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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-9, 11 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shintani et al. (US 2015/0078595 A1), hereinafter “Shintani,” in view of Kubiak et al. (US 2024/0007803 A1), hereinafter “Kubiak.”
As to claim 1, Shintani discloses an audio system (Figs. 1 and 6) comprising:
one or more hardware processors (Fig. 6) configured to:
access a hearing transfer function wherein the hearing transfer function is configured to correct audio playback to account for differences between a hearing perception of the user and normal hearing perception (¶0024-0026 and ¶0038, Figs. 2 and 6. “In order to customize the audio experience of each of the listeners, a profile can be established for each listener.” “Using this profile as a template, the audio system can beam a specialized audio signal to George in which the right channel volume is quite high and the left volume is higher than normal. Additionally, the audio in the right channel will be adjusted to provide more volume on middle and high frequencies than the low frequencies. This profile can be established experimentally with the assistance of the audio system or based upon the listener's preference. In one embodiment, an audio setup would guide the user in setting up a personal profile by playing testing the listener's hearing and modifying the audio characteristics.” “When a listener is identified in profile database 226, the programmed processor (or processors) 218 use the profile data to carry out a mixing and equalization function within audio processor 230 so that the audio from audio source 234 is adjusted to compensate for the hearing of the listener in accord with the listener's profile.”);
determine a spatial location of a user within an environment from sensor data (¶0024, ¶0031 and ¶0037-0038, Figs. 1, 3 and 6. “The camera 24, by imaging the listening area, can be used to provide images that upon analysis can determine 1) the location of each listener, 2) the location of the head and ears of each listener.” “Listeners are located and identified by use of camera 214 under control of a programmed processor 218 which is programmed to carry out image processing for identification of location and for facial recognition.”);
based on the spatial location of the user, generate beamforming data for generating audio according to a beam pattern having an acoustic lobe at the spatial location of the user (¶0026, ¶0035 and ¶0039-0040. “Using this profile as a template, the audio system can beam a specialized audio signal to George in which the right channel volume is quite high and the left volume is higher than normal.” “Once the audio profiles are loaded, the audio is directionally beamed to the recognized listeners at 132 at their physical location within the listening area.” “This process is continually updated so as to identify movements of the various listeners and maintain appropriate beam or beams of audio to each listener in the manner discussed above.” “Those skilled in the art will appreciate that other arrangements can also be provided in order to target the listeners with directional audio beams.”);
modify an audio playback signal based on the hearing transfer function (¶0024-0026 and ¶0038, Figs. 2 and 6. “Using this profile as a template, the audio system can beam a specialized audio signal to George in which the right channel volume is quite high and the left volume is higher than normal. Additionally, the audio in the right channel will be adjusted to provide more volume on middle and high frequencies than the low frequencies.” “When a listener is identified in profile database 226, the programmed processor (or processors) 218 use the profile data to carry out a mixing and equalization function within audio processor 230 so that the audio from audio source 234 is adjusted to compensate for the hearing of the listener in accord with the listener's profile.”); and
cause one or more speakers to emit modified audio based on the modified audio playback signal with the beamforming data to cause the acoustic lobe to form at the spatial location of the user with the modified audio to account for the hearing perception of the user (¶0026, ¶0035 and ¶0038-0039. “Once the audio profiles are loaded, the audio is directionally beamed to the recognized listeners at 132 at their physical location within the listening area.”).
Shintani does not expressly disclose the hearing transfer function originating from an auricular device, wherein the hearing transfer function is generated from audiometry data associated with a user.
Kubiak discloses the hearing transfer function originating from an auricular device (¶0029, ¶0033-0034, ¶0050, Figs. 2 and 4. “The hearing device 124 may transmit optimization data to the hearing application 162. This optimization data may include data about the hearing device 124 such as manufacture settings, user specific preferences, settings or signal processing requirements, among other data relating to the hearing impairments of the user.” “The hearing application 162 may use the hearing related data and/or the personal data to generate an audio-consumer profile for the respective user.”),
wherein the hearing transfer function is generated from audiometry data associated with a user (¶0036 and ¶0049, Fig. 4. “Pure-tone audiometry results performed by a third party may also be shared with the hearing application 162.”).
