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 . See 35 U.S.C. § 100 (note).
Art Rejections
Obviousness
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.
Claims 1–6 and 11–15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of US Patent Application Publication 2016/0269476 (published 15 September 2016) (“Wang”) and US Patent Application Publication 2025/0007901 (effectively filed 26 July 2021) (“Bourne”).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Wang; Bourne and US Patent Application Publication 2022/0279063 (published 01 September 2022) (“Coffman”).
Claims 8–10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Wang; Bourne; Coffman; US Patent Application Publication 2017/0372697 (published 28 December 2017) (“Cheatham”) and US Patent Application Publication 2024/0196053 (effectively filed 12 December 2022) (“Sharifi”).
Claims 16–20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Wang; Bourne; US Patent Application Publication 2024/0263967 (effectively filed 23 November 2021) (“Lv”) and US Patent Application Publication 2024/0201934 (effectively filed 15 December 2022) (“Choi”).
Claim 1 is drawn to “an electronic apparatus.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed apparatus and the Wang reference.
Claim 1
The Wang Reference
“1. An electronic apparatus, comprising:
The Wang reference similarly describes a system that comprises a smart personal device 240 used in conjunction with a plurality of target devices 200, 220. Wang at Abs., ¶¶ 36–37, FIG.2. In the context of the claim, smart personal device 240 corresponds with the claimed electronic apparatus.
“a communication interface; and
“at least one processor; and
“a memory configured to store instructions which, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the electronic apparatus to:
Smart personal device 240/540 includes a smart network unit I/O controller, or communication interface, 247/547. Id. at ¶¶ 38–39, FIG.3. Device 240/540 includes a central processing unit (CPU), or processor, 302. See id. Device includes main memory 304 that includes instructions executed by CPU 302. See id.
“based on a user input for a sound play being received, identify a target device capable of performing the sound play;
In order to playback audio from the smart personal device 240/540 on any number of target devices, device 240 performs a method to discover and register target devices, identify a proximate target, activate the identified target and deliver content to the target. More particularly, Wang discovers all target devices connected to the network to which device 240 belongs. Discovered devices are registered according to their ability to perform media playback or media sourcing. Id. at ¶ 41, FIG.4. As the user moves around with device 240/540, the device identifies a registered target device that is located proximate to the device. Id. at ¶¶ 30, 31, 41. A user uses the interface of device 240/540 to input a playback command in connection with his desire to cause playback of content. See id. at ¶¶ 10, 41, 44 (describing the use of a user’s smart device to control a number of content output devices instead of needing numerous remote controls and differing interfaces for each of the output devices; describing a user providing his desire to play content; describing a ready state to receive a user’s further operations). This causes the user’s device to identify and confirm that a proximate registered target device capable of playing audio sourced from the device. See id. at ¶¶ 27, 41. Additionally, a new target will be identified and selected in a seamless manner as the user moves around. Id. at ¶¶ 30, 31, 41.
“identify a power state of the target device;
“based on the power state of the target device being identified as an off state, transmit a first wakeup signal for changing a power state of a speaker in the target device to an on state, to the target device through the communication interface; and
If the identified proximate registered target device is off, device 240/540 sends a wake-up command. Id. at ¶¶ 13, 25, 41, FIG.4.
“based on a first response signal corresponding to the first wakeup signal being received, transmit a first control command for the sound play to the target device through the communication interface.”
Wang describes transmitting through interface 350 a playback command to a selected target device to begin playback of audio from device 240/540 once the target device wakes up. Id. at ¶¶ 27, 41–42, FIGs.3, 4.
However, the Wang reference does not describe any details about the wake-up procedure beyond referring to standard practices. Id. at ¶ 25. It does not anticipate receiving a first response signal from a target device and responsively transmitting a first control command to play audio from the target device.
Table 1
The table above shows that the Wang reference describes a system having a device 240/540 that corresponds closely to the claimed electronic apparatus. Despite their similarity, the Wang reference does not anticipate the claimed receipt of a first response signal and conditioning transmission of a first control command for sound playback on receipt of the first response signal.
