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. On 10 June 2026, the Office received a certified copy of the priority document.
Art Rejections
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.
Claims 1–6, 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of US Patent Application Publication 2016/0142852 (published 19 May 2016) (“Christoph”) and US Patent Application Publication 2023/0035325 (filed 08 December 2021) (“You”).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Christoph, You and US Patent Application Publication 2024/0025363 (effectively filed 03 August 2021) (“Nakamura”).
Claim 1 is drawn to “a signal processing apparatus.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed apparatus and the Christoph reference.
Claim 1
The Christoph Reference
“1. A signal processing apparatus comprising a controller configured to:
The Christoph reference describes a system for processing signals. Christoph’s system similarly includes circuitry that acts as a controller by controlling the manner in which audio is reproduced by loudspeakers.
(i) acquire a sound source signal for reproducing sound in a vehicle;
Christoph acquires input signals that correspond to the claimed sound source signals for reproducing sound in a vehicle. Id. at ¶¶ 19, 38, FIGs.2, 4, 7.
“(ii) acquire seat information indicating a state of a seat in the vehicle, the seat information including at least a seat-back angle;
Christoph describes that a user’s head may be positioned at different positions 28–30 in correspondence with the position of a seat 21. Id. at ¶ 41, FIG.5. Christoph further describes that seat portion 22 of seat 21 may move from a reference position along a front-back direction 25 and an up-down direction 26 while seat back 23 may move along an arc line 27 (i.e., a seat-back angle). Id. Christoph’s control circuit includes a head position detector 39 that determines a user’s head position. Id. In one embodiment, head position detector 39 tracks the seat position along directions 25–27 as a proxy for the position of the user’s head among positions 28–30. See id. at ¶ 41, FIG.5. In that case, head position detector 39 acquires information about where back portion 23 is along arc line 27—the information thus being a seat-back angle. See id.
“(iii) determine parameters for reproduction based on the seat information that has been acquired; and
Christoph’s circuitry uses seat information generated by head position detector 39 to determine filter coefficients. Id. at ¶¶ 41–43, FIGs.1, 5, 6, 7.
“(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 that have been determined, wherein
Christoph describes applying the determined filter coefficients to a filter matrix 35 or fader 43 to mix and route input audio signals for appropriate loudspeakers. Id.
“the parameters include a distribution parameter for distributing, based on the seat-back angle, at least a left-front channel signal and a right-front channel signal included in the sound source signal to a pair of front speakers provided in a front portion of the vehicle and
Christoph’s filter coefficients include a distribution parameter because the coefficients specify how each channel of audio (e.g., stereo audio defining a left-front channel signal and a right-front channel signal) is to be distributed among front speakers (e.g., SFLL and SFLR) in a vehicle to compensate for crosstalk between pairs of speakers. Id. at ¶¶ 37, FIGs.3, 5, 7, 42.
“a pair of ceiling speakers provided in a ceiling position of the vehicle, and
Christoph does not, however, describe distributing left-front channel signal and a right-front channel signal to a pair of ceiling speakers provided in a ceiling position of a vehicle.
“the controller is configured to localize a sound image corresponding to the left-front channel signal and the right-front channel signal in a direction a user sitting in the seat faces.”
Christoph’s circuitry filters input audio signals (e.g., left-front and right-front stereo signals) to create distinct listening positions, such as FLP-LC and FLP-RC. Id. at ¶¶ 37–39, 42–44, FIGs.3, 4, 7, 8. The positions are realized in part via crosstalk cancellation to prevent audio from a left speaker from leaking into the user’s right ear and vice versa for audio from the right speaker and the user’s left ear. Id. Filtering the audio in this way localizes a sound image corresponding to left-front channel and right-front channel signals in a direction that a user is facing while sitting since the crosstalk cancellation assumes the user’s head position is stable between a left speaker and a right speaker (i.e., the user is not looking to the side, which would inherently alter the balance of audio entering from the left and right speakers). See id.
Table 1
The table above shows that the Christoph reference describes a system that corresponds closely to the claimed apparatus. Christoph does not anticipate the claimed pair of ceiling speakers and the claimed distribution of left-front and right-front channel signals to the ceiling speakers based on a distribution parameter derived from a seat-back angle.
The differences between the claimed invention and the Christoph reference are such that the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this Application was effectively filed. As shown in the table, Christoph describes a system that distributes multiple channels of input audio signals (e.g., stereo signals) to speakers SFLL and SFLR associated with a listening position FLP-LC. The distribution is controlled in part by a transaural filter that alters the input audio signals to minimize crosstalk between speakers SFLL and SFLR. Christoph updates the filter coefficients used for distribution based on a seat-back angle, which acts as a proxy for a user’s head position. Christoph does not describe any ceiling speakers, or routing signals to the ceiling speakers based on a seat-back angle.