Shintani and Kubiak are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to user hearing profiles.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to receive user hearing data from a user hearing aid, as taught by Kubiak. The motivation would have been to acquire the parameters for optimizing audio playback for hearing impaired users without the user having to enter them manually.
As to claim 2, Shintani in view of Kubiak discloses determine an updated spatial location of the user within the environment from the sensor data as the user moves throughout the environment (Shintani, ¶0038-0039. “The captured images are processed as discussed previously to identify and locate people in the listening area 206.” “This process is continually updated so as to identify movements of the various listeners and maintain appropriate beam or beams of audio to each listener.”); and
generate the beamforming data for generating the audio having the acoustic lobe at the updated spatial location of the user as the user moves throughout the environment (Shintani, ¶0038-0039. “The captured images are processed as discussed previously to identify and locate people in the listening area 206.” “This process is continually updated so as to identify movements of the various listeners and maintain appropriate beam or beams of audio to each listener.”).
As to claim 3, Shintani in view of Kubiak discloses generate the beamforming data based on the spatial location of the user and another spatial location of another user, the beam pattern having the acoustic lobe at the spatial location of the user and another acoustic lobe at the another spatial location of the another user (Shintani, ¶0024 and ¶0039, Fig. 1. “The camera 24, by imaging the listening area, can be used to provide images that upon analysis can determine 1) the location of each listener, 2) the location of the head and ears of each listener, 3) recognize each registered and profiled listener, or assign the listener to be a guest, 4) to track movements of the listeners, 5) to note movements that are of significance to the listening experience in the listeners, and 6) to tailor the audio program to the listener's preferences or hearing abilities as set forth in the listener's profile. In this manner, if listener 36 has normal hearing and listener 40 has degraded hearing abilities, each can be treated individually according to their needs and preferences with minimal impact on the other.”)); and
cause the one or more speakers to emit the audio based on the beamforming data to cause the acoustic lobe to form at the spatial location of the user with the modified audio and to cause the another acoustic lobe to form at the another spatial location of the another user without the modified audio (Shintani, ¶0024 and ¶0039, Fig. 1. “The camera 24, by imaging the listening area, can be used to provide images that upon analysis can determine 1) the location of each listener, 2) the location of the head and ears of each listener, 3) recognize each registered and profiled listener, or assign the listener to be a guest, 4) to track movements of the listeners, 5) to note movements that are of significance to the listening experience in the listeners, and 6) to tailor the audio program to the listener's preferences or hearing abilities as set forth in the listener's profile. In this manner, if listener 36 has normal hearing and listener 40 has degraded hearing abilities, each can be treated individually according to their needs and preferences with minimal impact on the other.”).
As to claim 4, Shintani in view of Kubiak discloses wherein the audiometry data includes one or more of DPgram data or audiogram data (Kubiak, ¶0012 and ¶0036, Fig. 4. “The audio-consumer-profiles may be received from the hearing-aid itself, the hearing aid manufacturer, or from personalized data such as age and audiogram, individual hearing ratings, as well as user's audio adjustment history.” “Pure-tone audiometry results acquired from a third party may also be shared with the hearing application 162.”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use an audiogram, as taught by Kubiak.
The motivation would have been that audiograms are well-known, routine and conventional in the art to convey a user’s audiometry test results.
As to claim 5, Shintani in view of Kubiak discloses wherein the sensor data originates from one or more of a camera, mmWave sensor, or ultra-wide band (UWB) sensor (Shintani, ¶0022, Figs. 1 and 6. “In the preferred implementation, a camera or other image capture device is used to locate and identify listeners using facial recognition and stored listener profiles, and to spatially characterize each listener.”).
As to claim 6, Shintani in view of Kubiak discloses wherein the sensor data comprises image data (Shintani, ¶0022 and ¶0034, Figs. 1 and 6. “In the preferred implementation, a camera or other image capture device is used to locate and identify listeners using facial recognition and stored listener profiles, and to spatially characterize each listener.”), wherein the one or more hardware processors are configured to:
determine an identity of the user from the image data with one or more image processing techniques (Shintani, ¶0022 and ¶0034, Figs. 1 and 6. “One or more images are taken of the listening area at 116 and that image is analyzed at 120 to attempt to identify listeners and their locations using image analysis programs. In the image analysis, people are identified and then facial recognition algorithms are initiated in an effort to identify people who have stored profiles with the listeners' audio characteristics.”); and
update the beamforming data as the user moves throughout the environment to update the beam pattern with the acoustic lobe continuously at the spatial location of the user (Shintani, ¶0038-0039. “This process is continually updated so as to identify movements of the various listeners and maintain appropriate beam or beams of audio to each listener.”).
