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
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 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.
Claim(s) 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andrikowich et al. (US 2023/0131605) herein Andrikowich in view of Wells (US 2014/0153751).
Regarding claim 1, Treat discloses an aviation headset (headset for communication with air traffic control, Andrikowich: [0072], comprising: a microphone (boom microphone 115, Andrikowich: Fig. 1, [0074]); a port configured to accept a cord for coupling with an audio panel (port 410 configured to accept a cord 430, said cord capable of connecting to an audio panel, Andrikowich: Figs. 5-11, [0083]); a transceiver (electronics 70 include a transceiver, Andrikowich: [0075]); a speaker (speakers housed in ear cup 105, Andrikowich: Figs. 1, 2, 4, [0073]); and a processor coupled to the microphone, the port, the transceiver, and the speaker (electronics 70 includes amplification and signal processing components, explicitly implying connection to the microphone, port, transceiver and speaker, Andrikowich: [0075]), wherein the processor is configured to: receive an audio signal from the audio panel (processor receives an audio signal via connector from an external audio device (would functionally work with an audio panel), Andrikowich: [0087], [0090], [0096]); but lacks determine a relative direction of a headset corresponding to the audio signal; and based on the relative direction, play the audio signal as three-dimensional (3D) audio through the speaker.
Nevertheless, it is well known in the art to have a processor of a headset be configured to receive an audio signal from an external device and determine a relative direction of a headset corresponding to the audio signal, and based on the relative direction, play the audio signal as three-dimensional audio through the speaker as demonstrated by Wells (processor circuitry includes various input and output mechanisms (microphone, speaker, wireless communication circuitry, wired connection circuitry), Wells: [0016]), said processing circuitry determines a relative direction/orientation of a headset corresponding to an audio signal received at an AP or where a signal is received, and based on the relative direction/orientation determined modify the audio signal as a 3-D audio through the speaker, Wells: [0017], [0019], [0020], [0021])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the processor of Andrikowich to have a processor of a headset be configured to receive an audio signal from an external device and determine a relative direction of a headset corresponding to the audio signal, and based on the relative direction, play the audio signal as three-dimensional audio through the speaker as demonstrated by Wells in order to improve a user’s sense of immersion (Wells: [0001]) through improved audio directionality.
Regarding claim 2, in the combination of Andrikowich and Wells, Wells discloses wherein the transceiver is configured to determine the relative direction of the headset utilizing wireless direction finding (transceiver is configured to determine relative direction/orientation based on where a signal is received wirelessly/ when received at an access point (interpreted to meet wireless direction finding), Wells: [0017], [0019], [0020]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 11-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for allowance:
the prior art of records teaches various headsets, for example: Andrikowich et al. (US 2023/0131605), Wells (US 2014/0153751), Munoz et al. (US 2021/0006918), Chen et al. (US 2022/0070585), and Treat et al. (US 2024/0334112). However, the prior art of record fails to show “receive a passenger communication signal via the transceiver; determine a relative direction of a passenger headset corresponding to the passenger communication signal; and based on the relative direction, play the passenger communication signal as three-dimensional (3D) audio through the speaker,” as required by claim 11, and “the received audio signals including a crew communication signal from a crew headset and an air traffic control communication signal; determine a relative direction of the crew headset; and based on the relative direction, play the crew communication signal as three-dimensional (3D) audio through the speaker,” as required by claim 17 when combined with all the limitations of claims 11 and 17 respectively.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5728. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6 PM.
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, Duc Nguyen can be reached at (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 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.
/SEAN H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2691