The differences between the Wang reference and the claimed invention are such that the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this Application was effectively filed. Wang’s system relies on industry standard wake-up procedures (e.g., wake-on-LAN and wake-on-USB) to push content from a user’s device 240/540 to a target device that plays the content. Id. at ¶¶ 25, 32.
The Bourne reference teaches a suitable wake-up procedure to fulfill Wang’s need for remotely waking-up a device over a network. Bourne teaches a detailed device wake-up technique. Bourne at Abs., ¶¶ 3, 5. Bourne’s technique further includes an additional reliability feature where a targeted device transmits an acknowledgement after receiving and authenticating a wake-up signal. Id. at ¶¶ 39–40. If the acknowledgement is not received within a set period of time, the host device retransmits the wake-up message. Id.
The Bourne reference teaches a wake-up procedure with additional reliability features. Read in context with the Wang reference, Bourne reasonably suggests modifying Wang’s wake-up procedure to similarly include additional reliability features. For example, just as described in the Wang reference, user’s device 240/540 may transmit a wake-up command to a target device. In accord with the teachings of Bourne, device 240/540 will then instruct the targeted device to begin playback only after receiving an acknowledgement from the targeted device; otherwise, device 240/540 will retransmit a wake-up command. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Wang and the Bourne references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 2 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the electronic apparatus to:
“transmit, through the communication interface, a signal requesting power state information of the target device, to the target device; and
“based on the power state information of the target device being received through the communication interface, determine whether power state of the target device is in the off state based on the power state information.”
The Wang reference describes determining a target device’s power state and responsively waking it, if needed. Wang at ¶ 41. The rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of modifying Wang’s system according to the teachings of Bourne to wake a sleeping device. Bourne at ¶¶ 39–40. Part of Bourne’s process involves confirming a power state by sending a wake command and waiting for an acknowledgement. Id. In the context of the claim, Bourne’s initial wake command corresponds to a signal requesting power state information. The targeted device will then respond, or not, allowing Bourne’s user device 240/540 to determine whether the targeted device is in an on state or an off state. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Wang and the Bourne references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 3 depends on claim 2, and further requires the following:
“wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the electronic apparatus to:
“based on the power state information of the target device not being received for a threshold time through the communication interface, transmit the first wakeup signal to the target device through the communication interface.”
The rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of modifying Wang’s system according to the teachings of Bourne to wake a sleeping device. Bourne teaches transmitting a wake-up command to a device. Bourne at ¶¶ 39–40. If no response is received within a set amount of time, another wake-up command is transmitted. Id. In the context of the claim, the additional wake-up command corresponds to the claimed first wakeup signal. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Wang and the Bourne references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 4 depends on claim 3, and further requires the following:
“wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the electronic apparatus to:
“based on the first response signal corresponding to the first wakeup signal not being received for the threshold time, transmit a second wakeup signal for changing the power state of the target device to an on state, to the target device through the communication interface; and
“based on a second response signal corresponding to the second wakeup signal being received, transmit the first control command for the sound play to the target device through the communication interface.”
The rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of modifying Wang’s system according to the teachings of Bourne to wake a sleeping device. Bourne teaches transmitting a wake-up command to a device. Bourne at ¶¶ 39–40. If no response is received within a set amount of time, another wake-up command is transmitted. Obviously, this pattern may be repeated as many times as the system designer believes is appropriate. In the context of the claim, first and second additional wake-up commands correspond to the claimed first and second wakeup signals. Once one of Wang’s targeted devices acknowledges a wake-up command, Wang describes using the targeted device to playback content from user’s device 240/540. Wang at ¶¶ 27, 41–42, FIGs.3, 4. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Wang and the Bourne references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 5 depends on claim 4, and further requires the following:
“wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the electronic apparatus to:
“based on the second response signal corresponding to the second wakeup signal not being received for the threshold time, provide a guide screen associated with the power state of the target device.”
