DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the filing of a Continuation (CON) of Application 17/451756 which is now United States Patent 12,134,915; hereinafter referred to as Patent (‘915). This is in response to Applicants Preliminary Amendment filed 04/04/2025 which has been entered. No Claims have been amended. Claims 1-20 have been cancelled. Claims 21-40 have been added. Claims 21-40 are still pending in this application, with Claims 21, 30 and 38 being independent. Claims 21-40, as presently amended, are pending and have been considered as follows.
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 § 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) 21, 22, 24, 28-30, 32 and 36-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manley et al (2015/0199169 A1) in view of Rabii et al (2017/0055235 A1).
As per Claim 21, Manley teaches a method, comprising: receiving a signal conforming to a Universal Serial Bus (USB) standard from conferencing software, wherein the signal conforming to the USB standard comprises a first audio signal; adapting the signal conforming to the USB standard to a non-USB signal, the non-USB signal comprising a second audio signal that is based on the first audio signal (Figure 1 – References 108; Figure 2 – References 210, 212 and 214; Page 2, Paragraph [0026]; Page 4, Paragraph [0044]; Page 5, Paragraph [0047]).
(Note: In paragraph [0026], Manley describes a Universal Serial Bus [USB] to Bluetooth audio bridging device operating within a multimedia conferencing environment wherein a conferencing endpoint executes conferencing software. In paragraph [0044], Manley describes an input module receiving a set of audio data signals [i.e. USB signals] via a USB port. In paragraph [0047], Manley describes an output module converting the USB signals into Bluetooth compatible signals [i.e. non-USB signal] that are to be communicated to external communication devices)
Manley does not teach transmitting the non-USB signal to a plurality of networked audio devices that are synchronized based on a common clock. However, Rabii teaches transmitting the non-USB signal to a plurality of networked audio devices that are synchronized based on a common clock (Figure 3 – References 3040-X; Page 2, Paragraph [0019]; Page 4, Paragraph [0029]; Page 5, Paragraph [0040]).
(Note: In paragraph [0019], Rabii describes providing Precision Timing Protocol [PTP] timing and clock synchronization for wireless multimedia devices. In paragraph [0040], Rabii describes a timing synchronization control system applying PTP Best Master Clock [BMC] algorithm logic to dynamically select a master clock [i.e. common clock] which is used to synchronize a plurality of networked audio devices)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Manley with the method taught by Rabii to prevent audio degradation, eliminate echo/latency issues while ensuring seamless, high-quality communication. Synchronizing networked audio devices to a common clock allows all microphones and speakers across the system to capture and play back sound without stuttering.
As per Claim 22, the combination of Manley and Rabii teaches wherein adapting the signal conforming to the USB standard to the non-USB signal comprises generating the second audio signal of the non-USB signal to be configured to be received by the plurality of networked audio devices as described in Claim 21.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Manley with the method taught by Rabii to prevent audio degradation, eliminate echo/latency issues while ensuring seamless, high-quality communication. Synchronizing networked audio devices to a common clock allows all microphones and speakers across the system to capture and play back sound without stuttering.
As per Claims 24 and 32, the combination of Manley and Rabii teaches wherein the common clock comprises a Precision Time Protocol (PTP) clock as described in Claim 21. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Manley with the method taught by Rabii to prevent audio degradation, eliminate echo/latency issues while ensuring seamless, high-quality communication. Synchronizing networked audio devices to a common clock allows all microphones and speakers across the system to capture and play back sound without stuttering.
As per Claims 28, 29, 36 and 37, the combination of Manley and Rabii teaches wherein transmitting the non-USB signal comprises transmitting the non-USB signal to the plurality of networked audio devices through audio processing software; and wherein adapting the signal conforming to the USB standard to the non-USB signal comprises adapting the signal conforming to the USB standard to the non-USB signal based on the common clock as described in Claim 21.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Manley with the method taught by Rabii to prevent audio degradation, eliminate echo/latency issues while ensuring seamless, high-quality communication. Synchronizing networked audio devices to a common clock allows all microphones and speakers across the system to capture and play back sound without stuttering.
As per Claim 30, the combination of Manley and Rabii teaches a method, comprising: receiving a non-Universal Serial Bus (USB) signal from at least one of a plurality of networked audio devices that are synchronized based on a common clock, wherein the non-USB signal comprises a first audio signal; adapting the non-USB signal to a signal conforming to a USB standard, the signal conforming to the USB standard comprising a second audio signal that is based on the first audio signal; and transmitting the signal conforming to the USB standard to conferencing software as described in Claim 21.
(Note: Claim 30 differ from Claim 21 in that Claim 21 convers a USB standard signal to a non-USB standard signal where as Claim 30 converts a non-USB standard signal to a USB standard signal which is described in paragraphs [0044] and [0047] of Manley) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Manley with the method taught by Rabii to prevent audio degradation, eliminate echo/latency issues while ensuring seamless, high-quality communication. Synchronizing networked audio devices to a common clock allows all microphones and speakers across the system to capture and play back sound without stuttering.
As per Claim 38, the combination of Manley and Rabii teaches a method as described in Claim 21. Manley also teaches a system, comprising: one or more processors (Figure 2 – Reference 202; Page 4, Paragraph [0039] and [0043]); and a plurality of networked audio devices (Page 2, Paragraphs [0023], [0026] and [0027]; Page 3, Paragraph [0030]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method and system taught by Manley with the method and system taught by Rabii to prevent audio degradation, eliminate echo/latency issues while ensuring seamless, high-quality communication. Synchronizing networked audio devices to a common clock allows all microphones and speakers across the system to capture and play back sound without stuttering.
