Detailed Action
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . See 35 U.S.C. § 100 (note).
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of Applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Japan on 22 November 2023. However, Applicant has not filed a certified copy of the 2023-198317 Application as required by 37 C.F.R. § 1.55. An attempt was made to retrieve a copy of the priority document, but failed. A notice of that failure is reported in the file on 22 April 2025. Applicant is required to file a certified copy in order to obtain priority to the 2023-198317 Application.
Art Rejections
Anticipation
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 1–6, 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication 2019/0077345 (published 14 March 2019) (“Choi”).
Claim 1 is drawn to “a signal processing apparatus.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed apparatus and the Choi reference.
Claim 1
The Choi Reference
“1. A signal processing apparatus comprising a controller configured to:
Choi describes a vehicle capable of tuning sound reproduction based on the position of an adjustable seat. Choi at Abs., ¶¶ 1–5. Choi’s apparatus includes a DSP system 400 corresponding to the signal processing apparatus and a sound processor 402 that corresponds to the claimed controller. Id. at ¶ 21, FIG.4.
(i) acquire a sound source signal for reproducing sound in a vehicle;
Choi’s DSP system receives sound inputs from a head unit 404 and from secondary sources 406. Id.
“(ii) acquire seat information indicating a state of a seat in the vehicle;
Choi’s DSP system 400 receives a signal 418 indicating a seat position. Id.
“(iii) determine parameters for reproduction based on the seat information; and
A filter 420 maps the seat position 418 to a set of parameters for processing audio, including gain, delay, EQ, array and other algorithms used to reproduce audio received from head unit 404 and secondary sources 406. Id.
“(iv) generate sound signals for outputting the sound from a plurality of speakers provided in the vehicle based on the sound source signal and the parameters.”
DSP 400 then applies processing (e.g., applying gain 422, delay 424, EQ 426, array processing 428, other algorithms 430) to the audio from head unit 404 and the audio from secondary sources 406 according to the mapped parameters and outputs the processed audio via speakers 414. Id.
Table 1
For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 2 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein the seat information includes at least one of a position of the seat, a height of a seat surface of the seat, and an angle of a seat back.”
The seat position includes seat position, height and angle. Choi at ¶¶ 18, 19, FIGs.2A, 2B, 3. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 3 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein the parameters include a time alignment of the sound signals to be supplied to each of the plurality of the speakers.”
Similarly, Choi adjusts the delay applied to sounds provided to each speaker. Choi at ¶¶ 20–23, FIGs.3, 5, 6. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 4 depends on claim 3, and further requires the following:
“wherein the parameters further include at least one of a sound pressure of sound to be output from each of the plurality of the speakers and an increase/decrease of a level of the sound at a specific frequency.”
Similarly, Choi adjusts the gain and EQ applied to sounds provided to each speaker. Choi at ¶¶ 20–23, FIGs.3, 5, 6. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 5 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein the controller replaces the sound signals to be supplied to each of the plurality of the speakers depending on an angle of a seat back of the seat.”
Likewise, Choi adjusts the mixing and steering ratios of surround signals (i.e., audio channels) provided to each speaker 110, 112, 114 to present a desired spatial sound field based on a detected seat position, including the angle of a seat back. Choi at ¶¶ 16, 17. This effectively replaces the mix of channels provided to each speaker based on the angle of a seat back. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 6 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein the controller distributes the sound signals for outputting front sound in the vehicle to the plurality of the speakers depending on an angle of a seat back of the seat.”
Likewise, Choi adjusts the mixing and steering ratios of surround signals (i.e., audio channels) provided to each speaker 110, 112, 114 to present a desired spatial sound field based on a detected seat position, including the angle of a seat back. Choi at ¶¶ 16, 17. This effectively distributes, or steers, channels to each speaker based on the angle of a seat back. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 9 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“A sound system comprising:
“the signal processing apparatus according to claim 1;
“a sensor that detects a state of the seat; and
“a plurality of speakers that output sound based on the sound signals.”