Wang does not describe providing a guide screen to a user if a device does not respond to a wake-up command. However, Wang’s system includes a user device 240/540 in the form of a smart phone. Wang at ¶ 12. Further, the Examiner takes Official notice of displaying alerts to a user about unexpected system events, such as the ubiquitous warnings and error messages presented in computer systems, to inform a user about the system’s state. It would have been obvious to modify Wang’s system to display a guide screen displaying a message when a target device cannot be woken up from a sleep state so that a user would be informed about the state of the system. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Wang and the Bourne references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 6 depends on claim 4, and further requires the following:
“wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the electronic apparatus to:
“transmit, through a first wakeup pin of the communication interface, the first wakeup signal to the target device; and
“transmit, through a second wakeup pin of the communication interface, the second wakeup signal to the target device.”
Wang does not describe the use of different pins to attempt a wake-up of a target device. However, simply duplicating parts, such as a communication pin, and selectively using one pin over another would have been an obvious design choice. See MPEP § 2144.04(VI)(B), (C). For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Wang and the Bourne references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 7 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the electronic apparatus to:
“based on power state of the target device being in an on state, transmit a signal requesting authority for the speaker of the target device to the target device, through the communication interface; and
“based on a response signal corresponding to the signal requesting authority being received, transmit the first control command for the sound play to the target device, through the communication interface.”
Wang does not describe any type of permission management for its networked content playback system. The Coffman reference teaches and suggests a technique for managing audio playback permissions in a networked audio system, like the one described by Wang. Coffman at ¶¶ 861–881, FIGs.25E–25G, 26A, 26B. Coffman specifically teaches that when a third device wants to begin playback using a set of first and second devices, the third transmits a request for permission to playback audio using the set of devices. Id. When the third device receives the permission it begins playback on the set of devices. Id. One of ordinary skill would have reasonably expected that Coffman’s approach would provide security to managed playback devices while also facilitating connections between a third device and a set of playback devices. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Wang, the Bourne and the Coffman references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 8 depends on claim 7, and further requires the following:
“further comprising:
“a microphone,
“wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the electronic apparatus to:
“obtain, through the microphone, audio data while the target device is performing the sound play;
“distinguish a target audio signal and a noise audio signal associated with the sound play based on the audio data; and
“based on a first size of the noise audio signal being greater than or equal to a second size of the target audio signal, transmit a second control command for changing an output of the target device to the target device, through the communication interface.”
Claim 9 depends on claim 8, and further requires the following:
“wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the electronic apparatus to:
“transmit, through the communication interface, the second control command for increasing volume of the speaker in the target device, to the target device.”
Claim 10 depends on claim 8, and further requires the following:
“wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the electronic apparatus to:
“transmit, through the communication interface, the second control command for reducing noise output from the target device, to the target device.”
Claims 8–10 are treated together. Wang does not describe a microphone that obtains audio, distinguishing a target audio signal and a noise audio signal and based on a comparison between the two signals, adjusting the volume up/down of a speaker in a target device.
Sharifi teaches a media arbitration system that automatically controls the volume output of multiple devices based on whether they are conflicting. Sharifi at ¶¶ 44–46, 49, 58, FIGs.1, 3. For example, a conflict detector detects conflicts between two or more collocated audio devices by analyzing their output volumes and automatically arbitrates their usage. Id. If two devices conflict, the volume of one device is reduced to avoid further conflicts. Id. If two devices are not in conflict, the volume of one may be increased to improve enjoyment. Id.
Cheatham teaches a system for rule-based user control of audio rendering. Cheatham at ¶ 15, FIG.1. Cheatham’s system involves recording sounds with a microphone and splitting the recorded sounds according to their type, including target audio and noise audio. Id. at ¶¶ 24, 28. A user may then adjust the rendering of sounds based on rules. Id. at ¶ 25. This allows a user to control the way audio in the environment is rendered to a user. Id. For example, a noise sound may be automatically lowered to ensure it stays lower in volume than a target sound. Id. at ¶¶ 24, 25. Cheatham, however, does not teach controlling the volume output of a set of target devices based on the rule-based user control system. Rather, Cheatham includes a processor that digitally processes recorded audio to render audio with a particular volume. Id.
