DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to Application 18/642,613 filed on 04/22/2024.
In the instant application, claims 1, 9 and 16 are independent claims; Claims 1-20 have been examined and are pending. This action is made non-final.
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 submitted on 04/22/2024 are acceptable.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/22/2024 was filed before the mailing date of the first office action on the merits. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 12 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 12; this claim cites “detecting at least one of a tactile input, voice input, and voice input” on line 3 of the claim. This limitation repeats the “voice input” twice. Based on the subsequent limitation, the Examiner interprets one of the inputs to be “visual input”. Appropriate corrections are required.
Regarding claim 20; this claim cites “the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 15. However, claim 15 is a head gesture control system. Appropriate corrections are required.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 6, 15, 19 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected based claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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)(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.
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 of this title, 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.
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.
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 at the time any inventions covered therein were effectively filed 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 at the time a later invention was effectively filed 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.
Claims 1-2, 7-10, 12-14 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(2) as anticipated by Lawrenson et al. (“Lawrenson,” WO 2018/141409), published on August 9, 2018, or in the alternative, are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Lawrenson et al. (“Lawrenson,” WO 2018/141409), published on August 9, 2018 in view of Edelson et al. (“Edelson,” US 2025/0123691) – the rejection is based on Provisional Application 63/591111 filed on October 17, 2023.
Regarding claim 1, Lawrenson teaches A method for using a head gesture to control of a feature associated with a hearable device, the method comprising:
detecting a plurality of first user movements of a user of the hearable device (Lawrenson: see page 14 of 39 from line 8 through page 16 of 39 line 20; different sets of reference motion sensor data corresponding to multiple head gestures may be obtained and stored by computing device 100 so as to enable user 110 to initiate different control operations);
identifying the plurality of first user movements as a head control gesture corresponding to a particular adjustment of the feature associated with the hearable device (Lawrenson: see page 14 of 39 from line 8 through page 16 of 39 line 20; a certain head gesture may initiate changing a media trach, such as a song “Born to run”, which is currently rendered by computing device 100 and/or played-out using loudspeaker 105 or earphones 105 operatively connected to computing device 100. Alternatively, the performed head gesture may initiate increasing or decreasing a volume of audio which is currently played-out by computing device 100), by applying one or more gesture factors (Lawrenson: see page 16 of 39 lines 12-20; computing device 100 may optionally be operative to derive a measure which is related to the performed head gesture from the acquired motion sensor data, such as the distance, or angle, travelled when tilting or rotating the head. The initiated control operation may additionally be dependent on the derived measure. For instance, if the control mode allows user 110 to control the volume of audio played-out by computing device 100, the change in volume which is affected by initiating the control operation may be dependent on the derived measure, e.g., the angle by which the head is tilted forwards or backwards);
based, at least in part, on identifying the head control gesture, adjusting the feature according to the particular adjustment (Lawrenson: see page 14 of 39 from line 8 through page 16 of 39 line 20; a certain head gesture may initiate changing a media trach, such as a song “Born to run”, which is currently rendered by computing device 100 and/or played-out using loudspeaker 105 or earphones 105 operatively connected to computing device 100. Alternatively, the performed head gesture may initiate increasing or decreasing a volume of audio which is currently played-out by computing device 100); and
outputting to the user, a feedback indicator to describe the adjusting of the feature (Lawrenson: see page 14 of 39 from line 8 through page 16 of 39 line 20; a certain head gesture may initiate changing a media trach, such as a song “Born to run”, which is currently rendered by computing device 100 and/or played-out using loudspeaker 105 or earphones 105 operatively connected to computing device 100. Alternatively, the performed head gesture may initiate increasing or decreasing a volume of audio which is currently played-out by computing device 100. Note: the adjusted volume the user is hearing may be interpreted as feedback indicator).
If Lawrenson is not interpreted to teach the limitation: “outputting to the user, a feedback indicator to describe the adjusting of the feature”, Edelson is relied upon to teach this limitation. Lawrenson teaches: outputting to the user, a feedback indicator to describe the adjusting of the feature (Edelson: ¶0029, 0091 and Fig. 1A-1B; the head-wearable device 120 presents within the portion of the field of view of the user 105, a second visual cue 134 (e.g., a volume indicator) as shown in Fig. 1B, the second visual cue 134 changes in response to the first input gesture performed at the first portion 120a of head-wearable device 120, a volume of the audio data presented by the speakers communicatively coupled with the head-wearable device 120 is manipulated. For example, as shown in Fig. 1B, the user 105 swiping their pointer finger in a first direction at the first portion 120a of the head-wearable device 120 causes the head-wearable device to lower the volume of the music playing presented by the speakers and when the user 105 swiping their pointing finger in a second direction, opposite the first direction, the head-wearable device to increase the volume of the music playing presented by the speakers).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art , before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Edelson and Lawrenson in front of them to include the method of providing visual cue in response to volume change as taught by Edelson with the method of using head gestures to change a volume of a playing media as disclosed by Lawrenson to provide users with up-to-date feedback that proactively shows the user they are changing the volume as a result of their input gesture (Edelson:¶0039 and 0091).
