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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 10, and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ashenfelter et al. (WO 2008/005931 A2, cited in an IDS received on 9/8/2025 and hereafter Ashenfelter).
Regarding claim 1, Ashenfelter teaches an acoustic based positioning system and method for measuring the position of a model vehicle using an ultrasonic signal (see Ashenfelter, abstract).
Ashenfelter anticipates:
“A computer-implemented method for generating sound for a virtual sound source, the computer-implemented method comprising:
determining a first distance between a first speaker and a virtual sound source” by first teaching multiple acoustic receivers (104), where each acoustic receiver uses a microphone to detect an acoustic signal (e.g., an ultrasonic pulse) broadcast from a virtual sound source (e.g., a model railroad train) and a processor determines each acoustic receiver’s position, or distance, to the virtual sound source (see Ashenfelter, p. 3, last paragraph - p. 4, end of first paragraph, p. 4, second full paragraph, p. 6, last paragraph, figure 1, units 102, 104, and 106, and figure 10, units 104 and 138); each acoustic receiver is in a fixed location and accurately measured, and stationary speakers are placed around the room to use the measured position information to generate a virtual sound emanating from the vehicle (e.g., the model railroad train), such that the method determines a distance between a first speaker of the stationary speakers and the virtual sound source to provide the correct positioning of the virtual sound (see Ashenfelter, p. 17, first paragraph, p. 19, first - fourth paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, and figure 3, units 104 and 130);
“determining a second distance between a second speaker and the virtual sound source” by teaching the same process above, where the processor determines a second speaker’s position, or distance, to the virtual sound source, using the acoustic receiver locations and stationary speakers positions, such that the method determines a distance between a second speaker of the stationary speakers and the virtual sound source to provide the correct positioning of the virtual sound (see Ashenfelter, p. 3, last paragraph - p. 4, end of first paragraph, p. 4, second full paragraph, p. 6, last paragraph, p. 17, first paragraph, p. 19, first - fourth paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, figure 1, units 102, 104, and 106, figure 3, units 104 and 130, and figure 10, units 104 and 144);
“generating a first audio output signal for the first speaker based on an input audio signal, the first distance, and the second distance” by teaching that audio signals are generated for each speaker, therefore the processor generates a first audio output signal for the first speaker based on the desired sound (e.g., train sound) and the distances from each speaker (see Ashenfelter, p. 19, first - fourth paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, and figure 3, units 130);
“generating a second audio output signal for the second speaker based on the input audio signal, the first distance, and the second distance” by teaching that the processor generates a second audio output signal for the second speaker based on the desired sound (e.g., train sound) and the distances from each speaker (see Ashenfelter, p. 19, first - fourth paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, and figure 3, units 130);
“transmitting the first audio output signal to the first speaker for output” by teaching that a sound controller is coupled to the speakers, such that the desired audio output is transmitted to the first speaker for audible output (see Ashenfelter, p. 5, second full paragraph, p. 19, last paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, figure 2, units 108 and 116, and figure 3, units 130); and
“transmitting the second audio output signal to the second speaker for output” by teaching that the sound controller is coupled to the speakers, such that the desired audio output is transmitted to the second speaker for audible output (see Ashenfelter, p. 5, second full paragraph, p. 19, last paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, figure 2, units 108 and 116, and figure 3, units 130).
Regarding claim 10, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. Ashenfelter anticipates the “computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein determining the first distance comprises receiving a distance from a distance sensor disposed within the virtual sound source” by teaching the acoustic transmitter affixed to the vehicle (e.g., the model railroad train) that transmits an ultrasound audio signal to the first acoustic receiver (p. 3, last paragraph - p. 4, second full paragraph, p. 7, first paragraph, p. 17, last four paragraphs, figure 1, units 102, 104, and 106, and figure 11, unit 102).
Regarding claim 12, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. Ashenfelter anticipates the “computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the virtual sound source comprises an interactive toy” by teaching that the virtual sound emanates from the vehicle (e.g., the model railroad train) (see Ashenfelter, p. 3, last paragraph - p. 4, end of first paragraph, p. 19, first paragraph, and figure 1, unit 110).
Regarding claim 13, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. Ashenfelter anticipates the “computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the input audio signal corresponds to the virtual sound source” by teaching the input sound (e.g., train sound) corresponding to the virtual sound source of the vehicle (e.g., the model railroad train) (see Ashenfelter, p.5, second full paragraph and p. 19, first paragraph).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 14 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ashenfelter as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 14, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. Ashenfelter anticipates the method of claim 1, but does not appear to explicitly teach “one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions”.
