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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-21 are pending and Claims 1 and 11 are independent.
This Application was published as 20240406648.
Apparent priority: February 2019.
The instant Application is a continuation of17/750,598 issued as U.S. 12,010,487 which is a continuation of 16/785,176 issued as 11,388,516. Terminal Disclaimers over the terms of the two parents and U.S. 11,805,378 is required as set forth below.
And is related to the following:
16/785,202, (U.S. 11,184,711) (orientation of device as trigger plus jamming signal)
16/881,101, (U.S. 11,445,315) (jamming signal)
16/785,856, (U.S. 11,606,657) (synthetic command)
16/785,918, (U.S. 11,503,418) (removable blocking device)
16/785,930, (U.S. 11,606,658) (noise profile)
16/785,950, (U.S. 11,477,590) (each communication path between mic and processor through the blocking circuitry)
16/881,090, (U.S. 11,445,300) (unmuting by mechanical actuator)
16/785,176, (U.S. 11,388,516) (cutting communication path between microphone and processor and inserting the blocking device)
17/083,667, (U.S. 11,805,378) (circular element configured to attach to the top surface of the always listening device)
17/868,932, (U.S. 11,711,662) (actuating a mechanical actuator that mutes the mic of the listening device)
17/876,041 (U.S. 11,770,665) (jamming signal)
17/530,549, (U.S. 11,863,943) (jamming signal based on position of the blocker).
35 U.S.C. 112(f) Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “circular element” in Claims 1-10 and “circular element” and “blocker device” in Claims 11-21. These limitations are generic in the context of the art and don’t refer to any specific structure and only serve as placeholders for the structure that performs the associated function(s) without providing any information about what that structure is. MPEP 2181 I A says:
For a term to be considered a substitute for "means," and lack sufficient structure for performing the function, it must serve as a generic placeholder and thus not limit the scope of the claim to any specific manner or structure for performing the claimed function. It is important to remember that there are no absolutes in the determination of terms used as a substitute for "means" that serve as generic placeholders. The examiner must carefully consider the term in light of the specification and the commonly accepted meaning in the technological art. Every application will turn on its own facts.
Based on the ordinary skill in the art and description of functions of these components in the Specification, they refer to processors or a combination of processor and memory and possibly transducers such as microphones and displays or to a combination of software and hardware.
PLEASE NOTE: This is NOT a rejection. Please don’t address it as a rejection. If the Applicant does not agree with the INTERPRETATION, he may argue or amend to replace the terms interpreted under 112(f) with structural terms such as “microphone” or “processor” as appropriately supported by the Specification. In the alternative, he may let the interpretation stand if the intent was to include a means plus function limitation in the Claim.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of U.S. Patents Nos. 11,388,516, 11,805,378 and 12,010,487 as shown below. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the following mapping:
Instant Application
Reference Patent 11388516
11. A method comprising:
21. A method comprising:
detecting, using one or more first microphones of a blocker device configured to mount on an always-listening device via a circular element, environmental audio;
intercepting, by a blocking device configured to be installed in a listening device by cutting a communication path between a microphone of the listening device and a processor of the listening device and inserting the blocking device into one or more severed portion of the communication path, first communications between the microphone and the processor;
outputting, by the blocker device, a jamming signal to affect one or more second microphones of the always-listening device, wherein the jamming signal comprises one or more ultrasonic sound waves that disrupt functionality of the one or more second microphones of the always-listening device;
preventing, by the blocking device, all signals corresponding to the first communications from being received by the processor by disrupting the communication path; providing an indication that the communication path is disrupted; intercepting, by the blocking device, second communications between the microphone and the processor;
detecting, by the blocker device and using the one or more first microphones, a user input in the environmental audio; and
determining, by the blocking device, whether the second communications are associated with an audio trigger;
based on a determination that the user input comprises a command, ceasing output of the jamming signal to allow the one or more second microphones of the always-listening device to detect the environmental audio.
based on a determination that the second communications are associated with the audio trigger: ceasing, by the blocking device, disrupting the communications path; disabling the indication that the communication path is disrupted; permitting, by the blocking device, one or more signals associated with third communications to be received for processing by the processor of the listening device;
resuming disrupting, by the blocking device, the communication path; and re-enabling the indication that the communication path is disrupted.
