DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 05/15/2026 has been entered.
Claim 21 is new.
Claims 1-10 are cancelled.
Claims 11-20 are amended.
Claims 11-21 are pending.
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.
Claims 11-21 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.
The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors.
Terms such as "speaker protection module" and "distortion" and “characteristics of the speaker” do not make clear the metes and bounds of the claimed limitation. The speaker protection module may be physical protection for the speaker or it may be a part of the circuitry that is performing some unnamed function or it may be an algorithm. It is unclear what is being claimed and how a person of ordinary skill may avoid infringement. The term distortion may mean some sort of code or signature in the signal and it is unclear what it means and how it is supposed to be compensated for and what interaction if any it has with object detection. It may mean anything from codes or signature in the signal to doppler effect to detect objects. The characteristics of the speaker can be any arbitrarily chosen threshold or speaker specifications such has volume or power requirements or any such property and any routine optimization by a person of ordinary skill will read on the claim limitation and a person of ordinary skill would not be able to clearly ascertain the metes and bounds of the claim limitation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 11-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Koteshwara (US 11,564,036 B1).
Regarding claim 11, Koteshwara discloses at least one audio signal generator[Fig 1 has loudspeaker #110], generated signals being transmitted through an output interface including a speaker protection module to a speaker transmitting an acoustic signal[Abstract, Claim 1 has distortion caused by the loudspeaker], the speaker protection module comprising a signal processor configured to create a distortion to the transmitted signal based on the characteristics of the speaker in use[Abstract, Claim 1 has distortion caused by the loudspeaker and system has processors #302 in Fig 3 and loudspeaker is capable of playing the sounds meaning it has characteristics];
at least one microphone operable to receive signals reflected from the object[Abstract, Claim 1 and Fig 1 has microphones #112];
and a receiver processing module for receiving the signals from the microphone[Fig 4, 5 show processing of signals received by microphone by the presence detection device #104], the receiver processing module also being connected to the output interface for receiving a signal therefrom corresponding to the signal transmitted through the speaker[Fig 4 show device #104 getting reference signal #412 and audio signal #406 from the microphones #206 and speaker 110; Similar parts in Fig 5], the receiver processing module being configured to compare the transmitted signal with the received signal and compensating for distortions added to the transmitted signal by the speaker protection module, and to detect the object based on the compensated signals. [Fig 4 and 5 have processing to find the object; See also Abstract, Claim 1 and Col 16 Line 55 to Col 17 line 5 have compensate for distortion or use them to indicate the object]
Regarding claim 12, Koteshwara discloses wherein the at least one audio signal generator is configured to generate signal within the ultrasound range, the microphone being configured to received signals within the ultrasound range. [Abstract, Claim 1 have ultrasonic signals]
Regarding claim 13, Koteshwara discloses wherein the at least one audio signal generator comprises an audio generator and a separate ultrasound generator, the signals from the audio generator and signals from the separate ultrasound generator being mixed in a mixing module. [#710 in Fig 7 has audio mixer meaning separate sounds are being mixed together. See also claim 1 and 4 for emitting audible and ultrasonic signals]
Regarding claim 14, Koteshwara discloses wherein the speaker protection module is configured to receive the signals from the separate ultrasound generator and the audio generator and to adjust the signal transmitted to the speaker according to predetermined characteristics so as to avoid exceeding specifications of the speaker. [Fig' 7 has various specification in the Power level table #342 and audio volume limiter #708 all in the signal generation component #310]
Regarding claim 15, Koteshwara discloses wherein the speaker protection module is included in the mixing module. [Fig 7 has signal generation component #310 which has the power level table #342 and audio volume limiter #708 and audio mixer #710]
Regarding claim 16, Koteshwara discloses wherein the speaker protection module is connected to the mixing module for receiving and adjusting the mixed signal according to speaker specifications. [Fig 7 has various specification in the Power level table #342 and audio volume limiter #708 and audio mixer #710 all in the signal generation component #310]
Regarding claim 17, Koteshwara discloses wherein the generated signal is within the audible range. [Abstract, Claim 1, 4 has audible sound]
Regarding claim 18, Koteshwara discloses wherein the generated signal constitutes a known audio signal and the receiver processing module is configured to analyze the measured reflected signal based on a comparison between the transmitted and received signals. [Fig 4, 5, 6 has transmitted, and reflected and reference signals being compared in the processor to identify movement; Specifically Fig 4 has reflected signal #408 and reference signal #412]
Regarding claim 19, Koteshwara discloses wherein the receiver processing module is configured to compare the transmitted and received signal based on a prestored data set. [Col 5, Lines 30-35 and Col 11, Lines 20-30, and Lines 40-45 and Col 18, Lines 20-30 have signal components being stored].
Regarding claim 20, Koteshwara discloses wherein the prestored data set is based on a set of previous measurements analyzed using a machine learning algorithm selecting characteristics in the received signal indicating the presence of a person. [Col 4, Lines 45-60, Col 14, Lines 40-50 have data based on machine learning]
Regarding claim 21, Koteshwarea discloses wherein the distortion comprises at least one of amplitude adjustment, phase change, filtering, tapering, and harmonics.[Col 8, Lines 60-65 has amplitude and phase, Col 22, Lines 25-45 has filtering of distortion]
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/15/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s amendments and arguments rejection, the applicant is reading the prior art of Koteshwara overly narrowly with regards to the distortion and its origin. Such a reading of the claim would be an intended use and would not carry much patentable weight. It has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987).
Applicant's remaining arguments amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. Rejections are maintained – and no allowable subject matter can be identified at this time.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 VIKAS NMN ATMAKURI whose telephone number is (571)272-5080. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5:30pm.
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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at (571)272-6970. 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.
/VIKAS ATMAKURI/Examiner, Art Unit 3645
/JAMES R HULKA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights