Detailed Action
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . See 35 U.S.C. § 100 (note).
Art Rejections
Anticipation
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication 2017/0017640 (published 19 January 2017) (“Bellamy”).
Claim 15 is drawn to “a microphone device.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed device and the Bellamy reference.
Claim 15
The Bellamy Reference
“15. A microphone device to be worn by a local user physically present at a place of a meeting and participating in the meeting along with other local users physically present at the place and participating in the meeting, the device comprising:
The claimed microphone device, is not simply a microphone device, but a combination of elements, including a microphone sensor, filter and transmitter. The microphone device reasonably includes electronic devices that include microphones in combination with other elements.
The Bellamy reference describes a computer 102 corresponding to the claimed microphone device. Bellamy at ¶¶ 20, 65, FIG.1. Bellamy characterizes computer 102 as a wearable device, such as a lapel microphone, smartphone or smart watch. Id.
“a microphone sensor to detect audio proximate to the device;
Computer 102 includes a microphone 125 corresponding to the claimed microphone sensor. Id. at ¶ 21, FIG.1.
“a filter to remove, from the detected audio, any audio other than speech uttered by the local user, such that the filter generates filtered audio including just the speech uttered by the local user; and
Computer 102 further includes a processor 104 and system memory 136 that implement any number of functions. Id. at ¶ 20, FIG.1. One function includes noise cancelling to eliminate audio from people other than the user of the computer. Id. at ¶¶ 59, 78.
“a transmitter to wirelessly transmit the filtered audio and metadata identifying the local user.”
In a distributed embodiment, audio and location metadata from computer 102 is transmitted to a managing computer 158 (i.e., server) or a user computer 152 for identification of content, persons and additional processing. Id. at ¶¶ 14, 28, 35, 39, 66, FIG.2.
Table 1
For the foregoing reasons, the Bellamy reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 18 depends on claim 15, and further requires the following:
“further comprising: a beacon circuit to permit a computing device at the place of the meeting to detect a physical location of the microphone device within the place of the meeting.”
Bellamy’s computer 102 further includes positioning sensor 154 to provide GPS functionality. Bellamy at ¶ 28. For the foregoing reasons, the Bellamy reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Obviousness
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4–14 and 19–20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Bellamy.
Claims 3, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Bellamy and US Patent Application Publication 2024/0094976 (published 21 March 2024) (“Kleinhout”).
Claim 1 is drawn to “a method.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed method and the Bellamy reference.
Claim 1
The Bellamy Reference
“1. A method comprising:
The Bellamy reference similarly describes a method for remote users to drop-in on conversations among persons located in gathering places. Bellamy at Abs., ¶ 1.
Bellamy’s method is implemented by a computer system that includes a computer 102, network 128, a remote user computer 152 and a managing computer 158. Id. at ¶¶ 19–20, FIG.1. Computer 102 includes a processor 104 that executes logic 148 stored in memory 136 in order to identify and focal points of proximal activity. Id. Computer 102 may be associated with any number of persons 205 in a location 201. Id. at ¶¶ 28, 65.
N.B.: Bellamy describes implementing logic 148 across a plurality of computers in a distributed manner. Id. at ¶¶ 14, 35, 66. In that case processor 104 may be part of a server 158 that implements logic 148 as a service for a remote user’s client 152. See id.
“wirelessly receiving… [emphasis added]
While Bellamy generally discusses the use of both wired and wireless communication mediums, Bellamy does not specifically address the use of a wireless link between each microphone and computer 102. Id. at ¶¶ 20, 29.
“[receiving] by a processor and from each of a plurality of microphone devices respectively worn by a plurality of local users participating in a meeting and physically present at a place of the meeting, speech uttered by a corresponding local user and detected by the microphone device, and metadata identifying the corresponding local user;
Processor 104 receives audio from an array of microphones 225. Id. at ¶ 39, FIG.2. In one embodiment, microphones 225 are associated with each person 205 in a location 201. Id. at ¶¶ 65, 79. For example, each user has a lapel mic or a smartphone that transmits the user’s speech to computer 102. See id. at ¶ 65. Processor 104 further receives metadata identifying each user’s speech, such as visual information, proximity to devices with a known ownership, gait, gaze, fingerprint, retina scanning, etc. Id. at ¶ 41.
