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 § 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) 1-2, 13-15 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Yamashita et al (US 2013/0063668) (and if necessary) in view of Yu et al (US 2023/0297324) OR Zhang et al (US 2024/0056676).
Claims 1, 13, 14 and 19, Yamashita teaches an apparatus, an electronic device, a storage media and a method for audio processing in a multi-view mode (see Fig. 4 for multi-view mode), the method comprising:
triggering (the keywords are the trigger information, [0085]), when a preset audio output adjusting event occurs, corresponding views to perform audio output by using matching audio output devices based on a policy (an audio adjustment unit configured to adjust focus values each indicating a degree of highlighting of audio data of each content displayed in a plurality of display areas, [0005]), that a first application uses a real audio output device and a non-first application uses a virtual audio output device, (Application example 4, [0085-0087]: degrees of importance may be given to the keywords. It is thus possible for the focus ratio setting unit 122 to set the focus value of the audio of the secondary program in response to the degree of importance of the keyword. For example, when a program matching the keyword having a high degree of importance is detected, the focus ratio setting unit 122 may set the focus value of the program to be greater (e.g., equal to or greater than the focus value of the audio of the primary program), thereby strongly notifying the viewer of the broadcasting of the corresponding program. On the other hand, when a program matching the keyword having a low degree of importance is detected, the focus ratio setting unit 122 may set the focus value of the program to be smaller (e.g., smaller than the focus value of the audio of the primary program));
wherein the audio output adjusting event is an event causing the audio output devices used by the views to not match the policy, when a mixing mode is off, the first application is an application currently in an audio focus, and when the mixing mode is on, the first application is an application currently participating in mixing ( Yamashita teaches, per [0098], “Traffic information and music or television programs may also be presented to the car navigation system at the same time. Here, while listening to the music from the car navigation system, an interruption such as traffic jam information or road construction information may be carried out using the audio output system of the present embodiment, and an audio mixed with the interruption information may be output without stopping the music reproduction. In this case, since the interruption information is considered as information having a high degree of importance, the focus ratio setting unit 122 may decrease the focus value of the music and increase the focus value of the composed audio of the interruption information, thereby allowing the interruption information to be readily listened to.
Further clarification “policy” which Yamashita does not use the term “policy”. Yet he teaches, [0086] Here, degrees of importance may be given to the keywords. It is thus possible for the focus ratio setting unit 122 to set the focus value of the audio of the secondary program in response to the degree of importance of the keyword. For example, when a program matching the keyword having a high degree of importance is detected, the focus ratio setting unit 122 may set the focus value of the program to be greater (e.g., equal to or greater than the focus value of the audio of the primary program), thereby strongly notifying the viewer of the broadcasting of the corresponding program. On the other hand, when a program matching the keyword having a low degree of importance is detected, the focus ratio setting unit 122 may set the focus value of the program to be smaller (e.g., smaller than the focus value of the audio of the primary program). Here examiner maps “policy” to low degree of importance, [0086] or high degree of importance, [0098] or highest degree of importance, [0087] of keyword, [0085]). Yamashita suggests or at least by obviousness presents “policy>
To support this obviousness, examiner provides Yu who teaches, “ the mixing policy may specifically include a type of audio data that needs to be mixed and an application from which the audio data that needs to be mixed comes, and/or a type of audio data that does not need to be mixed and an application from which the audio data that does not need to be mixed comes, [0107]). [0716] Therefore, in this embodiment of this application, a mixing policy may be preset in the master device (for example, the mobile phone), and the mixing policy may be used to indicate whether to allow to mix audio data of different types. For example, in a mixing policy shown in Table 1, the user generally has a high requirement on audio quality of the Music type. Therefore, it may be preset in the mixing policy that music of the MUSIC type is not allowed to be mixed with other audio data, and a notification tone of the NOTIFICATION type and a keypad tone of the DTMF type are allowed to be mixed with other audio data. Subsequently, when the mobile phone generates a plurality of channels of audio data, and the plurality of channels of audio data need to be played by a same audio output device, the mobile phone may determine, based on a type of each channel of audio data and the mixing policy shown in Table 1, audio data that does not need to be mixed and audio data that needs to be mixed, [0716]”.
Zhang teaches, per [0352] FIG. 13B is a schematic diagram of a data flow direction in an Android operating system according to an embodiment of this application. For example, in this embodiment of this application, an application running in the foreground/background (which is referred to as a foreground/background application for short below) may invoke the media player (MediaPlayer) at the framework layer. Then, an audio stream played by the foreground/background application is output, and the output audio stream is sent to AudioFlinger. AudioFlinger sends the audio stream to the audio mixing module. The audio mixing module processes the audio stream and provides a corresponding audio mixing policy. Finally, the audio mixing module at the framework layer invokes AudioHAL at the hardware abstraction layer HAL, and AudioHAL sends the output audio stream to a device at the hardware layer for playing. And per [0353] FIG. 13C is a schematic diagram of a software module according to an embodiment of this application. Specifically, foreground and background applications may send respective audio streams to the audio mixing module, and an audio source classifier in the audio mixing module identifies and classifies the audio streams of the foreground and background applications, and then sends the audio streams to a policy library of the audio mixing module. The policy library provides a corresponding audio mixing policy based on an identification and classification result of the audio streams. It should be noted that, in the schematic diagram shown in FIG. 13C, the audio mixing module in the schematic diagram shown in FIG. 13B is specifically subdivided into the audio source classifier and the policy library.
Therefore it would have been obvious to the ordinary artisan before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching of Yu or Zhang for the purpose of explicitly defining the policy whether it is an audio playing policy, an audio mixing policy to carry out the method of the invention without confusion to improve an audio control, a greater flexibility switch control and thus to improve the user experience.
Claims 2 and 20. The method of claim 1, wherein the audio output adjusting event comprises view modes being switched, the audio focus being changed and the mixing mode being off in the multi-view mode, the mixing mode being turned on or off in the multi-view mode, and/or a set of applications participating in mixing being changed. (Yamashita: In the remote 200 of the present embodiment, for example, a display mode switching button for switching the display area of the display unit 110 between a one-screen mode and a two-screen mode, a focus value ratio change slider for changing the ratio of the focus value with respect to the audio of each program in the two screen modes, and so forth are disposed. The user may change the ratio of the focus value of each program using the focus value ratio change slider, so that the audio of the interesting program may be more clearly output and the audio of the other program with a recognizable sound quality may also be output naturally without disruption. That is, it is possible to change the audio to the sound quality according to degrees of interest of the viewers. It is thus possible to satisfy the interest of each viewer and for the viewers to share the same time and place, [0026]).
Claim 15. The electronic device of claim 14, wherein the audio output adjusting event comprises view modes being switched, the audio focus being changed and the mixing mode being off in the multi-view mode, the mixing mode being turned on or off in the multi-view mode, and/or a set of applications participating in mixing being changed. (See claims 2 and 2 above and in addition see Fig. 4 for sliding scale from 0 to 100 where examiner maps 0 to OFF).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-12, 16-18 are 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.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHUNG-HOANG J. NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1949. The examiner can normally be reached Reg. Sched. 6:00-3:00.
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, Duc Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-7503. 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.
/PHUNG-HOANG J NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2691
Prosecution Insights