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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-21 are presented for examination.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-7, 10, 15-16, 19, and 26 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5, 8, 15-16, 18-19, 23, and 26 of U.S. Patent No. 12070986. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both claim the similar invention of determination of a sound control pattern to control sound within a sound control zone utilizing a plurality of noise inputs and a plurality of residual-noise inputs in a real-time. A comparison between the independent claim 1 of US Patent 12070986 and the independent claim 1 of the current application is provided below for an example.
US Patent 12070986
Current Application 18/770521
Claim 1. An apparatus comprising:
an input to receive input information, the input information comprising:
system bus information received via a system bus of a vehicle; a plurality of noise inputs representing acoustic noise at a plurality of noise sensing locations; and
a plurality of residual-noise inputs representing acoustic residual-noise at a plurality of residual-noise sensing locations within a sound control zone in the vehicle;
a controller comprising logic and circuitry configured to determine a sound control pattern to control sound within the sound control zone in the vehicle, the controller configured to determine the sound control pattern based on the system bus information, the plurality of noise inputs, and the plurality of residual-noise inputs, wherein the controller is configured to determine a path transfer function setting of one or more path transfer functions based on the system bus information, and to determine the sound control pattern based on the path transfer function setting; and
an output to output the sound control pattern to a plurality of acoustic transducers.
Claim 1. An apparatus comprising:
an input to receive input information, the input information comprising:
system bus information received via a system bus of a vehicle; a plurality of noise inputs representing acoustic noise at a plurality of noise sensing locations; and
a plurality of residual-noise inputs representing acoustic residual-noise at a plurality of residual-noise sensing locations within a sound control zone in the vehicle;
a controller configured to determine a sound control pattern to control sound within the sound control zone, the controller configured to determine the sound control pattern based on the system bus information, the plurality of noise inputs, and the plurality of residual-noise inputs, wherein the controller is configured to monitor the system bus information, and to update the sound control pattern based on a detection of a real-time change in the system bus information; and
an output to output the sound control pattern to a plurality of acoustic transducers.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation of “wherein the controller is configured to monitor the system bus information” which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Examiner searched the provided detailed description by applicants but he was unable to find any supporting paragraph.
Claim 16 recites the limitation of “wherein the controller is configured to monitor the system bus information” which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Examiner searched the provided detailed description by applicants but he was unable to find any supporting paragraph.
Claim 19 recites the limitation of “wherein the instructions, when executed, cause the sound control system to monitor the system bus information” which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Examiner searched the provided detailed description by applicants but he was unable to find any supporting paragraph.
Claims 1, 16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation of “wherein the controller is configured to monitor the system bus information” which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Examiner searched the provided detailed description by applicants but he was unable to find any supporting paragraph. Therefore, the examiner submits that it would require undue experimentation to make/use the claimed limitation.
Claim 16 recites the limitation of “wherein the controller is configured to monitor the system bus information” which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Examiner searched the provided detailed description by applicants but he was unable to find any supporting paragraph. Therefore, the examiner submits that it would require undue experimentation to make/use the claimed limitation.
Claim 19 recites the limitation of “wherein the instructions, when executed, cause the sound control system to monitor the system bus information” which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Examiner searched the provided detailed description by applicants but he was unable to find any supporting paragraph. Therefore, the examiner submits that it would require undue experimentation to make/use the claimed limitation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-9, 11-14, and 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cherkassky et al (US Pub. 2012/02881101; hereinafter Cherkassky).
As per claim 1, Cherkassky discloses an apparatus comprising:
an input to receive input information [Abstract; Fig. 1; receiving a plurality of noise inputs; receiving a plurality of residual-noise inputs], the input information comprising:
system bus information received via a system bus of a vehicle [Fig. 1; para 0031; inherent to a vehicle (Fig. 2; para 0057; a vehicle data bus; US Pub. 2017/0213541 cited by the applicant)];
a plurality of noise inputs representing acoustic noise at a plurality of noise sensing locations [Abstract; Fig. 1; para 0006, 0056; receive a plurality of noise inputs at a plurality of predefined noise sensing locations]; and
a plurality of residual-noise inputs representing acoustic residual-noise at a plurality of residual-noise sensing locations within a sound control zone in the vehicle [Abstract; Fig. 1; para 0006, 0058; receive a plurality of residual-noise inputs representing acoustic residual-noise at a plurality of predefined residual-noise sensing locations];
a controller configured to determine a sound control pattern to control sound within the sound control zone, the controller configured to determine the sound control pattern based on the system bus information, the plurality of noise inputs, and the plurality of residual-noise inputs, wherein the controller is configured to monitor the system bus information, and to update the sound control pattern based on a detection of a real-time change in the system bus information [Abstract; Fig. 8; para 0006, 0161; a controller determine a noise control pattern based on received input information (received via the system bus) comprising of noise inputs and the plurality of residual-noise inputs; and monitoring the system bus is inherent (See Fig. 2; para 0057; a vehicle data bus; US Pub. 2017/0213541 cited by the applicant)]; and
an output to output the sound control pattern to a plurality of acoustic transducers [Abstract; Fig. 8; para 0161-0162; outputting the noise control pattern to at least one acoustic transducer].
As per claim 16, Cherkassky discloses a vehicle comprising:
a system bus to communicate information between a plurality of vehicular systems of the vehicle [Fig.1; para 0031; a computing system; inherent to a vehicle (Fig. 2; para 0057; a vehicle data bus; US Pub. 2017/0213541 cited by the applicant)]; and
a sound control system configured to control sound within a sound control zone in the vehicle [para 0006, 0013, 0088; “… an active noise control system may include a controller to control noise within a predefined noise-control zone, …”], the sound control system comprising:
a plurality of acoustic transducers [Abstract; Fig. 1; para 0006, 0059-0064; acoustic transducer];
a plurality of noise sensors to generate a plurality of noise inputs representing acoustic noise at a plurality of noise sensing locations [para 0056; acoustic sensors];
a plurality of residual-noise sensors to generate a plurality of residual-noise inputs representing acoustic residual-noise at a plurality of residual-noise sensing locations within the sound control zone [para 0157; residual-noise sensors]; and
a controller configured to determine a sound control pattern to control sound within the sound control zone and to output the sound control pattern to the plurality of acoustic transducers, the controller configured to determine the sound control pattern based on the plurality of noise inputs, the plurality of residual-noise inputs, and system bus information received via the system bus of the vehicle, wherein the controller is configured to monitor the system bus information, and to update the sound control pattern based on a detection of a real-time change in the system bus information [Abstract; Fig. 8; para 0006, 0161; a controller determine a noise control pattern based on received input information (received via the system bus) comprising the plurality of noise inputs and the plurality of residual-noise inputs].
As per claim 19, Cherkassky discloses a product comprising one or more tangible computer-readable non-transitory storage media comprising instructions operable to, when executed by at least one processor, enable the at least one processor to cause a sound control system to control sound within a sound control zone in a vehicle, the instructions, when executed, to cause the sound control system to:
process input information [Abstract; Fig. 1], the input information comprising:
system bus information received via a system bus of the vehicle [Fig.1; para 0031; a computing system; inherent to a vehicle (Fig. 2; para 0057; a vehicle data bus; US Pub. 2017/0213541 cited by the applicant)];
a plurality of noise inputs representing acoustic noise at a plurality of noise sensing locations [Abstract; Fig. 1; para 0006, 0056; receive a plurality of noise inputs at a plurality of predefined noise sensing locations]; and
a plurality of residual-noise inputs representing acoustic residual-noise at a plurality of residual-noise sensing locations within the sound control zone in the vehicle [Abstract; Fig. 1; para 0006, 0058; receive a plurality of residual-noise inputs representing acoustic residual-noise at a plurality of predefined residual-noise sensing locations];
determine a sound control pattern to control sound within the sound control zone based on the system bus information, the plurality of noise inputs and the plurality of residual-noise inputs, wherein the instructions, when executed, cause the sound control system to monitor the system bus information, and to update the sound control pattern based on a detection of a real-time change in the system bus information [Abstract; Fig. 8; para 0006, 0161; a controller determine a noise control pattern based on received input information (received via the system bus) comprising the plurality of noise inputs and the plurality of residual-noise inputs]; and
output the sound control pattern to a plurality of acoustic transducers [Abstract; Fig. 8; para 0161; outputting the noise control pattern to at least one acoustic transducer].
As per claims 2, 17, and 20, Cherkassky discloses wherein the controller is configured to determine the sound control pattern based on a setting of one or more sound control parameters, and to update the setting of the one or more sound control parameters based on the detection of the real-time change in the system bus information [Abstract; Fig. 8; para 0006, 0161; a controller determine a noise control pattern based on real-time changes].
As per claim 3, Cherkassky discloses wherein the controller is configured to determine the sound control pattern based on a prediction filter setting of at least one prediction filter, and to update the prediction filter setting based on the detection of the real-time change in the system bus information [para 0146-0149; a prediction filter].
As per claim 4, Cherkassky discloses wherein the prediction filter setting comprises a prediction filter weight vector [para 0149; adaptive weight vector].
As per claim 5, Cherkassky discloses wherein the prediction filter setting comprises an update rate parameter for updating the prediction filter weight vector [para 0146-0151; optimizing the prediction filter].
As per claim 6, Cherkassky discloses wherein the controller is configured to determine the sound control pattern based on a path transfer function setting of one or more path transfer functions, and to update the path transfer function setting based on the detection of the real-time change in the system bus information [para 0150; a path transfer function].
As per claim 7, Cherkassky discloses wherein the path transfer function setting of the one or more path transfer functions comprises a setting of a path transfer function representing an acoustic path between an acoustic transducer and a noise sensing location [para 0150; a path transfer function].