“determining, by the processor, a group of the local users that a remote user participating in the meeting and not physically present at the place of the meeting is interested in hearing; and
Processor 104 analyzes the audio recorded by microphones 225, which includes the speech of persons 205 at location 201 and the metadata. Id. at ¶ 39, FIG.2. The analysis identifies activity clusters, persons in the clusters, the clusters’ topics of conversation and the clusters’ group dynamics. Id. at ¶¶ 39–48, 74–75, FIGs.2–4. Processor 104 presents these determined pieces of information to a user who is remote from location 201 and who selects a cluster of interest for presentation. Id. at ¶¶ 50–60, 76, FIG.3. Essentially, the remote user chooses to “drop-in” on a cluster. Id.
“causing, by the processor, a computing device of the remote user to output just the speech uttered by each local user of the determined group of the local users that the remote user is interested in hearing, using the metadata identifying the corresponding local user of each microphone device.”
Processor 104 causes computer 102 (or, in a distributed architecture, a remote user’s computer 152) to establish a connection between computer 102 and devices associated with a selected cluster that the user wishes to drop-in on. Id. at ¶ 82. Recall that each person 205 in a cluster is identified using one of several techniques that involves the use of metadata concerning the person. Id. at ¶ 41. Thus, based on the metadata that identifies each user in a selected cluster, processor 104 causes computer 102 to connect to microphones 225 associated with each identified person 205 in a chosen cluster to be output from computer 102 or a remote user’s computer 152 while suppressing audio from users outside the cluster. Id. at ¶¶ 27, 59, 76, 82.
Table 2
The table above shows that the Bellamy reference describes a method that corresponds closely to the claimed method. Bellamy does not anticipate the claimed wireless transmission and reception of audio and metadata from an array of microphones to a processor.
The differences between the claimed invention and the Bellamy reference are such that the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this Application was effectively filed. Bellamy describes a method and system that allows remote users to drop-in and participate on conversations occurring in a gathering place. Bellamy at ¶ 1. Bellamy’s method and system identify clusters of activity and present those clusters to remote users, who select a preferred cluster in which to participate. Id. at ¶¶ 65–77, FIG.4. The audio from that cluster and identifying metadata of persons 205 in the cluster is then transmitted to the users over a communication channel. Id. at ¶ 42, 52. The audio is collected from an array of microphones 225 implemented as a set of personal microphones attached to a user, either as a lapel microphone or carried in a smartphone. Id. at ¶ 79. Bellamy does not address the mechanism used to transmit audio and identifying metadata from the microphones to computer 102 for processing. Generally, Bellamy identifies an I/O interface 116 and a network interface 130 for interfacing with external devices, such as a microphone 125 or other hardware sensors 129. Id. at ¶¶ 20, 29, 41. Bellamy describes I/O interface as a USB interface and describes network interface 130 as supporting both wired (e.g., Ethernet) and wireless protocols (e.g., Bluetooth and WiFi). Id. Bellamy contemplates an embodiment in which the user of computer 102 is remote from a location 201 in which microphones 225 are located. Id. at ¶¶ 42, 52–60, FIG.3. This would have reasonably suggested modifying Bellamy’s method and system to use network interface 130 to connect with microphones 225 using any known mechanism, including wired and wireless protocols, like Bluetooth or WiFi. For the foregoing reasons the Bellamy reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 2 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein wirelessly receiving, from each microphone device, the speech uttered by the corresponding local user comprises:
“wirelessly receiving all audio detected by the microphone device; and
“removing, from the audio detected by the microphone device, any audio other than the speech uttered by the corresponding local user.”
