DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
1. 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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
2. Claim 1 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Shneidman (US 2006/0038794) in view of Morse et al. (US 2007/0025194).
Regarding claim 1, Shneidman teaches a personal audio assistant comprising: a speaker; a microphone; a display; a memory that stores instructions (see fig. 2, 4, 16, ¶ 0049, 0051, 0096, 0098, 0126. The handset can perform the functions of a computerized personal assistant. This device is having speaker, microphone, display, memory thereon.); receiving a request from a user for audio content (see fig. 2, 4, 16, ¶ 0049, 0051, 0096, 0098, 0119, 0126. The user can request on demand music to be delivered to the handset unit. Outside servers of music can deliver the music or audio content to the device.).
Shneidman discloses a personal assistant device that enables a user to request audio content from a server, which will provide the content to be displayed on the device. The system is able to retrieve and store the requested content on the device. The display will be able to provide content listing and playback commands for content.
Shneidman does not disclose a logic circuit operatively coupled to the memory, wherein the logic circuit is structured to execute the instructions such that portions of the logic circuit are activated to perform operations comprising: retrieving a listening history envelope of the user; retrieving a set of personalized playlist content from a remote server using the listening history envelop as a filter; and sending a list of the set of personalized playlist content to the display.
Morse teaches a logic circuit operatively coupled to the memory, wherein the logic circuit is structured to execute the instructions such that portions of the logic circuit are activated to perform operations comprising: retrieving a listening history envelope of the user; retrieving a set of personalized playlist content from a remote server using the listening history envelop as a filter; and sending a list of the set of personalized playlist content to the display (see fig. 5B, ¶ 0062: The portable media player 501 is configured to receive the user preference data such as through buttons or switches 503 located on the player 501. The user interface will rely on both the display 518 to display playlists, format templates, and other options to the user and the buttons switches to allow user input among the displayed options. The portable device 501 is further configured to access non-local files such as network based files. For example, these may be accessed through the device's connection 540 to the host computer, which in turn, is connected to servers 555 connected in a network 560. The servers may contain, for example, archived media files available to the public or merely to subscribers, or some combination thereof. Alternatively, the portable device 501 may be connected directly to the network based files, such as through a wireless interface 539. Thus Morse is able to retrieve a playlist from the server (media files) and provide them on the interface of the device. The processor 535 is configured to receive user inputs from buttons/switches 503. The user interface will rely on both the display 518 to display playlists, format templates, and other options to the user and the buttons switches to allow user input among the displayed options The processor being a CPU wherein such processing device can be logic circuitry.).
The combination of Morse to Shneidman will provide accessing a media playlist from a server via the user device and provide the content of the media files on the display for the user.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the combination of Shneidman to incorporate the concepts of Morse for obtaining media files (playlist) for display on the user device from a server. The modification provides for obtaining media files from a server to be displayed on the user device.
3. Claims 2, 3 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Shneidman (US 2006/0038794) in view of Morse et al. (US 2007/0025194) further in view of Komano et al. (US 2006/0171682).
Regarding claim 2, Shneidman and Morse do not teach the personal audio assistant of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise: receiving from the user a selection of a first audio content from the set of personalized playlist content; sending the first audio content to the speaker.
Komano teaches wherein the operations further comprise: receiving from the user a selection of a first audio content from the set of personalized playlist content; sending the first audio content to the speaker (see fig. 2, ¶ 0047, 0059. The user is able to select content from a playlist and it will produce the selected content via speakers.).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the combination of Shneidman and Morse to incorporate the concepts of Komano for selecting an audio file from a playlist for playback. The modification provides a user for selecting a audio file for audio playback.
Regarding claim 3, Shneidman teaches the personal audio assistant according to claim 2, wherein the selection is chosen from touching the display (see ¶ 0096-0097. A user can make a selection on a touch screen display.).
4. Claims 4, 10, 11 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Shneidman (US 2006/0038794) in view of Morse et al. (US 2007/0025194) further in view of Komano et al. (US 2006/0171682) in further view of Yoon et al. (US 2002/0059313).