The You reference describes a vehicle outfitted with a plurality of roof/ceiling speakers 601–607. You at ¶¶ 78–82, 128, 129, FIGs.4, 6A. You describes routing audio to speakers 601–607 based on a user’s head position, as determined in part by seat angle, to create a zone of localized sound at the position of a user’s head. Id. at ¶¶ 96–101, FIGs.6A–9B. You describes that adding roof speakers 601–607 allows for the support of more audio channels (i.e., height channels) than a standard two-speaker setup, like the one described by Christoph. Id. at ¶ 82.
Read in light of Christoph, You’s teachings reasonably suggest modifying Christoph’s system to similarly include roof/ceiling speakers and to route audio to the roof speakers based on a seat-back angle that acts as a proxy for a user’s head position. See MPEP § 2143(I)(D) (applying You’s known technique of including ceiling speakers in a vehicle and routing audio to the ceiling speakers based on a seat-back angle to Christoph’s vehicle, which already includes a sound system that alters audio based on a seat-back angle). For the foregoing reasons, the Christoph and the You references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 2 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein the seat information further includes at least one of a seat position of the seat, and a seat height of a seat surface of the seat.
Christoph describes that a user’s head may be positioned at different positions 28–30 in correspondence with the position of a seat 21. Id. at ¶ 41, FIG.5. Christoph further describes that seat portion 22 of seat 21 may move from a reference position along a front-back direction 25 and an up-down direction 26 while seat back 23 may move along an arc line 27 (i.e., a seat-back angle). Id. Christoph’s control circuit includes a head position detector 39 that determines a user’s head position. Id. In one embodiment, head position detector 39 tracks the seat position along directions 25–27 as a proxy for the position of the user’s head among positions 28–30. See id. at ¶ 41, FIG.5. In that case, head position detector 39 acquires information about where seat portion 22 is located along lines 25 (i.e., seat position) and 26 (i.e., seat height) and where back portion 23 is along arc line 27—the information thus being a seat-back angle. See id. For the foregoing reasons, the Christoph and the You references makes obvious 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, Christoph generates sound signals by applying a filter matrix C that includes a set delay amount t to compensate for acoustic delays between the loudspeakers and the user’s ears. Christoph at ¶ 27. For the foregoing reasons, the Christoph and the You references makes obvious 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.”
Likewise, Christoph’s filter coefficients C determine a transfer function that is applied to input audio signals prior to reproduction by a vehicle’s loudspeakers. Christoph at ¶ 27. One of ordinary skill would have known that a transfer function is a term of art that determines the sound pressure of a signal (e.g., a signal output by speakers after filtering) and includes increases/decreases in sound levels at specific frequencies. For the foregoing reasons, the Christoph and the You references makes obvious 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 the seat-back angle
As shown in the obviousness rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, the You reference similarly suggests replacing signals supplied to particular speakers based on a seat-back angle. For the foregoing reasons, the Christoph and the You references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
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 the seat information indicating the state of the seat after change.”
Christoph’s vehicle includes a seat 21 that is positioned along directions 25, 26 and arc line 27. Id. Christoph’s signal processing circuitry acquires information about the seat’s position from a seat positioning system. However, Christoph does not describe a user-selectable mode that may be selected to adjust the state of seat 21.
The Nakamura reference, like Christoph, 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 Christoph, Nakamura’s teachings reasonably suggest modifying Christoph’s vehicle to include a similar occupant-dependent setting system. When a particular occupant enters, Christoph’s vehicle 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 the vehicle 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 Christoph’s teachings at ¶¶ 41–44, FIGs.5–8, when the seat position is adjusted, the signal processing circuitry 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 Christoph and the Nakamura references makes obvious 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 the state of the seat; and
“a plurality of speakers that output sound based on the sound signals.”
Christoph’s system similarly includes a seat sensor to detect the positions 25, 26 of a seat 22 and the angle 27 of a seat back 23. Christoph at ¶ 41, FIG.5. Christoph’s system includes a plurality of speakers that output sound based on signals generated by Christoph’s processing circuitry. Id. at ¶¶ 37, 38, FIGs.3, 4.
Claim 8 is drawn to “a signal processing method.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed method and the Christoph reference.
Claim 8
The Christoph Reference
“8. A signal processing method executed by a controller, the method comprising:
The Christoph reference describes a system for processing signals. Christoph’s system similarly includes circuitry that acts as a controller by controlling the manner in which audio is reproduced by loudspeakers.
“(a) acquiring a sound source signal for reproducing sound in a vehicle;
Christoph acquires input signals that correspond to the claimed sound source signals for reproducing sound in a vehicle. Id. at ¶¶ 19, 38, FIGs.2, 4, 7.
