DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to communications filed 7/31/2024:
Claims 1-14 and 16-21 are pending
Claim 15 is cancelled
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 .
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)(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) 1, 4-14, 16, and 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Rack et al (US20230226974, hereinafter “Rack”).
Regarding claim 1, Rack teaches a method for detecting a sound field around a solid structure, wherein the solid structure comprises at least one sound transducing element, which is a part of the solid structure and forms at least a part of an outer surface of the solid structure, wherein the sound field falls at least partly onto the sound transducing element (Fig. 1, ¶33, method in which the vehicle is equipped with vehicle parts which are further equipped with acoustic elements), the method comprising:
obtaining sensor data from at least one vibration sensor mounted onto a mounting surface of the at least one sound transducing element, wherein the at least one vibration sensor detects vibrations in the at least one sound transducing element, which are induced into the at least one sound transducing element by an incident sound field (¶34, Fig. 3, obtaining sensor data from the plurality of actuators mounted onto a surface of the vehicle part);
processing the sensor data to generate output data; and
providing the output data (¶36, sensor data can related to a soundfield caused by a pedestrian wherein words spoken by the pedestrian can be captured and processed in order to generate an output).
Regarding claim 4, Rack teaches wherein the solid structure is a vehicle, a building, or an electronic consumer device, and the outer surface of the at least one sound transducing element is an even continuous surface, onto which the incident sound field impacts (Fig. 1, solid structure is a vehicle body which comprises of an even continuous surface).
Regarding claim 5, Rack teaches wherein processing the sensor data comprises:
extracting a set of features from the sensor data, wherein the sensor data represents a sound event, which generated the incident sound field,
determining a type of the sound event by comparing the extracted set of features with a plurality of reference feature sets each representing a different sound event type, and
providing the type of the sound event as output data (¶22, 41, features such as length of time of oscillation detected can be used to determine whether a collision as occurred – by comparison against predetermined criteria or patterns for motions indicating a collision).
Regarding claim 6, Rack teaches wherein processing the sensor data further comprises:
determining warning information for the type of the sound event, and
outputting the warning information to a user of the solid structure (¶22, 41, user can be informed of a potential collision by means of the acoustic device).
Regarding claim 7, Rack teaches wherein processing the sensor data comprises:
applying a trained function to the sensor data, wherein the trained function is trained with training sensor datasets and corresponding known reference output data (¶22, detected motion data can be compared with appropriate predetermined criteria or patterns for motions indicating a collision).
Regarding claim 8, Rack teaches wherein the output data comprises a direction, in which a sound event, from which the sound field originates, is located (¶17, a direction or a range of a respective sound-source that sent out the captured acoustic signal can be determined or at least estimated automatically).
Regarding claim 9, Rack teaches wherein the at least one vibration sensor is mounted to a surface of the at least one sound transducing element opposite the outer surface, which the sound field impacts, or onto the outer surface of the at least one sound transducing element, which the sound field impacts (Fig. 3, actuators can be mounted on the opposite side of the outer surface).
Regarding claim 10, Rack teaches wherein a sound energy of the incident sound field propagates in air towards the solid structure, falls onto the outer surface of the at least one sound transducing element, whereby the incident sound field induces vibrations in the at least one sound transducing element, the vibrations propagate from the outer surface through the at least one sound transducing element to a mounting surface of the at least one sound transducing element, to which the at least one vibration sensor is fixed, wherein the at least one vibration sensor detects oscillating movement of at least part of the mounting surface (¶41-42, actuator captures the external sound which hits the body panel and travels through said body panel until detected by said actuator).
Regarding claim 11, Rack teaches wherein the at least one sound transducing element is formed as a sheet made out glass, plastic, metal, or composite and exceeds an area of 20 mm×20 mm (Figs. 1-2, ¶38, body panel can be a rear bumper onto which the acoustic elements can be mounted to).
Regarding claim 12, Rack teaches wherein the at least one vibration sensor is sealed at least partly by the at least one sound transducing element from an outside environment, where the sound field originates (¶39, actuator is concealed and protected by vehicle part).
Regarding claim 13, Rack teaches wherein multiple vibration sensors are mounted in the solid structure to respective corresponding multiple sound transducing elements, and wherein an orientation of surface is normal to the sound transducing elements receiving the incident sound field span at least 90°, preferably 180° (Fig. 1, plurality of sensors mounted to one or more body panels and wherein the surface receiving the sound field can be of a plurality of angles – Fig. 1 shows a pedestrian outputting a sound field that is normal to the driver side front-side bumper which has a vibration sensor mounted therein).
Regarding claim 14, it is rejected similarly as claim 1. The system can be found in Rack (abstract, vehicle comprising the sound detection system).
Regarding claim 16, it is rejected similarly as claim 1. The system can be found in Rack (abstract, vehicle comprising the sound detection system).
Regarding claim 19, it is rejected similarly as claim 4. The system can be found in Rack (abstract, vehicle comprising the sound detection system).
Regarding claim 20, it is rejected similarly as claim 9. The system can be found in Rack (abstract, vehicle comprising the sound detection system).
Regarding claim 21, it is rejected similarly as claim 12. The system can be found in Rack (abstract, vehicle comprising the sound detection system).
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) 2-3 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rack et al (US20230226974, hereinafter “Rack”) in view of Farahanisamani et al (US20230197048, hereinafter “Farah”).
Regarding claim 2, Rack teaches wherein the at least one vibration sensor is moved together with the mounting surface of the at least one sound transducing element in oscillating movements induced into the at least one sound transducing element by the incident sound field (¶37, Fig. 2-3, the actuators are mounted together with the body panel so that they would move together to determine the oscillation).
Rack fails to explicitly teach wherein the at least one vibration sensor is an accelerometer.
Farah teaches wherein the at least one vibration sensor is an accelerometer (¶49, accelerometer to detect vibrations/noise).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the vibration sensor (as taught by Rack) for the accelerometer (as taught by Farah). The rationale to do so is to substitute one well known type of sensor for detecting vibrations/oscillations for another to yield the predictable result of determining vibrations using a well-known sensor.
Regarding claim 3, Rack in view of Farah teaches wherein the at least one vibration sensor is a strain sensor which detects an oscillating material strain induced into the at least one sound transducing element by the incident sound field (Farah, ¶49, strain gauge/strain sensor can be used to determined vibrations).
Regarding claims 17-18, they are rejected similarly as claims 2-3, respectively. The system can be found in Rack (abstract, vehicle comprising the sound detection system).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to PTO-892, Notice of References Cited for a listing of analogous art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QIN ZHU whose telephone number is (571)270-1304. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6AM-4PM EST.
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 on 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.
/QIN ZHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2691
Prosecution Insights