The Bellamy reference describes that a microphone included in array 225 may pickup sound that is extraneous to the focus of a particular cluster. Bellamy at ¶ 78–81. Bellamy describes suppressing audio from these sub-clusters through noise cancellation or other filtering mechanisms. Id. at ¶¶ 81. Additionally, after establishing a link between a remote, drop-in user and devices of users in a cluster, Bellamy describes noise cancelling any sounds from other clusters that are picked up by the chosen cluster’s devices. Id. at ¶ 59. For the foregoing reasons the Bellamy reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 3 depends on claim 2, and further requires the following:
“wherein removing, from the audio detected by the microphone device, any audio other than the speech uttered by the corresponding local user comprises:
“comparing the audio detected by the microphone device to an uttered speech sample of the corresponding user to identify whether the audio detected by the microphone device was spoken by a same person as the uttered speech sample;
“passing the audio detected by the microphone device in response to identifying that the audio detected by the microphone device was spoken by the same person as the uttered speech sample; and
“not passing the audio detected by the microphone device in response to identifying that the audio detected by the microphone device was not spoken by the same person as the uttered speech sample.”
Bellamy describes the use of voiceprints in order to identify persons 205. Bellamy at ¶ 25. Bellamy also describes noise-cancelling sounds from outside a selected cluster or cross-talk in a sub-cluster. Id. at ¶¶ 59, 78. Bellamy, however, does not describe using the results of the voiceprint comparison to make a pass/no-pass decision as to whether audio from a particular person should be passed or not allowed to pass.
The Kleinhout reference teaches and suggests a videoconference system with an automatic mute control system to suppress the inadvertent leaking of extraneous audio from an unmuted microphone. Kleinhout at ¶¶ 2–9, 41, 68, 79. Kleinhout’s system includes a gate control model that filters out all voices except a determined voice. Id. The system is trained on voice samples provided by each user. Id. Using the models, the system identifies voices and blocks all voices except those corresponding to a selected voice. Id.
Read in the context of Bellamy’s embodiments involving a set of personal microphones, the teachings of Kleinhout reasonably suggest modifying Bellamy to include a similar system. Bellamy’s method would then engage the system to identify speech picked up by a person’s microphone. If the speech matches the voiceprint of the person (i.e., the owner) associated with the microphone, the speech will be allowed to pass; otherwise, the speech will be suppressed, or not allowed to pass, as suggested by Bellamy at ¶¶ 59, 78. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Bellamy and the Kleinhout references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 4 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein determining the group of the local users that the remote user is interested in hearing comprises:
“receiving, from the computing device of the remote user, selection of a subset of the local users by the remote user, such that which of the remote users belong to the group that the remote user is interested in hearing is explicitly defined by the remote user.”
Similarly, Bellamy describes a remote user expressly designating a cluster as a cluster of interest that the user would like to drop-in on. Bellamy at ¶¶ 49–60, FIG.3. For the foregoing reasons the Bellamy reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 5 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein determining the group of the local users that the remote user is interested in hearing comprises:
“segmenting, by the processor, the local users among a plurality of physical groups, each physical group including those of the local users that are located at a same physical location within the place of the meeting;
“receiving, from the computing device of the remote user, selection of a physical location within the place of the meeting at which the remote user is interested in being virtually located; and
“identifying, as the group of the local users that the remote user is interested in hearing, the physical group of the local users located at the physical location at which the remote user is interested in being virtually located.”
The Bellamy reference similarly describes that processor 104 segments persons 205 into clusters, for example, three clusters 203a, 203b, 203c. Bellamy at ¶ 37, FIG.2. Users are clustered based on proximity, among other factors. Id. at ¶ 40. Bellamy describes a remote user expressly designating a cluster as a cluster of interest that the user would like to drop-in on. Id. at ¶¶ 49–60, FIG.3. For example, a remote user designates cluster 203a as a cluster to be dropped-in on. Processor 104 will then connect the remote user with the devices associated with persons 205 belonging to cluster 203a. Id. For the foregoing reasons the Bellamy reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 6 depends on claim 5, and further requires the following:
“wherein determining the group of the local users that the remote user is interested in hearing further comprises:
“detecting, by the processor, a specific location of the microphone device of each local user within the place of the meeting,
“wherein the local users are segmented among the physical groups based on the specific location of the microphone device of each local user.”
