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
Applicant is advised that the new art unit number is 2692. Please use the new art unit number for all future communications.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/24/2024, 5/19/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 7, 9, 11-12, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gauger et al. (US 2015/0281829).
Regarding claim 9, Gauger discloses an electronic device comprising:
a processor (¶ 0029, 0019) configured to:
determine current sound environment properties of an environment external to a user (¶ 0012: ambient noise input signal) (¶ 0038: spectrum of ambient noise), current device properties of a sound playback device (¶ 0015: attenuation characteristic and/or output response characteristic of headphones), and current media properties of media that is played through the sound playback device (¶ 0012: level and equalization of audio output signals), and
generate, based on (a) the current sound environment properties (¶ 0012: based on ambient noise input signal), (b) the current device properties (¶ 0012: based on output response characteristic and attenuation characteristic of headphone), and (c) the current media properties (¶ 0012, and note that predicting the loudness of the audio output would require determining the current loudness because the predicted loudness is based on the current loudness) (also see ¶ 0030, where current spectrum (A) of audio signal is used to calculate spectrum of audio at the ear), an adaptive masking soundscape (natural sound, rain or flowing water) that, when combined with external sounds (ambient noise) in the environment, renders the external sounds less perceptible (masked) to the user (¶ 0038),
wherein the adaptive masking soundscape is played through the sound playback device (¶ 0030).
Regarding claim 11, Gauger discloses the electronic device of claim 9, wherein the processor is configured to:
determine, as at least part of the current sound environment properties, at least one of a current frequency composition of the environment (¶ 0038: spectrum of ambient noise), a current loudness of the environment, a classification for each sound in the environment, and a classification of an acoustic scene of the environment;
determine, as at least part of the current device properties, at least one of a current active noise cancelling (ANC) status of the sound playback device and an amount of ear canal occlusion caused by the sound playback device (¶ 0015: attenuation characteristic includes active noise reduction); and
determine, as at least part of the current media properties, at least one of a current loudness of the media and a current frequency composition of the media (¶ 0012: loudness as already explained in claim 9 rejection) (¶ 0030: spectrum of audio signal).
Regarding claim 12, Gauger discloses the electronic device of claim 9, wherein the processor is configured to:
compare the current sound environment properties to the current device and media properties to determine properties (¶ 0012: expected residual ambient noise) (¶ 0030: what user hears due to ambient noise less the attenuation and due to the audio being played) of currently perceptible external sounds in the environment; and
determine, as at least part of the adaptive masking soundscape, based on the properties of the currently perceptible external sounds, at least one masking sound that has positive emotional valence (¶ 0030: natural sound, rain, flowing water has positive emotional valence) and will render the currently perceptible external sounds less perceptible (masked) to the user when played through the sound playback device (¶ 0030).
Regarding claim 15, Gauger discloses the electronic device of claim 12, wherein the processor configured to determine the at least one masking sound is configured to generate, in real time, the at least one masking sound using the properties of the currently perceptible external sounds (¶ 0038: “masking noise adaptively maintains a match to the distracting noise” indicates real time masking).
Claims 1, 3-4, 7 recite similar limitations as claims 9, 11-12, 15, respectively, and are rejected for the same reasons as claims 9, 11-12, 15, respectively.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 17, 19, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gauger.
Regarding claim 17, Gauger discloses a non-transitory computer readable medium (¶ 0029)
determine current sound environment properties of an environment external to a user (¶ 0012: ambient noise input signal) (¶ 0038: spectrum of ambient noise), current device properties of a sound playback device (¶ 0015: attenuation characteristic and/or output response characteristic of headphones), and current media properties of media that is played through the sound playback device (¶ 0012: level and equalization of audio output signals); and
generate, based on (a) the current sound environment properties (¶ 0012: based on ambient noise input signal), (b) the current device properties (¶ 0012: based on output response characteristic and attenuation characteristic of headphone), and (c) the current media properties (¶ 0012, and note that predicting the loudness of the audio output would require determining the current loudness because the predicted loudness is based on the current loudness) (also see ¶ 0030, where current spectrum (A) of audio signal is used to calculate spectrum of audio at the ear), an adaptive masking soundscape (natural sound, rain or flowing water) that, when combined with external sounds (ambient noise) in the environment, renders the external sounds less perceptible (masked) to the user (¶ 0038),
wherein the adaptive masking soundscape is played through the sound playback device (¶ 0030).
Gauger is not relied upon to disclose the non-transitory computer readable medium containing instructions that when executed cause the at least one processor of the electronic device to perform the steps of Gauger.
Official notice is taken that it is very well-known in the art to configure a non-transitory computer-readable medium containing instructions that when executed cause at least one processor of an electronic device to perform steps. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to configure the non-transitory computer readable medium to contain instructions that when executed cause the at least one processor of the electronic device to perform the steps of Gauger, the motivation being to use a well-known configuration to perform the steps of Gauger.