As per claim 8, Cherkassky discloses wherein the path transfer function setting of the one or more path transfer functions comprises a setting of a path transfer function representing an acoustic path between an acoustic transducer and a virtual acoustic sensor at a virtual sensing location [para 0150; a path transfer function].
As per claim 9, Cherkassky discloses wherein the controller is configured to determine the sound control pattern based on a setting of a Multiple-Input-Multiple-Output (MIMO) adaptive filter, and to update the setting of the MIMO adaptive filter based on the detection of the real-time change in the system bus information [para 0141-0142; multi-input-multi-output (MIMO)].
As per claims 11 and 18, Cherkassky discloses wherein the system bus information comprises system-setting information representing a setting of a system of the vehicle, the controller configured to update the sound control pattern based on a detection of a change in the setting of the system [Abstract; Fig. 8; para 0006, 0161; a controller determine a noise control pattern based on received input information (received via the system bus) comprising of noise inputs and the plurality of residual-noise inputs].
As per claim 12, Cherkassky discloses wherein the system bus information comprises information corresponding to a noise generating system of the vehicle, the controller configured to update the sound control pattern based on a detection of a change in the information corresponding to the noise generating system of the vehicle [para 0014-0015, 0089; noise source generating; Abstract; Fig. 8; para 0006, 0161; a controller determine a noise control pattern based on received input information (received via the system bus) comprising of noise inputs and the plurality of residual-noise inputs].
As per claims 13 and 21, Cherkassky discloses wherein the system bus information comprises mode of operation information representing a mode of operation of a system of the vehicle, the controller configured to update the sound control pattern based on a detection of a change in the mode of operation of the system [para 0158; “… one or more operations of the method of Fig. 8 may be performed by an ANC system, e.g., system 100 (Fig. 1), a controller, e.g., controller 300 (Fig. 3) and/or any other component of an ANC system.”].
As per claim 14, Cherkassky discloses wherein the system bus information comprises speed information, the controller configured to update the sound control pattern based on a detection of a change in the speed information [para 0082; “… wherein c denotes the speed …”].
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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cherkassky et al (US Pub. 2012/02881101; hereinafter Cherkassky) in view of Benattar et al (US Pub. 2016/01633031; hereinafter Benattar).
As per claim 10, Cherkassky discloses the invention substantially. However, Benattar (in the same field of endeavor, i.e., active noise control) discloses the sound control pattern to be based on the sound control profile [para 0040, 0054, 0127; “… the audio characteristics may be tailored according to a profile …”]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed limitation to combine the cited references as both are directed to noise control in a vehicle. Moreover, namely when the sound control is applied to change the acoustic energy of acoustic pattern produced by acoustic sources, to implement the sound control mechanism of Benattar to the apparatus of Cherkassky, thereby arriving at the subject matter of claim 10.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cherkassky et al (US Pub. 2012/02881101; hereinafter Cherkassky) in view of MacNeille et al (US Pub. 2017/02135411; hereinafter McNeille).
As per claim 15, Cherkassky discloses the invention substantially. Though Cherkassky does not specifically disclose wherein the system bus information comprises at least one of Controller Area Network (CAN) bus information received via a CAN bus of the vehicle, A to B (A2B) bus information received via an A2B bus of the vehicle, Media Oriented Systems Transport (MOST) bus information received via a MOST bus of the vehicle, or Ethernet bus information received via an Ethernet bus of the vehicle, all these are well-known in the art. However, MacNeille (in the same field of endeavor, i.e., noise control in a vehicle) discloses use of a controller area network (CAN) bus and/or Ethernet bus [para 0058]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the cited references as both are directed to noise control in a vehicle.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
A. US-20210056778 discloses detecting vehicle anomalies based on real-time vehicle data collection and processing.
B. US-20210031757 discloses processing data for driving automation system wherein the sound characteristic is a type of sound and the at least one processor is configured to: process the sound data to obtain a sound pattern; and compare the sound pattern with at least one sound signature in a sound signature database to determine a type of sound corresponding to the sound pattern, the sound signature database containing information indicative of a respective type of sound pattern.
C. US-20110175718 discloses an active acoustic control apparatus for a vehicle.
N. JP-2004531695 discloses a method for measuring a noise signal of a noise source, especially a fixed or movable noise source, for example, a vehicle.
O. CN-101823464 discloses invention belongs to the technical field of vehicular control mechanism and claims a vehicular intelligent control information system, comprising a vehicular bus network system connected to a control computer capable of multimedia function, wherein the control computer is provided with a wireless network mechanism, a video input system, a video output system, an audio input system and an audio output system.
P. DE-102020113756 discloses systems and methods for acoustic control and in particular to methods and systems for acoustic control of a vehicle interior.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SURESH K SURYAWANSHI whose telephone number is (571)272-3668. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-5:00 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, Kenneth M Lo can be reached at 5712729774. 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.
/SURESH SURYAWANSHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2116
1 Prior art cited by the applicant in submitted information discloser statement.
Prosecution Insights