CTNF 18/855,693 CTNF 87992 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement 06-52 AIA The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/10/2024 was filed after the mailing date of the application on 10/10/2024 . The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Drawings 06-22-07 AIA The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: processor 21, control unit 29 ... are shown on Fig 1 but are not described in the specification . Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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. Specification 06-30 AIA 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, requires the specification to be written in “full, clear, concise, and exact terms.” The specification is replete with terms which are not clear, concise and exact. The specification should be revised carefully in order to comply with 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112. Examples of some unclear, inexact or verbose terms used in the specification are: “a specifying unit that specifies…” is not described in the specification. The following number 21, 23, 29… of Fig 1 of the drawing are not described in the specification . 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation 07-30-03 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. 07-30-06 This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a data acquisition unit that acquires sensor data “; “a position acquisition unit that acquires” “a specifying unit that specifies “in claim 20. The examiner interprets the processor 21 in Fig 1 as the structure performing the function of “a data acquisition unit that acquires sensor data “; “a position acquisition unit that acquires” “a specifying unit that specifies “. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-12-aia AIA (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. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 8, 14, 17-18, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Takata et al (US 2021/0166659 A1) . Regarding claim 1, Takata et al disclose an acoustic control method comprising: acquiring sensor data from two or more sensors mounted on a moving body that moves in a three-dimensional space (Takata et al; Para [0020]-[0021]; acquiring microphone data from microphones 40a to 40d interpreted as sensors); acquiring a position of the moving body (Takata et al; Para [0020]-[0021] GPS information interpreted as position of the moving body 2); specifying a sound source and a position of the sound source outside the moving body on a basis of output of acoustic event information acquisition processing using the sensor data as input (Takata et al; Para [0027]; [0029]-[0030]); and displaying, on a display, a moving body icon corresponding to the moving body (Takata et al; Fig 8 (b2) moving body icon 90; Para [0048]), wherein the display further displays metadata of the sound source that has been specified in a visually identifiable manner reflecting a relative positional relationship between the position of the moving body and the position of the sound source that has been specified (Takata et al; Para [0027]; [0029] [0035]; [0055] icons showing sound sources types and sound source direction interpreted as metadata of the sound sources). Regarding claim 2, Takata et al disclose the acoustic control method according to claim 1, wherein the two or more sensors include at least two acoustic sensors (Takata et al; Para [0020]-[0021]). Regarding claim 3, Takata et al disclose the acoustic control method according to claim 2, wherein the acoustic sensor is a microphone (Takata et al; Para [0020]-[0021]). Regarding claim 6, Takata et al disclose the acoustic control method according to claim 1, wherein the metadata of the sound source includes event feature data related to a feature of an event of the sound source that has been specified (Takata et al; Para [0049]; Fig 8(b2); icons interpreted as metadata includes type of sound source like siren or horn). Regarding claim 8, Takata et al disclose the acoustic control method according to claim 6, wherein displaying the metadata of the sound source includes displaying the metadata in accordance with a priority ranking specified on a basis of the event feature data (Takata et al; Para [0043]-[0044]). Regarding claim 14, Takata et al disclose the acoustic control method according to claim 1, further comprising: outputting sound of the sound source that has been specified to at least one of one or more speakers inside the moving body (Takata et al; Para [0021] [0024]). Regarding claim 17, Takata et al disclose the acoustic control method according to claim 1, wherein the two or more sensors further include an image sensor, and the sensor data includes data related to a detected object (Takata et al; Para [0021]). Regarding claim 18, Takata et al disclose the acoustic control method according to claim 6, wherein the metadata of the sound source further includes object feature data related to an object of the sound source that has been specified (Takata et al; Para [0049]; Fig 8(b2); icons interpreted as metadata includes siren or horn image interpreted as specification of the sound source). Regarding claim 20, Takata et al disclose an acoustic control device comprising: a data acquisition unit that acquires sensor data from two or more sensors mounted on a moving body that moves in a three- dimensional space (Takata et al; Para [0020]-[0021]; acquiring microphone data from microphones 40a to 40d interpreted as sensors); a position acquisition unit that acquires a position of the moving body (Takata et al; Para [0020]-[0021] GPS information interpreted as position of the moving body 2); a specifying unit that specifies a sound source and a position of the sound source outside the moving body on a basis of output of acoustic event information acquisition processing using the sensor data as input (Takata et al; Para [0027]; [0029]-[0030]); and a display control unit that displays, on a display, a moving body icon corresponding to the moving body (Takata et al; Fig 8(b2) moving body icon 90; Para [0048]), wherein the display control unit further displays, on the display, metadata of the sound source that has been specified in a visually identifiable manner reflecting