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
Anticipation
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4–6, 11–13, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication 2023/0335091 (19 October 2023) (“Morsy”).
Claim 1 is drawn to “a playback device.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed device and the Morsy reference.
Claim 1
The Morsy Reference
“1. A playback device, comprising:
The Morsy reference similarly describes a method and device for decomposing, recombining and playing audio data. Morsy at Abs., ¶¶ 1, 10. The device 10 may be formed as a piece of DJ equipment. Id. at ¶¶ 24, 111, FIG.1.
“an audio separation module configured to perform track separation processing on an input audio signal to generate at least two independent track signals;
Device 10 has a processing section 14 including microprocessor 20, RAM 16, ROM 18, storage 19 and AI systems 22, a recombination unit 32 and an audio interface 34. Id. at ¶¶ 111–115, FIG.1. Processing section 14 corresponds to the claimed audio separation module. In particular, section 14 implements decomposition units 38, 40 that segment audio into chunks for processing by AI systems 22/44. Id. at ¶¶ 116–117, FIG.2. AI systems 22/44 then decompose an input audio track into a plurality of independent tracks, such as tracks corresponding to different voices or instruments. Id. at ¶¶ 121–124, FIG.2. Preferably, the tracks are complements, meaning the tracks are independent because they do not contain overlapping outputs. Id.
“an audio synthesis module configured to: process the at least two independent track signals according to a target instruction, and generate a target audio signal; and
Recombination unit 32 corresponds to the claimed audio synthesis module. Like the claimed module, recombination unit 32 combines the independent outputs of AI systems 44 to generate a mixed output track, or target audio signal, based on target instructions, such as a mixing amount for each track. Id. at ¶ 128, FIG.2.
“an audio playback module configured to receive the target audio signal from the audio synthesis module and play back the target audio signal;
An audio interface 34 provides the mixed output, or target audio signal, from recombination unit 32 for output through element 36 and play back on a speaker. Id. at ¶¶ 114, 129, FIGs.1, 2.
“wherein the audio separation module, the audio synthesis module and the audio playback module are all integrated in the playback device.”
Similarly, all of Morsy’s elements are integrated into a piece of DJ equipment 10. Id. at ¶¶ 111, FIG.1.
Table 1
For the foregoing reasons, the Morsy reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 2 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein the at least two independent track signals comprise at least one of: a track signal corresponding to vocals, or a track signal corresponding to a musical instrument.”
Similarly, the Morsy reference describes decomposition units as generating vocal and instrumental tracks. Morsy at ¶¶ 122–123, 175, FIGs.2, 17. For the foregoing reasons, the Morsy reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 4 depends on claim 2, and further requires the following:
“wherein the track signal corresponding to the musical instrument comprises at least one of a guitar track signal, a bass track signal, a drum track signal, or a piano track signal.”
Morsy describes extracting instrumental tracks, including drums, bass, vocals and a complement (i.e., other instruments). Morsy at ¶¶ 122–123, 175, FIGs.2, 17. For the foregoing reasons, the Morsy reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 5 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein the audio synthesis module comprises:
“a to-be-processed track determination submodule configured to: receive the target instruction, and determine, in the at least two independent track signals, a to-be-processed track signal based on the target instruction;
“a track processing submodule configured to adjust performance parameters of the to-be-processed track signal according to the target instruction to generate a processed track signal; and
“a track synthesis submodule configured to synthesize the processed track signal and other track signals of the at least two independent track signals to generate the target audio signal.”