Read together, Cheatham and Sharifi suggest several features to improve the operation of Wang’s system by automatically classifying sounds in an environment to detect conflicts and to reduce the volume of a device to remove the conflict. First, Cheatham suggests adding a rule-based system to control the manner in which audio is rendered. At the center of Cheatham’s function is the ability to record and classify audio in order to apply different rendering rules to each class of audio. Second, Sharifi suggests automatically detecting conflicts between two devices and controlling the volume of output devices to prevent sound from a first device from conflicting with target sound from another device.
Sharifi fairly suggests detecting conflicts in order to automatically resolve conflicts between multiple audio devices. Further, Cheatham’s rule-based approach to audio classes fairly suggests applying a similar classification technique to Sharifi’s system to reliably detect target audio and conflicting audio. Thus, by analyzing and classifying audio from a microphone, conflicts may be detected and audio from each device may be compared to determine if audio from one device has a sufficiently high volume level to cause a conflict with another device. In that case, the system would eliminate the conflict by reducing the volume of audio produced by the conflicting device. On the other hand, volume of the various output devices would be increased when no conflict exists. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Wang, the Bourne, the Coffman, the Cheatham and the Sharifi references makes obvious all limitations of the claims.
Claim 11 is drawn to “a method of controlling an electronic apparatus.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed method and the Wang reference.
Claim 11
The Wang Reference
“11. A method of controlling an electronic apparatus, the method comprising:
The Wang reference similarly describes a method to control a system that comprises a smart personal device 240 used in conjunction with a plurality of target devices 200, 220. Wang at Abs., ¶¶ 36–37, FIG.2. In the context of the claim, smart personal device 240 corresponds with the claimed electronic apparatus.
“based on a user input for a sound play being received, identifying a target device capable of performing the sound play;
In order to playback audio from the smart personal device 240/540 on any number of target devices, device 240 performs a method to discover and register target devices, identify a proximate target, activate the identified target and deliver content to the target. More particularly, Wang discovers all target devices connected to the network to which device 240 belongs. Discovered devices are registered according to their ability to perform media playback or media sourcing. Id. at ¶ 41, FIG.4. As the user moves around with device 240/540, the device identifies a registered target device that is located proximate to the device. Id. at ¶¶ 30, 31, 41. A user uses the interface of device 240/540 to input a playback command in connection with his desire to cause playback of content. See id. at ¶¶ 10, 41, 44 (describing the use of a user’s smart device to control a number of content output devices instead of needing numerous remote controls and differing interfaces for each of the output devices; describing a user providing his desire to play content; describing a ready state to receive a user’s further operations). This causes the user’s device to identify and confirm that a proximate registered target device capable of playing audio sourced from the device. See id. at ¶¶ 27, 41. Additionally, a new target will be identified and selected in a seamless manner as the user moves around. Id. at ¶¶ 30, 31, 41.
“identifying a power state of the target device;
“based on power state of the target device being identified as in an off state, transmitting a first wakeup signal for changing power state of a speaker in the target device to an on state, to the target device; and
If the identified proximate registered target device is off, device 240/540 sends a wake-up command. Id. at ¶¶ 13, 25, 41, FIG.4.
“based on a first response signal corresponding to the first wakeup signal being received, transmitting a first control command for the sound play, to the target device.”
Wang describes transmitting through interface 350 a playback command to a selected target device to begin playback of audio from device 240/540 once the target device wakes up. Id. at ¶¶ 27, 41–42, FIGs.3, 4.
However, the Wang reference does not describe any details about the wake-up procedure beyond referring to standard practices. Id. at ¶ 25. It does not anticipate receiving a first response signal from a target device and responsively transmitting a first control command to play audio from the target device.
Table 2
The table above shows that the Wang reference describes a system having a device 240/540 that corresponds closely to the claimed electronic apparatus. Despite their similarity, the Wang reference does not anticipate the claimed receipt of a first response signal and conditioning transmission of a first control command for sound playback on receipt of the first response signal.
The differences between the Wang reference and the claimed invention are such that the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this Application was effectively filed. Wang’s system relies on industry standard wake-up procedures (e.g., wake-on-LAN and wake-on-USB) to push content from a user’s device 240/540 to a target device that plays the content. Id. at ¶¶ 25, 32.
