DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
This Office Action is in response to correspondence filed 26 February 2026 in reference to application 18/650,923. Claims 1-13 are pending and have been examined.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 26 February 2026 has been accepted and considered in this office action. Claim 8 has been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 26 February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues, see Remarks pages 5-6, that Huang, Gong and Stammler fail to teach the limitations of “using the phonetic representations of the type for and the brand of the target appliance to identify within a library of codesets stored in a memory of the controlling device at least one codeset comprised of a first record having protocol and formatting data and a plurality of further records in which a phonetic representation of a controllable function of the target appliance is cross-referenced to a command data" as claimed. The examiner respectfully disagrees. Stammler was relied upon to teach that phonetic representations of commands that are linked with recognizable commands. Huang teaches that speech can be used to trigger commands at 0068, and as illustrated in 0068m where the commands and their formatting and protocol data are clearly linked and triggered by recognized speech input. Thus the combination suggests “a plurality of further records in which a phonetic representation of a controllable function of the target appliance is cross-referenced to a command data” as the phonetic representation of recognizable commands of Stammler would be used to select the triggered commands disclosed in Huang. Therefore the combination of references cited teach the limitations of the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 1-8, 12, and 13 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (US PAP 2009/0254778) in view of Gong (US PAP 2003/0149563) and further in view of Stammler et al. (US Patent 6,839,670).
Consider claim 1, Huang teaches A method (abstract), comprising:
receiving a first data indicative of a type for a target appliance received associated with a controlling device (0155, receiving type such as television via user interface);
receiving a second data indicative of a brand of a target appliance received associated with the controlling device (0155, receiving brand such as Apex via user interface);
identifying within a library of codesets stored in a memory of the controlling device at least one codeset comprised of a first record having protocol and formatting data (0152, 0156, IR codeset is provisioned into the remote control for use);
receiving a third data indicative of a command to be transmitted from the controlling device (0046, 0199-205, receiving inputs to control a TV for example);
identify a command data within the identified at least one codeset (0046, 0229, retrieving IR codes for command); and
using the protocol and formatting data and the identified command data within the identified at least one codeset to transmit a command to control a functional operation s of the target appliance (0046, transmitting IR codes to devices).
Huang suggesting using voice data as an input via a microphone (see 0068, speech input interface, which would require a microphone) does not specifically teach that the input data used for inputting a type and brand is voice data.
In the same field of providing information to a computer system, Gong teaches teach that the input data for inputting type and brand is voice data (abstract, figure 4, 0045, using voice recognition to select type and manufacturer).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use speech recognition as taught by Gong to fill in the information in Huang in order to increase user convenience by allowing speech input of data (Gong 0003).
Huang and Gong do not specifically teach that the voice data is converted to phonetic representations and that the phonetic representations to identifying codesets,
a plurality of further records in which a phonetic representation of a controllable function of the target appliance is cross-referenced to a command data;
converting a third voice data indicative of a command to be transmitted from the controlling device received via the microphone into a phonetic representation of the command;
using the phonetic representation of the command to identify a command data within the identified at least one codeset.
In the same field of voice controlled systems, Stammler teaches that the voice data is converted to phonetic representations and that the phonetic representations are used to identify codsets (Col 8 line 51- col 9 line 10, speech is recognized into phonetic units, which is then used to recognize commands. In combination with Huang and Gong, this would be provisioning code sets).
a plurality of further records in which a phonetic representation of a controllable function of the target appliance is cross-referenced to a command data (Col 8 line 51- col 9 line 10, phonetic representations are linked via the HMM model to words or commands to be recognized);
converting a third voice data indicative of a command to be transmitted from the controlling device received via the microphone into a phonetic representation of the command (Col 8 line 51- col 9 line 10, speech is recognized into phonetic units, which is then used to recognize commands. In combination with Huang and Gong, this would be include executing control commands for devices);
using the phonetic representation of the command to identify a command data within the identified at least one codeset (Col 8 line 51- col 9 line 10, speech is recognized into phonetic units, which is then used to recognize commands. In combination with Huang and Gong, this would be include executing control commands for devices).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to use phonetic units as taught by Stammler in the system of Haung and Gong in order to allow the recognizer to be easily adapted to recognize new words (Stammler Col 9 lines 1-6).
Consider claim 2, Stammler teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the phonetic representations of the type for and brand of the target appliance and the phonetic representation of the command each comprise one of digitized phoneme templates, cepstral coefficients, and vectors (col 8 lines 13 col 9 line 32, processing speech as cepstral coefficients and using HMMs to determine phonemes spoken. Specifically the HMMs represent emission probabilities for each phoneme based on a comparison of the input cepstral coefficients to the trained representation).