Similarly, Bellamy describes clustering persons 205 into clusters 203 based on the proximity of their devices (i.e., proximity to ancillary devices with known ownership). Bellamy at ¶¶ 40, 41. For the foregoing reasons the Bellamy reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 7 depends on claim 5, and further requires the following:
“wherein, in addition to the speech uttered by the corresponding local user and the metadata identifying the corresponding local user, identification of the microphone devices or audio speakers that are physically proximate is wirelessly received from each microphone device, and
“wherein the local users are segmented among the physical groups based on the microphone devices or audio speakers that are physically proximate to each microphone device.”
Bellamy describes receiving data from multiple sensors, including GPS sensors or beacons that detect the presence of persons 205 and/or their associated microphones 225 by picking up signals transmitted from microphones 225. Bellamy at ¶ 28. Bellamy then clusters persons 205 into clusters 203 based on their proximity. Id. at ¶¶ 40, 41. For the foregoing reasons the Bellamy reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 8 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein causing the computing device of the remote user to output just the speech uttered by each local user of the determined group that the remote user is interested in hearing comprises:
“identifying the speech uttered by each local user of the determined group that the remote user is interested in hearing, based on the metadata; and
“transmitting, to the computing device of the remote user, the speech uttered by just each local user of the determined group, as has been identified based on the metadata, and the metadata received from the microphone device worn by the local user,
“wherein the computing device of the remote user outputs the speech uttered by every local user that has been received.”
Claim 9 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein causing the computing device of the remote user to output just the speech uttered by each local user of the determined group that the remote user is interested in hearing comprises:
“transmitting, to the computing device of the remote user, the speech and the metadata received from the microphone device worn by every local user,
“wherein the computing device of the remote user outputs just the speech uttered by each local user of the determined group that the user is interested in hearing.”
Claims 8 and 9 are treated together because they both relate to how speech is caused to be output from local users in a determined group. The Bellamy reference describes a method and system that may be implemented by a single remote user’s computer or in a distributed fashion. Bellamy at ¶ 35. A designer will decide to implement each function at any convenient location as a design choice.
Further, Bellamy describes that once a remote user chooses a particular cluster to drop-in on, audio from only that cluster will be reproduced by the remote user’s computer speakers, so the remote user may participate in the cluster’s conversation. Id. at ¶¶ 59, 81. Bellamy further describes outputting only the audio from persons 205 associated with a selected cluster 203 by establishing a connection between the remote user’s device and the microphones 225 associated with the persons 205 in the selected cluster. Id. at ¶ 82. The establishment of a connection is based on the identity of the persons in the selected cluster in order to select microphones attached to particular persons in a selected cluster. Id. at ¶¶ 79, 82.
Since Bellamy requires establishing a connection between a remote user’s computer and microphones of particular persons based on their identity and membership in a selected cluster and since Bellamy describes both a local and distributed system, it is reasonable that this filtering mechanism be implemented either at the remote user’s computer or a remote server. In the former case, all audio and identifying metadata will be provided to the user’s computer and the computer will select audio based on the identifies of the persons in the selected cluster. In the latter case, the server will perform the filtering, such that just the audio of the persons associated with the selected cluster will be provided to the user’s computer. For the foregoing reasons, the Bellamy reference makes obvious all limitations of the claims.
Claim 10 is drawn to “a non-transitory computer-readable data storage medium.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed medium and the Bellamy reference.
Claim 10
The Bellamy Reference
“10. A non-transitory computer-readable data storage medium storing program code executable by a processor of a computing device of a remote user participating in a meeting and not physically present at a place of the meeting to perform processing comprising:
The Bellamy reference similarly describes a method and system for remote users to drop-in on conversations among persons located in gathering places. Bellamy at Abs., ¶ 1.
Bellamy’s method is implemented by a computer system that includes a computer 102, network 128 and a user computer 152. Id. at ¶¶ 19–20, FIG.1. Computer 102 includes a processor 104 that serves as the main processor to execute logic 148 stored in memory 136 (i.e., a non-transitory computer-readable data storage medium storing program code executable by a processor of a computing device of a remote user participating in a meeting and not physically present at a place of the meeting to perform processing) in order to identify and focal points of proximal activity. Id.