The Bourne reference teaches a suitable wake-up procedure to fulfill Wang’s need for remotely waking-up a device over a network. Bourne teaches a detailed device wake-up technique. Bourne at Abs., ¶¶ 3, 5. Bourne’s technique further includes an additional reliability feature where a targeted device transmits an acknowledgement after receiving and authenticating a wake-up signal. Id. at ¶¶ 39–40. If the acknowledgement is not received within a set period of time, the host device retransmits the wake-up message. Id.
The Bourne reference teaches a wake-up procedure with additional reliability features. Read in context with the Wang reference, Bourne reasonably suggests modifying Wang’s wake-up procedure to similarly include additional reliability features. For example, just as described in the Wang reference, user’s device 240/540 may transmit a wake-up command to a target device. In accord with the teachings of Bourne, device 240/540 will then instruct the targeted device to begin playback only after receiving an acknowledgement from the targeted device; otherwise, device 240/540 will retransmit a wake-up command. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Wang and the Bourne references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 12 depends on claim 11, and further requires the following:
“wherein the identifying the power state of the target device comprises:
“transmitting a signal requesting for power state information of the target device, to the target device; and
“based on the power state information of the target device being received, determining whether the power state of the target device is the off state based on the power state information.”
The Wang reference describes determining a target device’s power state and responsively waking it, if needed. Wang at ¶ 41. The rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of modifying Wang’s system according to the teachings of Bourne to wake a sleeping device. Bourne at ¶¶ 39–40. Part of Bourne’s process involves confirming a power state by sending a wake command and waiting for an acknowledgement. Id. In the context of the claim, Bourne’s initial wake command corresponds to a signal requesting power state information. The targeted device will then respond, or not, allowing Bourne’s user device 240/540 to determine whether the targeted device is in an on state or an off state. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Wang and the Bourne references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 13 depends on claim 12, and further requires the following:
“wherein the transmitting the first wakeup signal comprises:
“based on the power state information of the target device not being received for a threshold time, transmitting the first wakeup signal to the target device.”
The rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of modifying Wang’s system according to the teachings of Bourne to wake a sleeping device. Bourne teaches transmitting a wake-up command to a device. Bourne at ¶¶ 39–40. If no response is received within a set amount of time, another wake-up command is transmitted. Id. In the context of the claim, the additional wake-up command corresponds to the claimed first wakeup signal. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Wang and the Bourne references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 14 depends on claim 13, and further requires the following:
“further comprising:
“based on the first response signal corresponding to the first wakeup signal not being received for the threshold time, transmitting a second wakeup signal for changing the power state of the target device to an on state, to the target device; and
“based on a second response signal corresponding to the second wakeup signal being received, transmitting the first control command for the sound play to the target device.”
The rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of modifying Wang’s system according to the teachings of Bourne to wake a sleeping device. Bourne teaches transmitting a wake-up command to a device. Bourne at ¶¶ 39–40. If no response is received within a set amount of time, another wake-up command is transmitted. Obviously, this pattern may be repeated as many times as the system designer believes is appropriate. In the context of the claim, first and second additional wake-up commands correspond to the claimed first and second wakeup signals. Once one of Wang’s targeted devices acknowledges a wake-up command, Wang describes using the targeted device to playback content from user’s device 240/540. Wang at ¶¶ 27, 41–42, FIGs.3, 4. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Wang and the Bourne references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 15 depends on claim 14, and further requires the following:
“further comprising:
“based on the second response signal corresponding to the second wakeup signal not being received for the threshold time, providing a guide screen associated with the power state of the target device.”
Wang does not describe providing a guide screen to a user if a device does not respond to a wake-up command. However, Wang’s system includes a user device 240/540 in the form of a smart phone. Wang at ¶ 12. Further, the Examiner takes Official notice of displaying alerts to a user about unexpected system events, such as the ubiquitous warnings and error messages presented in computer systems, to inform a user about the system’s state. It would have been obvious to modify Wang’s system to display a guide screen displaying a message when a target device cannot be woken up from a sleep state so that a user would be informed about the state of the system. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Wang and the Bourne references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 16 is drawn to “a method of controlling an electronic apparatus.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed method and the Wang reference.
