Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/633,689

METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR DETERMINING POSITION AND ORIENTATION OF A DEVICE USING LIGHT BEACONS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Apr 12, 2024
Examiner
SUTHERS, DOUGLAS JOHN
Art Unit
2695
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
BOSE CORPORATION
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
598 granted / 783 resolved
+14.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
799
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.3%
-33.7% vs TC avg
§103
37.6%
-2.4% vs TC avg
§102
17.8%
-22.2% vs TC avg
§112
31.4%
-8.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 783 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION In the response to this office action, the examiner respectfully requests that support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line numbers in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the examiner in prosecuting this application. 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 . Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: Figure 3B shows items 106a’ and 106b’ not mentioned in the specification. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Objections Claims 5 and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 5 states “wherein the wearable audio device is configured to use the measured angles of incidence for object oriented spatial audio rendering (placing objects (virtual audio sources) in an absolute place relative to the beacons)”, which is not proper. As below, parentheses are reserved for citing reference characters and do not affect the scope of the claim. This portion would be better to be not included or worded in manner to positively recite limitations to the claim. See MPEP 608.01(m): “Reference characters corresponding to elements recited in the detailed description and the drawings may be used in conjunction with the recitation of the same element or group of elements in the claims. The reference characters, however, should be enclosed within parentheses so as to avoid confusion with other numbers or characters which may appear in the claims. Generally, the presence or absence of such reference characters does not affect the scope of a claim”. Claim 12 is rejected in an analogous manner. Appropriate correction is required. 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(s) 6 and 8-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eronen et al. (US 2020/0382896 A1). Regarding claim 6, Eronen discloses a system comprising: a source device with a pair of light beacons (paragraph [0167], “tracking the position of the headphones 603 may involve utilising a plurality of beacons/base stations emitting infrared signals from known locations. Such infrared signals may be detected by via an array of infrared sensors, e.g. on the headphones”); and a wearable audio device (headphones 603 of figure 6B and mentioned throughout figures, also 703, 803, 903 of figures 7-9) configured to receive an audio signal from the source device (paragraph [0165]), wherein the wearable audio device is configured to process the audio signals based, at least in part, on information derived from light beams emitted by the light beacons (paragraphs [0165] to [0168]). Although Eronen does not expressly disclose where the light beacons and the audio come from the same device, it would have been obvious to the designer to combine components in any combination at their preference. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further comprise wherein the beacon source and the audio source where the same device in the system of Eronen for the benefit of using the same enclosure and reducing the number of components, as well as esthetic reasons. Regarding claim 8, Eronen discloses wherein the light beacons are infrared light emitters (paragraph [0167]). Regarding claim 9, Eronen discloses wherein the light beacons are infrared light emitters (paragraph [0167]). Regarding claim 10, Eronen discloses wherein the source device is a loudspeaker (various arrangements throughout reference, see at least paragraphs [0156] to [0157]) Although Eronen does not expressly disclose a soundbar, the examiner takes official notice that loudspeakers being arranged in a soundbar was well known in the art. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a soundbar for the loudspeaker in the system of Eronen for the benefit of providing several channels of speakers in a single enclosure. Regarding claim 11, Eronen discloses wherein the system is a conferencing system (paragraph [0216] to [0221], “provide one or more audio/text/video communication functions (e.g. tele-communication, video-communication”, also see paragraph [0142]). Regarding claim 12, Eronen discloses wherein the source device is a display (paragraphs [0095], [0097], [0136], paragraph [0216] to [0221], “provide one or more audio/text/video communication functions (e.g. tele-communication, video-communication”, “portable digital assistants (PDAs), pagers, mobile computers, desktop computers, televisions, gaming devices, laptop computers, cameras, video recorders, GPS devices and other types of electronic systems”, also see paragraph [0142]). Regarding claim 13, Eronen discloses wherein the system is an navigation system (paragraphs [0096], [0217], and [0221], also see paragraph [0216] to [0221]). Although Eronen does not expressly disclose an aviation system, it would have been obvious to the designer that the system may be any system at their preference, especially those that use navigation. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the system of Eronen in an aviation system for the benefit of providing quality audio as desired in an aviation vehicle. Regarding claim 14, although Eronen does not expressly disclose wherein the source device is an instrument panel within a cockpit of an aircraft, it would have been obvious to the designer that the source device may be any device at their preference, including devices of the aviation vehicle of claim 13. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further comprise wherein the source device of Eronen is an instrument panel within a cockpit of an aircraft for the benefit of providing quality audio as desired in an aviation vehicle. Regarding claim 15, Eronen discloses wherein the system is disposed within an automobile (paragraph [0221], “automotive systems”). Regarding claim 16, Eronen discloses wherein the system is a gaming system (paragraphs [0216] to [0221], “gaming devices”, also see paragraphs [0100] to [0102]). Claim(s) 1-5, 7, and 17- 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eronen et al. (US 2020/0382896 A1) in view of Deliwala (US 2009/0279107 A1). Regarding claim 1, Eronen discloses a wearable audio device (headphones 603 of figure 6B and mentioned throughout figures, also 703, 803, 903 of figures 7-9), comprising: a light sensor (paragraph [0167], “tracking the position of the headphones 603 may involve utilising a plurality of beacons/base stations emitting infrared signals from known locations. Such infrared signals may be detected by via an array of infrared sensors, e.g. on the headphones”) configured to measure light from a pair of light beams emitted by respective light beacons associated with a source device (paragraph [0167]), wherein the wearable audio device is configured to use the measurement of light for spatial audio rendering (paragraph [0165], via step 503/505, synchronously to user, paragraphs [0165] to [0168]). Eronen does not expressly disclose wherein the light sensor is an light angle sensor. Deliwala a light angle sensor (see 440.1 and 440.2 of console 410) configured to measure respective angles of incidence of a pair of light beams (from 420.1 to 440.1 and 440.2) emitted by respective light beacons associated with a source device (430, paragraph [0038] to [0042], see figure 5 for 3D case). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use the light angle sensor of Deliwala for the light sensor in the system of Eronen for the benefit of using an known implementation, thereby reducing engineering costs. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Deliwala with Eronen, for the benefits above, to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1. Regarding claim 2, Eronen discloses wherein the wearable audio device is configured to use the measurement for detecting the absolute position of the source device (used to locate absolutely to wearable device, paragraph [0167]). Regarding claim 3, although Eronen does not expressly disclose where the light beacons and the audio come from the same device, it would have been obvious to the designer to combine components in any combination at their preference. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further comprise wherein the beacon source and the audio source where the same device in the system of Eronen for the benefit of using the same enclosure and reducing the number of components, as well as esthetic reasons. Regarding claim 4, Eronen discloses wherein the wearable audio device is configured to use the measurement for detecting a position of the light sensor relative to an absolute location (known locations, paragraph [0167]) within an acoustical space to render physically or psychoacoustical accurate audio queues (paragraph [0165], via step 503/505, synchronously to user). Regarding claim 5, Eronen discloses wherein the wearable audio device is configured to use the measurement for object oriented spatial audio rendering (paragraphs [0165] to [0168]). Regarding claim 7, Eronen does not expressly disclose three light beacons. Eronen does not expressly disclose wherein the light sensor is an light angle sensor. Deliwala discloses wherein a source device comprises three light beacons (530.1 to 530.3) for 3-dimensional sensing (paragraph [0040] to [0042], see figure 5 for 3D case). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use the three light beacons of Deliwala for the light sensor in the system of Eronen for the benefit of using an known 3D implementation, thereby reducing engineering costs. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Deliwala with Eronen, for the benefits above, to obtain the invention as specified in claim 7. Regarding claim 17, Eronen discloses a system comprising: a wearable audio device (headphones 603 of figure 6B and mentioned throughout figures, also 703, 803, 903 of figures 7-9) comprising a light sensor (paragraph [0167], “tracking the position of the headphones 603 may involve utilising a plurality of beacons/base stations emitting infrared signals from known locations. Such infrared signals may be detected by via an array of infrared sensors, e.g. on the headphones”); and a source device configured to transmit an audio signal to the wearable audio device (necessarily present to receive at block 501 of figure 5), wherein the wearable audio device is configured to process the audio signal based, at least in part on information derived from the light sensor to provide spatial audio rendering (paragraph [0165], via step 503/505, synchronously to user, paragraphs [0165] to [0168]). Eronen does not expressly disclose wherein the light sensor is an light angle sensor. Deliwala a light angle sensor (see 440.1 and 440.2 of console 410) configured to measure respective angles of incidence of a pair of light beams (from 420.1 to 440.1 and 440.2) emitted by respective light beacons associated with a source device (430, paragraph [0038] to [0042], see figure 5 for 3D case). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use the light angle sensor of Deliwala for the light sensor in the system of Eronen for the benefit of using an known implementation, thereby reducing engineering costs. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Deliwala with Eronen, for the benefits above, to obtain the invention as specified in claim 17. Regarding claim 18, Eronen discloses wherein the wearable audio device comprises an open-ear earbud (paragraph [0158], “As used herein, the term “headphones” can be used to denote an array of a plurality of wearable/head mountable audio output devices configured for near field listening, proximal to a user's ears, e.g. less than 5 cm from a user's ear”). Regarding claim 19, Eronen discloses wherein the light angle sensor is supported on the open-ear bud (paragraph [0167]). Regarding claim 20, Eronen discloses wherein the wearable audio device comprises headphones comprising a pair of earcups connected to each other by a band (paragraph [0158], “As used herein, the term “headphones” can be used to denote an array of a plurality of wearable/head mountable audio output devices configured for near field listening, proximal to a user's ears, e.g. less than 5 cm from a user's ear”). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS JOHN SUTHERS whose telephone number is (571)272-0563. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8 am -5 pm. 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. /DOUGLAS J SUTHERS/ Examiner, Art Unit 2695 /VIVIAN C CHIN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2695
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 12, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597410
ACTIVE NOISE CONTROL CIRCUIT WITH MULTIPLE FILTERS CONNECTED IN PARALLEL FASHION AND ASSOCIATED METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12581261
SOUND PROCESSING SYSTEM AND SOUND PROCESSING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574697
MEDIA PLAYBACK BASED ON SENSOR DATA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12573364
AUDIO DATA PROCESSING METHOD, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12573366
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR OCCUPANT-BASED NOISE CANCELLATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+11.0%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 783 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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