Regarding claim 19, Gauger discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 17, further containing instructions that when executed cause the at least one processor to:
determine, as at least part of the current sound environment properties, at least one of a current frequency composition of the environment (¶ 0038: spectrum of ambient noise), a current loudness of the environment, a classification for each sound in the environment, and a classification of an acoustic scene of the environment;
determine, as at least part of the current device properties, at least one of a current active noise cancelling (ANC) status of the sound playback device and an amount of ear canal occlusion caused by the sound playback device (¶ 0015: attenuation characteristic includes active noise reduction); and
determine, as at least part of the current media properties, at least one of a current loudness of the media and a current frequency composition of the media (¶ 0012: loudness as already explained in claim 9 rejection) (¶ 0030: spectrum of audio signal).
Regarding claim 20, Gauger discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 17, further containing instructions that when executed cause the at least one processor to:
compare the current sound environment properties to the current device and media properties to determine properties (¶ 0012: expected residual ambient noise) (¶ 0030: what user hears due to ambient noise less the attenuation and due to the audio being played) of currently perceptible external sounds in the environment; and
determine, as at least part of the adaptive masking soundscape, based on the properties of the currently perceptible external sounds, at least one masking sound that has positive emotional valence (¶ 0030: natural sound, rain, flowing water has positive emotional valence) and will render the currently perceptible external sounds less perceptible (masked) to the user when played through the sound playback device (¶ 0030).
Claim(s) 2, 10, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gauger in view of Spittle (US 2023/0300532).
Regarding claim 10, Gauger discloses the electronic device of claim 9.
Gauger is not relied upon to disclose wherein:
the current sound environment properties include locations of sound sources in the environment,
the processor is further configured to:
determine a current spatial orientation of the user; and
adjust spatial properties of the adaptive masking soundscape based on the locations of the sound sources and the current spatial orientation of the user to generate a dynamic spatial masking soundscape, and
the dynamic spatial masking soundscape is played through the sound playback device.
In a similar field of endeavor, Spittle discloses wherein:
the current sound environment properties include locations of sound sources in the environment (¶ 0219, 0316, 0705) (also, ¶ 0810: “masking sounds can be intentionally spatialized such that they are perceived at the location of the disturbing trigger sound” implies that the location of the disturbing trigger sound is determined) (¶ 0217: tagging sounds based on spatial analysis),
the processor is further configured to:
determine a current spatial orientation of the user (¶ 0326); and
adjust spatial properties of the adaptive masking soundscape based on the locations of the sound sources and the current spatial orientation of the user to generate a dynamic spatial masking soundscape (¶ 0326, 0385, 0810), and
the dynamic spatial masking soundscape is played through the sound playback device (¶ 0319).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to: wherein:
the current sound environment properties include locations of sound sources in the environment,
the processor is further configured to:
determine a current spatial orientation of the user; and
adjust spatial properties of the adaptive masking soundscape based on the locations of the sound sources and the current spatial orientation of the user to generate a dynamic spatial masking soundscape, and
the dynamic spatial masking soundscape is played through the sound playback device,
the motivation being to spatialize masking sounds so that they are perceived at the location of the disturbing trigger sound to cause maximum masking (Spittle - ¶ 0810).
Claims 2 recite similar limitations as claim 10, respectively, and are rejected for the same reasons as claims 10, respectively.
Regarding claim 18, Gauger discloses the non-transitory computer readable medium of claim 17.
Gauger is not relied upon to disclose wherein:
the current sound environment properties include locations of sound sources in the environment,
the non-transitory computer readable medium further contains instructions that when executed cause the at least one processor to:
determine a current spatial orientation of the user; and
adjust spatial properties of the adaptive masking soundscape based on the locations of the sound sources and the current spatial orientation of the user to generate a dynamic spatial masking soundscape, and
the dynamic spatial masking soundscape is played through the sound playback device.
In a similar field of endeavor, Spittle discloses wherein:
the current sound environment properties include locations of sound sources in the environment (¶ 0219, 0316, 0705) (also, ¶ 0810: “masking sounds can be intentionally spatialized such that they are perceived at the location of the disturbing trigger sound” implies that the location of the disturbing trigger sound is determined) (¶ 0217: tagging sounds based on spatial analysis),
the processor is further configured to:
determine a current spatial orientation of the user (¶ 0326); and
adjust spatial properties of the adaptive masking soundscape based on the locations of the sound sources and the current spatial orientation of the user to generate a dynamic spatial masking soundscape (¶ 0326, 0385, 0810), and
the dynamic spatial masking soundscape is played through the sound playback device (¶ 0319).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to: wherein:
the current sound environment properties include locations of sound sources in the environment,
the non-transitory computer readable medium further contains instructions that when executed cause the at least one processor to:
determine a current spatial orientation of the user; and
adjust spatial properties of the adaptive masking soundscape based on the locations of the sound sources and the current spatial orientation of the user to generate a dynamic spatial masking soundscape, and
the dynamic spatial masking soundscape is played through the sound playback device,
the motivation being to spatialize masking sounds so that they are perceived at the location of the disturbing trigger sound to cause maximum masking (Spittle - ¶ 0810).
