 8, ll. 57-62, see also “speakers of the headset” Col. 4, ll. 64-65, Fig. 2 speakers 295).
Jetter discloses in Figs. 1 and 2, a system with a single transceiver 285 {wireless receiver} which operate on any frequency but also discloses “It will be appreciated that the game audio A and network chat B may be sent and received by individual components of the exemplary system both independently of each other and/or simultaneously.” Col. 6, ll. 41-45). Examiner interprets this as disclosing first and second wireless receivers operating at respective {first, second} frequencies.
If Applicant disagrees with Examiner’s understanding of Jetter as to first and second transceivers, Applicant is directed to the teachings of van Erven.
Van Erven teaches of headphone devices with multiple operational modes and diverse antenna switching policies (Abstr.). Figs. 2A and 5 teach of communication circuitry 247 within a headphone device [0019] including separate antenna receivers 244a and 244b. According to van Erven, “In some embodiments, the antennas 244a and 244b are multi-band antennas configured to operate on several frequency bands (e.g., the 2.4 GHz band and the 5 GHz band), such as a dual-band inverted-F antenna (IFA). Further, in some examples, one or more of the antennas 244a and 244b may be passive multi-band antennas. In other examples, one or more of the antennas 244a and 244b may be active multi-band antennas. Still yet further, one of antennas 244a and 244b may be an active multi-band antenna while the other antenna may be a passive multi-band antenna. In other embodiments, one or more of antennas 244a and 244b may be single-band antennas configured to operate on a single frequency band (e.g., the 2.4 GHz band and the 5 GHz band.” [0085]). Van Erven invents this device to because “One approach to improve the wireless performance of headphones is to integrate multiple antennas into the headphone including at least one antenna in each earpiece to provide spatial and pattern diversity.” [0031] and “It should be appreciated that the antenna switching techniques described herein to, for example, provide improved Wi-Fi performance that meets (or exceeds) user expectations may be readily applied to other wireless communication schemes to further enhance wireless performance (e.g., to substantially exceed user expectations).” [0033]).
The Supreme Court in KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007) identified a number of rationales to support a conclusion of obviousness
(A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results;
(B) Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results;
(C) Use of known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way; and
(D) Applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results.
Here, it would require only routine skill in the art to duplicate receiver parts and frequencies of Jetter with the individual receivers and frequencies of van Erwen to achieve the predictable result of improving wireless performance of headphones. The Courts have held that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results to be indicia of obviousness.
In Reference to Claim 17
Jetter discloses individual receivers can operate at any frequencies Col. 6, ll. 41-45). Further, van Erwen teaches that first and second wireless receivers can be assigned first and second frequencies where the first received is at the 2.4 GHz band and the second receiver is at the 5 GHz band. [0085]).
In Reference to Claim 19
Jetter discloses the Audio Mixing Module 280 is on the headset 260 (Fig. 2).
In Reference to Claim 20
Jetter discloses a head-wearable listening device (“During game play, a user wants a better audio experience without the need to be physically tethered to a gaming device. Moreover, serious gamers require the ability to converse with other gamers at remote locations and listen to game audio simultaneously through the use of a headset.” Col. 1, ll. 5-12, Col. 1, ll. 19-22), comprising:
receiving, using a listening device, first wireless signals from a first source of audio (Fig. 1 wireless headset 160/Fig. 2 headset 260, receiving with transceiver 285 game audio A {first wireless signals} via a transceiver 130 from a video game application {first source} on a PC 120 Col. 5, ll. 33-44, Col. 6, ll. 1-7, see also “game audio” Col. 4, ll. 1-8 and prior art Col. 2, LL. 7-11);
receiving, using a listening device, second wireless signals from a second source of audio, different from the first source of audio, the second wireless signals having content different from the first wireless signals (Fig. 1 wireless headset 160/Fig. 2 headset 260, receiving with transceiver 285 chat audio B {second wireless signals} via the transceiver 130 from a network 110 source {second source of audio different from the first source of audio, where the second signals having content different from the first signals, see “network chat” Col. 4, ll. 14-25 and Col. 6, ll. 8-19);
mixing outputs representing the first and second wireless signals at least in part according to information from a computer simulation {game program}(Fig. 2 Audio Mixing Module 280, where “the two streams/signals are mixed together by audio mixing model 280” to transmit a blended audio output signal A+B Col. 6, ll. 34-45, the information for game audio A coming from a communication program running on a gaming device 120 Col. 5, ll. 37-38, based on “game audio A may originate from a video game software/program running on the gaming device 120 when a user 100 launches the video game program.” {computer simulation} Col. 6, ll. 1-7, Col. 8, ll. 29-47, Col. 8, ll. 57-62); and
playing the mixed audio signal to plural speakers of the listening device (“The mixing module 280 generates a blended audio signal incorporating any modifications to the game audio and network chat signals received from the transceiver 285, and the blended audio signal is then sent to the speakers 295, which reproduce the signals as audible sound to the user.” Col. 8, ll. 57-62, see also “speakers of the headset” Col. 4, ll. 64-65, Fig. 2 speakers 295).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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 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.
8. 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.
9. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
10. Claim 3-6 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jetter in
view of van Erven.