“(b) acquiring seat information indicating a state of a seat in the vehicle, the seat information including at least a seat-back angle;
Christoph describes that a user’s head may be positioned at different positions 28–30 in correspondence with the position of a seat 21. Id. at ¶ 41, FIG.5. Christoph further describes that seat portion 22 of seat 21 may move from a reference position along a front-back direction 25 and an up-down direction 26 while seat back 23 may move along an arc line 27 (i.e., a seat-back angle). Id. Christoph’s control circuit includes a head position detector 39 that determines a user’s head position. Id. In one embodiment, head position detector 39 tracks the seat position along directions 25–27 as a proxy for the position of the user’s head among positions 28–30. See id. at ¶ 41, FIG.5. In that case, head position detector 39 acquires information about where back portion 23 is along arc line 27—the information thus being a seat-back angle. See id.
“(c) determining parameters for reproduction based on the seat information that has been acquired; and
Christoph’s circuitry uses seat information generated by head position detector 39 to determine filter coefficients. Id. at ¶¶ 41–43, FIGs.1, 5, 6, 7.
(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 that have been determined, wherein
Christoph describes applying the determined filter coefficients to a filter matrix 35 or fader 43 to mix and route input audio signals for appropriate loudspeakers. Id.
“the parameters include a distribution parameter for distributing, based on the seat-back angle, at least a left-front channel signal and a right-front channel signal included in the sound source signal to a pair of front speakers provided in a front portion of the vehicle and
Christoph’s filter coefficients include a distribution parameter because the coefficients specify how each channel of audio (e.g., stereo audio defining a left-front channel signal and a right-front channel signal) is to be distributed among front speakers (e.g., SFLL and SFLR) in a vehicle to compensate for crosstalk between pairs of speakers. Id. at ¶¶ 37, FIGs.3, 5, 7, 42.
“a pair of ceiling speakers provided in a ceiling position of the vehicle, and
Christoph does not, however, describe distributing left-front channel signal and a right-front channel signal to a pair of ceiling speakers provided in a ceiling position of a vehicle.
“the controller further localizes a sound image corresponding to the left-front channel signal and the right-front channel signal in a direction a user sitting in the seat faces.”
Christoph’s circuitry filters input audio signals (e.g., left-front and right-front stereo signals) to create distinct listening positions, such as FLP-LC and FLP-RC. Id. at ¶¶ 37–39, 42–44, FIGs.3, 4, 7, 8. The positions are realized in part via crosstalk cancellation to prevent audio from a left speaker from leaking into the user’s right ear and vice versa for audio from the right speaker and the user’s left ear. Id. Filtering the audio in this way localizes a sound image corresponding to left-front channel and right-front channel signals in a direction that a user is facing while sitting since the crosstalk cancellation assumes the user’s head position is stable between a left speaker and a right speaker (i.e., the user is not looking to the side, which would inherently alter the balance of audio entering from the left and right speakers). See id.
Table 2
The table above shows that the Christoph reference describes a system that performs a method that corresponds closely to the claimed method. Christoph does not anticipate the claimed pair of ceiling speakers and the claimed distribution of left-front and right-front channel signals to the ceiling speakers based on a distribution parameter derived from a seat-back angle.
The differences between the claimed invention and the Christoph reference are such that the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this Application was effectively filed. As shown in the table, Christoph describes a system that distributes multiple channels of input audio signals (e.g., stereo signals) to speakers SFLL and SFLR associated with a listening position FLP-LC. The distribution is controlled in part by a transaural filter that alters the input audio signals to minimize crosstalk between speakers SFLL and SFLR. Christoph updates the filter coefficients used for distribution based on a seat-back angle, which acts as a proxy for a user’s head position. Christoph does not describe any ceiling speakers, or routing signals to the ceiling speakers based on a seat-back angle.
The You reference describes a vehicle outfitted with a plurality of roof/ceiling speakers 601–607. You at ¶¶ 78–82, 128, 129, FIGs.4, 6A. You describes routing audio to speakers 601–607 based on a user’s head position, as determined in part by seat angle, to create a zone of localized sound at the position of a user’s head. Id. at ¶¶ 96–101, FIGs.6A–9B. You describes that adding roof speakers 601–607 allows for the support of more audio channels (i.e., height channels) than a standard two-speaker setup, like the one described by Christoph. Id. at ¶ 82.
Read in light of Christoph, You’s teachings reasonably suggest modifying Christoph’s system to similarly include roof/ceiling speakers and to route audio to the roof speakers based on a seat-back angle that acts as a proxy for a user’s head position. See MPEP § 2143(I)(D) (applying You’s known technique of including ceiling speakers in a vehicle and routing audio to the ceiling speakers based on a seat-back angle to Christoph’s vehicle, which already includes a sound system that alters audio based on a seat-back angle). For the foregoing reasons, the Christoph and the You 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
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 C.F.R. § 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 C.F.R. § 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 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 mailing date of this final action.
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
8/31/2026
Prosecution Insights