Regarding claim 4, Shneidman, Morse and Komano do not teach the personal audio assistant of claim 2, wherein the listening history envelope includes at least two of, when the user auditions content, or a time stamp of content being auditioned, or content which is skipped, or content which is deleted, or content which is played multiple times, or content saved in a Wish List, or a combination thereof.
Yoon teaches wherein the listening history envelope includes at least two of, when the user auditions content, or a time stamp of content being auditioned, or content which is skipped, or content which is deleted, or content which is played multiple times, or content saved in a Wish List, or a combination thereof (see abstract, ¶ 0078. The user history provides skip history and replay data history of the user.).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the combination of Shneidman, Morse and Komano to incorporate the concepts of Yoon for providing user history. The modification provides a user history for replay and skipping content.
Regarding claim 10, Shneidman, Morse and Komano do not teach the personal audio assistant of claim 2, personal audio assistant of claim 2, wherein the listening history envelope includes content which is skipped.
Yoon teaches personal audio assistant of claim 2, wherein the listening history envelope includes content which is skipped (see abstract, ¶ 0078. The user history provides skip history and replay data history of the user.).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the combination of Shneidman, Morse and Komano to incorporate the concepts of Yoon for providing user history. The modification provides a user history for replay and skipping content.
Regarding claim 11, Shneidman, Morse and Komano do not teach the personal audio assistant of claim 2, wherein the listening history envelope includes content which is played multiple times.
Yoon teaches wherein the listening history envelope includes content which is played multiple times (see abstract, ¶ 0078. The user history provides skip history and replay data history of the user.).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the combination of Shneidman, Morse and Komano to incorporate the concepts of Yoon for providing user history. The modification provides a user history for replay and skipping content.
5. Claims 5, 6, 7, 8 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Shneidman (US 2006/0038794) in view of Morse et al. (US 2007/0025194).
Regarding claim 5, Shneidman teaches the personal audio assistant of claim 1, wherein the request from the user is a vocal request (see ¶ 0097. The device allows for voice commands, thus allowing the user to voice their selections.).
Regarding claim 6, Shneidman teaches the personal audio assistant of claim 1, wherein the personal audio assistant if part of a wearable (see fig. 2, 4, 16, ¶ 0047-0051. The handset can perform the functions of a computerized personal assistant. This device is having speaker, microphone, display, memory thereon.).
Regarding claim 7, Shneidman teaches the personal audio assistant of claim 6, wherein the wearable is a phone (see fig. 2, 4, 16, ¶ 0047-0051. The handset can perform the functions of a computerized personal assistant. This device is having speaker, microphone, display, memory thereon.).
Regarding claim 8, Shneidman teaches the personal audio assistant of claim 6, wherein the wearable is a tablet (see fig. 2, 4, 16, ¶ 0047-0051. The handset can perform the functions of a computerized personal assistant. This device is having speaker, microphone, display, memory thereon. This can be a cellular phone, phone, a personal computer with internet access, a tablet notebook computer, etc…).
6. Claim 9 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Shneidman (US 2006/0038794) in view of Morse et al. (US 2007/0025194) further in view of Seshadri et al. (US 7,558,529).
Regarding claim 9, Shneidman and Morse do not teach the personal audio assistant of claim 6, wherein the wearable is an earphone.
Seshadri teaches wherein the wearable is an earphone (see fig. 1, col. 4, lines 7-42. The device can be an earpiece.).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the combination of Shneidman and Morse to incorporate the a device being an earpiece. The modification provides a user with a device to be used as an earpiece.
7. Claims 12, 13, 14 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Shneidman (US 2006/0038794) in view of Morse et al. (US 2007/0025194) further in view of Takmine et al. (US 2004/0183896).
Regarding claim 12, Shneidman and Morse do not teach the personal audio assistant of claim 1 wherein the operations further comprise: sending information to a second user's device.
Takmine teaches wherein the operations further comprise: sending information to a second user's device (see fig. 1, ¶ 0005, 0008. Sharing information (text, image or music data) over the network to other devices).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the combination of Shneidman and Morse to incorporate sending information data (music or image or text data) to other devices in the network. The modification provides sharing information with other users and user devices.
