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 .
Response to Amendment
1. This in response to an amendment filed 06/09/2026. No claims have been added. No claims have been canceled. Claims 1-16 are still pending in this application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. 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.
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) 1-3, 7, 9-11 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dublon et al. (US PAT # 12,543,015) in view of BREEBAART et al. (Pub.No.: 20189/0359596 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 9, Dublon teaches an audio effect adjustment method and apparatus (reads on the processor-based device configured to perform the recited method step, for example wearable playback device as discussed in example 72, see col. 89, lines 1-25), adaptable for a processor implementation, the audio effect adjustment method comprising:
determining a sound source direction corresponding to sound characteristics of a sound signal, wherein the sound characteristics are related to at least one of an amplitude and a phase of the sound signal (reads on determining times-of-arrival of the localization signal at the microphones, determining pairwise angles-of-arrival, determining an ensemble angle-of-arrival to the buffer 1156b-1 (FIG. 11C), which represents estimated user gaze directions, see col. 64, lines 9-61);
determining posture changes of a head, wherein the posture changes include a rotation angle of the head from a first orientation to a second orientation, and the head is used for wearing a sound playing apparatus (reads on determining head tracking data... rotate incoming IMU samples... estimating orientation of the headphone and head position, see col. 64, line 62 through col. 65, lines 8 and col. 68, lines 22-50); and
adjusting the sound characteristics of the sound signal according to the sound source direction and the second orientation, wherein the adjusted sound signal is used to be played by the sound playing apparatus (reads on rendering binaural-rendered audio, rendering according to the user’s current head position, rotate the audio, first directions of center indication orientations of the headphone and rotations facilitate the impression of the rendered audio coming from direction, see, col. 65, lines 9-28 and col. 70, lines 21-35).
Dublon does not specifically teach “the sound direction refers to relative positioning of the sound source in relation to where it is recorded”, “modifying the first orientation of the posture changes to the sound source direction, and determining a modified second orientation, wherein the modified second orientation is an orientation after the posture changes from the sound source direction” and “a spatial audio effect corresponding to the sound source direction and a spatial audio effect corresponding to the modified second orientation”.
BREEBAART teaches determining a dominant audio component direction or position, using sound source position or sound source direction as transformation data, and modifying/rotating the audio rendering in response to head orientation/heard tracking data. BREEBAART further teaches binaural rendering using HRIR/HRTF processing based on the transmitted sound source position/direction, possibly rotated based on head tracker information (see [0013], [0015], [0022], [0025], [0027-0029], [0040], [0054], [0057], [0060] and [0063]).
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Dublon’s head-tracked spatial audio rendering using BREEBAART’s sound-source-direction-based binaural rendering and headtracking modification, because BREEBAART expressly teaches improved parametric binaural output including head tracking and low decoder complexity for headphone playback (see BREEBAART [0036-0037]).
Regarding claims 2 and 10, the combination of Dublon and BREEBAART teaches wherein the sound characteristics include a frequency response, the frequency response is a corresponding amplitude of the sound signal at a plurality of frequencies, and the step of adjusting the sound characteristics of the sound signal (reads on amplitude of captured audio 847 (e.g., from the example measurements described in connection with FIG. 7) is plotted over time. The captured audio 847 includes direct sound 847a, early reflections 847b, and late reverberation 847c. The late reverberation 847c is also referred to as the “long tail” given its relatively long duration compared to the early reflections 847b, as illustrated in FIG. 8A. FIG. 8B also illustrates the captured audio 847, albeit zoomed in on the sub 100 ms portion to better illustrate transitions between segments, see FIG 8A, FIG. 8B and FIG 8E) according to the spatial audio effect corresponding to the sound source direction and the spatial audio effect corresponding the modified second orientation the sound source direction and the second orientation (reads on source position/direction is used with head orientation/headtracking data, and that audio/auxiliary signals are modified in response to head orientation, see BREEBAART [0027-0029], [0040] and [0060]) comprises:
adjusting the frequency response of the sound signal by a first parameter of an equalizer (reads on linear-phase finite impulse response (FIR) filters, see col. 29, line 60 through col. 30, line 10), wherein the sound source direction corresponds to a second parameter of the equalizer (reads on determining pairwise angles-of-arrival, see col. 64, lines 9-61), the modified second orientation corresponds to a third parameter of the equalizer (reads on orientation of the headphone device ...relative to the HT primary, see col. 68, lines 22-41), the first parameter, the second parameter, the third parameter have corresponding gains at the plurality of frequencies (reads on gain adjustment on pre-subband basis, see col. 38, line 53 through col. 39, line 10), and the first parameter is a gain difference between the second parameter and the third parameter at the plurality of frequencies (reads on gain adjustment determined from the difference between the target MTE and reference MTE on a per-sub band basis, see col. 38, line 53 through col. 39, line 10).