a relative positional relationship between the position of the moving body and the position of the sound source that has been specified (Takata et al; Para [0027]; [0029] [0035]; [0055] icons showing sound sources types and sound source direction interpreted as metadata of the sound sources) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takata et al (US 2021/0166659 A1) in view of Cordourier Maruri et al (US 2019/0220248 A1) . Regarding claim 4, Takata et al disclose the acoustic control method according to claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein the acoustic event information acquisition processing includes a machine learning algorithm. However, in the same field of endeavor, Cordourier Maruri et al disclose a device wherein the acoustic event information acquisition processing includes a machine learning algorithm (Cordourier Maruri et al; Fig 1; Para [0025] [0046]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the event information acquisition taught by Cordourier Maruri et al as event identification taught by Takata. The motivation to do so would have been to detect and identify events that are out of view (Cordourier Maruri et al; Para [0015]). Regarding claim 5, Takata et al in Cordourier Maruri et al disclose the acoustic control method according to claim 4, but do not expressly disclose wherein the machine learning algorithm is a deep neural network. However, in the same field of endeavor, Cordourier Maruri et al disclose a device wherein the machine learning algorithm is a deep neural network (Cordourier Maruri et al; Fig 1; Para [0025] [0046]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the event information acquisition taught by Cordourier Maruri et al as event identification taught by Takata. The motivation to do so would have been to detect and identify events that are out of view (Cordourier Maruri et al; Para [0015]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takata et al (US 2021/0166659 A1) in view of Jang et al (US 2018/0165964 A1) . Regarding claim 7, Takata et al disclose the acoustic control method according to claim 6, but do not expressly disclose wherein displaying the metadata of the sound source includes identifiably assigning at least one of a color, a ratio, and a display area to each piece of the event feature data. However, in the same field of endeavor, Jang et al disclose a device wherein displaying the metadata of the sound source includes identifiably assigning at least one of a color, a ratio, and a display area to each piece of the event feature data (Jang et al; Para [0118]-[0119][0126]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the sound sources indicator taught by Jang et al as event identification taught by Takata. The motivation to do so would have been to visually provide location information of the neighbor vehicle to a driver of the vehicle (Jang et al; Para [0002]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takata et al (US 2021/0166659 A1) in view of Oda (US 2016/0266869 A1) . Regarding claim 9, Takata et al disclose the acoustic control method according to claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein the moving body icon is displayed to overlap with map data displayed on the display, and an icon of the sound source that has been specified is further displayed on the map. However, in the same field of endeavor, Oda et al disclose wherein the moving body icon is displayed to overlap with map data displayed on the display, and an icon of the sound source that has been specified is further displayed on the map (Oda et al; Fig 1; Para [0007] [0010]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the icon display taught by Oda et al as icon display taught by Takata. The motivation to do so would have been for hearing-challenged to find the position of sound using sight (Oda et al; Para [0005]). Regarding claim 19, Takata et al disclose the acoustic control method according to claim 18, but do not expressly disclose wherein specifying the position of the sound source includes specifying a relationship between the event feature data and the object feature data, and the display further updates display in a case where the relative positional relationship between the position of the moving body and the position of the sound source that has been specified is changed. However, in the same field of endeavor, Oda et al disclose a device wherein specifying the position of the sound source includes specifying a relationship between the event feature data and the object feature data (Oda et al; Para [0011][0080]), and the display further updates display in a case where the relative positional relationship between the position of the moving body and the position of the sound source that has been specified is changed (Oda et al; Para [0087]-[0089][0108]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the sound source ranking taught by Oda as sound sources indication in the device taught by Takata. The motivation to do so would have been for hearing-challenged to find the position of sound using sight (Oda et al; Para [0005]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takata et al (US 2021/0166659 A1) in view of Oda (US 2016/0266869 A1) and further in view of Trapani (US 2006/0139454 A1) . Regarding claim 10, Takata et al in view of Oda disclose the acoustic control method according to claim 9, but do not expressly disclose further comprising: acquiring time and recording the time in association with the position of the moving body and the sound source and the position of the sound source that have been specified. However, in the same field of endeavor, Trapani et al disclose a device further comprising: acquiring time and recording the time in association with the position of the moving body and the sound source and the position of the sound source that have been specified (Trapani; Para [0036]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the icon display taught by Oda et al as icon display taught by Takata. The motivation to do so would have been to reduce the cost of the system (Trapani; Para [0006]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takata et al (US 2021/0166659 A1) in view of Oda (US 2016/0266869 A1) and further in view of Trapani (US 