As per Claim 39, the combination of Manley and Rabii teaches wherein the one or more processors are further configured to: receive a second non-USB signal from the at least one of the plurality of networked audio devices, wherein the second non-USB signal comprises a second packetized audio signal; adapt the second non-USB signal to a second signal conforming to the USB standard, the second signal conforming to the USB standard comprising a second audio signal that is based on the second packetized audio signal; and transmit the second signal conforming to the USB standard to the conferencing software.
(Note: Claim 39 occurs in the environment of an active conference where a plurality or USB as well as non-USB signals are being exchanged. The receiving of, conversion [from USB to non-USB and vice versa], transmission of multiple USB and non-USB signals in such of an environment is found to be obvious)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method and system taught by Manley with the method and system taught by Rabii to prevent audio degradation, eliminate echo/latency issues while ensuring seamless, high-quality communication. Synchronizing networked audio devices to a common clock allows all microphones and speakers across the system to capture and play back sound without stuttering.
Claim(s) 23, 31 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manley et al (2015/0199169 A1) in view of Rabii et al (2017/0055235 A1) as applied to Claims 22 and 30 above, and further in view of Jensen (2013/0013841 A1).
As per Claim 23 and 31, the combination of Manley and Rabii teaches the method of Claims 22 and 30; but does not teach wherein the second audio signal comprises a pulse code modulation (PCM) audio data stream. However, Jensen teaches wherein the second audio signal comprises a pulse code modulation (PCM) audio data stream (Page 1, Paragraph [0010]; Page 2, Paragraph [0026]; Page 4, Paragraph [0062]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Manley and Rabii with the method taught by Jensen to translate a continuous waveform [i.e. conference audio] into a series of discrete values that can be easily transmitted, stored and manipulated; thereby allowing for clearer, more reliable transmission of voice signals over long distances.
As per Claim 40, the combination of Manley and Rabii teaches wherein the first packetized audio signal comprises a pulse code modulation (PCM) audio data stream; and wherein the common clock comprises a Precision Time Protocol (PTP) clock as described above in Claims 23 and 24.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method taught by Manley and Rabii with the method taught by Jensen to translate a continuous waveform [i.e. conference audio] into a series of discrete values that can be easily transmitted, stored and manipulated; thereby allowing for clearer, more reliable transmission of voice signals over long distances.
Claim(s) 25, 26, 33 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manley et al (2015/0199169 A1) in view of Rabii et al (2017/0055235 A1) as applied to Claims 21 and 30 above, and further in view of Elenes (7,339,503 B1).
As per Claims 25 and 33, the combination of Manley and Rabii teaches the method of Claims 21 and 30; but does not teach writing, to a buffer, audio samples of the signal conforming to the USB standard received from the conferencing software; and writing, based on a number of the audio samples that have been written to the buffer in a given time period, additional audio samples to the buffer.
However, Elenes teaches writing, to a buffer, audio samples of the signal conforming to the USB standard received from the conferencing software; and writing, based on a number of the audio samples that have been written to the buffer in a given time period, additional audio samples to the buffer (Column 3, Lines 15-24; Column 3, Lines 38-62).
(Note: In Column 3, Lines 15-24; Elenes describes storing samples of an audio signal in a buffer at in input sample rate determined by an input clock signal. Elenes indicates that the sample rate may be between 32 to 48 kilo-samples per second. Changes in the input clock signal result in changes to the number of audio samples being written to the buffer. Claim 14 differs from Claim 11 in that Claim 15 is directed to a non-USB signal whereas Claim 11 is directed to a USB signal)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method and apparatus taught by Manley and Rabii with the method and apparatus taught by Elenes to provide an audio data inputting apparatus that allows hardware other than a central processing unit (CPU) to perform processing at each predetermined frame period so that the CPU will not be interrupted at each frame period.
As per Claims 26 and 34, the combination of Manley, Rabii and Elenes teaches wherein the signal conforming to the USB standard is received, with a buffer, at a first clock rate as described in Claims 25 and 33. Elenes also teaches reading data from the buffer at a second clock rate that is different than the first clock rate; and transmitting, at the second clock rate and to the plurality of networked audio devices, the data that is read from the buffer (Column 3, Lines 38-62; Column 5, Line 65 – Column 6, Line 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method and apparatus taught by Manley and Rabii with the method and apparatus taught by Elenes to provide an audio data inputting apparatus that allows hardware other than a central processing unit (CPU) to perform processing at each predetermined frame period so that the CPU will not be interrupted at each frame period.
Claim(s) 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manley et al (2015/0199169 A1) in view of Rabii et al (2017/0055235 A1) and Elenes (7,339,503 B1) as applied to Claim 26 above, and further in view of Lottis et al (2006/0104397 A1).
As per Claim 27, the combination of Manley, Rabii and Elenes teaches the method of Claim 26; but does not teach adjusting the first clock rate to converge to the second clock rate. However, Lottis teaches adjusting the first clock rate to converge to the second clock rate (Page 4, Paragraphs [0033] and [0034]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method and apparatus taught by Manley, Rabii and Elenes with the method and apparatus taught by Lottis to provide consistent delivery of conference media to endpoints of various capabilities by utilizing a transmission rate that supports a best available transmission rate for all devices supported by a conferencing appliance.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Koll (2014/0274004 A1), Sherburne et al (2019/0281147 A1), Manley et al (2014/0148934 A1), SKJOLDBORD (2017/0318142 A1), MIYATA et al (2012/0253491 A1), Ubriaco et al (2007/0019802 A1), RAND et al (2018/0173661 A1) and Ryazanov (2015/0264513 A1). Each of these describes systems and methods of employing USB standards in a conferencing environment.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHARYE POPE whose telephone number is (571)270-5587. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8AM - 4PM.
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, Ahmad Matar can be reached at 571-272-7488. 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.
KHARYE POPE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2693
/KHARYE POPE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
Prosecution Insights