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 Arguments
Following response to arguments is based on Applicant’s arguments filed on 30 July 2026.
Regarding Previous Claim Objections
Previous objection to claim 17 has been withdrawn in view of the amendment to the objected claim.
Regarding Previous Rejection Under 35 USC § 112
Previous rejection of claims 11-14 and 19-20 has been withdrawn in view of the amendment to the rejected claims.
Regarding Previous Rejection Under 35 USC § 103
Applicant’s arguments [Pages 6-8] with respect to rejection of claims 11 and 16 have been fully considered and, for the purpose of the examination, are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of different interpretation of the previously applied reference.
Regarding claim 11, on pages 7-8, Applicant argues that prior art of record fails to teach newly incorporated limitations.
The Examiner acknowledges the incorporation of the new limitations; however, in view of the indefiniteness of these newly incorporated limitations, the claim will be interpreted as outputting some audios to users in different zones of a specific location. Hence, Mossner is still applicable, as Mossner discloses a system (Fig. 3), where speaker 6, while in a first zone 10A, outputs audio to users to guide the users around the area 12A; and outputs other audios while in second zone 10B [Paragraphs 16, 122, 132-137]
Regarding claim 16, this claim has been amended to incorporate similar limitations to those set forth in independent claim 1, and are rejected based on similar reasoning.
Therefore, in view of the above reasons, the Examiner maintains the rejections.
Claim Status
Claims 11-14 and 16-19 have been amended. Claims 15 and 20 have been canceled. Claims 21-22 have been added. Thus, claims 11-14, 16-19, 21-22 are presented for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 – Second Paragraph
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 11-14 and 19-20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
For claim 11:
At lines 4-9, it is unclear the relevance of the limitations in these lines, as it is interpreted as having, apparently, a person speaking over a microphone connected to a speaker. In fact, since there are no further details, the mobile communications infrastructure seems to be irrelevant, unless it is detailed how this communications infrastructure is being actually applied.
At lines 3-4, based on the above, it is unclear, then, how the first person is associated with the first communication node.
At line 6, it is unclear how “the first person guides the plurality of persons through the building”. This limitation is interpreted as having the first person accompanying the plurality of persons.
At lines 13-15, it is unclear what second audio is being transmitted to the third communication node. There is no further explanation about this audio, thus it is being interpreted as any audio being transmitted.
At line 16, the second audio signal is being transmitted to the plurality of persons in the second zone; but, the plurality of persons, in line 9, were located in the first zone. Then, it is unclear how the second audio would be sent to the plurality of persons.
For claim 16:
This claim is rejected as applied to claim 11.
For claim 22:
At lines 3-4, it is unclear whether “a third communication node” should refer to the third communication node in claim 11, or this node in claim 22 should be labeled differently.
For claims 12-14, 17-19, 21-22:
These claims are also rejected as they depend upon a rejected claim.
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.
(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 11-14 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)-(a)(2) as being anticipated by Mossner et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0017615).
Regarding claim 11, Mossner teaches a building infrastructure (Figs. 3, 8) comprising a building (12A) and having at least a first zone (10A) and a second zone (10B), wherein the building has a mobile communications infrastructure ([Paragraphs 13, 16]), wherein an audio system is located in the building ([Paragraph 40]) and configured to:
receive, via the mobile communications infrastructure, a first audio signal from a first communication node associated with a first person located in the first zone, wherein the first person guides a plurality of persons through the building (the audio learning system receives input from a guider, so that audio indications are provided to users in first zone 10A for them to be guided around premises 12A [Paragraphs 16, 122, 132-137]);
transmit, via the mobile communications infrastructure, the first audio signal to a second communication node, the second communication node being a first loudspeaker located in the first zone that outputs the first audio signal to the plurality of persons (the audios are transmitted to speakers 6 [Paragraphs 16, 122, 132-137]);
determine, via the mobile communications infrastructure, whether a location of the first communication node has changed from the first zone to the second zone that is different than the first zone (it is determined whether users and user equipment are moved to another zone, such as zone 10B [Paragraphs 16, 122, 132-137]); and
transmit, via the mobile communications infrastructure in response to determining the location of the first communication node has changed from the first zone to the second zone, a second audio signal to a third communication node (thus, speakers in second zone 10B receive the audios [Paragraphs 16, 122, 132-137]), the third communication node being a second loudspeaker located in the second zone that outputs the second audio signal to the plurality of persons (speakers in zone 10B output the sounds to users [Paragraphs 16, 122, 132-137]).