2006/0139454 A1) and further in view of Inaba (US 2020/0353946 A1) . Regarding claim 11, Takata et al in view of Oda and further in view of Trapani disclose the acoustic control method according to claim 10, but do not expressly disclose further comprising: displaying the position of the moving body at a predetermined time and the sound source and the position of the sound source that have been specified on the display on a basis of instruction input by a user. However, in the same field of endeavor, Inaba disclose a device further comprising: displaying the position of the moving body at a predetermined time (Inaba; Para [0097]-[0098]) and the sound source and the position of the sound source that have been specified on the display on a basis of instruction input by a user (Inaba; Para [0057]-[0061]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the command feature taught by Inaba et al as command feature taught by Takata. The motivation to do so would have been to achieve driving support for the vehicle (Inaba; Para [0007]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takata et al (US 2021/0166659 A1) in view of Oda (US 2016/0266869 A1) and further in view of Trapani (US 2006/0139454 A1) and further in view of Inaba (US 2020/0353946 A1) and further in view of Sim (US 2022/0396204 A1) . Regarding claim 12, Takata et al in view of Oda and further in view of Trapani and further view Inaba disclose the acoustic control method according to claim 11, but do not expressly disclose wherein the instruction input by the user is input for changing the predetermined time. However, in the same field of endeavor, Sim disclose a device wherein the instruction input by the user is input for changing the predetermined time (Sim; Para [0050]-[0052]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the command feature taught by Sim as command feature taught by Takata. The motivation to do so would have been to provide convenient to operate the device (Sim; Para [0033]). Regarding claim 13, Takata et al in view of Oda and further in view of Trapani and further view Inaba and further in view of Sim disclose the acoustic control method according to claim 11, but do not expressly disclose wherein the instruction input by the user is voice input. However, in the same field of endeavor, Sim disclose a device wherein the instruction input by the user is voice input (Sim; Para [0050]-[0052]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the command feature taught by Sim as command feature taught by Takata. The motivation to do so would have been to provide convenient to operate the device (Sim; Para [0033]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takata et al (US 2021/0166659 A1) in view of Pognon et al (US2020/0168200 A1) . Regarding claim 15, Takata et al disclose the acoustic control method according to claim 14, but do not expressly disclose wherein the at least one speaker is installed in a vicinity of a user who controls the moving body. However, in the same field of endeavor, Pognon et al disclose a device wherein the at least one speaker is installed in a vicinity of a user who controls the moving body (Pognon; Fig 1; HP speaker near the driver). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the loudspeaker position taught by Pognon as loudspeaker position in the device taught by Takata. The motivation to do so would have been to improve the user experience . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takata et al (US 2021/0166659 A1) in view of Yamasaki et al (US 2021/0082434 A1) and further in view of Oda (US 2016/0266869 A1) . Regarding claim 16, Takata et al disclose the acoustic control method according to claim 1, but do not expressly disclose further comprising: performing speech recognition based on input of a microphone inside the moving body; and displaying the metadata of the sound source that has been specified depending on a degree of relevance between an event specified by the speech recognition and an event of the sound source that has been specified. However, in the same field of endeavor, Yamasaki et al disclose a device further comprising: performing speech recognition based on input of a microphone inside the moving body (Yamasaki et al; Para [0021]-[0023]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the speech recognition taught by Yamasaki as user input in the device taught by Takata. The motivation to do so would have been to reduce the distortion in the voice commands captured by the microphones (Yamasaki et al; Para [0032]). Moreover, in the same field of endeavor, Oda et al disclose a device further comprising: displaying the metadata of the sound source that has been specified depending on a degree of relevance between an event specified by the speech recognition and an event of the sound source that has been specified (Oda et al; Para [0015]-[0019]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the sound source ranking taught by Oda as sound sources indication in the device taught by Takata. The motivation to do so would have been for hearing-challenged to find the position of sound using sight (Oda et al; Para [0005]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KUASSI A GANMAVO whose telephone number is (571)270-5761. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 AM-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, Carolyn Edwards can be reached at 5712707136. 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. /KUASSI A GANMAVO/Examiner, Art Unit 2692 /CAROLYN R EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2692 Application/Control Number: 18/855,693 Page 2 Art Unit: 2692 Application/Control Number: 18/855,693 Page 3 Art Unit: 2692 Application/Control Number: 18/855,693 Page 4 Art Unit: 2692 Application/Control Number: 18/855,693 Page 5 Art Unit: 2692 Application/Control Number: 18/855,693 Page 6 Art Unit: 2692 Application/Control Number: 18/855,693 Page 8 Art Unit: 2692 Application/Control Number: 18/855,693 Page 9 Art Unit: 2692 Application/Control Number: 18/855,693 Page 10 Art Unit: 2692 Application/Control Number: 18/855,693 Page 11 Art Unit: 2692 Application/Control Number: 18/855,693 Page 13 Art Unit: 2692 Application/Control Number: 18/855,693 Page 15 Art Unit: 2692
Prosecution Insights