Independent Claim 1 a system counterpart of method Claim 11. Several of the dependent Claims of the instant Application find counterparts in the parent reference claims.
Instant Application
Reference Patent 11,805,378
11. A method comprising:
11. A method comprising:
detecting, using one or more first microphones of a blocker device configured to mount on an always-listening device via a circular element, environmental audio;
detecting, using one or more first microphones of a blocker device configured to mount on an always-listening device via a circular element, environmental audio;
outputting, by the blocker device, a jamming signal to affect one or more second microphones of the always-listening device, wherein the jamming signal comprises one or more ultrasonic sound waves that disrupt functionality of the one or more second microphones of the always-listening device;
outputting, by the blocker device, a jamming signal to affect one or more second microphones of the always-listening device, wherein the jamming signal comprises one or more ultrasonic sound waves that disrupt functionality of the one or more second microphones of the always-listening device and that do not interfere with one or more second speakers of the always-listening device when the blocker device is mounted on the always-listening device;
detecting, by the blocker device and using the one or more first microphones, a user input in the environmental audio; and
detecting, by the blocker device and using the one or more first microphones, a user input in the environmental audio, wherein the user input comprises clapping;
based on a determination that the user input comprises a command, ceasing output of the jamming signal to allow the one or more second microphones of the always-listening device to detect the environmental audio.
determining, by the blocker device, that the user input comprises a command; and
ceasing output, by the blocker device and in response to detecting the command, of the jamming signal to allow the one or more second microphones of the always-listening device to detect the environmental audio.
Independent Claim 1 a system counterpart of method Claim 11. Several of the dependent Claims of the instant Application find counterparts in the parent reference claims.
Instant Application
Reference Patent 12,010,487
11. A method comprising:
1. A method comprising:
detecting, using one or more first microphones of a blocker device configured to mount on an always-listening device via a circular element, environmental audio;
outputting, by the blocker device, a jamming signal to affect one or more second microphones of the always-listening device, wherein the jamming signal comprises one or more ultrasonic sound waves that disrupt functionality of the one or more second microphones of the always-listening device;
intercepting, by a privacy module configured to replace one or more components of a listening device by being inserted in a communication path between a sensor and a processor of the listening device, signals associated with environmental audio, wherein the privacy module is configured to disrupt the communication path by at least one of: grounding the communication path, shorting the communication path, interrupting the communication path, or cutting the communication path;
detecting, by the blocker device and using the one or more first microphones, a user input in the environmental audio; and
storing, in a memory associated with the privacy module, the environmental audio; determining whether an initial portion of the environmental audio comprises a trigger;
based on a determination that the user input comprises a command, ceasing output of the jamming signal to allow the one or more second microphones of the always-listening device to detect the environmental audio.
permitting, based on a determination that the initial portion of the environmental audio comprises a trigger, a portion of the environmental audio after the trigger to be received by the processor; and
resuming disruption of the communication path after the portion of the environmental audio after the trigger has been sent to the processor.
Independent Claim 1 a system counterpart of method Claim 11. Several of the dependent Claims of the instant Application find counterparts in the parent reference claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the audio trigger" in Claim 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
2. The blocker device of claim 1, wherein the audio trigger comprises at least one of a spoken command, a whistle, or a clap.
Allowable Subject Matter
Subject to overcoming the Obviousness Double Patenting and 112(b) rejections above, the pending Claims are considered allowable in view of the prior art. The 112(b) rejection may be achieved by the cancellation of Claim 2.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: In view of each of the particular limitations of the independent Claims when considered in the order established by the Claim language and in the context of the language of the independent Claims when each Claim is considered as a whole, the independent Claims of this Application were not found in the prior art that was viewed.
In particular refer to the prosecution of the parent applications. The invention is a particular tool or gadget which is composed of well-known components and derives its novelty and nonobviousness from a particular combination of these well-known components for use in particular situation.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Close Art of Record
Refer to the prosecution of the parent and related applications.