Ashenfelter teaches that the system uses a processor to perform the method of claim 1, where the processor is used, among other features, to measure the position of the virtual sound source and display positions on multiple computer screens (see Ashenfelter, p. 5, second full paragraph, p. 21, first full paragraph - third full paragraph, figure 1, unit 108, and figure 2, units 108 and 120). Ashenfelter also teaches that the processor has storage (see Ashenfelter, p. 5, second full paragraph and figure 2, units 108 and 118). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date that Ashenfelter’s teachings use instructions stored on a medium, such as a non-transitory computer-readable media, for the purpose of implementing the method via a personal computer or the like (see Ashenfelter, p. 5, second full paragraph, p. 21, first full paragraph - third full paragraph, and figure 2, units 108, 118, and 120).
Therefore, Ashenfelter makes obvious:
“One or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform the steps of:
determining a first distance between a first speaker and a virtual sound source” by making obvious a personal computer to implement the method (see Ashenfelter, p. 5, second full paragraph, p. 21, first full paragraph - third full paragraph, and figure 2, units 108, 118, and 120), where multiple acoustic receivers (104), where each acoustic receiver uses a microphone to detect an acoustic signal (e.g., an ultrasonic pulse) broadcast from a virtual sound source (e.g., a model railroad train) and a processor determines each acoustic receiver’s position, or distance, to the virtual sound source (see Ashenfelter, p. 3, last paragraph - p. 4, end of first paragraph, p. 4, second full paragraph, p. 6, last paragraph, figure 1, units 102, 104, and 106, and figure 10, units 104 and 138); each acoustic receiver is in a fixed location and accurately measured, and stationary speakers are placed around the room to use the measured position information to generate a virtual sound emanating from the vehicle (e.g., the model railroad train), such that the method determines a distance between a first speaker of the stationary speakers and the virtual sound source to provide the correct positioning of the virtual sound (see Ashenfelter, p. 17, first paragraph, p. 19, first - fourth paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, and figure 3, units 104 and 130);
“determining a second distance between a second speaker and the virtual sound source” by teaching the same process above, where the processor determines a second speaker’s position, or distance, to the virtual sound source, using the acoustic receiver locations and stationary speakers positions, such that the method determines a distance between a second speaker of the stationary speakers and the virtual sound source to provide the correct positioning of the virtual sound (see Ashenfelter, p. 3, last paragraph - p. 4, end of first paragraph, p. 4, second full paragraph, p. 6, last paragraph, p. 17, first paragraph, p. 19, first - fourth paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, figure 1, units 102, 104, and 106, figure 3, units 104 and 130, and figure 10, units 104 and 144);
“generating a first audio output signal for the first speaker based on an input audio signal, the first distance, and the second distance” by teaching that audio signals are generated for each speaker, therefore the processor generates a first audio output signal for the first speaker based on the desired sound (e.g., train sound) and the distances from each speaker (see Ashenfelter, p. 19, first - fourth paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, and figure 3, units 130);
“generating a second audio output signal for the second speaker based on the input audio signal, the first distance, and the second distance” by teaching that the processor generates a second audio output signal for the second speaker based on the desired sound (e.g., train sound) and the distances from each speaker (see Ashenfelter, p. 19, first - fourth paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, and figure 3, units 130);
“transmitting the first audio output signal to the first speaker for output” by teaching that a sound controller is coupled to the speakers, such that the desired audio output is transmitted to the first speaker for audible output (see Ashenfelter, p. 5, second full paragraph, p. 19, last paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, figure 2, units 108 and 116, and figure 3, units 130); and
“transmitting the second audio output signal to the second speaker for output” by teaching that the sound controller is coupled to the speakers, such that the desired audio output is transmitted to the second speaker for audible output (see Ashenfelter, p. 5, second full paragraph, p. 19, last paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, figure 2, units 108 and 116, and figure 3, units 130).