Regarding claim 2, Lawrenson and Edelson teach the method of claim 1,
Lawrenson and Edelson further teaches: wherein the feature is selected from the group of: setting, mode, audio content player, audio beam focus, audio source tracking, calling interaction, and smart assistant operation, and combinations thereof (Lawrenson: see page 14 of 39 from line 8 through page 16 of 39 line 20; a certain head gesture may initiate changing a media trach, such as a song “Born to run”, which is currently rendered by computing device 100 and/or played-out using loudspeaker 105 or earphones 105 operatively connected to computing device 100. Alternatively, the performed head gesture may initiate increasing or decreasing a volume of audio which is currently played-out by computing device 100).
Regarding claim 7, Lawrenson and Edelson teach the method of claim 1,
Lawrenson and Edelson further teaches: wherein identifying the head control gesture comprises: detecting a base head position prior to the plurality of first user movements; and assessing the plurality of first user movements relative to the base head position (Lawrenson: see page 13 of 39 from lines 20-28; motion sensor 102 comprised in BCI headset 150 which is worn by user 110 can be used to determine whether user 110 is performed a specific head gesture which, e.g., involves tilting the head backwards or forwards, tilting the head left or right, rotating the head clockwise or counter-clockwise, or any combination thereof).
Regarding claim 8, Lawrenson and Edelson teach the method of claim 1,
Lawrenson and Edelson further teaches: the method further comprising: outputting an inquiry for user control (Elderson: ¶0028; the head wearable device can also include one or more of the following input modalities: gesture recognition based on image data captured by one or more cameras communicatively coupled and/or integrated into to the head wearable device, voice inputs (including virtual assistant supported voice commands), gaze detection based gestures, and/or inputs at an actuation device); detecting the plurality of first user movements; and determining the plurality of first user movements is responsive to the inquiry (Edelson: ¶0029, 0091 and Fig. 1A-1B; the head-wearable device 120 presents within the portion of the field of view of the user 105, a second visual cue 134 (e.g., a volume indicator) as shown in Fig. 1B, the second visual cue 134 changes in response to the first input gesture performed at the first portion 120a of head-wearable device 120, a volume of the audio data presented by the speakers communicatively coupled with the head-wearable device 120 is manipulated. For example, as shown in Fig. 1B, the user 105 swiping their pointer finger in a first direction at the first portion 120a of the head-wearable device 120 causes the head-wearable device to lower the volume of the music playing presented by the speakers and when the user 105 swiping their pointing finger in a second direction, opposite the first direction, the head-wearable device to increase the volume of the music playing presented by the speakers).
Regarding claims 9-10, these claims are directed to a head gesture control system, executing the method as claimed in claims 1-2, respectively. Claims 9-10 are similar scope to claims 1-2, respectively and are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 12, Lawrenson and Edelson teach the head gesture control system of claim 9,
Lawrenson and Edelson further teach: wherein the operations further comprise: detecting at least one of a tactile input, voice input, and voice input; and identifying the at least one of the tactile input, voice input, and visual input as a control input for the feature, wherein adjusting of the feature of the hearable device is further based on identifying the control input (Edelson: ¶0029, 0091 and Fig. 1A-1B; the head-wearable device 120 presents within the portion of the field of view of the user 105, a second visual cue 134 (e.g., a volume indicator) as shown in Fig. 1B, the second visual cue 134 changes in response to the first input gesture performed at the first portion 120a of head-wearable device 120, a volume of the audio data presented by the speakers communicatively coupled with the head-wearable device 120 is manipulated. For example, as shown in Fig. 1B, the user 105 swiping their pointer finger in a first direction at the first portion 120a of the head-wearable device 120 causes the head-wearable device to lower the volume of the music playing presented by the speakers and when the user 105 swiping their pointing finger in a second direction, opposite the first direction, the head-wearable device to increase the volume of the music playing presented by the speakers).
Regarding claim 13, Lawrenson and Edelson teach the head gesture control system of claim 9,
Lawrenson and Edelson further teach: the head gesture control system further comprises a wearable configured to be worn by the user and holding the sensor positioned to detect the plurality of first user movements (Lawrenson: see page 7 of 39 lines 23-27; the computing device further comprises EEG sensors arranged for contacting a skin of the user, and at least one motion sensor for measuring a movement of the head. That is the EEG sensors and the motion sensors are provided with the computing device. The computing device may, e.g., be a BCI headset, an in-ear EEG device, or an around-ear EEG device).
Regarding claim 14, Lawrenson and Edelson teach the head gesture control system of claim 13,
Lawrenson and Edelson further teach: wherein the plurality of user movements includes eye movement and wherein the wearable includes at least one reverse camera configured to detect the eye movement (Elderson: ¶0028; the head wearable device can also include one or more of the following input modalities: gesture recognition based on image data captured by one or more cameras communicatively coupled and/or integrated into to the head wearable device, voice inputs, gaze detection based gestures, and/or inputs at an actuation device).