Similarly, Choi’s vehicle 100 includes DSP 400, seat detecting sensors (dedicated sensors, cameras, LIDAR, sonar) and a plurality of speakers 110, 112, 114. Choi at ¶¶ 16, 21, 22, FIGs.1, 4. For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 8 is drawn to “a signal processing method.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed method and the Choi reference.
Claim 8
The Choi Reference
“8. A signal processing method executed by a controller, the method comprising:
Choi describes a vehicle capable of tuning sound reproduction based on the position of an adjustable seat. Choi at Abs., ¶¶ 1–5. Choi’s apparatus includes a DSP system 400 and a sound processor 402, or controller, that performs a method corresponding to the claimed signal processing method. Id. at ¶ 21, FIG.4.
“(a) acquiring a sound source signal for reproducing sound in a vehicle;
Choi’s DSP system receives sound inputs from a head unit 404 and from secondary sources 406. Id.
“(b) acquiring seat information indicating a state of a seat in the vehicle;
Choi’s DSP system 400 receives a signal 418 indicating a seat position. Id.
“(c) determining parameters for reproduction based on the seat information; and
A filter 420 maps the seat position 418 to a set of parameters for processing audio, including gain, delay, EQ, array and other algorithms used to reproduce audio received from head unit 404 and secondary sources 406. Id.
(d) generating sound signals for outputting the sound from a plurality of speakers provided in the vehicle based on the sound source signal and the parameters.”
DSP 400 then applies processing (e.g., applying gain 422, delay 424, EQ 426, array processing 428, other algorithms 430) to the audio from head unit 404 and the audio from secondary sources 406 according to the mapped parameters and outputs the processed audio via speakers 414. Id.
Table 2
For the foregoing reasons, the Choi reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Obviousness
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 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Choi and US Patent Application Publication 2024/0025363 (effectively filed 03 August 2021) (“Nakamura”).
Claim 7 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein the controller changes the state of the seat according to a mode selected by a user from a plurality of modes, and acquires seat information indicating a state of the seat after change.”
Choi’s vehicle 100 includes seats 206 with controls 220 for adjusting the position of the seats. Choi at ¶ 19, FIGs.2A, 2B. The DSP 400, or controller, detects the manipulation of controls 220 to detect an adjusted position. Id. at ¶ 21, FIG.4. However, Choi does not describe a mode selection that adjusts the state of seats 206 and detecting changes based on the mode selection.
The Nakamura reference, like Choi, is drawn to the field of automobile technology. Nakamura at Abs., ¶ 2. Nakamura teaches and suggests providing an automobile with occupant-dependent settings to facilitate multiple drivers who share a vehicle. Id. at ¶¶ 3–6, 17–25. When an occupant enters a vehicle, the vehicle determines the identity of the occupant and retrieves the occupant-specific settings. Id. at ¶¶ 45, 49, 64. Settings include seat position. Id.
Read in light of Choi, Nakamura’s teachings reasonably suggest modifying Choi’s vehicle 100 to include a similar occupant-dependent setting system. When a particular occupant enters, vehicle 100 will detect the occupant’s identity and retrieve the occupant’s settings and apply them, effectively switching to a mode of operation corresponding to the identified occupant. For example, when a first driver enters vehicle 100 and is identified by the vehicle, the vehicle will retrieve the first driver’s previously set seat position and adjust the seat into that position. And, in conjunction with Choi’s teachings, when the seat position is adjusted, DSP 400 will adjust sound settings to correspond to the occupant-specific seat position. One of ordinary skill would have reasonably expected that doing so would have simplified sharing vehicle 100 among multiple drivers. See Nakamura at ¶¶ 17–22. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Choi and the Nakamura references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Summary
Claims 1–9 are rejected under at least one of 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103 as being unpatentable over the cited prior art. 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.
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 C.F.R. § 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WALTER F BRINEY III whose telephone number is (571)272-7513. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-4:30 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, Carolyn Edwards can be reached at 571-270-7136. 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.
/Walter F Briney III/
Walter F Briney IIIPrimary ExaminerArt Unit 2692
3/5/2026