Regarding claim 20, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 14 above. Ashenfelter makes obvious the product of claim 14 by making obvious the use of a personal computer to implement the method (see Ashenfelter, p. 5, second full paragraph, p. 21, first full paragraph - third full paragraph, and figure 2, units 108, 118, and 120). Therefore, Ashenfelter makes obvious:
“A system comprising: a first speaker; a second speaker” by teaching multiple stationary speakers (see Ashenfelter, p. 19, first - fourth paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, and figure 3, units 130);
“one or more distance sensors operable to determine a first distance between a first speaker and a virtual sound source and a second distance between a second speaker and the virtual sound source” by teaching multiple acoustic receivers (104), where each acoustic receiver uses a microphone to detect an acoustic signal (e.g., an ultrasonic pulse) broadcast from a virtual sound source (e.g., a model railroad train) and a processor determines each acoustic receiver’s position, or distance, to the virtual sound source (see Ashenfelter, p. 3, last paragraph - p. 4, end of first paragraph, p. 4, second full paragraph, p. 6, last paragraph, figure 1, units 102, 104, and 106, and figure 10, units 104 and 138); each acoustic receiver is in a fixed location and accurately measured, and stationary speakers are placed around the room to use the measured position information to generate a virtual sound emanating from the vehicle (e.g., the model railroad train), such that the method determines a first and second distance between a first and second speaker of the multiple stationary speakers and the virtual sound source to provide the correct positioning of the virtual sound (see Ashenfelter, p. 17, first paragraph, p. 19, first - fourth paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, and figure 3, units 104 and 130);
“a memory storing instructions” by teaching a processor with storage, which makes obvious this feature (see Ashenfelter, p. 5, second full paragraph, p. 21, first full paragraph - third full paragraph, and figure 2, units 108, 118, and 120); and
“one or more processors, that when executing the instructions, are configured to perform the steps of: determining the first distance” by making obvious a personal computer with instructions, or software, to implement the method (see Ashenfelter, p. 5, second full paragraph, p. 21, first full paragraph - third full paragraph, and figure 2, units 108, 118, and 120), where the processor determines a first speaker’s position, or distance, to the virtual sound source, using the acoustic receiver locations and stationary speakers positions, such that the method determines a distance between the first speaker of the multiple stationary speakers and the virtual sound source to provide the correct positioning of the virtual sound (see Ashenfelter, p. 3, last paragraph - p. 4, end of first paragraph, p. 4, second full paragraph, p. 6, last paragraph, p. 17, first paragraph, p. 19, first - fourth paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, figure 1, units 102, 104, and 106, figure 3, units 104 and 130, and figure 10, units 104 and 144);
“determining the second distance” by teaching that the processor determines a second speaker’s position, or distance, to the virtual sound source, using the acoustic receiver locations and stationary speakers positions, such that the method determines a distance between the second speaker of the multiple stationary speakers and the virtual sound source to provide the correct positioning of the virtual sound (see Ashenfelter, p. 3, last paragraph - p. 4, end of first paragraph, p. 4, second full paragraph, p. 6, last paragraph, p. 17, first paragraph, p. 19, first - fourth paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, figure 1, units 102, 104, and 106, figure 3, units 104 and 130, and figure 10, units 104 and 144);
“generating a first audio output signal for the first speaker based on an input audio signal, the first distance, and the second distance” by teaching that audio signals are generated for each speaker, therefore the processor generates a first audio output signal for the first speaker based on the desired sound (e.g., train sound) and the distances from each speaker (see Ashenfelter, p. 19, first - fourth paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, and figure 3, units 130);
“generating a second audio output signal for the second speaker based on the input audio signal, the first distance, and the second distance” by teaching that the processor generates a second audio output signal for the second speaker based on the desired sound (e.g., train sound) and the distances from each speaker (see Ashenfelter, p. 19, first - fourth paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, and figure 3, units 130);
“transmitting the first audio output signal to the first speaker for output” by teaching that a sound controller is coupled to the speakers, such that the desired audio output is transmitted to the first speaker for audible output (see Ashenfelter, p. 5, second full paragraph, p. 19, last paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, figure 2, units 108 and 116, and figure 3, units 130); and
“transmitting the second audio output signal to the second speaker for output” by teaching that the sound controller is coupled to the speakers, such that the desired audio output is transmitted to the second speaker for audible output (see Ashenfelter, p. 5, second full paragraph, p. 19, last paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, figure 2, units 108 and 116, and figure 3, units 130).
Claim(s) 2-3, 7-8, and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ashenfelter as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim (US 2006/0045295 A1).
Regarding claim 2, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. Ashenfelter anticipates the computer-implemented method of claim 1, but does not appear to teach the features where “generating the first audio output signal for the first speaker comprises determining a first gain value for the first speaker based on the first distance and the second distance”.
