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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 17-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Regarding independent claim 17, the limitations of carrying out a mathematical function to relate a first set of values (i.e., spatial audio signal direction index value, grid circle index value, low direction index value and high direction index value) and a second set of values (i.e., an elevation index value and an azimuth index value), is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components without requiring any improvement to eh operation of the computer itself. That is, other than reciting a “computer program code configured,” nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the “one processor and at least one memory including computer program code configured” language, relating a first and second set of index values in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually carrying out a mathematical function. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites two additional elements – firstly, using a processor to store instructions. The processor in both steps is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function for executable instructions) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Secondly, a computer program code, is considered insignificant extra-solution activity which is considered “an additional element” and they do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a processor to store instructions amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Independent claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 for the significant similar reasons to independent claim 17.
Dependent claims 18-24 and 26-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 for in which they do not include additional elements that help integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, thus are rejected for at least the similar reasons as that of base claim 17 and 25 which they depend on.
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 17-32 are 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.
Regarding claim 17, it recites “estimate, by application of a defined polynomial comprising the spatial audio signal direction index value, a grid circle index value.” It is unclear what is being estimated in this step. However, as recited on page 2, paragraph 2 of the specification, “the means for estimating, by application of a defined polynomial comprising the spatial audio signal direction index value, a grid circle index value may be for obtaining polynomial coefficients, wherein the polynomial coefficients within the polynomial cause the polynomial to approximate a function of the cumulative index value as function of the grid circle index value,” it appears the applicant is estimating the polynomial of the set of index values, but the subject is omitted in the claim language, hence unclear what is being estimated.
Independent claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 for the significant similar reasons to independent claim 17.
Dependent claims 18-24 and 26-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 for in which they do not include additional elements that help clarify what is being estimated, thus are rejected for at least the similar reasons as that of base claim 17 and 25 which they depend on.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANNABELLE KANG whose telephone number is (571)270-3403. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00-5:00.
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, Vivian Chin can be reached at 571-272-7848. 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.
/ANNABELLE KANG/ Examiner, Art Unit 2695
/VIVIAN C CHIN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2695
Prosecution Insights