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 .
Status of Application
This communication is responsive to the applicant's application filed 12/11/2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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 §§ 706.02(l) (1) - 706.02(l) (3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,089,019. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-20 of the current Application are broader than claims 1-20 in the patent. See 214 U.S.P.Q. 761 In re Van Ornum and Stanz. The “playback devices” in claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,089,019 covers “a wearable playback device” and nonwearable playback device. It would have been obvious that “the first audio content and the second audio content” presented in the claims of U.S. Patent No. 12,089,019 could have been “extended reality audio content” because it is just one type of well-known audio content that the “playback device” of U.S. Patent No. 12,089,019 could have played since the cited patent does not limit its audio content to any particular kind of audio content.
Below is a chart showing the similarities and differences of instant application independent claims 1, 8 and 15; and U.S. Patent No. 12,089,019, independent claims 1, 8 and 15.
Regarding dependent claims 2, 6-7, 9, 13-14, and 16, 20, the claimed limitations are worded substantially the same as presented in dependent claims 2-7, 9-14, and 16-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,089,019.
Regarding dependent claims 3-5, 10-12, and 17-19, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify claims 1, 8 and 15 of U.S. Patent No. 12,089,019 with the old and well known monitoring of type of network connection for accurate and desired audio signal distribution for the playback device.
18/791,140
12,089,019
1. A wearable playback device comprising:
a housing configured to be worn by a user;
one or more audio transducers within the housing;
one or more processors; and data storage having instructions stored thereon that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the wearable playback device to perform operations comprising:
receiving a request to play back extended reality audio content;
determining playback restrictions based on characteristics of at least one of (i) the wearable playback device or (ii) a media playback system comprising the wearable playback device; and
based on the determined playback restrictions, controlling playback of the ER audio content via the one or more audio transducers.
8. A method comprising:
receiving, via a wearable playback device comprising one or more audio transducers, a request to play back extended reality (ER) audio content;
determining playback restrictions based on characteristics of at least one of (i) the wearable playback device or (ii) a media playback system comprising the wearable playback device; and
based on the determined playback restrictions, controlling playback of the ER audio content via the one or more audio transducers.
15. A non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:
receiving, via a wearable playback device comprising one or more audio transducers, a request to play back extended reality (ER) audio content;
determining playback restrictions based on characteristics of at least one of (i) the wearable playback device or (ii) a media playback system comprising the wearable playback device; and
based on the determined playback restrictions, controlling playback of the ER audio content via the one or more audio transducers.
1. A playback device comprising:
one or more audio transducers;
one or more processors; and
a computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:
receiving a command to play back first audio content;
in response to the command, playing back, via the one or more audio transducers, the first audio content;
receiving (i) second audio content to be played back by the playback device and (ii) content source properties associated with the second audio content;
determining playback restrictions based on the content source properties, wherein the playback restrictions limit playback depending on a playback device location; and
based at least in part on the determination of the playback restrictions, restricting operation of the playback device.
8. A method comprising:
receiving, via a media playback system comprising a playback device and one or more remote computing devices, a command for the playback devices to play back first audio content;
in response to the command, playing back, via the playback device, the first audio content;
receiving, via the media playback system, (i) second audio content to be played back by the playback device and (ii) content source properties associated with the second audio content;
determining playback restrictions based on the content source properties, wherein the playback restrictions limit playback depending on a playback device location; and
based at least in part on the determination of the playback restrictions, restricting operation of the playback device.
15. A tangible, non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:
receiving a command for a playback device to play back first audio content;
in response to the command, playing back, via the playback device, the first audio content;
receiving (i) second audio content to be played back by the playback device and (ii) content source properties associated with an audio source of the second audio content;
determining playback restrictions based on the content source properties, wherein the playback restrictions limit playback depending on a playback device location; and
based at least in part on the determination of the playback restrictions, restricting operation of the playback device.
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 1-7 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.
Claims 1, 2, and 4 recites the limitation "the ER audio content". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. If applicant amends “the ER audio content“ to “the extended reality audio content”, it can overcome the problem. Correction is required.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lett discloses arrangements for sound generation based on rules that defines a sound event to be remotely output in occurrence of a home automation event.
Johnston et al discloses a system for improving resource connectivity between various computing device depending on device status information and task status information identifying at least one media content.
Borah discloses a context sensitive remote controller for controlling operation of electronic device configured to receive network based content determined based on type of network connection.
Issued patent(s) 10,433,058, 10,785,570, 11,172,299, and 11,533,562 of parent application(s) 16/008,740, 16/536,053, 16/948,347, and 17/450,496 are made of record here as pertinent art to the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XU MEI whose telephone number is (571)272-7523. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 10-6:30 est.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Vivian Chin can be reached on 571-272-7848. 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.
/XU MEI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695 03/19/2026
Prosecution Insights