As to claim 7, Shintani in view of Kubiak discloses analyze the sensor data to determine an identity of the user (Shintani, ¶0022 and ¶0034, Figs. 1 and 6. “In the preferred implementation, a camera or other image capture device is used to locate and identify listeners using facial recognition and stored listener profiles, and to spatially characterize each listener.”); and
access the hearing transfer function from memory based on determining that the identity of the user corresponds to the hearing transfer function (Shintani, ¶0022 ¶0025 and ¶0034, Figs. 1-2 and 6 “The television's camera 24, when capturing an image of the listening area can use this image as a reference for facial recognition in order to retrieve George's audio characteristics from the profile 50.”).
As to claim 8, Shintani in view of Kubiak discloses access the hearing transfer function from the auricular device over a wireless communication network based on determining that the auricular device and the audio system are associated with the user (Kubiak, ¶0026 and ¶0029, Fig. 2. “Once a user is within the vehicle, the user's hearing device 124 may communicate with the vehicle systems via the internal vehicle network 126 or other wireless radio frequency channels via the wireless transceiver 134 including BLUETOOTH, Wi-Fi, ZIGBEE etc.”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use wireless communication, as taught by Kubiak. The motivation would have been for ease of transfer/input of parameters. Wireless transmission is further well-known, routine and conventional in the art.
As to claim 9, Shintani in view of Kubiak discloses wherein the one or more speakers are positioned in a vehicle, wherein the one or more hardware processors are configured to access the hearing transfer function from the auricular device in response to the auricular device being positioned within a receptacle of the vehicle (Kubiak, ¶0021, ¶0029 and ¶0044, Figs. 1-2. “The vehicle 104 may include an audio system having audio playback functionality through an audio processor (sound system) 109 and vehicle speakers 148.” “Once a user is within the vehicle, the user's hearing device 124 may communicate with the vehicle systems via the internal vehicle network 126 or other wireless radio frequency channels via the wireless transceiver 134 including BLUETOOTH, Wi-Fi, ZIGBEE etc.” “The hearing application 162 may pole vehicle sensors, such as sensor 152, to determine if there is an indication that the hearing device 124 is out-of-ear. In one example, if the hearing device 124 or case of the hearing device 124 has been placed on a charger, or connected via USB, the charger may transmit a signal to the hearing application 162 that the hearing device is being charged.”).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art for the listening area to be in a vehicle, as taught by Kubiak. The motivation would have been so the user has the same improved audio accessibility when they are in a vehicle environment.
As to claim 11, Shintani in view of Kubiak discloses wherein the one or more hardware processors are configured to access a hearing transfer function associated with each ear of the user (Shintani, ¶0025, Figs. 2-3. “In this example, George's hearing in the right ear is poor compared to the left ear, and this is reflected in the volume settings 60 in which the right ear volume is at full and the left ear volume is at about half. Additionally, at 64 is appears that the left ear has a balanced ability to hear low, middle and high frequencies as compared to the right ear which has difficulties in hearing higher frequencies as shown in 68.” “Using this profile as a template, the audio system can beam a specialized audio signal to George in which the right channel volume is quite high and the left volume is higher than normal. Additionally, the audio in the right channel will be adjusted to provide more volume on middle and high frequencies than the low frequencies.”).
As to claim 14, Shintani in view of Kubiak discloses modify the audio playback signal based on applying one or more frequency dependent gains to an amplitude of the audio playback signal (Shintani, ¶0025-0026, Fig. 2. “The audio in the right channel will be adjusted to provide more volume on middle and high frequencies than the low frequencies.”).
As to claim 15, Shintani in view of Kubiak discloses modify the audio playback signal based on adjusting one or more of a phase of the audio playback signal, a latency of the audio playback signal, or an amplitude of the audio playback signal (Shintani, ¶0025-0026, Fig. 2. “The audio in the right channel will be adjusted to provide more volume on middle and high frequencies than the low frequencies.” See also Kubiak, ¶0030. “The latency introduced by the audio processing in the hearing device 124 may be part of the optimization data transmitted to the hearing application 162. Since one of the configuration parameters of the hearing application 162 is the latency of the vehicle audio system, the hearing application 162 may calculate the required delay that needs to be introduced in the respective path in order to synchronize the different playback systems.”).