Regarding claim 12, Mossner further teaches the building infrastructure according to claim 11, wherein the first communication node is a mobile device (UE 2).
Regarding claim 13, Mossner further teaches the building infrastructure according to claim 11, wherein the first audio signal from the first communication node is a voice signal from the first person, wherein the first person is a tour guide (voice signal to be transmitted to speaker 6 from UE 2).
Regarding claim 14, Mossner further teaches the building infrastructure according to claim 11, wherein the mobile communications infrastructure includes at least one base station, and mobile communications antennas of the at least one base station are arranged at a distance from one another which is less than or equal to 10 meters (as in Fig. 3, BS 38 must comprise antennas to communicate with UE 2).
Regarding claim 16, Mossner teaches a method (Figs. 3, 8) for transmitting an audio signal from a first communication node (UE 2) to a second communication node (speaker 6) using an audio system (audio system 2, 6) and a mobile communications infrastructure ([Paragraphs 12-13, 120]), wherein the audio system maintains a connection with the mobile communications infrastructure ([Paragraphs 12-13, 120]), the method comprising the following steps:
registering the first communication node using a unique identification feature ([Paragraphs 12-13, 120]), wherein a message is sent to the audio system that the first communication node is being used for an audio tour (signals 21, 33 are being communicated to UE 2 so that it communicates to speaker 6);
transmitting a first audio signal via the first communication node to the audio system (the signal is sent to 2, 6 [Paragraphs 12-13, 120]), wherein the first communication node is associated with a first person conducting the audio tour in a building having at least a first zone and a second zone (instructions are provided to users in the different zones, thus the instructions are provided by a guider [Paragraphs 12-13, 120-122]), and wherein the first communication node maintains a connection to a base station of the mobile communications infrastructure (BS 38 communicates the signals between the zones and the audio system [Paragraphs 12-13, 120-122]);
transmitting the first audio signal to a second communication node, the second communication node being a first loudspeaker located in the first zone that outputs the first audio signal to a plurality of persons being guided through the building by the first person (the audios are transmitted to speakers 6 [Paragraphs 16, 122, 132-137]);
determining whether a location of the first communication node has changed from the first zone to the second zone that is different than the first zone (it is determined whether users and user equipment are moved to another zone, such as zone 10B [Paragraphs 16, 122, 132-137]);
transmitting, in response to determining the location of the first communication node has changed from the first zone to the second zone, a second audio signal to a third communication node (thus, speakers in second zone 10B receive the audios [Paragraphs 16, 122, 132-137]), the third communication node being a second loudspeaker located in the second zone that outputs the second audio signal to the plurality of persons (speakers in zone 10B output the sounds to users [Paragraphs 16, 122, 132-137]).
Regarding claim 17, Mossner further teaches the method according to claim 16, wherein the second communication node is selected from a plurality of communication nodes including a plurality of loudspeakers, the plurality of loudspeakers comprising the first loudspeaker and the second loudspeaker (several speakers 6, as several users are present [Paragraphs 12-13, 120-122]), and wherein the transmission from the first communication node to the first loudspeaker takes place via the audio system (UE 2 communicating to speakers 6).
Regarding claim 18, Mossner further teaches the method according to claim 17, further comprising determining at which mobile communications antenna the first audio signal of the first communication node is received, wherein the determination is made in the base station (central system determines which UE is to receive the signal, thus being selected among other UEs [Paragraphs 12-13, 120-122]).