Morsy’s recombination unit 32 similarly includes software that corresponds to the claimed to-be-processed track determination submodule by receiving a user input and determining which track to adjust. Morsy at ¶¶ 113, 115, 149, FIGs.1, 2. For example, a user may manipulate a volume control knob for a first decomposed track or a second decomposed track. See id. User input software will determine which track to control based on the user’s input. See id. Another piece of software corresponding to the claimed track processing submodule will then adjust the volume of the track corresponding to the user-manipulated volume control knob. Id. at ¶¶ 127, FIG.2. And software corresponding to the claimed track synthesis submodule will synthesize the adjusted track with all other tracks to create a mixed output track. Id. at ¶ 128, FIG.2. For the foregoing reasons, the Morsy reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 6 depends on claim 5, and further requires the following:
“wherein the track processing submodule is configured to adjust the performance parameters of the to-be-processed track signal by adjusting a volume level of the to-be-processed track signal.”
Morsy similarly adjusts the volume of tracks. Morsy at ¶¶ 127–128, FIG.2. For the foregoing reasons, the Morsy reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 11 is drawn to “a playback system.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed system and the Morsy reference.
Claim 11
The Morsy Reference
“11. A playback system, comprising:
“a plurality of playback devices, wherein at least one of the playback devices comprises:
“an audio separation module, configured to perform track separation processing on an input audio signal to generate at least two independent track signals;
“an audio synthesis module, configured to: process the at least two independent track signals according to a target instruction, and generate a target audio signal; and
“an audio playback module, configured to: receive the target audio signal from the audio synthesis module, and perform playback of the target audio signal;
“wherein the audio separation module, the audio synthesis module and the audio playback module are all integrated in the playback device.”
Table 2
Claim 12 is drawn to “a computer-implemented method.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed method and the Morsy reference.
Claim 12
The Morsy Reference
“12. A computer-implemented method comprising:
“performing, by an audio separation module of a playback device, track separation processing on an input audio signal to generate at least two independent track signals;
“processing, by an audio synthesis module of the playback device, the at least two independent track signals according to a target instruction to generate a target audio signal;
“receiving, by an audio playback module of the playback device, the target audio signal from the audio synthesis module; and
“performing, by the audio playback module, playback of the target audio signal;
“wherein the audio separation module, the audio synthesis module and the audio playback module are all integrated in the playback device.”
Table 3
Claim 13 depends on claim 12, and further requires the following:
“wherein the at least two independent track signals comprise at least one of: a track signal corresponding to vocals, or a track signal corresponding to a musical instrument.”
Similarly, the Morsy reference describes decomposition units as generating vocal and instrumental tracks. Morsy at ¶¶ 122–123, 175, FIGs.2, 17. For the foregoing reasons, the Morsy reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 15 depends on claim 12, and further requires the following:
“wherein processing the at least two independent track signals comprises:
“receiving, by a to-be-processed track determination submodule of the audio synthesis module, the target instruction;
“determining, in the at least two independent track signals by the to-be-processes track determination submodule, a to-be-processed track signal based on the target instruction;
“adjusting, by a track processing submodule of the audio synthesis module, performance parameters of the to-be-processed track signal according to the target instruction to generate a processed track signal; and
“synthesizing, by a track synthesis submodule of the audio synthesis module, the processed track signal and other track signals of the at least two independent track signals to generate the target audio signal.”
Morsy’s recombination unit 32 similarly includes software that corresponds to the claimed to-be-processed track determination submodule by receiving a user input and determining which track to adjust. Morsy at ¶¶ 113, 115, 149, FIGs.1, 2. For example, a user may manipulate a volume control knob for a first decomposed track or a second decomposed track. See id. User input software will determine which track to control based on the user’s input. See id. Another piece of software corresponding to the claimed track processing submodule will then adjust the volume of the track corresponding to the user-manipulated volume control knob. Id. at ¶¶ 127, FIG.2. And software corresponding to the claimed track synthesis submodule will synthesize the adjusted track with all other tracks to create a mixed output track. Id. at ¶ 128, FIG.2. For the foregoing reasons, the Morsy reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 16 depends on claim 15, and further requires the following:
“wherein adjusting the performance parameters of the to-be-processed track signal comprises adjusting volume of the to-be-processed track signal.”