Regarding claims 3 and 11, the combination of Dublon and BREEBAART teaches wherein the sound characteristics comprise a signal delay, the signal delay is a time difference between sound signals of two channels, and the step of adjusting the sound characteristics of the sound signal (time-difference of arrival between each pair of microphones see col. 64, lines 9-61) according to the spatial audio effect corresponding to the sound source direction and the spatial audio effect corresponding the modified second orientation the sound source direction and the second orientation (reads on source position/direction is used with head orientation/headtracking data, and that audio/auxiliary signals are modified in response to head orientation, see BREEBAART [0027-0029], [0040] and [0060]) comprises:
adjusting the signal delay of the sound signals of the two channels to a modified delay (reads on determining pairwise angles-of-arrival, determining an ensemble angle-of-arrival to the buffer 1156b-1 (FIG. 11C), which represents estimated user gaze directions, see col. 64, lines 9-61), the modified delay is a difference between a first delay and a second delay (reads on measuring differences in time-of-flight of audio signals, see col. 68, lines 22-41), the sound source direction corresponds to the first delay (reads on determining pairwise angles-of-arrival... ensemble angle-of-arrival to the buffer 1156b-1 (FIG. 11C), see col. 64, lines 9-61), and the modified second orientation corresponds to the second delay (reads on orientation of the headphone device ...relative to the HT primary, see col. 68, lines 22-41).
Regarding claims 7 and 15, the combination of Dublon and BREEBAART teaches
transferring the sound signals of two channels to a surround sound field with a plurality of virtual speakers (reads on binaural rendering 990 via the speakers 918, see col. 56, lines 22-36 of Dublon);
adjusting a frequency response and a phase from a plurality of directions corresponding to the plurality of virtual speakers based on a head related transfer functions (HRTF) theory (see col. 35, lines 24-35 of Dublon); and
transferring the adjusted sound signal back to stereo sound field signals of the two channels (reads on binaural-rendered audio ... playback, see col. 6, line 47 through col. 7, line 4 and col. 56, lines 22-36 of Dublon).
3. Claim(s) 4-6 and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dublon et al. (US PAT # 12,543,015 B2) in view of BREEBAART et al. (Pub.No.: 20189/0359596 A1) and further in view of Mahmud et al. (Pub.No.: 2025/0060782 A1).
Claims 4 and 12 recite “wherein the step of determining the sound source direction corresponding to the sound characteristics of the sound signal comprises:
determining, by inputting the sound characteristics of the sound signal to a direction identification model, the sound source direction by the direction identification model, wherein the direction identification model is trained through a machine learning algorithm to learn an association between a reference sound source located in a plurality of reference directions and corresponding sound characteristics”.
Dublon and BREEBAART features already addressed in the above rejection. The combination does not specifically teach “machine learning model/trained model”. However, Mahmud teaches in “WEARABLE DEVICES WITH WIRELESS TRANSMITTER-RECEIVER PAIRS FOR ACOUSTIC SENSING OF USER CHARACTERISTICS” data processing computing device 1920 applies a deep learning model to the constructed profile (see [0238]) where the system utilizes machine learning and signal processing algorithms that focus on temporal and structural differences in activities from these reflected acoustic signals, rather than individual body shapes, for usability to minimize user effort for training (see [0653]).