N.B.: Bellamy describes implementing logic 148 across a plurality of computers in a distributed manner. Id. at ¶¶ 14, 35, 66. In that case processor 104 may be implemented as a server 158 that implements logic 148 as a service for a remote user’s client 152. See id.
“determining, from a plurality of local users participating in the meeting and physically present at the place of the meeting, a group of the local users that a remote user is interested in hearing,
Processor 104 analyzes the audio recorded by microphones 225, which includes the speech of persons 205 at location 201 and the metadata. Id. at ¶ 39, FIG.2. The analysis identifies activity clusters, persons in the clusters, the clusters’ topics of conversation and the clusters’ group dynamics. Id. at ¶¶ 39–48, 74–75, FIGs.2–4. Processor 104 presents these determined pieces of information to a user who is remote from location 201 and who selects a cluster of interest for presentation. Id. at ¶¶ 50–60, 76, FIG.3. Essentially, the remote user chooses to “drop-in” on a cluster. Id.
the local users respectively wearing microphone devices that each wirelessly transmit speech uttered by a corresponding local user detected by the microphone device and metadata identifying the corresponding local user; and [emphasis added]
Processor 104 receives audio from an array of microphones 225. Id. at ¶ 39, FIG.2. In one embodiment, microphones 225 are associated with each person 205 in a location 201. Id. at ¶¶ 65, 79. For example, each user has a lapel mic or a smartphone that transmits the user’s speech to computer 102. See id. at ¶ 65. Processor 104 further receives metadata identifying each user’s speech, such as visual information, proximity to devices with a known ownership, gait, gaze, fingerprint, retina scanning, etc. Id. at ¶ 41. For example, each user has a smartphone with a camera that transmits video or other biometric data that identifies the user. Id. at ¶¶ 41, 65.
[the microphone devices that each wirelessly transmit]
While Bellamy generally discusses the use of both wired and wireless communication mediums, Bellamy does not specifically address the use of a wireless link between each microphone and computer 102. Id. at ¶¶ 20, 29.
“outputting just the speech uttered by each local user of the determined group of the local users that the remote user is interested in hearing, using the metadata identifying the corresponding local user of each microphone device.”
Processor 104 causes computer 102 (or, in a distributed architecture, a remote user’s computer 152) to establish a connection between computer 102 and devices associated with a selected cluster that the user wishes to drop-in on. Id. at ¶ 82. Recall that each person 205 in a cluster is identified using one of several techniques that involves the use of metadata concerning the person. Id. at ¶ 41. Thus, based on the metadata that identifies each user in a selected cluster, processor 104 causes computer 102 to connect to microphones 225 associated with each identified person 205 in a chosen cluster to be output from computer 102 or a remote user’s computer 152 while suppressing audio from users outside the cluster. Id. at ¶¶ 27, 59, 76, 82.
Table 3
The table above shows that the Bellamy reference describes a method that corresponds closely to the claimed method. Bellamy does not anticipate the claimed wireless transmission and reception of audio and metadata from an array of microphones to a processor.