Listing of Claims
1. A blocker device comprising:
a circular element configured to attach to a top surface of an always-listening device, wherein the blocker device is configured to mount on the always-listening device via the circular element;
one or more sensors configured to detect a user input, wherein:
the one or more sensors comprise at least one of: an accelerometer, a motion sensor, or a position sensor; and
the user input comprises at least one of: tapping or a pattern of movements;
one or more first speakers configured to output a jamming signal to affect one or more second microphones of the always-listening device, wherein the jamming signal comprises one or more ultrasonic sound waves that disrupt functionality of the one or more microphones of the always-listening device; and
one or more processors configured to:
cause the one or more first speakers to output the jamming signal to prevent the one or more microphones of the always-listening device from discerning environmental audio;
receive the user input from at least one of the one or more sensors; and
based on a determination that the user input comprises a command, cause the one or more first speakers to cease outputting the jamming signal to allow the one or more microphones of the always-listening device to detect the environmental audio.
2. The blocker device of claim 1, wherein the audio trigger comprises at least one of a spoken command, a whistle, or a clap.
3. The blocker device of claim 1, wherein the one or more first speakers comprise parametric loudspeakers.
4. The blocker device of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to:
determine, using one or more first microphones, one or more characteristics of environmental audio; and
adjust, based on the one or more characteristics of the environmental audio, one or more parameters of the jamming signal.
5. The blocker device of claim 4, wherein the one or more characteristics of the environmental audio comprise at least one of:
a presence of a frequency range;
a volume of a frequency range;
a type of sound waveform;
a duration of a frequency; or
a degree to which human speech is present.
6. The blocker device of claim 4, wherein the one or more parameters of the jamming signal comprise at least one of:
a volume of the jamming signal;
a profile of frequencies used in the jamming signal;
a mix of frequencies used in the jamming signal;
a duration of frequencies used in the jamming signal; or
a volume of one or more frequencies used in the jamming signal.
7. The blocker device of claim 1, wherein the jamming signal comprises a signal inverse to environmental audio detected by one or more first microphones.
8. The blocker device of claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to:
resume outputting the jamming signal based on at least one of: a predetermined amount of time or a second command.
9. The blocker device of claim 8, wherein the second command is the same as the command.
10. The blocker device of claim 1, wherein the circular element comprises foam configured to block sound waves from reaching the always-listening device.
11. A method comprising:
detecting, using one or more first microphones of a blocker device configured to mount on an always-listening device via a circular element, environmental audio;
outputting, by the blocker device, a jamming signal to affect one or more second microphones of the always-listening device, wherein the jamming signal comprises one or more ultrasonic sound waves that disrupt functionality of the one or more second microphones of the always-listening device;
detecting, by the blocker device and using the one or more first microphones, a user input in the environmental audio; and
based on a determination that the user input comprises a command, ceasing output of the jamming signal to allow the one or more second microphones of the always-listening device to detect the environmental audio.
12. The method of claim 11, further comprising: changing one or more parameters of the jamming signal based on one or more characteristics of the environmental audio.
13. The method of claim 11, further comprising: generating the jamming signal as an inverse signal to the detected environmental audio.
14. The method of claim 11, further comprising: detecting the user input within a predetermined period of time.
Claim 15 is a method claim with a limitation similar to the limitation of Claim 2 modified to be narrower.
15. The method of claim 11, wherein the user input comprises clapping for a predetermined duration.
16. The method of claim 11, further comprising: resuming outputting the jamming signal based on at least one of: a predetermined amount of time or a second command.
Claim 17 is a method claim with a limitation similar to the limitation of Claim 4 modified to be narrower.
17. The method of claim 11, further comprising:
detecting, using one or more sensors, a second user input, wherein the second user input comprises at least one of a spoken command or a whistle; and
resuming outputting the jamming signal based on the second user input.
18. The method of claim 17, wherein the one or more sensors are located on a wearable device.
19. The method of claim 17, wherein the one or more sensors comprise at least one of: an accelerometer, a motion sensor, or a position sensor.
20. The method of claim 11, wherein the circular element is configured to attach to a top surface of the always-listening device.
Claim 21 is a method claim with a limitation similar to the limitation of Claim 10.
21. The method of claim 20, wherein the circular element comprises foam configured to block sound waves from reaching the always-listening device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARIBA SIRJANI whose telephone number is (571)270-1499. The examiner can normally be reached on 9 to 5, M-F.
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, Pierre Desir can be reached on 571-272-7799. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Fariba Sirjani/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2659