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 . This action is made non-final.
Claims 24-43 are pending in the case. Claims 24, 42, and 43 are independent claims. Claims 1-23 have been canceled.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because FIG. 3 contains foreign language characters. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 24, 25, 27, 28, 31, 33, 34, 38-40, 42, and 43 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Charlton et al. (US 2020/0076388 A1).
Regarding claim 24, Charlton teaches an electronic device (FIGS. 1A-B and [0042-0058], FIG. 1C and [0059-0068]: an electronic device may be a playback device 110a), comprising:
a memory configured to store instructions (memory 112b of FIG. 1C and [0062-0065], [0068]); and
one or more processors coupled to the memory and configured to execute the instructions (processor(s) 112a of FIG. 1C, [0062-0064], and [0068]) to:
adjust N volume levels of the electronic device to M volume levels of the electronic device when a first condition is satisfied (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: for example, N volume levels may be in the range of 0% to 75%, as seen in FIG. 8E. As supported in [0156], “Accordingly, when a playback device receives an instruction to set a maximum volume variable, the playback device will set a maximum volume state variable accordingly, and thereafter carry out volume adjustments in accordance with the discussion set forth herein. Additional adjustments to the volume slider 833e will cause the controller device to issue respective instructions to change the maximum volume state variable accordingly.” Thus, the user can adjust N volume levels to M volume levels by adjusting the volume slider 833e, thereby satisfying a first condition. As an example, M volume levels may be 0% to 90% if the user slides the volume slider 833e to the right at the appropriate distance. Note that other examples of adjusting the N volume levels to M volume levels exist),
wherein N is a first positive integer (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: as there is a minimum and maximum in the range of volume levels, there are 2 volume levels),
wherein the N volume levels comprise a first level and a second level (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: N volume levels comprise a first level, which is a highest level like 75% seen in FIG. 8E, and a second level, which is a lowest level like 0% seen in FIG. 8E),
wherein the first level corresponds to a first volume (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: the first level, like the 75% of FIG. 8E, corresponds to a first volume),
wherein the second level corresponds to a second volume (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: the second level, like the 0% of FIG. 8E, corresponds to a second volume),
wherein a first difference is between the first volume and the second volume (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: a first difference exists between the first volume and the second volume, like 75% as seen in FIG. 8E),
wherein M is a second positive integer (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: continuing the example set forth above, as there is a minimum and maximum in the range of volume levels, there are 2 volume levels),
wherein the M volume levels comprise a third level and a fourth level (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: continuing the example previously set forth, M volume levels comprise a third level, which is a highest level like 90% after the user adjusts volume slider 833e of FIG. 8E, and a second level, which is a lowest level like 0%),
wherein the third level corresponds to a third volume (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: the third level, like adjusted 90%, corresponds to a third volume),
wherein the fourth level corresponds to a fourth volume (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: the fourth level, like the 0%, corresponds to a fourth volume),
wherein the third level and the first level are the same (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: the third level and the first level represent the highest level and are thus the same),
wherein the fourth level and the second level are the same (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: the fourth level and the second level represent the lowest level and are thus the same),
wherein a second difference is between the third volume and the fourth volume (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: a second difference exists between the third volume and the fourth volume, like 90%),
and
wherein the M volume levels satisfy at least one of the following:
M is not equal to N;
the third volume is not equal to the first volume;
the fourth volume is not equal to the second volume; or
the second difference is not equal to the first difference (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: continuing the example previously set forth, the third volume of 90% is not equal to the first volume of 75%. Furthermore, the second difference of 90% is not equal to the first difference of 75%. Note that this is an example and other variations of N and M volume levels may occur).