Regarding claim 19, Mossner further teaches the method according to claim 18, wherein the first audio signal of the first communication node is transmitted to the second communication node which is closest to the mobile communications antenna (UE 2 communicates the audio to speaker 6 [Paragraphs 12-13, 120-122]).
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 of this title, 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 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mossner et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0017615) in view of Thornton et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0340222).
Regarding claim 21, Mossner teaches all the limitations recited in claim 11.
However, Mossner does not explicitly mention: further comprising an emergency and alarm system, wherein the audio system is further configured to: receive, via the mobile communications infrastructure during the transmitting of the first audio signal, a third audio signal from the emergency and alarm system; and transmit, via the mobile communications infrastructure, the third audio signal to the second communication node such that the transmitting of the first audio signal is stopped, wherein the second communication node outputs the third audio signal to the plurality of persons, and wherein the third audio signal has a higher priority than the first audio signal.
Thornton teaches, in a similar field of endeavor of communication systems, the following:
further comprising an emergency ([Paragraph 26]) and alarm system ([Paragraph 35]), wherein the audio system is further configured to: receive, via the mobile communications infrastructure during the transmitting of the first audio signal, a third audio signal from the emergency and alarm system ([Paragraphs 49, 52]); and transmit, via the mobile communications infrastructure, the third audio signal to the second communication node such that the transmitting of the first audio signal is stopped ([Paragraphs 70-71]), wherein the second communication node outputs the third audio signal to the plurality of persons, and wherein the third audio signal has a higher priority than the first audio signal ([Paragraphs 58, 60]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication system (as taught by Mossner) by processing emergency signals (as taught by Thornton) for the purpose of providing accurate information in emergency situations (Thornton – Paragraph 3).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mossner et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0017615) in view of Herring et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2014/0129231).
Regarding claim 22, Mossner teaches all the limitations recited in claim 11.
However, Mossner does not explicitly mention: wherein the audio system is further configured to, after transmitting the first audio signal: receive, via the mobile communications infrastructure, a third audio signal from a third communication node associated with a second person located in the first zone, wherein the second person guides a second plurality of persons through the building that is different than the plurality of persons; determine, via the mobile communications infrastructure, whether the plurality of persons are located in the first zone or the second zone; and transmit, via the mobile communications infrastructure in response to determining the plurality of persons are located in the second zone, the third audio signal to the second communication node, wherein the second communication node outputs the third audio signal to the second plurality of persons located in the first zone.
Herring teaches, in a similar field of endeavor of communication systems, the following:
wherein the audio system is further configured to, after transmitting the first audio signal: receive, via the mobile communications infrastructure, a third audio signal from a third communication node associated with a second person located in the first zone (other guiders provide audio signals [Paragraphs 5-6, 12, 19, 39]), wherein the second person guides a second plurality of persons through the building that is different than the plurality of persons ([Paragraphs 5-6, 12, 19, 39]); determine, via the mobile communications infrastructure, whether the plurality of persons are located in the first zone or the second zone ([Paragraphs 5-6, 12, 19, 39]); and transmit, via the mobile communications infrastructure in response to determining the plurality of persons are located in the second zone, the third audio signal to the second communication node ([Paragraphs 5-6, 12, 19, 39]), wherein the second communication node outputs the third audio signal to the second plurality of persons located in the first zone (thus, the other persons receive corresponding audio signals based on their current location [Paragraphs 5-6, 12, 19, 39]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the communication system (as taught by Mossner) by processing emergency signals (as taught by Herring) for the purpose of properly communicating audio signals (Herring – Paragraph 6).
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 FABRICIO R MURILLO GARCIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5708. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5pm.
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, Sam K Ahn can be reached at 5712723044. 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.
August 8, 2026
/FABRICIO R MURILLO GARCIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633
Prosecution Insights