In Reference to Claims 3, 4, and 18
Van Erven discloses wherein the first wireless receiver is configured to operate using a first protocol and the second wireless receiver is configured to operate using a second protocol (where one protocol is Wi-Fi and the other is BLUETOOTH, "It should be appreciated that the headphone device 200 may employ any number of antennas and is not limited to implementations with only two antennas. For example, the headphone device 200 may comprise two antennas for communication over Wi-Fi and a third antenna for communication over BLUETOOTH. Additionally (or alternatively), the headphone device 200 may comprise an additional antenna to enable near-field communication (NFC).” [0086]).
In Reference to Claims 5 and 6
Van Erven discloses wherein the device comprises left and right ear buds ([0081] "FIG.
2A shows some aspects of an example headphone device 200 according to some embodiments. The headphone device 200 may be implemented as a wearable device
such as over-ear headphones, in-ear headphones, or on-ear headphones. As shown, the headphone device 200 includes a headband 242 that couples a first earpiece 240a to a second earpiece 240b." [0081]; and "As shown in FIG. 2A, the headphone device 200 may further
include ear cushions 245a and 245b that are coupled to earpieces 240 a and 240 b, respectively. The ear cushions 245a and 245b may provide a soft barrier between the head of a user and the earpieces 240a and 240b, respectively, to improve user comfort and/or provide
acoustic Isolation from the surrounding environment (e.g., passive noise reduction (PNR))." [0083]).
11. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jetter in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2005/0053252 to Cohen.
Jetter discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, the reference does not explicitly disclose mixing according to a manufacturer-defined mix. One of skill in the art would be aware of the teachings of Cohen.
Cohen discloses sound transmission pads (abstract) and further discloses mixing according to a manufacturer-defined mix ([0385] "The Equalizer (EQ) function allows the user to filter the mixed audio signal before it is outputted by the speakers. This function can be independently applied to the audio signals sent to each of the Head, Spine, and External speakers and the seat driver."; [0392]-[0393] "Virtual Surround Sound or VSS is the virtual creation of surround sound using the audio data supplied to the head speakers. One can access this function by pressing the VSS button in one of the Head Speaker Control Screens. The user can turn the VSS function on or off by pressing the Virtual Surround Sound status button (it will be labeled "ON" or "OFF" depending on whether this function is turned "ON" or "OFF", respectively). One may press this button to change the status. The user should use the factory default settings in the Mixer when in 5.1 Mode for VSS to function best, but the user should not hesitate to experiment because the user can always press the RD button and restore the default settings.").
Here, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have included the method of mixing audio signals as per the factory/manufacturer settings of Cohen for the system of Jetter because it allows for providing best function of the system under certain output conditions for various spatial characteristics of the sound (Cohen, [0394]-[0396]).
12. Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jetter in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2023/0060642 to Mahlmeister.
In Reference to Claim 9
Jetter discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, the reference does not disclose wherein the processor assembly is configured to establish a mix according to an application programming interface (API).
Mahlmeister discloses a gaming system with a headset (abstract, [0139]) and further discloses wherein the processor assembly is configured to establish a mix output of the first and second wireless receivers ([0043] "One or more aspects of the subject disclosure include receiving a plurality of audio streams from a gaming system and providing, on a display
device of a gamer, a graphical user Interface including an audio mix panel configured to receive audio adjustments for each audio stream of the plurality of audio streams, the audio mix panel including a plurality of selectable views for user interaction by the gamer to modify
audio processing of each audio stream of the plurality of audio streams, the plurality of selectable views including a parametric equalizer and an audio render effects for each audio stream of the plurality of audio streams. "), according to an application programming interface (API) (para [0112] "Contemporaneous to the embodiments described above, the AMS
application can monitor in step 750 for game action results supplied by the gaming application via API messages previously described. For instance, suppose the stimulation sent to the gaming application in step 738 is a command to shoot a pistol. The gaming application can
determine that the shot fired resulted in a miss of a target or a hit. The gaming application can respond with a message which is submitted by way of the API to the AMS application that indicates the shot fired resulted in a miss or a hit.").
Here, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill In the art to have included the method of establishing the mix as per an API as per Mahlmeister for the device of Jetter because it allows for efficiently controlling the mixing as required for the game action
(See Mahlmeister [0112], [0135]).
In Reference to Claim 10
Mahlmeister also wherein the processor assembly is configured to establish a mix output of the first and second wireless receivers according to a machine learning (ML) model. Mahlmeister teaches a gaming system with a headset (abstract, [0139]) and further to establish a mix output of the first and second wireless receivers ([0135] "The computing device 206 operates according to an operating system (OS) for controlling various functions of the computing device 206 including input of data and other information and output of data or other information. The audio processing system 7600 further cooperates with the OS of the computing device to control audio processing, including mixing and equalization of audio streams associated with the computing device 206."), according to a machine learning (ML) model ([0150] "The neural network effects service 7622 provides audio processing of the user audio stream from the chat audio input stream 7604. In some embodiments, the neural network effects service 7624 implements an artificial intelligence routine for customizing one or more audio streams such as the audio stream from the chat audio sources 7620.").
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have included the method of establishing the mix as per a ML model as per Mahlmeister for the system of Jetter because it allows for customizing the audio streams as required (See Mahlmeister [0150]).
Conclusion
11. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee 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.
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Paul A. D’Agostino whose telephone number is (571) 270-1992.
13. 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.
14. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kang Hu can be reached on (571) 270-1344. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-270-2992.
/PAUL A D'AGOSTINO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights