DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to communications filed 5/17/2024:
Claims 1-20 are pending
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 Interpretation
Claims 1, 12, and 15 (12 and 15 being based on claim 1) recite “positioning a main loudspeaker and a correction loudspeaker in a room, for example in a sound studio, wherein these loudspeakers can be two separate loudspeakers or one common loudspeaker”. However, the phrase “for example in a sound studio” seems to imply intended use which does not carry patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.02II (“During examination, statements in the preamble reciting the purpose or intended use of the claimed invention must be evaluated to determine whether or not the recited purpose or intended use results in a structural difference (or, in the case of process claims, manipulative difference) between the claimed invention and the prior art. If so, the recitation serves to limit the claim. See, e.g., In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 938, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963) (The claims were directed to a core member for hair curlers and a process of making a core member for hair curlers. The court held that the intended use of hair curling was of no significance to the structure and process of making.); In re Sinex, 309 F.2d 488, 492, 135 USPQ 302, 305 (CCPA 1962) (statement of intended use in an apparatus claim did not distinguish over the prior art apparatus). To satisfy an intended use limitation which is limiting, a prior art structure which is capable of performing the intended use as recited in the preamble meets the claim. See, e.g., In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (anticipation rejection affirmed based on Board’s factual finding that the reference dispenser (a spout disclosed as useful for purposes such as dispensing oil from an oil can) would be capable of dispensing popcorn in the manner set forth in appellant’s claim 1 (a dispensing top for dispensing popcorn in a specified manner)) and cases cited therein. See also MPEP § 2112 - MPEP § 2112.02.”).
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 1-20 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 1, it recites “positioning a main loudspeaker…can be two separate loudspeakers or one common loudspeaker.” However, later dependent claims (for example claim 3) recites only “the main loudspeaker”. Claim 3 would be indefinite and lack support if the latter (common loudspeaker) was chosen in claim 1. Applicant is advised to structure the dependent claims such that both separate and common loudspeaker set ups are accounted for in the further limiting claims.
Regarding claim 15, the claim is directed to “a loudspeaker” (note the singular) comprising of the DSP. However, the DSP (as recited in claim 12) comprises of either a first and second output for connecting a main loudspeaker and a correction speaker or a common output for connecting to a common loudspeaker. However, since claim 15 is “a loudspeaker” comprising of a DSP and claim 16 recites that the loudspeaker is either a correction loudspeaker or a common loudspeaker, there appears to be a lapse in logic in the way the claims are recited. Examiner believes that the “system” claim of 15 should be corrected to allow for one or more loudspeakers in the case that the DSP supports two outputs and one single output.
Regarding claim 18, it recites “…for generating and detecting sound waves by means of loudspeakers and microphone”. However, the claim recites “wherein connection of the signal processor, the loudspeaker or loudspeakers….” Therefore, the generating and detecting recitation should include the case for a singular loudspeaker.
The remaining dependent claims are rejected as being dependent upon an indefinite parent claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are allowed upon overcoming the above rejection(s).
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: regarding claims 1, 12, and 15, the prior art or combination thereof fails to disclose and make obvious the invention as a whole.