Claims 16 and 19 are directed towards substantially the same subject matter as claim 1 and are therefore rejected using the same motivation as claim 1 above.
Claims 17-18 are rejected under claim 16 using the same motivation as claims 2-3 above.
Claim 20 is rejected under claim 19 using the same motivation as claim 2 above.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shintani in view of Kubiak, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Telefort et al. (US 12,538,084 B1 – citations made to Provisional application 63/483,444), hereinafter “Telefort.”
As to claim 10, Shintani in view of Kubiak discloses wherein the one or more hardware processors are configured to access the hearing transfer function from a database over a network (Kubiak, ¶0015, ¶0019 and ¶0026. “The vehicle 104 may be configured to include various types of components, processors, and memory, and may communicate with a communication network 110. The communication network 110 may be referred to as a “cloud” and may involve data transfer via wide area and/or local area networks, such as the Internet, Global Positioning System (GPS), cellular networks, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc. The communication network 110 may provide for communication between the vehicle 104 and an external or remote server 112 and/or database 114, as well as other external applications, systems, vehicles, etc.”).
Shintani in view of Kubiak does not expressly disclose an electronics medical records (EMR) database over a network.
Telefort discloses access from an electronics medical records (EMR) database over a network (Telefort, ¶0070. “Alternatively or additionally, the auricular device 100 can communicate with patient databases of hospitals and care facilities 325 over the network 305. Hospital and care facilities 325 can include a server such as… a medical records database.”). Shintani, Kubiak and Telefort are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to user hearing profiles.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to communicate with a medical records database, as taught by Telefort. The motivation would have been to easily access hearing profile and medical records data of the user.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shintani in view of Kubiak, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pye et al. (US 2020/0221240 A1), hereinafter “Pye.”
As to claim 12, Shintani in view of Kubiak does not expressly disclose access an environmental transfer function associated with an environment of the user, wherein the environmental transfer function is based on one or more acoustic characteristics of the environment determined from an audio spectral response; and
modify the audio playback signal based on the environmental transfer function.
Pye discloses access an environmental transfer function associated with an environment of the user, wherein the environmental transfer function is based on one or more acoustic characteristics of the environment determined from an audio spectral response (Pye, ¶0024-0025, Fig. 1. “Environment EQ profile(s) 122 include acoustic filters and/or EQ curves that are each configured for a specific audio environment 110 and/or a specific location within a specific audio environment 110.”); and
modify the audio playback signal based on the environmental transfer function (Pye, ¶0024-0025, Fig. 1. “Environment EQ profile(s) 122 include acoustic filters and/or EQ curves that are each configured for a specific audio environment 110 and/or a specific location within a specific audio environment 110.”).
Shintani, Kubiak and Pye are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to hearing profiles.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the audio based on the environment, as taught by Pye. The motivation would have been to compensate for issues caused by interaction of sound generated in an environment with surfaces in the environment and improve the audio experience for the user (Pye, ¶0025).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shintani in view of Kubiak, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim (US 2009/0028350 A1).
As to claim 13, Shintani in view of Kubiak does not expressly disclose apply one or more device filters to the audio playback signal to modify the audio playback signal to account for physical characteristics of the audio system that affect an acoustic quality of audio playback from the one or more speakers.
Kim discloses apply one or more device filters to the audio playback signal to modify the audio playback signal to account for physical characteristics of the audio system that affect an acoustic quality of audio playback from the one or more speakers (Kim, ¶0029-0030, Fig. 2. “The resonance reduction processor 240 generates a resonance reduction filter based on the physical characteristics of the loudspeaker… The resonance reduction processor 240 transforms audio data using the resonance reduction filter.”).
Shintani, Kubiak and Kim are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to audio processing.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to filter the audio to reduce resonance, as taught by Kim. The motivation would have been to reduce resonance in the output audio caused by the resonance physical characteristics of the loudspeaker that adversely affect sound quality.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES K MOONEY whose telephone number is (571)272-2412. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00 AM -5:00 PM 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, Vivian Chin can be reached at 5712727848. 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.
/JAMES K MOONEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695
Prosecution Insights