Regarding claims 16-17, these claims are directed to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, executing the method as claimed in claims 1-2, respectively. Claims 16-17 are similar scope to claims 1-2, respectively and are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 3, 11 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Lawrenson and Edelson as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of FERNANDEZ FRANCO (“Fernandez,” US 2024/0406667), filed on October 7, 2022.
Regarding claim 3, Lawrenson and Edelson teach the method of claim 1,
Lawrenson and Edelson do not appear to teach: assessing the plurality of first user movements to determine a target sound source in an environment of the user; receiving by one or more microphones of the hearable device, sound signals for a sound from the target sound source; based, at least in part, on determining the target sound source, locking onto the target sound source by adjusting one or more audio elements of the hearable device to enhance hearing of the sound; tracking a change in direction of the target sound source; and based on the change in direction, readjusting the feature to maintain enhanced hearing of the sound.
However Fernandez teaches: assessing the plurality of first user movements to determine a target sound source in an environment of the user (Fernandez: ¶0018 and Fig. 1; the head tracking system 100 includes headphones 101 that transmit audio data from an audio source 102 to a user 104 who hears the headphones 101); receiving by one or more microphones of the hearable device, sound signals for a sound from the target sound source (Fernandez: ¶0019; the headphones 101 may also include a microphone 109 for wireless transmission to the gaming system 107 so that the user’s audio may be provided to other gamers/users who are engaged in playing a video game); based, at least in part, on determining the target sound source, locking onto the target sound source by adjusting one or more audio elements of the hearable device to enhance hearing of the sound; tracking a change in direction of the target sound source; and based on the change in direction, readjusting the feature to maintain enhanced hearing of the sound (Fernandez: ¶0022; the headphones 101 may then adjust the playback of the audio being provided by the audio source 102 of the gaming system 107 based on the location of the user’s head while wearing the headphones 101. In this regard, the audio that is played back by the gaming headphones may adjust real or virtual surround sound settings and/or active noise cancellation attributes based on the location of the user’s head. ¶0024; as the user’s head may move horizontally and/or vertically, the playback of the audio in a surround sound format needs to take into account the location and the relative orientation of the user’s head and adjust the surround sound properties based on the location of the user’s head).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art , before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Fernandez, Lawrenson and Edelson in front of them to incorporate the adjustment of surround sound based on relative orientation of the user’s head as taught by Fernandez with the method of using head gestures to change a volume of a playing media as disclosed by Lawrenson to provide high quality surround sound while the user’s head moves while engaged in the game (Fernandez: ¶0024).
Regarding claim 11, the claim is directed to a head gesture control system, executing the method as claimed in claim 3. Claim 11 is similar scope to claims 3 and is therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 18, the claim is directed to the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, executing the method as claimed in claim 3. Claim 18 is similar scope to claims 3 and is therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Lawrenson and Edelson as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of SHIN (“Shin,” US 2015/0358579), published on December 10, 2015.
Regarding claim 5, Lawrenson and Edelson teach the method of claim 1,
Lawrenson and Edelson do not appear to teach: wherein the feature includes audio beam focusing and wherein the feedback indicator includes a notification of a section of a sound field that the audio beam focusing is directed.
However Shin teaches: 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the feature includes audio beam focusing (Shin: ¶0028; in order to form an audio beam, the mobile terminal may determine a speaker position and form the audio beam corresponding to the speaker position, based on at least one of an image captured by photographing the speaker 50 using a camera 121 and motion information from a motion sensor. ¶0094, 0115-0116 and Figs. 5A-5C; the audio beam may be formed based on at least one of a photograph image acquired from the camera 121, motion information from the motion sensor 145, and the audio signal collected by the microphones) and wherein the feedback indicator includes a notification of a section of a sound field that the audio beam focusing is directed.( Shin: ¶0126-0127; when the audio beam 806 of Fig. 8B is formed, the processor 180 may display an object 710 indicating that an audio beam is completely formed, on the speaker mode image 530. Accordingly, the speaker may recognize that the audio beam is completely formed).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art , before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Shin, Lawrenson and Edelson in front of them to incorporate the method of forming an audio beam for receiving optimum audio signal as taught by Shin with the method of using head gestures to change a volume of a playing media as disclosed by Lawrenson to receive an optimum audio signal corresponding to the position of the speaker, thereby enhancing user convenience (Shin: ¶0008).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record on form PTO-892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is required under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(c) to consider these references fully when responding to this action.
It is noted that any citation to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the references should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006,1009, 158 USPQ 275,277 (CCPA 1968)).
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tam T. Tran whose telephone number is (571) 270-5029. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:30 AM - 5:00 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, William L. Bashore can be reached on 571-272-4088. 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.
/TAM T TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2174