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 .
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chapman et al. (US 2019/0208322 A1 and hereafter Chapman) in view of Meyer (US 5,602,367 A).
Regarding claim 1, Chapman teaches a method for homogenizing a low frequency listening experience (i.e., performing multiband bass management) in a vehicle (see Chapman, abstract and ¶ 0025). Chapman further teaches that the audio system in the vehicle has a controller to separate bass signals from a source signal (see Chapman, figure 1, unit 106, figure 2, units 200 and 203-205, and ¶ 0044-0045, 0049, and 0051). Finite impulse response (FIR) filters are provided for one or more of the woofers in the vehicle, where one or more of the FIR filters associated with the woofers can differ (see Chapman, figure 2, units 205 and 208 and ¶ 0052). However, Chapman does not appear to teach the features where “the second bass audio information comprising all contents of the first bass audio information above a second frequency” and “the third bass audio information comprising all contents of the first bass audio information other than the second bass audio information”.
Meyer teaches a bass reflex loudspeaker system with two or more drivers each in their own isolated bass reflex chambers (see Meyer, abstract, figure 3, units 21, 23, 25, 41, 45, and 49, and column 4, lines 45-62). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify Chapman with the teachings of Meyer for the purpose of improving the reproduction of the lower bass frequency range (see Chapman, ¶ 0040 and 0066, in view of Meyer, column 1, lines 8-25 and column 2, lines 24-43).
Therefore, the combination of Chapman and Meyer makes obvious:
“A method of performing multiband bass management in a vehicle, the method comprising:
separating, by an audio system in the vehicle, first bass audio information from an audio signal, the first bass audio information comprising all contents of the audio signal below a first frequency” (see Chapman, figure 2, units 200 and 203-205, and ¶ 0049 and 0051, where a controller of an audio system in a vehicle separates bass signals from a source signal);
“providing second bass audio information to each of multiple woofers of the audio system of the vehicle, the second bass audio information comprising all contents of the first bass audio information above a second frequency” (see Chapman, figure 2, units 205 and 208, and ¶ 0045 and 0052, in view of Meyer, figure 4, units 25, 67, 73, 79, and 81, column 2, lines 24-43, and column 5, line 33 - column 6, line 13, which makes obvious second bass information comprising all contents above 90 Hz up to 200 Hz, where it is obvious to supply multiple woofers in the audio system the second bass audio information); and
“providing third bass audio information to fewer than all of the multiple woofers, the third bass audio information comprising all contents of the first bass audio information other than the second bass audio information” (see Meyer, figure 4, units 21, 23, 63, 65, 69, 71, 75, 77, and 81, column 2, lines 24-43, and column 5, line 33 - column 6, line 13, where it is obvious to provide the lower bass range to at least one or more woofers).
Regarding claim 2, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. The combination makes obvious the “method of claim 1, wherein the third bass audio information is provided to a first woofer of the multiple woofers” (see Chapman, figure 9, unit 906, in view of Meyer, figure 4, units 21, 63, 69, 75, and 81 and column 5, lines 33-65).
Regarding claim 3, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 2 above. The combination makes obvious the “method of claim 2, wherein the third bass audio information is provided to the first woofer based on the first woofer having a greater enclosure size than at least a second woofer of the multiple woofers” (see Meyer, column 4, lines 29-45, where it is obvious that the woofer used for the lowest frequency range will have the greatest volume, or size).
Regarding claim 4, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 2 above. The combination makes obvious the “method of claim 2, wherein the third bass audio information is provided to the first woofer based on woofer type” (see Meyer, column 4, lines 29-45, where it is obvious to provide the third bass audio information to the largest woofer based on driver and/or cabinet size).
Regarding claim 5, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 4 above. The combination makes obvious the “method of claim 4, wherein the third bass audio information is provided to multiple first woofers at a trunk region of the vehicle” (see Chapman, figure 9, unit 906, in view of Meyer, figure 4, units 21, 23, and 25 and column 5, lines 33-65, where it is obvious to place multiple woofers in the trunk region to improve the low frequency response of the audio system).