0154]: “FIGS. 8A-E depict example user interfaces 831a-831e that are configured for presentation on a controller device (e.g., one or more of control devices 130a (FIG. 1H), 430 (FIGS. 4A-4D), and 530 (FIG. 5))”; FIG. 1H and [0077-0082]: For example, an electronic device may be at least control device 130a
Regarding claim 25, Charlton further teaches the electronic device of claim 24, wherein the first level and the second level are first adjacent levels, wherein the third level and the fourth level are second adjacent levels, and wherein the second difference is less than the first difference (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: for example, N volume levels may be in the range of 0% to 75%, as seen in FIG. 8E. As supported in [0156], “Accordingly, when a playback device receives an instruction to set a maximum volume variable, the playback device will set a maximum volume state variable accordingly, and thereafter carry out volume adjustments in accordance with the discussion set forth herein. Additional adjustments to the volume slider 833e will cause the controller device to issue respective instructions to change the maximum volume state variable accordingly.” Thus, the user can adjust N volume levels to M volume levels by adjusting the volume slider 833e, thereby satisfying a first condition. As another example, M volume levels may be 0% to 60% if the user slides the volume slider 833e to the left at the appropriate distance. Using this example, the first level corresponding to 90% and the second level corresponding to 0% are first adjacent levels as the third level corresponding to 60% and the fourth level corresponding to 0% are second adjacent levels. In this case, the second difference of 60% is less than the first difference of 75%. Note that other examples of adjusting the N volume levels to M volume levels exist).
Regarding claim 27, Charlton further teaches the electronic device of claim 24, wherein the first level and the third level are a highest level, wherein the second level and the fourth level are a lowest level, and wherein the second difference is greater than the first difference (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: the third level and the first level are a highest level as the fourth level and the second level are a lowest level. Continuing the example previously set forth in claim 24, the second difference of 90% is greater than the first difference of 75%).
Regarding claim 28, Charlton further teaches the electronic device of claim 27, wherein the third volume is higher than the first volume, or wherein the fourth volume is lower than the second volume (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: continuing the example, the third volume of 90% is higher than the first volume of 75%).
Regarding claim 31, Charlton further teaches the electronic device of claim 27, wherein the first condition comprises:
receiving a first operation indicating to continue to increase a volume of the electronic device when the first level is reached (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: for example, N volume levels may be in the range of 0% to 75%, as seen in FIG. 8E. As supported in [0156], “Accordingly, when a playback device receives an instruction to set a maximum volume variable, the playback device will set a maximum volume state variable accordingly, and thereafter carry out volume adjustments in accordance with the discussion set forth herein. Additional adjustments to the volume slider 833e will cause the controller device to issue respective instructions to change the maximum volume state variable accordingly.” Thus, the user can adjust N volume levels to M volume levels by adjusting the volume slider 833e, thereby satisfying a first condition. As another example, the user may initially slide the volume slider 833e to the left to decrease the maximum volume variable from 75% to 70% but then slide the volume slider 833e to the right to increase the maximum volume variable back to 75% and then perform a first operation to continue to increase a volume of the electronic device when the first level of 75% is reached to ultimately arrive at 90%. Note that other examples of adjusting the N volume levels to M volume levels exist); or
receiving a second operation indicating to continue to decrease the volume when the second level is reached.
Regarding claim 33, Charlton further teaches the electronic device of claim 24, wherein the first condition comprises at least one of the following:
detecting that one of the N volume levels has a use frequency less than a use frequency threshold;
detecting that a current user of the electronic device has changed;
detecting that a current environment in which the electronic device is located has changed;
detecting that the electronic device is connected to an external sound output device; or
detecting that a user performs a volume adjustment operation in a first interface (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: for example, N volume levels may be in the range of 0% to 75%, as seen in FIG. 8E. As supported in [0156], “Accordingly, when a playback device receives an instruction to set a maximum volume variable, the playback device will set a maximum volume state variable accordingly, and thereafter carry out volume adjustments in accordance with the discussion set forth herein. Additional adjustments to the volume slider 833e will cause the controller device to issue respective instructions to change the maximum volume state variable accordingly.” Thus, the user can adjust N volume levels to M volume levels by adjusting the volume slider 833e in a first interface, thereby satisfying a first condition. As an example, M volume levels may be 0% to 90% if the user slides the volume slider 833e to the right at the appropriate distance. Note that other examples of adjusting the N volume levels to M volume levels exist).