The differences between the claimed invention and the Bellamy reference are such that the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this Application was effectively filed. Bellamy describes a method and system that allows remote users to drop-in and participate on conversations occurring in a gathering place. Bellamy at ¶ 1. Bellamy’s method and system identify clusters of activity and present those clusters to remote users, who select a preferred cluster in which to participate. Id. at ¶¶ 65–77, FIG.4. The audio from that cluster is then transmitted to the users over a communication channel. Id. at ¶ 42, 52. The audio is collected from an array of microphones 225 implemented as a set of personal microphones attached to a user, either as a lapel microphone or carried in a smartphone. Id. at ¶ 79. Bellamy does not address the mechanism used to transmit audio from the microphones to computer 102 for processing. Generally, Bellamy identifies an I/O interface 116 and a network interface 130 for interfacing with external devices, such as a microphone 125 or other hardware sensors 129. Id. at ¶¶ 20, 29, 41. Bellamy describes I/O interface as a USB interface and describes network interface 130 as supporting both wired (e.g., Ethernet) and wireless protocols (e.g., Bluetooth and WiFi). Id. Bellamy contemplates an embodiment in which the user of computer 102 is remote from a location 201 in which microphones 225 are located. Id. at ¶¶ 42, 52–60, FIG.3. This would have reasonably suggested modifying Bellamy’s method and system to use network interface 130 to connect with microphones 225 using any known mechanism, including wired and wireless protocols, like Bluetooth or WiFi. For the foregoing reasons the Bellamy reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 11 depends on claim 10, and further requires the following:
“wherein determining the group of the local users that the remote user is interested in hearing comprises:
“receiving selection of a subset of the local users by the remote user, such that which of the remote users belong to the group that the remote user is interested in hearing is explicitly defined by the remote user.”
Similarly, Bellamy describes a remote user expressly designating a cluster as a cluster of interest that the user would like to drop-in on. Bellamy at ¶¶ 49–60, FIG.3. For the foregoing reasons the Bellamy reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 12 depends on claim 10, and further requires the following:
“wherein determining the group of the local users that the remote user is interested in hearing comprises:
“receiving selection of a physical location within the place of the meeting at which the remote user is interested in being virtually located,
“wherein the group of the local users that the remote user is interested in hearing is identified as the local users located at the physical location at which the user is interested in being virtually located.”
Similarly, Bellamy describes a remote user expressly designating a cluster as a cluster of interest that the user would like to drop-in on. Bellamy at ¶¶ 49–60, FIG.3. The remote user will then listen to the users at the location of the selected cluster. Id. For the foregoing reasons the Bellamy reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 13 depends on claim 10, and further requires the following:
“wherein outputting just the speech uttered by each local user of the determined group of the local users that the remote user is interested in hearing comprises:
“receiving, just for each local user of the determined group that the user is interested in hearing, the speech and the metadata received from the microphone device worn by the local user,
“wherein the speech uttered by every local user that has been received is output.”
Claim 14 depends on claim 10, and further requires the following:
“wherein outputting just the speech uttered by each local user of the determined group of the local users that the remote user is interested in hearing comprises:
“receiving, for every local user, the speech and the metadata received from the microphone device worn by the local user; and
“identifying the speech uttered by each local user of the determined group that the remote user is interested in hearing, based on the metadata, wherein the speech uttered by each local user of the determined group, as has been identified based on the metadata, is output.”
Claims 13 and 14 are treated together because they both relate to how to output just the speech uttered by each local of a determined group. The Bellamy reference describes a method and system that may be implemented by a single remote user’s computer or in a distributed fashion. Bellamy at ¶ 35. A designer will decide to implement each function at any convenient location as a design choice.
Further, Bellamy describes that once a remote user chooses a particular cluster to drop-in on, audio from only that cluster will be reproduced by the remote user’s computer speakers, so the remote user may participate in the cluster’s conversation. Id. at ¶¶ 59, 81. Bellamy further describes outputting only the audio from persons 205 associated with a selected cluster 203 by establishing a connection between the remote user’s device and the microphones 225 associated with the persons 205 in the selected cluster. Id. at ¶ 82. The establishment of a connection is based on the identity of the persons in the selected cluster in order to select microphones attached to particular persons in a selected cluster. Id. at ¶¶ 79, 82.
Since Bellamy requires establishing a connection between a remote user’s computer and microphones of particular persons based on their identity and membership in a selected cluster and since Bellamy describes both a local and distributed system, it is reasonable that this filtering mechanism be implemented either at the remote user’s computer or a remote server. In the former case, all audio and identifying metadata will be provided to the user’s computer and the computer will select audio based on the identifies of the persons in the selected cluster. In the latter case, the server will perform the filtering, such that just the audio of the persons associated with the selected cluster will be provided to the user’s computer. For the foregoing reasons, the Bellamy reference makes obvious all limitations of the claims.