Regarding claim 6, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 2 above. The combination makes obvious the “method of claim 2, wherein the first woofer is positioned at a trunk region of the vehicle” (see Chapman, figure 1, units 109-111 and figure 9, unit 906, in view of Meyer, column 5, line 54 - column 6, line 13, where it is obvious to provide the second bass information to a woofer placed near or in a trunk to provide the reproduction of the upper frequencies of the bass frequencies).
Regarding claim 7, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 6 above. The combination makes obvious the “method of claim 6, wherein a second woofer of the multiple woofers is positioned at a front of the vehicle, and wherein the second bass audio information, but not the third bass audio information, is provided to the second woofer” (see Chapman, figure 1, units 107-108, figure 2, units 201 and 203-205, and ¶ 0044-0045, 0049, and 0051 in view of Meyer, column 6, lines 3-13, where it is obvious to provide the bass frequencies above the lowest range to smaller sized woofers, which are placed in the front of the vehicle on either side of the driver and passenger).
Regarding claim 8, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 7 above. The combination makes obvious the “method of claim 7, wherein the vehicle has multiple second woofers at the front of the vehicle” (see Chapman, figure 1, units 107-108, figure 2, units 201 and 203-205, and ¶ 0044-0045, 0049, and 0051 in view of Meyer, column 6, lines 3-13, where it is obvious to provide the bass frequencies above the lowest range to smaller sized woofers, which are placed in the front of the vehicle on either side of the driver and passenger).
Regarding claim 9, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. As stated above with respect to claim 1, Chapman does not appear to teach the features where “the second bass audio information comprising all contents of the first bass audio information above a second frequency” and “the third bass audio information comprising all contents of the first bass audio information other than the second bass audio information”, and Meyer makes obvious these features. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify Chapman with the teachings of Meyer for the purpose of improving the reproduction of the lower bass frequency range (see Chapman, ¶ 0040 and 0066, in view of Meyer, column 1, lines 8-25 and column 2, lines 24-43).
Therefore, the combination of Chapman and Meyer makes obvious:
“An audio system, the audio system comprising: a non-woofer speaker” (see Chapman, figure 2, units 202 and ¶ 0039 and 0050, where Chapman teaches at least one mid-frequency or high frequency transducer or speaker);
“first and second woofers” (see Chapman, figure 1, units 107 and 108, figure 2, units 201, and ¶ 0028 and 0049, where Chapman teaches multiple woofers, and any two illustrated in figure 1 read on the first and second woofer);
“a first filter separating first bass audio information from an audio signal before a remainder of the audio signal is provided to the non-woofer speaker, the first bass audio information comprising all contents of the audio signal below a first frequency” (see Chapman, figure 2, units 200 and 203-205, and ¶ 0049 and 0051, where a controller of an audio system in a vehicle separates bass signals from a source signal);
“a second filter for providing second bass audio information to the first and second woofers, the second bass audio information comprising all contents of the first bass audio information above a second frequency” (see Chapman, figure 2, units 205 and 208, and ¶ 0045 and 0052, in view of Meyer, figure 4, units 25, 67, 73, 79, and 81, column 2, lines 24-43, and column 5, line 33 - column 6, line 13, which makes obvious second bass information comprising all contents above 90 Hz up to 200 Hz, where it is obvious to supply multiple woofers in the audio system the second bass audio information); and
“a third filter for providing third bass audio information to the first woofer and not to the second woofer, the third bass audio information comprising all contents of the first bass audio information other than the second bass audio information” (see Meyer, figure 4, units 21, 23, 63, 65, 69, 71, 75, 77, and 81, column 2, lines 24-43, and column 5, line 33 - column 6, line 13, where it is obvious to provide the lower bass range to at least one or more woofers).