Regarding claim 34, Charlton teaches the electronic device of claim 33, and, based on Charlton’s teachings for parent claim 33, the remaining limitations are unrequired.
Regarding claim 38, Charlton further teaches the electronic device of claim 24, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the instructions to:
display, before adjusting the N volume levels and in response to a first operation, a first progress bar to indicate the N volume levels (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: for example, N volume levels may be in the range of 0% to 75%, as seen in the progress bar denoted by the left end of the slider to the position of volume slider 833e of FIG. 8E.); and
display, after adjusting the N volume levels and in response to a second operation, a second progress bar to indicate the M volume levels (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: As supported in [0156], “Accordingly, when a playback device receives an instruction to set a maximum volume variable, the playback device will set a maximum volume state variable accordingly, and thereafter carry out volume adjustments in accordance with the discussion set forth herein. Additional adjustments to the volume slider 833e will cause the controller device to issue respective instructions to change the maximum volume state variable accordingly.” Thus, the user can adjust N volume levels to M volume levels by adjusting the volume slider 833e, thereby satisfying a first condition. As an example, M volume levels may be 0% to 90% if the user slides the volume slider 833e to the right at the appropriate distance. Such adjustment would be reflected in a second progress bar with the volume slider 833e in the new position. Note that other examples of adjusting the N volume levels to M volume levels exist).
Regarding claim 39, Charlton further teaches the electronic device of claim 38, wherein the first progress bar is different from the second progress bar by at least one of the following:
a first total length of the first progress bar is different from a second total length of the second progress bar (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: continuing the example, a first total length of the first progress bar, going from 0% to 75%, is shorter than the second total length of the second progress bar, going from 0% to 90%);
a first movement step of the first progress bar is different from a second movement step of the second progress bar, wherein the first movement step and the second movement step indicate a movement length required when one level is adjusted; or
a first quantity of movement times of the first progress bar is different from a second quantity of movement times of the second progress bar, wherein the first quantity and the second quantity indicate a quantity of movement times required when a lowest level is adjusted to a highest level.
Regarding claim 40, Charlton further teaches the electronic device of claim 39, wherein the first total length and the first quantity are related to N, wherein the first movement step is related to a first volume difference between two first adjacent levels in the N volume levels, wherein the second total length and the second quantity are related to M, and wherein the second movement step is related to a second volume difference between two second adjacent levels in the M volume levels (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: continuing the example, a first total length of the first progress bar, going from 0% to 75% as it pertains to N, is shorter than the second total length of the second progress bar, going from 0% to 90% as it pertains to M. The other features are unrequired contingent limitations).
Regarding claim 42, the claim recites a method, comprising steps corresponding to the electronic device of claim 24 and is therefore rejected on the same premise.
Regarding claim 43, the claim recites a computer program product comprising instructions that are stored on a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium and that, when executed by one or more processors, cause an electronic device (FIGS. 1A-B and [0042-0058], FIG. 1C and [0059-0068]) to perform operations corresponding to the electronic device of claim 24 and is therefore rejected on the same premise.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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(s) 26 and 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Charlton et al. (US 2020/0076388 A1), in view of DiNunzio (US 2014/0240595 A1).
Regarding claim 26, Charlton further teaches the electronic device of claim 25, wherein the first condition comprises that a quantity of times of switching between the first level and the second level (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: for example, N volume levels may be in the range of 0% to 75%, as seen in FIG. 8E. As supported in [0156], “Accordingly, when a playback device receives an instruction to set a maximum volume variable, the playback device will set a maximum volume state variable accordingly, and thereafter carry out volume adjustments in accordance with the discussion set forth herein. Additional adjustments to the volume slider 833e will cause the controller device to issue respective instructions to change the maximum volume state variable accordingly.” Thus, the user can adjust N volume levels to M volume levels by adjusting the volume slider 833e, switching from the first level to the second level at least once, that is greater than zero, thereby satisfying a first condition. As an example, M volume levels may be 0% to 90% if the user slides the volume slider 833e to the right at the appropriate distance. Note that other examples of adjusting the N volume levels to M volume levels exist).