Claim 16 depends on claim 15, and further requires the following:
“further comprising:
“a processor; and
“a memory storing program code executable by the processor to calibrate the device for the local user by receiving an uttered speech sample of the local user from the microphone sensor, and storing the uttered speech sample in the memory,
“wherein the filter is to remove, from the detected audio, any audio other than the speech uttered by the local user by:
“comparing the detected audio to the uttered speech sample to identify whether the detected audio was spoken by a same person as the uttered speech sample;
“passing the detected audio to the transmitter for wireless transmission in response to identifying that the detected audio was spoken by the same person as the uttered speech sample; and
“not passing the detected audio to the transmitter for wireless transmission in response to identifying that the detected audio was not spoken by the same person as the uttered speech sample.”
Claim 17 depends on claim 16, and further requires the following:
“wherein the program code is executable by the processor to calibrate the device for the local user by further generating a reference voice signature corresponding to a voice of the local user from the uttered speech sample,
“wherein the uttered speech sample is stored in the memory in that the reference voice signature corresponding to the voice of the local user is stored in the memory,
“wherein the filter is to remove, from the detected audio, any audio other than the speech uttered by the local user by further generating a voice signature from the detected audio, and
“wherein the detected audio is compared to the uttered speech sample in that the voice signature generated from the detected audio is compared to the reference voice signature.”
Claims 16 and 17 are treated together because they both relate to training/calibrating a voice model to recognize voices and filter voices that are not recognized. Bellamy describes the use of voiceprints in order to identify persons 205. Bellamy at ¶ 25. Bellamy also describes noise-cancelling sounds from outside a selected cluster or cross-talk in a sub-cluster. Id. at ¶¶ 59, 78. Bellamy, however, does not describe using the results of the voiceprint comparison to make a pass/no-pass decision as to whether audio from a particular person should be passed or not allowed to pass.
The Kleinhout reference teaches and suggests a videoconference system with an automatic mute control system to suppress the inadvertent leaking of extraneous audio from an unmuted microphone. Kleinhout at ¶¶ 2–9, 41, 68, 79. Kleinhout’s system includes a gate control model that filters out all voices except a determined voice. Id. The system is trained on voice samples provided by each user, such that the voice of the user (i.e., owner) is stored in memory as a model. Id. Using the models, the system identifies voices by comparing detected voices to the model and blocks all voices except those corresponding to a selected voice. Id.
Read in the context of Bellamy’s embodiments involving a set of personal microphones, the teachings of Kleinhout reasonably suggest modifying Bellamy to include a similar system. Bellamy’s method would then engage the system to identify speech picked up by a person’s microphone. If the speech matches the voiceprint of the person (i.e., the owner) associated with the microphone, the speech will be allowed to pass; otherwise, the speech will be suppressed, or not allowed to pass, as suggested by Bellamy at ¶¶ 59, 78. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Bellamy and the Kleinhout references makes obvious all limitations of the claims.
Claim 19 depends on claim 15, and further requires the following:
“further comprising: a location-identification circuit to identify a physical location of the microphone device within the place of the meeting,
“wherein the transmitter is to wirelessly transmit the identified physical location of the microphone device.”
Bellamy’s computer 102 further includes positioning sensor 154 to provide GPS functionality. Bellamy at ¶ 28.