Kim teaches a method and apparatus to reproduce a localized virtual sound in 3-D space using multiple channel speakers (see Kim, abstract). Kim teaches a conventional vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) method, where the gains of multiple speakers selected from a plurality of N speakers are determined in order to localize a virtual sound source in the 3-D space (see Kim, ¶ 0006-0015 and figure 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify Ashenfelter with the teachings of Kim in order to place the virtual sound source in a desired location without changing the timbre of the sound and without large amounts of calculations (see Ashenfelter, p. 19, first - fourth paragraph, in view of Kim, ¶ 0006-0007).
Therefore, the combination of Ashenfelter and Kim makes obvious the “computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein generating the first audio output signal for the first speaker comprises determining a first gain value for the first speaker based on the first distance and the second distance” by teaching the determination of the first and second distances (see Ashenfelter, p. 3, last paragraph - p. 4, end of first paragraph, p. 4, second full paragraph, p. 6, last paragraph, p. 17, first paragraph, p. 19, first - fourth paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, figure 1, units 102, 104, and 106, figure 3, units 104 and 130, and figure 10, units 104 and 144) and making obvious to determine a first gain value (e.g., g1) based on the distances between the virtual sound source location and the speakers position using vectors and linear algebra (see Kim, ¶ 0010-0014 and figure 1).
Regarding claim 3, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 2 above. The combination makes obvious the “computer-implemented method of claim 2, wherein generating the first audio output signal for the first speaker further comprises modifying the input audio signal with the first gain value to produce the first audio output signal” because Kim makes obvious multiplying the input by the determined gains to pan the virtual sound source (see Kim, ¶ 0006-0007 and 0014).
Regarding claim 7, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 2 above. The combination makes obvious the “computer-implemented method of claim 2, wherein generating the second audio output signal for the second speaker comprises determining a second gain value for the second speaker based on the first distance and the second distance” by making obvious a second gain value (e.g., g2) based on the distances between the virtual sound source location and the speakers position using vectors and linear algebra (see Kim, ¶ 0010-0014 and figure 1).
Regarding claim 8, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 7 above. The combination makes obvious the “computer-implemented method of claim 7, further comprising:
determining a third distance between the first speaker and the virtual sound source” because Ashenfelter teaches that the position of the moving train is tracked to play the train sound at the correct virtual sound position, which teaches that a third distance is determined when the train has moved from the first distance from the first speaker (see Ashenfelter, p. 19 and p. 20, last paragraph - p. 21, third full paragraph);
“determining a fourth distance between the second speaker and the virtual sound source” because Ashenfelter teaches that the position of the moving train is tracked to play the train sound at the correct virtual sound position, which teaches that a fourth distance is determined when the train has moved from the second distance from the second speaker (see Ashenfelter, p. 19 and p. 20, last paragraph - p. 21, third full paragraph);
“determining a third gain value for the first speaker based on the third distance and the fourth distance” by teaching the determination of updated distances, such as the third and fourth distances (see Ashenfelter, p. 19 and p. 20, last paragraph - p. 21, third full paragraph) and making obvious to determine a new third gain value based on the distances between the virtual sound source location and the speakers position using vectors and linear algebra (see Kim, ¶ 0010-0014 and figure 1); and
“determining a fourth gain value for the second speaker based on the third distance and the fourth distance” by teaching the determination of updated distances, such as the third and fourth distances (see Ashenfelter, p. 19 and p. 20, last paragraph - p. 21, third full paragraph) and making obvious to determine a new fourth gain value based on the distances between the virtual sound source location and the speakers position using vectors and linear algebra (see Kim, ¶ 0010-0014 and figure 1),
“wherein a sum of the squares of the first gain value and the second gain value equals a certain value and a sum of the squares of the third gain value and the fourth gain value equals the certain value” (see Kim, ¶ 0006-0014 and 0039-0040).
Regarding claim 15, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 14 above. Ashenfelter makes obvious the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 14, but does not appear to teach the features where “generating the first audio output signal for the first speaker comprises determining a first gain value for the first speaker based on the first distance and the second distance”.