Consider claim 3, Huang teaches The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the controlling device comprises a smart device (paragraphs [0005] and [0030] disclose that the method of the invention is drawn towards implementing remote configuration on various types of hand-held controlling devices including an extended-functionality/smart phone and a tablet computing device).
Consider claim 4, Huan teaches the method as recited in claim 3, wherein the smart device comprises a media rendering device and the target appliance comprises a television (paragraphs [0005] and [0030] disclose that the method of the invention is drawn towards implementing remote configuration on various types of hand-held controlling devices including an extended-functionality/smart phone and a tablet computing device, [0155] and figure 14 shows setting up to control a TV).
Consider claim 5, Huang teaches the method as recited in claim 1, wherein the at least one codeset is associated with a one of an infrared, radio-frequency, point-to-point, or networked protocol by which commands are to be transmitted by the controlling device when commanding functional operations of the target appliance (0030-31 IR, RF codes used to control devices).
Consider claim 6, Huang teaches the method as recited in claim 4, wherein the at least one codeset is associated with a one of an infrared, radio-frequency, point-to-point, or networked protocol by which commands are to be transmitted by the controlling device when commanding functional operations of the target appliance (0030-31 IR, RF codes used to control devices).
Consider claim 7, Huang teaches the method as recited in claim 3, wherein the controlling device comprises one of a smart phone or a tablet computing device (paragraphs [0005] and [0030] disclose that the method of the invention is drawn towards implementing remote configuration on various types of hand-held controlling devices including an extended-functionality/smart phone and a tablet computing device).
Consider claim 8, Huang teaches the method as recited in claim 7, wherein the at least one codeset is associated with a one of an infrared, radio-frequency, point-to-point, or networked protocol by which commands are to be transmitted by the controlling device when commanding functional operations of the target appliance (0030-31 IR, RF codes used to control devices).
Consider claim 12, Huang teaches the method as recited in claim 1 wherein the instructions additionally use a location data when identifying the at least one codeset that is cross- referenced to the phonetic representation of the brand of the target appliance (paragraph [0317] discloses the use of a region/location data to present the most likely codeset to the user during the codeset identification process to improve usability).
Consider claim 13, Huang teaches the method as recited in claim 12, wherein the instructions prompt a user to provide a location data to the controlling device (paragraph [0317] discloses the use of a region/location data to present the most likely codeset to the user during the codeset identification process to improve usability, Figure 23b, prompting for region).
Claims 9-11 rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Huang and Gong and Stammler as applied to claims 1 above, and further in further view of Harris (US Patent 7,944,370 )
Consider claim 9, Huang and Gong and Stammler teach the method as recited in claim 1, further comprising converting a fourth voice data indicative of a model of the target appliance into a phonetic representation of the model of the target appliance and further using the phonetic representation of the model of the target appliance (Gong abstract, figure 4, 0045, using voice recognition to select model., Stammler Col 8 line 51- col 9 line 10, speech is recognized into phonetic units, which is then used to recognize commands. In combination with Huang and Gong, this would be recognizing models) but do not specifically teach based on phonetic representation of models, to identify within the library of codesets stored in the memory of the controlling device the at least one codeset.
In the same field of remote control devices Harris teaches ased on phonetic representation of models, to identify within the library of codesets stored in the memory of the controlling device the at least one codeset (Harris figure 12, col 9 lines 54-65, discloses the user input of a model of a target device which is used by the receiving system to determine configuration data/codesets that are cross-referenced with the particular model. In combination with Stammler, the speech recognition would be phonetic unit based.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to include receiving user input/data, which Huang and Gong already teaches can be speech, indicating the model number of the target appliance in order to improve the user experience by narrowing down the candidate codesets as suggested by Harris in order to minimize errors and user inconvenience when selecting the appropriate codeset (Harris, col 2 lines 31-35).
Consider claim 10, Stammler teaches the method of claim 9, wherein the phonetic representations of the model of the target appliance comprises one of digitized phoneme templates, cepstral coefficients, and vectors (col 8 lines 13 col 9 line 32, processing speech as cepstral coefficients and using HMMs to determine phonemes spoken. Specifically the HMMs represent emission probabilities for each phoneme based on a comparison of the input cepstral coefficients to the trained representation).
Consider claim 11, Harris teaches the non-transitory, computer readable media as recited in claim 10, wherein the instructions prompt a user to provide the voice data indicative of the a model of the target appliance (Harris figure 12 and col 9 lines 54-65 discloses soliciting user input in the form of a GUI of a model of a target device which is used by the receiving system to determine configuration data/codesets that are cross-referenced with the particular model).
Conclusion
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS C GODBOLD whose telephone number is (571)270-1451. The examiner can normally be reached 6:30am-5pm Monday-Thursday.
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, Andrew Flanders can be reached at (571)272-7516. 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 GODBOLD
Examiner
Art Unit 2655
/DOUGLAS GODBOLD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2655