Bellamy does not anticipate the claimed wireless transmission of an identified physical location of the microphone device (i.e., computer 102). The differences between the claimed invention and the Bellamy reference are such that the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this Application was effectively filed. Bellamy describes a method and system that allows remote users to drop-in and participate on conversations occurring in a gathering place. Bellamy at ¶ 1. Bellamy’s method and system identify clusters of activity and present those clusters to remote users, who select a preferred cluster in which to participate. Id. at ¶¶ 65–77, FIG.4. The audio from that cluster and identifying metadata of persons 205 in the cluster is then transmitted to the users over a communication channel. Id. at ¶ 42, 52. The audio is collected from an array of microphones 225 implemented as a set of personal microphones attached to a user, either as a lapel microphone or carried in a smartphone. Id. at ¶ 79. Bellamy does not address the mechanism used to transmit audio and identifying metadata from the microphones to computer 102 for processing. Generally, Bellamy identifies an I/O interface 116 and a network interface 130 for interfacing with external devices, such as a microphone 125 or other hardware sensors 129. Id. at ¶¶ 20, 29, 41. Bellamy describes I/O interface as a USB interface and describes network interface 130 as supporting both wired (e.g., Ethernet) and wireless protocols (e.g., Bluetooth and WiFi). Id. Bellamy contemplates an embodiment in which the user of computer 102 is remote from a location 201 in which microphones 225 are located. Id. at ¶¶ 42, 52–60, FIG.3. This would have reasonably suggested modifying Bellamy’s method and system to use network interface 130 to connect with microphones 225 using any known mechanism, including wired and wireless protocols, like Bluetooth or WiFi. For the foregoing reasons the Bellamy reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 20 depends on claim 15, and further requires the following:
“further comprising: a physical proximity sensor to identify other microphone devices of the other local users that are physically proximate to the microphone device, or to identify audio speakers to which the microphone device is physically proximate,
“wherein the transmitter is to wirelessly transmit the identified other microphone devices that are physically proximate to the microphone device, or the identified audio speakers to which the microphone device is physically proximate.”
Bellamy’s computer 102 includes a camera 127 and multiple sensors 129 to identify users in proximity to computer 102. Bellamy at ¶ 41. For example, a camera may identify the face of a proximate person. Id.
Bellamy does not anticipate the claimed wireless transmission of identified other microphone devices or persons. The differences between the claimed invention and the Bellamy reference are such that the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this Application was effectively filed. Bellamy describes a method and system that allows remote users to drop-in and participate on conversations occurring in a gathering place. Bellamy at ¶ 1. Bellamy’s method and system identify clusters of activity and present those clusters to remote users, who select a preferred cluster in which to participate. Id. at ¶¶ 65–77, FIG.4. The audio from that cluster and identifying metadata of persons 205 in the cluster is then transmitted to the users over a communication channel. Id. at ¶ 42, 52. The audio is collected from an array of microphones 225 implemented as a set of personal microphones attached to a user, either as a lapel microphone or carried in a smartphone. Id. at ¶ 79. Bellamy does not address the mechanism used to transmit audio and identifying metadata from the microphones to computer 102 for processing. Generally, Bellamy identifies an I/O interface 116 and a network interface 130 for interfacing with external devices, such as a microphone 125 or other hardware sensors 129. Id. at ¶¶ 20, 29, 41. Bellamy describes I/O interface as a USB interface and describes network interface 130 as supporting both wired (e.g., Ethernet) and wireless protocols (e.g., Bluetooth and WiFi). Id. Bellamy contemplates an embodiment in which the user of computer 102 is remote from a location 201 in which microphones 225 are located. Id. at ¶¶ 42, 52–60, FIG.3. This would have reasonably suggested modifying Bellamy’s method and system to use network interface 130 to connect with microphones 225 using any known mechanism, including wired and wireless protocols, like Bluetooth or WiFi. For the foregoing reasons the Bellamy reference makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Summary
Claims 1–20 are rejected under at least one of 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103 as being unpatentable over the cited prior art. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 C.F.R. § 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention 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.
Additional Citations
The following references were identified during a prior art search. While these references are not relied on in this Office action, they are relevant to the subject matter disclosed and claimed in this Application.
Citation
Relevance
US 2025/0285638
Separation of speech in a location using models
US 2025/0227203
Local mix or central cessation of transmission.
US 2014/0267577
Server that detects if a client supports multitrack mixing. Forwards multistream if yes, otherwise performs mixing and transmits single stream.
US 2010/0125353
RFID
Table 4
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WALTER F BRINEY III whose telephone number is (571)272-7513. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-4:30 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, Carolyn Edwards can be reached at 571-270-7136. 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.
/Walter F Briney III/
/CAROLYN R EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2692
Walter F Briney IIIPrimary ExaminerArt Unit 2692
1/10/2026