Claim 16
The Wang Reference
“16. A method of controlling an electronic apparatus, the method comprising:
The Wang reference similarly describes a method to control a system that comprises a smart personal device 240 used in conjunction with a plurality of target devices 200, 220. Wang at Abs., ¶¶ 36–37, FIG.2. In the context of the claim, smart personal device 240 corresponds with the claimed electronic apparatus.
“based on a user input for a sound play being received, identifying a target device capable of performing the sound play and capable of moving;
In order to playback audio from the smart personal device 240/540 on any number of target devices, device 240 performs a method to discover and register target devices, identify a proximate target, activate the identified target and deliver content to the target. More particularly, Wang discovers all target devices connected to the network to which device 240 belongs. Discovered devices are registered according to their ability to perform media playback or media sourcing. Id. at ¶ 41, FIG.4. As the user moves around with device 240/540, the device identifies a registered target device that is located proximate to the device. Id. at ¶¶ 30, 31, 41. A user uses the interface of device 240/540 to input a playback command in connection with his desire to cause playback of content. See id. at ¶¶ 10, 41, 44 (describing the use of a user’s smart device to control a number of content output devices instead of needing numerous remote controls and differing interfaces for each of the output devices; describing a user providing his desire to play content; describing a ready state to receive a user’s further operations). This causes the user’s device to identify and confirm that a proximate registered target device capable of playing audio sourced from the device. See id. at ¶¶ 27, 41. Additionally, a new target will be identified and selected in a seamless manner as the user moves around. Id. at ¶¶ 30, 31, 41.
“identifying a power state of the target device;
“based on power state of the target device being identified as in an off state, transmitting a first wakeup signal for changing power state of a speaker in the target device to an on state, to the target device;
If the identified proximate registered target device is off, device 240/540 sends a wake-up command. Id. at ¶¶ 13, 25, 41, FIG.4.
“based on a first response signal corresponding to the first wakeup signal being received, transmitting a first control command for the sound play, to the target device;
The Wang reference describes determining a target device’s power state and responsively waking it, if needed. Wang at ¶ 41. The rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of modifying Wang’s system according to the teachings of Bourne to wake a sleeping device. Bourne at ¶¶ 39–40. Part of Bourne’s process involves confirming a power state by sending a wake command and waiting for an acknowledgement. Id. In the context of the claim, Bourne’s initial wake command corresponds to a signal requesting power state information. The targeted device will then respond, or not, allowing Bourne’s user device 240/540 to determine whether the targeted device is in an on state or an off state.
“obtaining position data of a user based on sensing data;
“based on the position data, determining whether the user has moved by a threshold distance or more since the transmitting of the first control command; and
“transmitting a second control command for moving the target device to a target position corresponding to a moved position of the user, to the target device.”
Wang does not teach a corresponding set of actions.
Table 3
The table above shows that the Wang reference describes a system having a device 240/540 that corresponds closely to the claimed electronic apparatus. Despite their similarity, the Wang reference does not anticipate the claimed receipt of a first response signal and conditioning transmission of a first control command for sound playback on receipt of the first response signal. Further, Wang does not describe obtaining position data of a user based on sensing data, determining whether the user has moved by a threshold distance or more since transmitting a first control command and transmitting a second control command to move a target position to a moved position of the user to the target device.
The differences between the Wang reference and the claimed invention are such that the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this Application was effectively filed. Wang’s system relies on industry standard wake-up procedures (e.g., wake-on-LAN and wake-on-USB) to push content from a user’s device 240/540 to a target device that plays the content. Id. at ¶¶ 25, 32.
The Bourne reference teaches a suitable wake-up procedure to fulfill Wang’s need for remotely waking-up a device over a network. Bourne teaches a detailed device wake-up technique. Bourne at Abs., ¶¶ 3, 5. Bourne’s technique further includes an additional reliability feature where a targeted device transmits an acknowledgement after receiving and authenticating a wake-up signal. Id. at ¶¶ 39–40. If the acknowledgement is not received within a set period of time, the host device retransmits the wake-up message. Id.