Claim(s) 5-6, 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gauger in view of Chang et al. (US 2024/0420673).
Regarding claim 13, Gauger discloses the electronic device of claim 12.
Gauger is not relied upon to disclose wherein the processor configured to determine the at least one masking sound is configured to:
categorize each of the currently perceptible external sounds as one of intelligible human speech, transient noise, or non-transient noise; and
select, for each categorized currently perceptible external sound, a masking sound from a predefined set of masking sounds for that category.
In a similar field of endeavor, Chang discloses categorize each of the currently perceptible external sounds as one of intelligible human speech (conversational noise), transient noise (impact noise), or non-transient noise (continuity noise) (¶ 0063, 0151); and
select, for each categorized currently perceptible external sound, a masking sound from a predefined set of masking sounds for that category (¶ 0078, 0151).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to: wherein the processor configured to determine the at least one masking sound is configured to:
categorize each of the currently perceptible external sounds as one of intelligible human speech, transient noise, or non-transient noise; and
select, for each categorized currently perceptible external sound, a masking sound from a predefined set of masking sounds for that category,
the motivation being to use masking sound suitable for the current environmental noise (Chang - ¶ 0151).
Regarding claim 14, Gauger-Chang discloses the electronic device of claim 13, and Chang discloses wherein:
the predefined set of masking sounds for intelligible human speech includes sounds that, when played alongside intelligible human speech, render the speech unintelligible without introducing distraction, and without creating discomfort or negative emotional valence (¶ 0069, 0144, 0151: rap music with 100% voice coverage rate),
the predefined set of masking sounds for transient noise includes transient sounds with positive emotional valence that, when played at a randomized interval alongside transient noise with a similar loudness and in a similar frequency range, render the transient noise less perceptible (¶ 0069, 0151: dance music with strong beat), and
the predefined set of masking sounds for non-transient noise includes non-transient sounds with positive emotional valence that, when played alongside non-transient noise with a similar loudness and in a similar frequency range, reduce a level of the non-transient noise perceived by the user (¶ 0069, 0127, 0151: classical music).
Claims 5-6 recite similar limitations as claim 13-14, respectively, and are rejected for the same reasons as claims 13-14, respectively.
Claim(s) 8, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gauger in view of Ayzenberg et al. (US 2025/0344009).
Regarding claim 16, Gauger discloses the electronic device of claim 12, wherein:
the processor configured to determine the at least one masking sound is configured to:
the selected masking sound is played through the sound playback device at a time (¶ 0030)
Gauger is not relied upon to disclose wherein:
the processor configured to determine the at least one masking sound is configured to:
categorize the currently perceptible external sounds as transient noise; and
select a masking sound from a predefined set of masking sounds with positive emotional valence that, when played alongside transient noise with a similar loudness and in a similar frequency range, render the transient noise less perceptible, and
the selected masking sound is played through the sound playback device at a time immediately after the transient noise occurs.
In a similar field of endeavor, Ayzenberg discloses:
the processor configured to determine the at least one masking sound is configured to:
categorize the currently perceptible external sounds as transient noise (¶ 0064-0065: “recurring” indicates transient); and
select a masking sound from a predefined set of masking sounds (generative features) with positive emotional valence (¶ 0113: wind rushing through trees, water trickling over rocks have positive emotional valence) that, when played alongside transient noise with a similar loudness and in a similar frequency range, render the transient noise less perceptible (¶ 0068, 0071-0072, 0152, 0154), and
the selected masking sound is played through the sound playback device at a time immediately after the transient noise occurs (¶ 0153).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to: wherein:
the processor configured to determine the at least one masking sound is configured to:
categorize the currently perceptible external sounds as transient noise; and
select a masking sound from a predefined set of masking sounds with positive emotional valence that, when played alongside transient noise with a similar loudness and in a similar frequency range, render the transient noise less perceptible, and
the selected masking sound is played through the sound playback device at a time immediately after the transient noise occurs,
the motivation being to make the masking effective (Ayzenberg - ¶ 0153).
Claims 8 recite similar limitations as claim 16, respectively, and are rejected for the same reasons as claims 16, respectively.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK FISCHER whose telephone number is (571)270-3549. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 1-6, 7:30-11:59pm EST.
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 R EDWARDS can be reached on 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.
/MARK FISCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2692
/CAROLYN R EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2692