Charlton does not explicitly teach the quantity of times switching being measured within a preset duration.
DiNunzio teaches the quantity of times switching being measured within a preset duration (FIG. 5 and [0079]: for example, the user presses the volume up key a preset quantity of times, like two times, within a predetermined amount of time, like 10 seconds).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the first condition as disclosed in Charlton by incorporating the teachings of DiNunzio so as to include the quantity of times switching being measured within a preset duration. Doing so would allow for a more stringent first condition so as to reduce inadvertent switching from N volume levels to M volume levels.
Regarding claim 32, Charlton further teaches the electronic device of claim 31, wherein the first operation comprises pressing and holding a volume up button, or pressing the volume up button more than a first preset quantity of times within a first preset duration, and wherein the second operation comprises pressing and holding a volume down button, or pressing the volume down button more than a second preset quantity of times within a second preset duration.
Charlton teaches wherein the first operation comprises pressing the volume up button ([0161]: “the controller receives a request to further increase the volume level of the playback device (e.g., by identifying an attempt to adjust the slider past the 100% position, or by identifying a respective volume-up button press on the controller, or the like)”).
Charlton does not explicitly teach pressing the volume up button more than a first preset quantity of times within a first preset duration.
DiNunzio teaches pressing the volume up button more than a first preset quantity of times within a first preset duration (FIG. 5 and [0079]: for example, the user presses the volume up key a preset quantity of times, like two times, within a first preset duration, like 10 seconds).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the first operation as disclosed in Charlton by incorporating the teachings of DiNunzio so as to include pressing the volume up button more than a first preset quantity of times within a first preset duration. Doing so would allow for a more stringent first condition for a first operation so as to reduce inadvertent switching from N volume levels to M volume levels.
Claim(s) 34 and 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Charlton et al. (US 2020/0076388 A1), in view of Williams et al. (US 2024/0281202 A1).
Regarding claim 34, Charlton teaches the electronic device of claim 33. As set forth above, the limitations of claim 34 are not required based on Charlton’s teachings of claim 33. However, for the sake of compact prosecution, supplementary mapping using a secondary reference is provided.
Charlton does not explicitly teach wherein when the first condition comprises detecting that the one of the N volume levels has the use frequency less than the use frequency threshold, adjusting the N volume levels comprises removing the one of the N volume levels, wherein when the first condition comprises detecting that the current user has changed and the M volume levels correspond to the current user, adjusting the N volume levels comprises adjusting the N volume levels to the M volume levels corresponding to the current user, wherein when the first condition comprises detecting that the current environment has changed and the M volume levels correspond to the current environment, adjusting the N volume levels comprises adjusting the N volume levels to the M volume levels corresponding to the current environment, or wherein when the first condition comprises detecting that the electronic device is connected to the external sound output device and the M volume levels correspond to the external sound output device, adjusting the N volume levels comprises adjusting the N volume levels to the M volume levels corresponding to the external sound output device.
Williams teaches wherein when the first condition comprises detecting that the current user has changed and the M volume levels correspond to the current user, adjusting the N volume levels comprises adjusting the N volume levels to the M volume levels corresponding to the current user (FIG. 3 and [0029-0040]: volume levels are adjusted based on a change in a user of the electronic device, as evident by the different user profiles 352, 368, and 370, for example).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Charlton by incorporating the teachings of Williams so as to include wherein when the first condition comprises detecting that the current user has changed and the M volume levels correspond to the current user, adjusting the N volume levels comprises adjusting the N volume levels to the M volume levels corresponding to the current user. Doing so would improve the robustness of an electronic device given its ability to automatically adjust its volume levels based on changes like a current user. In this way, the current user is precluded from having to manually adjust the electronic device’s volume levels even when a different user has previously used it with different preferred settings.