Regarding claim 10, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 9 above. The combination makes obvious the “audio system of claim 9, wherein the first woofer has a greater enclosure size than the second woofer” (see Meyer, column 4, lines 29-45, where it is obvious that the woofer used for the lowest frequency range will have the greatest volume, or size).
Regarding claim 11, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 9 above. The combination makes obvious the “audio system of claim 9, wherein the first woofer is of a different type than the second woofer” (see Meyer, column 4, lines 29-45, where it is obvious to provide the third bass audio information to the largest woofer based on driver and/or cabinet size and the other woofers are a different type or size).
Regarding claim 12, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 9 above. The combination makes obvious the “audio system of claim 9, further comprising at least two first woofers, wherein the second bass audio information is provided to the at least two first woofers, and wherein the third bass audio information is provided to the at least two first woofers” (see Chapman, figure 1, units 109-111, figure 2, units 201 and 203-205, figure 9, unit 906, and ¶ 0044-0045, 0049, and 0051 in view of Meyer, figure 4, units 21, 23, and 25, column 5, lines 33-65, and column 6, lines 3-13, where it is obvious to provide the third bass frequencies to the largest woofers and provide the second bass frequencies above the lowest range to smaller sized woofers).
Regarding claim 13, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 9 above. The combination makes obvious the “audio system of claim 9, wherein the first woofer is located at a trunk region of the vehicle” (see Chapman, figure 1, units 109-111 and figure 9, unit 906, in view of Meyer, column 5, line 54 - column 6, line 13, where it is obvious to provide the second bass information to a woofer placed near or in a trunk to provide the reproduction of the upper frequencies of the bass frequencies).
Regarding claim 14, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 13 above. The combination makes obvious the “audio system of claim 13, wherein the second woofer is positioned at a front of the vehicle” (see Chapman, figure 1, units 107-108, figure 2, units 201 and 203-205, and ¶ 0044-0045, 0049, and 0051 in view of Meyer, column 6, lines 3-13, where it is obvious to provide the bass frequencies above the lowest range to smaller sized woofers, which are placed in the front of the vehicle on either side of the driver and passenger).
Regarding claim 15, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 14 above. The combination makes obvious the “audio system of claim 14, further comprising at least two second woofers positioned at the front of the vehicle, wherein the second bass audio information is provided to the at least two second woofers, and wherein the third bass audio information is not provided to the at least two second woofers” (see Chapman, figure 1, units 107-108, figure 2, units 201 and 203-205, and ¶ 0044-0045, 0049, and 0051 in view of Meyer, column 6, lines 3-13, where it is obvious to provide the bass frequencies above the lowest range to smaller sized woofers, which are placed in the front of the vehicle on either side of the driver and passenger).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kates (US 4,243,840 A) teaches a loudspeakers system with an improved crossover network (see Kates, abstract and figures 1-3);
Kim et al. (US 2006/0233378 A1 and hereafter Kim) teaches multi-channel bass management with various signal routing features (see Kim, abstract, figures 1-3 and ¶ 0060);
Katayama et al. (US 2009/0190773 A1 and hereafter Katayama) teaches an audio playback system in a vehicle to improve the low frequency range reproduction (see Katayama, abstract and figures 1A-7);
Akatsu (US 2014/0031962 A1) teaches an acoustic characteristics setting support system, such as a smart phone running an audio setting application to configure an audio system of a vehicle (see Akatsu, abstract and figures 1-3 and 5A-6); and
Ludwig et al. (US 2018/0020290 A1 and hereafter Ludwig) teaches an audio system for a vehicle to distribute the bass-range sound output to a woofer and a bass-compatible speaker (see Ludwig, abstract and figures 1-9).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel R Sellers whose telephone number is (571)272-7528. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 10:00-4:00.
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, Fan S Tsang can be reached at (571)272-7547. 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.
/Daniel R Sellers/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2694