Regarding claim 13, Shneidman and Morse do not teach the personal audio assistant according to claim 12 wherein the information includes at least one of a song, or a video, or a picture, or a text or a combination thereof.
Takmine teaches wherein the information includes at least one of a song, or a video, or a picture, or a text or a combination thereof (see fig. 1, ¶ 0005, 0008. Sharing information (text, image or music data) over the network to other devices).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the combination of Shneidman and Morse to incorporate sending information data (music or image or text data) to other devices in the network. The modification provides sharing information with other users and user devices.
Regarding claim 14, Shneidman and Morse do not teach the personal audio assistant according to claim 12, wherein the operations further comprise: receiving a signal from the user selecting the information.
Takmine teaches wherein the operations further comprise: receiving a signal from the user selecting the information (see fig. 1, ¶ 0005, 0008. Sharing information (text, image or music data) over the network to other devices. The sharing of a text, or image or music data, will be a selection from a user, which upon will trigger the system to share with other devices based on user selection. This will be obvious if not inherent during a conference session.).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the combination of Shneidman and Morse to incorporate sending information data (music or image or text data) to other devices in the network in regards to a selection. The modification provides sharing information with other users and user devices.
8. Claim 15, 16, 18 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Shneidman (US 2006/0038794) in view of Morse et al. (US 2007/0025194) further in view of Sudai et al. (US 5,950,200).
Regarding claim 15, Shneidman and Morse do not teach the personal audio assistant according to claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise: locating a second user matches at least one common interest with the user.
Sudai teaches wherein the operations further comprise: locating a second user matches at least one common interest with the user (see fig. 8A-8B, col 1, line 45-60. A system program can match participants together based on matching interest.).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the combination of Shneidman and Morse to incorporate matching participants based on interests. The modification provides locating participants that have the same or similar interests.
Regarding claim 16, Shneidman and Morse do not teach the personal audio assistant according to claim 15, wherein the operations further comprise: sending a notification to the user when a match occurs.
Sudai teaches wherein the operations further comprise: sending a notification to the user when a match occurs (see fig. 8A-8B, col 1, line 45-60, col. 6, line 62-col. 7, line 5. A system program can match participants together based on matching interest and based on the matching occurring, providing notification to the participants.).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the combination of Shneidman and Morse to incorporate matching participants based on interests provide notifications. The modification provides locating participants that have the same or similar interests.
Regarding claim 18, Shneidman and Morse do not teach the personal audio assistant according to claim 16, wherein the notification is a visual notification.
Sudai teaches wherein the notification is a visual notification (see fig. 8A-8B, col 1, line 45-60, col. 6, line 62-col. 7, line 5. A system program can match participants together based on matching interest and based on the matching occurring, providing notification to the participants. The notification will be an email notification which is visual to the users.).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the combination of Shneidman and Morse to incorporate matching participants based on interests provide notifications. The modification provides locating participants that have the same or similar interests.
9. Claim 17 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Shneidman (US 2006/0038794) in view of Morse et al. (US 2007/0025194) further in view of Sudai et al. (US 5,950,200) in further view of Fratti (US 2007/0073848).
Regarding claim 17, Shneidman, Morse and Sudai do not teach the personal audio assistant according to claim 16, wherein the notification is an audible notification.
Fratti teaches wherein the notification is an audible notification (see ¶ 0006, 0017. The email notification produces an notification sound to the recipient.).
The combination of Fratti to Sudai teaches when an match has occurred, Sudai provides a notification which is in email form and is visual. With the added feature of an sound alert, the user will be able to hear when receiving an email and can retrieve the email to read it.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the combination of Shneidman, Morse and Sudai to incorporate email sound notification being alerted to the user. The modification provides sound notification when an email is received.
Conclusion
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASSAD MOHAMMED whose telephone number is (571)270-7253. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00AM-5:00PM.
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.
/ASSAD MOHAMMED/Examiner, Art Unit 2691
/DUC NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2691