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Mahmud’s machine learning processing into the system of Dublon in view of BREEBAART to improve detection accuracy of user characteristics.
Claims 5 and 13 recite “wherein the step of determining the posture changes of the head comprises:
identifying the posture changes according to a plurality of head images, wherein the plurality of head images are images captured by rotating the head from the first orientation to the second orientation”.
Dublon and BREEBAART features already addressed in the above rejection. The combination of Dublon in view of BREEBAART does not specifically teach “facial image/facial feature-based processing”. However, Mahmud teaches in “WEARABLE DEVICES WITH WIRELESS TRANSMITTER-RECEIVER PAIRS FOR ACOUSTIC SENSING OF USER CHARACTERISTICS” detection of “’facial expressions” and movements of the “face”, see ([0246] and [0648]).
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize Mahmud’s facial-based processing with the acoustic sensing system of Dublon and BREEBAART to enable recognition of user facial characteristics.
Claims 6 and 14 recite “wherein the step of identifying the posture changes according to the plurality of head images comprises:
identifying a face of the head image;
defining a feature point of the face; and
tracking a position of the feature point of the plurality of head images, wherein the posture changes are reflected in changes in the position of the feature point”.
Dublon and BREEBAART features already addressed in the above rejection. The combination of Dublon in view of BREEBAART does not specifically teach “identifying a face of the head image; defining a feature point of the face; and tracking a position of the feature point of the plurality of head images, wherein the posture changes are reflected in changes in the position of the feature point”.
However, Mahmud teaches in “WEARABLE DEVICES WITH WIRELESS TRANSMITTER-RECEIVER PAIRS FOR ACOUSTIC SENSING OF USER CHARACTERISTICS” a “facial landmark positions” and “key feature points or landmarks from frontal view digital images” (see [0144]) and further teaches processing of “facial digital images” (see [0149]).
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Mahmud’s facial feature point extraction and tracking into the system of Dublon in view of BREEBAART to enable determination of posture changes based on facial feature movement.
4. Claim(s) 8 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dublon et al. (US PAT # 12,543,015 B2) in view of in view of BREEBAART et al. (Pub.No.: 20189/0359596 A1) and further in view of Janke et al. (Pub.No.: 2006/0271215 A1).
Claims 8 and 16 recite “wherein the step of adjusting the sound characteristics of the sound signal according to the direction difference between the sound source direction and the second orientation comprises:
decreasing a parameter of the sound signal of a right channel at the first frequency in response to an increase in a parameter of the sound signal of a left channel at the first frequency, and increasing a parameter of the sound signal of the right channel at the second frequency in response to a decrease in a parameter of the sound signal of the left channel at the second frequency; or
decreasing a parameter of the sound signal of the left channel at the third frequency in response to an increase in a parameter of the sound signal of the right channel at the third frequency, and increasing a parameter of the sound signal of the left channel at the fourth frequency in response to a decrease in a parameter of the sound signal of the right channel at the fourth frequency”.
Dublon and BREEBAART features already addressed in the above rejection. The combination does not specifically teach “decreasing a parameter of the sound signal of a right channel at the first frequency in response to an increase in a parameter of the sound signal of a left channel at the first frequency, and increasing a parameter of the sound signal of the right channel at the second frequency in response to a decrease in a parameter of the sound signal of the left channel at the second frequency” as recited in claims 8 and 16.
However, Janke teaches a multi-channel audio system in which a “frequency responses of the various channels are summed together” to produce a common frequency response (see [0043]-[0045]).
Thus, it would have been obvious for one of an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Dublon and BREEBAART to adjust the frequency characteristics of the channels to achieve a common frequency response as taught by Janke, in order to improve audio consistency and overall sound quality across channels.
Response to Arguments
5. Applicant’s arguments for independent claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
6. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rasha S. AL-Aubaidi whose telephone number is (571) 272-7481. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:30 am to 5:30 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Ahmad Matar, can be reached on (571) 272-7488.
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).
/RASHA S AL AUBAIDI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
Prosecution Insights