DETAILED ACTION
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 . This Office action is based on the communications filed December 2, 2024. Claims 1 – 6 are currently pending and considered below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1 – 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The terms “left,” “right,” “near-ear area,” “side,” “away,” in claim 1 are relative terms which renders the claim indefinite. The term are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Claims 2 – 6 are rejected due to dependency. Appropriate correction and/or clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 – 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hartung et al. (US 2008/0273713 A1), hereinafter Hartung.
Claim 1: Hartung discloses an in-vehicle speaker system, comprising: a first sound zone located in a left near-ear area of a passenger (see at least, array 34, Hartung FIG. 2B), a second sound zone located in a right near-ear area of the passenger (see at least, array 36, Hartung FIG. 2B), a third sound zone located on a side of the second sound zone away from the first sound zone (see at least, array 25, Hartung FIG. 2B), and a fourth sound zone located on a side of the third sound zone away from the second sound zone (see at least, array 27, Hartung FIG. 2B); wherein the first sound zone is provided with a first speaker array consisting of M speakers, and the second sound zone is provided with a second speaker array consisting of N speakers, wherein N is a natural number greater than M (see at least, “Each of the outboard high frequency arrays 26, 28, 36, 38, 42, 46, 52 and 54 is near at least one such near reflective surface, and in addition, the arrays' respective intended listeners are aligned close to a line extending between the array and an unintended listener. Thus, a greater degree of control over the directivity of these arrays is desired, and the arrays therefore include a greater number of secondary transducers,” Hartung [0033], “Referring more specifically to seat position 18 in FIG. 2B, loudspeaker array 26 is a three-element array, and loudspeaker array 27 is a two-element array, positioned adjacent to and on either side of the expected head position of an occupant 58 of seat position 18. Arrays 26 and 27 are positioned, for example, in the seat back, in the seat headrest, on the side of the headrest, in the headliner, or in some other similar location. In one embodiment, the head rest at each seat wraps around to the sides of the seat occupants' head, thereby allowing disposition of the arrays closer to the occupant's head and partially blocking acoustic energy from the other seat locations,” Hartung [0038], “Referring to FIG. 2B and seat position 20, loudspeaker array 34 is mounted similarly to loudspeaker array 27 and is disposed with respect to seat occupant 70 similarly to the disposition of array 27 with respect to occupant 58 of seat position 18, except that array 34 is to the left of occupant 70. Both arrays 34 and 27 are on the inboard side of their respective seat positions,” Hartung [0043], “Arrays 36 and 38, and arrays 26 and 28, are on the outboard sides of their respective seat positions. Array 36 is mounted similarly to array 26 and is disposed with respect to occupant 70 similarly to the disposition of array 26 with respect to occupant 58,” Hartung [0044]).
Claim 2: Hartung discloses the in-vehicle speaker system according to claim 1, wherein the in-vehicle speaker system comprises a first seat for the passenger, and the first sound zone and the second sound zone are symmetrically arranged on two sides of the passenger along a central axis of the first seat (see at least, seat position 20, seat occupant 70, array 34, array 36, Hartung FIG. 2B, “For instance, arrays disposed in symmetric positions with respect to the listener (i.e. in similar positions with respect to, but on opposite side of, the listener) may be asymmetric (i.e. may have different number of and/or differently oriented transducers) with respect to each other in response to asymmetric aspects of the acoustic environment,” Hartung [0029]).
Claim 3: Hartung discloses the in-vehicle speaker system according to claim 1, wherein the speakers in the first speaker array and/or the second speaker array are arranged in a matrix form (see at least, Hartung FIG. 2B Illustrates array 34 in 1x2 matrix and array 36 in 1x3 matrix).
Claim 4: Hartung discloses the in-vehicle speaker system according to claim 1, wherein the in-vehicle speaker system further comprises a second seat for the passenger, wherein the second seat is adjacent to the first seat, the third sound zone and the fourth sound zone are symmetrically arranged on two sides of the passenger along a central axis of the second seat, another second speaker array is provided in the third sound zone, and another first speaker array is provided in the fourth sound zone (see at least, seat position 18, seat occupant 58, array 26, array 27, Hartung FIG. 2B, “For instance, arrays disposed in symmetric positions with respect to the listener (i.e. in similar positions with respect to, but on opposite side of, the listener) may be asymmetric (i.e. may have different number of and/or differently oriented transducers) with respect to each other in response to asymmetric aspects of the acoustic environment,” Hartung [0029]).
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) 5 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hartung.
Claim 5: Hartung discloses the in-vehicle speaker system according to claim 3, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the first speaker array comprises four speakers arranged in a 2×2 array. However, Hartung does not limit the number of speakers when disclosing asymmetry (see at least, Hartung [0033], “Thus, while the speaker element locations and orientations described herein comprise one embodiment for this particular vehicle arrangement, it should be understood that other array arrangements can be used in this or other vehicles (e.g. including but not limited to busses, vans, airplanes or boats) or buildings or other fixed audio venues, and for various number and configuration of
seat or listening positions within such vehicles or venues, depending upon the desired performance and the vehicle or venue configuration. Moreover, it should also be understood that various configurations of speaker elements within a given array may be used and may fall within the scope of the present
disclosure,” Hartung [0021]). Hartung further illustrates arrays of 2x2 (see at least, array 30, Hartung FIG.2B, “Each of the three center arrays 30, 48 and 44 can be considered a multi-element array with respect to each of the two seat positions served by the array. That is, referring to FIG. 2B, and as discussed in more detailed below, loudspeaker elements 30a, 30b, 30c and 30d radiate audio signals to both seat positions 18 and 20,” Hartung [0035]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to double 1x2 matrix array 34 to a 2x2 as well as the 1x3 matrix array 36 to a 2x3 thereby further improving directionality.
Claim 6: Hartung discloses the in-vehicle speaker system according to claim 3, , but does not explicitly disclose wherein the second speaker array comprises six speakers arranged in a 2×3 array. However, Hartung does not limit the number of speakers when disclosing asymmetry (see at least, Hartung [0033], “Thus, while the speaker element locations and orientations described herein comprise one embodiment for this particular vehicle arrangement, it should be understood that other array arrangements can be used in this or other vehicles (e.g. including but not limited to busses, vans, airplanes or boats) or buildings or other fixed audio venues, and for various number and configuration of seat or listening positions within such vehicles or venues, depending upon the desired performance and the vehicle or venue configuration. Moreover, it should also be understood that various configurations of speaker elements within a given array may be used and may fall within the scope of the present disclosure,” Hartung [0021]). Hartung further illustrates arrays of 2x2 (see at least, array 30, Hartung FIG.2B, “Each of the three center arrays 30, 48 and 44 can be considered a multi-element array with respect to each of the two seat positions served by the array. That is, referring to FIG. 2B, and as discussed in more detailed below, loudspeaker elements 30a, 30b, 30c and 30d radiate audio signals to both seat positions 18 and 20,” Hartung [0035]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to double 1x2 matrix array 34 to a 2x2 as well as the 1x3 matrix array 36 to a 2x3 thereby further improving directionality.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH SAUNDERS whose telephone number is (571)270-1063. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 9:00 a.m. - 4 p.m., 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, Carolyn R 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.
/JOSEPH SAUNDERS JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2692
Prosecution Insights