The Bourne reference teaches a wake-up procedure with additional reliability features. Read in context with the Wang reference, Bourne reasonably suggests modifying Wang’s wake-up procedure to similarly include additional reliability features. For example, just as described in the Wang reference, user’s device 240/540 may transmit a wake-up command to a target device. In accord with the teachings of Bourne, device 240/540 will then instruct the targeted device to begin playback only after receiving an acknowledgement from the targeted device; otherwise, device 240/540 will retransmit a wake-up command.
Further, the Lv reference teaches a rotatable smart speaker that rotates in order to track a user based on camera sensor data. Lv at Abs., ¶¶ 3–5, 63, 114. This would have reasonably suggested modifying Wang’s system in a similar way to include a similar loudspeaker that would be able to track the user and provide sound to the user as he moves. When the user moves, the camera would track the user and adjust the position of the loudspeaker. For example, according to the teachings of Choi, the camera would detect when a user moves beyond a threshold defining a center of the camera, and would rotate the camera to keep the user centered. Choi at ¶ 33. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Wang, the Bourne, the Lv and the Choi references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 17 depends on claim 16, and further requires the following:
“further comprising: obtaining the sensing data through an image sensor.”
Wang describes using a RFID sensor. However, the Lv reference teaches the use of a camera as an alternative sensor for determining the proximity between a user and a device. This would have reasonably suggested modifying Wang’s system to similarly include a camera for determining proximity. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Wang, the Bourne, the Lv and the Choi references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 18 depends on claim 16, and further requires the following:
“wherein the identifying the power state of the target device comprises:
“transmitting a signal requesting for power state information of the target device, to the target device; and
“based on the power state information of the target device being received, determining whether the power state of the target device is the off state based on the power state information.”
The Wang reference describes determining a target device’s power state and responsively waking it, if needed. Wang at ¶ 41. The rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of modifying Wang’s system according to the teachings of Bourne to wake a sleeping device. Bourne at ¶¶ 39–40. Part of Bourne’s process involves confirming a power state by sending a wake command and waiting for an acknowledgement. Id. In the context of the claim, Bourne’s initial wake command corresponds to a signal requesting power state information. The targeted device will then respond, or not, allowing Bourne’s user device 240/540 to determine whether the targeted device is in an on state or an off state. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Wang, the Bourne, the Lv and the Choi references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 19 depends on claim 16, and further requires the following:
“wherein the transmitting the first wakeup signal comprises:
“based on the power state information of the target device not being received for a threshold time, transmitting the first wakeup signal to the target device.”
The rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of modifying Wang’s system according to the teachings of Bourne to wake a sleeping device. Bourne teaches transmitting a wake-up command to a device. Bourne at ¶¶ 39–40. If no response is received within a set amount of time, another wake-up command is transmitted. Id. In the context of the claim, the additional wake-up command corresponds to the claimed first wakeup signal. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Wang, the Bourne, the Lv and the Choi references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 20 depends on claim 16, and further requires the following:
“further comprising:
“based on the first response signal corresponding to the first wakeup signal not being received for the threshold time, transmitting a second wakeup signal for changing the power state of the target device to an on state, to the target device; and
“based on a second response signal corresponding to the second wakeup signal being received, transmitting the first control command for the sound play to the target device.”
The rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of modifying Wang’s system according to the teachings of Bourne to wake a sleeping device. Bourne teaches transmitting a wake-up command to a device. Bourne at ¶¶ 39–40. If no response is received within a set amount of time, another wake-up command is transmitted. Obviously, this pattern may be repeated as many times as the system designer believes is appropriate. In the context of the claim, first and second additional wake-up commands correspond to the claimed first and second wakeup signals. Once one of Wang’s targeted devices acknowledges a wake-up command, Wang describes using the targeted device to playback content from user’s device 240/540. Wang at ¶¶ 27, 41–42, FIGs.3, 4. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Wang, the Bourne, the Lv and the Choi references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Summary
Claims 1–20 are rejected under at least one of 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103 as being unpatentable over the cited prior art. 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WALTER F BRINEY III whose telephone number is (571)272-7513. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-4:30 pm.
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 571-270-7136. 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.
/Walter F Briney III/
Walter F Briney IIIPrimary ExaminerArt Unit 2692
5/29/2026
Prosecution Insights