As stated above with respect to claim 2 above, Kim teaches a method and apparatus to reproduce a localized virtual sound in 3-D space using multiple channel speakers (see Kim, abstract). Kim teaches a conventional vector base amplitude panning (VBAP) method, where the gains of multiple speakers selected from a plurality of N speakers are determined in order to localize a virtual sound source in the 3-D space (see Kim, ¶ 0006-0015 and figure 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify Ashenfelter with the teachings of Kim in order to place the virtual sound source in a desired location without changing the timbre of the sound and without large amounts of calculations (see Ashenfelter, p. 19, first - fourth paragraph, in view of Kim, ¶ 0006-0007).
Therefore, the combination of Ashenfelter and Kim makes obvious the “one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 14, wherein generating the first audio output signal for the first speaker comprises determining a first gain value for the first speaker based on the first distance and the second distance” by teaching the determination of the first and second distances (see Ashenfelter, p. 3, last paragraph - p. 4, end of first paragraph, p. 4, second full paragraph, p. 6, last paragraph, p. 17, first paragraph, p. 19, first - fourth paragraph, p. 21, second full paragraph - third full paragraph, figure 1, units 102, 104, and 106, figure 3, units 104 and 130, and figure 10, units 104 and 144) and making obvious to determine a first gain value (e.g., g1) based on the distances between the virtual sound source location and the speakers position using vectors and linear algebra (see Kim, ¶ 0010-0014 and figure 1).
Regarding claim 16, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 15 above. The combination makes obvious the “one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15, wherein generating the first audio output signal for the first speaker further comprises modifying the input audio signal with the first gain value to produce the first audio output signal” because Kim makes obvious multiplying the input by the determined gains to pan the virtual sound source (see Kim, ¶ 0006-0007 and 0014).
Claim(s) 11 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ashenfelter as applied to claims 1 and 14 above, and further in view of Sasaki et al. (US 2005/0152557 A1 and hereafter Sasaki).
Regarding claim 11, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 1 above. Ashenfelter anticipates the computer-implemented method of claim 1, where the distance sensor is separate from the physical loudspeaker (see Ashenfelter, figure 3, units 104 and 130). Ashenfelter does not appear to teach the features “wherein determining the first distance comprises receiving a distance from a distance sensor disposed within the first speaker”.
Sasaki teaches a multi-speaker audio system and automatic control method, where the system calculates the distances to each loudspeaker in the system from a received audio signal (see Sasaki, abstract). Herein, Sasaki teaches that each loudspeaker has a microphone (see Sasaki, ¶ 0137 and figure 1, units 200-202). Sasaki teaches that each loudspeaker uses its microphone and a captured voice of a listener to determine the loudspeaker’s distance to the listener (see Sasaki, ¶ 0208), and suggests that ultrasonic waves can be used for the same purpose (see Sasaki, ¶ 0210). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify Ashenfelter with the teachings of Sasaki for the purpose of determining distances between the virtual sound source and each loudspeaker using only the loudspeaker devices (see Ashenfelter, p. 6, last paragraph, p. 19, and figure 3, units 104 and 130, in view of Ashenfelter, ¶ 0208 and 0210).
Therefore, the combination of Ashenfelter and Sasaki makes obvious the “computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein determining the first distance comprises receiving a distance from a distance sensor disposed within the first speaker” because Sasaki makes obvious the loudspeaker receiving an audio signal, such as an ultrasonic sound signal, and computing the distance from the source of the audio signal (see Sasaki, ¶ 0208 and 0210).
Regarding claim 19, see the preceding rejection with respect to claim 14 above. Ashenfelter makes obvious the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 14, but does not appear to teach or reasonably suggest the features “wherein determining the first distance comprises receiving a distance from a distance sensor disposed within the first speaker”.
For the same reasons as stated above with respect to claim 11, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify Ashenfelter with the teachings of Sasaki for the purpose of determining distances between the virtual sound source and each loudspeaker using only the loudspeaker devices (see Ashenfelter, p. 6, last paragraph, p. 19, and figure 3, units 104 and 130, in view of Ashenfelter, ¶ 0208 and 0210).
Therefore, the combination of Ashenfelter and Sasaki makes obvious the “one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 14, wherein determining the first distance comprises receiving a distance from a distance sensor disposed within the first speaker” because Sasaki makes obvious the loudspeaker receiving an audio signal, such as an ultrasonic sound signal, and computing the distance from the source of the audio signal (see Sasaki, ¶ 0208 and 0210).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6, 9, and 17-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel R Sellers whose telephone number is (571)272-7528. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 10:00-4:00.
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 C Chin can be reached at (571)272-7848. 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.
/Daniel R Sellers/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2694
Prosecution Insights