Regarding claim 35, Charlton further teaches the electronic device of claim 24.
Charlton does not explicitly teach wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the instructions to adjust a current volume level of the electronic device according to a change of at least one of the following: an environment, time, a user of the electronic device, a foreground application, or a connected sound output device.
Williams teaches adjust a current volume level of the electronic device according to a change of at least one of the following: an environment, time, a user of the electronic device, a foreground application, or a connected sound output device (FIG. 3 and [0029-0040]: a current volume of an electronic device may change based on a change in an environment, like when a user moves from room to room, and/or a change in a user of the electronic device, as evident by the different user profiles 352, 368, and 370, for example).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Charlton by incorporating the teachings of Williams so as to include adjust a current volume level of the electronic device according to a change of at least one of the following: an environment, time, a user of the electronic device, a foreground application, or a connected sound output device. Doing so would improve the robustness of an electronic device given its ability to automatically adjust its current volume level based on changes like an environment or a user of the electronic device. In this way, the user is precluded from having to manually adjust the electronic device’s current volume level.
Claim(s) 41 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Charlton et al. (US 2020/0076388 A1), in view of Marino, JR. et al. (hereinafter Marino, US 2014/0037107 A1).
Regarding claim 41, Charlton further teaches the electronic device of claim 24, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to execute the instructions to:
display a first prompt bar indicating first progress to describe a current volume; and
display, in response to an operation, a second prompt bar indicating second progress,
wherein the first length is greater than the second length (FIGS. 8A-H and [0154-0161]: For example, FIG. 8F shows a first prompt bar corresponding to “Surround Channels” and a second prompt bar corresponding to “Front Channels” with respective lengths from the left edge to the position of the slider control. The second prompt bar is displayed in response to operations analogous to FIGS. 8A-C).
Charlton does not explicitly teach wherein when the second progress is changed by a first length, the first progress is changed by a second length, wherein a first volume change amount corresponding to the first length is the same as a second volume change amount corresponding to the second length.
Marino teaches display a first prompt bar indicating first progress to describe a current volume; and
display, in response to an operation, a second prompt bar indicating second progress,
wherein when the second progress is changed by a first length, the first progress is changed by a second length,
wherein a first volume change amount corresponding to the first length is the same as a second volume change amount corresponding to the second length, and
wherein the first length is greater than the second length (FIGS. 9A-B and [0096-0107]: see first prompt bar corresponding to BEDROOM and a second prompt bar corresponding to GROUP. When the second progress is changed by a first length, as seen in the change in GROUP from FIG. 9A to 9B, the first progress for BEDROOM changes by a second length. The first length is greater than the second length. A first volume change amount corresponding to the first length is the same as a second volume change amount corresponding to the second length when the user overrides the maximum volume limit for BEDROOM).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Charlton by incorporating the teachings of Marino JR. so as to include wherein when the second progress is changed by a first length, the first progress is changed by a second length, wherein a first volume change amount corresponding to the first length is the same as a second volume change amount corresponding to the second length. Doing so would allow the user to more efficiently adjust volume settings for multiple devices simultaneously, precluding the need for the user to adjust volume settings for each device individually. The user is able to conveniently visualize the changes in volume via respective prompt bars concurrently, reducing the likelihood of misinterpreting the result of a simultaneous volume change input.
Allowable Subject Matter
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Claims 29, 30, 36, and 37 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, including:
US 9971561 B1: pressing volume control button within a threshold period of time to adjust volume levels
US 11900015 B2: increasing volume level to a threshold of a specified range
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENNY NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4980. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7AM to 5PM.
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, KIEU D VU can be reached on (571)272-4057. 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.
/KENNY NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2171
Prosecution Insights