Regarding claim 1, Jain et al (US20190132678, hereinafter “Jain”) teaches a method for eliminating room modes (Ñ) which form as resonances in a room when a digital user signal (N) is played by a main loudspeaker (abstract, method of noise cancellation wherein the noise can be modes of a room), characterised by the following steps:
a. setting up and carrying out characteristic value measurements, by
i. positioning a main loudspeaker and a correction loudspeaker in a room, for example in a sound studio, wherein these loudspeakers can be two separate loudspeakers or one common loudspeaker (¶4, outputting of a loudspeaker signal);
positioning a microphone in this room (¶4, microphone);
providing a digital signal processor with a signal input for inputting and processing digital signals (A, C, N), a first loudspeaker output and a second loudspeaker output for the main loudspeaker and the correction loudspeaker, which can be combined to form a common loudspeaker output for the common loudspeaker, and a microphone input for the microphone (¶4, error signal processing determined as an output from the transducer and captured by the microphone),
connection of the signal processor, the loudspeaker or loudspeakers and the microphone to sound electronics (¶4, Fig. 2, all signal processing modules are connected);
ii. carrying out a first characteristic value measurement, in which a first transfer function (S(z)), which maps the change in a digital signal (A) after it has been recorded on the microphone on a secondary path (S) which is played via the correction loudspeaker or the common loudspeaker as sound waves (¶4, measurements are carried out by the microphone and transducer),
using an LMS(Least Mean Square) module to carry out a numerical gradient method (¶40, LMS method can be applied),
i. positioning the main loudspeaker and the correction loudspeaker, or the common loudspeaker, at the same locations in the same room as for the characteristic value measurements, with the same sound electronics required for that and connection to the digital signal processor as in step a (¶4, the cancellation sound being realized using adaptive filtering techniques at the same location wherein the error signal was captured);
Jain fails to explicitly teach and captured as a digital signal [AS(z)=B], is reproduced by a changeable electronic filter (S′(z)),
iii. saving this electronic filter (S′*(z)), which thus becomes unchangeable;
iv. carrying out a second characteristic value measurement, in which a second transfer function (P(z)), which maps the change in a digital signal C after it has been recorded on the microphone on a primary path (P) which is played via the main loudspeaker or the common loudspeaker as sound waves and captured as a digital signal (D) [CP(z)=D], is partially reproduced by a changeable electronic filter (W(z)),
using the LMS module to carry out a numeric gradient method;
v. saving the electronic filter (W*(z)), which thus becomes unchangeable;
iii. simultaneously routing this user signal (N) through the last saved filter (W*(z)) in the signal processor and subsequently forwarding it to the second or common output, and
playing this filtered user signal (Ñ−) through the correction loudspeaker or common loudspeaker with a delay on account of the time (dt) required by the filter (W*(z)),
iv. through which the room modes (Ñ) of the digital user signal (N) that are still present in the room after the time delay (dt) are eliminated.
Urhonen teaches b. setting up and using the method with a user signal (N) (¶74, receiving a user input signal), by
ii. routing the digital user signal (N) to the first or common output and playing it through the main loudspeaker or common loudspeaker, wherein room modes (Ñ) are formed in the room (Fig. 1, ¶5, 49, outputting a signal at the speaker to generate room modes);
Urhonen similarly fails to explicitly teach and captured as a digital signal [AS(z)=B], is reproduced by a changeable electronic filter (S′(z)),
iii. saving this electronic filter (S′*(z)), which thus becomes unchangeable;
iv. carrying out a second characteristic value measurement, in which a second transfer function (P(z)), which maps the change in a digital signal C after it has been recorded on the microphone on a primary path (P) which is played via the main loudspeaker or the common loudspeaker as sound waves and captured as a digital signal (D) [CP(z)=D], is partially reproduced by a changeable electronic filter (W(z)),
using the LMS module to carry out a numeric gradient method;
v. saving the electronic filter (W*(z)), which thus becomes unchangeable;
iii. simultaneously routing this user signal (N) through the last saved filter (W*(z)) in the signal processor and subsequently forwarding it to the second or common output, and
playing this filtered user signal (Ñ−) through the correction loudspeaker or common loudspeaker with a delay on account of the time (dt) required by the filter (W*(z)),
iv. through which the room modes (Ñ) of the digital user signal (N) that are still present in the room after the time delay (dt) are eliminated.
Based on the above references, it does not appear to be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to eliminate room modes using the same limitations as currently recited.
The respective dependent claims are also allowable as they depend upon an allowable parent claim.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to PTO-892, Notice of References Cited for a listing of analogous art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QIN ZHU whose telephone number is (571)270-1304. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri: 7:30AM-5:00PM EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Duc Nguyen can be reached on (571)272-7503. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/QIN ZHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2691