Morsy similarly adjusts the volume of tracks. Morsy at ¶¶ 127–128, FIG.2. For the foregoing reasons, the Morsy reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
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 3 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Morsy.
Claim 7–10 and 17–20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Morsy and US Patent Application Publication 2021/0294567 (published 23 September 2021) (“Morsy II”).
Claim 3 depends on claim 2, and further requires the following:
“wherein the track signal corresponding to the vocals comprises at least one of a male lead vocal track signal, a female lead vocal track signal, or a harmonic chorus track signal.”
Similarly, the Morsy reference describes decomposition units as generating vocal and instrumental tracks. Morsy at ¶¶ 122–123, 175, FIGs.2, 17. Morsy does not expressly describe the vocals as belonging to a male lead, a female lead or a harmonic chorus. Morsy broadly teaches the use of AI trained decomposition units 38, 40 to recognize the timbre of vocals. Id. at ¶¶ 10, 175. It is well known that songs exist with female lead vocals, male lead vocals and harmonic choruses and that they exhibit very different musical timbres that allow humans to distinguish among the different types of vocals. These facts reasonably suggest training Morsy’s decomposition units to recognize vocal timbres from male lead singers and female lead singers and harmonic choruses, all of which are notoriously well-known types of vocals worthy of Official notice. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to train Morsy’s decomposition units to recognize male lead vocals, female lead vocals and harmonic choruses, so that the units will be able to decompose the wide variety of songs that exist into vocal tracks corresponding to male lead vocalists, female lead vocalists and harmonic choruses. For the foregoing reasons, the Morsy reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 14 depends on claim 13, and further requires the following:
“wherein: the track signal corresponding to the vocals comprises at least one of a male lead vocal track signal, a female lead vocal track signal, or a harmonic chorus track signal; and the track signal corresponding to the musical instrument comprises at least one of a guitar track signal, a bass track signal, a drum track signal, or a piano track signal.”
Similarly, the Morsy reference describes decomposition units as generating vocal and instrumental tracks. Morsy at ¶¶ 122–123, 175, FIGs.2, 17. Morsy does not expressly describe the vocals as belonging to a male lead, a female lead or a harmonic chorus. Morsy broadly teaches the use of AI trained decomposition units 38, 40 to recognize the timbre of vocals. Id. at ¶¶ 10, 175. It is well known that songs exist with female lead vocals, male lead vocals and harmonic choruses and that they exhibit very different musical timbres that allow humans to distinguish among the different types of vocals. These facts reasonably suggest training Morsy’s decomposition units to recognize vocal timbres from male lead singers and female lead singers and harmonic choruses, all of which are notoriously well-known types of vocals worthy of Official notice. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to train Morsy’s decomposition units to recognize male lead vocals, female lead vocals and harmonic choruses, so that the units will be able to decompose the wide variety of songs that exist into vocal tracks corresponding to male lead vocalists, female lead vocalists and harmonic choruses. For the foregoing reasons, the Morsy reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 7 depends on claim 5, and further requires the following:
“wherein the target instruction comprises a music device to which the playback device is currently connected.”
The Morsy reference describes receiving a set of audio files or audio from a streaming source, such as the Internet. Morsy at ¶ 49. Decomposition units 38, 40 decompose the input into a set of independent tracks. Id. at ¶ 124, FIG.2. 49A user then inputs commands through faders 26 that identify a specific decomposed track to modify and an amount by which to adjust the track. See id. at ¶¶ 127, 172, FIGs.1, 2, 14, 16 (describing faders and displayed labels that correspond to each channel).
While Morsy describes processing pre-recorded and streaming audio, Morsy does not describe receiving and processing other types of streaming audio, such as audio received from a microphone or instrument line-in input. Accordingly, Morsy does not describe an instruction that comprises the use of any mechanism for determining a music device (e.g., a microphone or instrument line-in) to which device 10 is currently connected.
The Morsy II reference, however, teaches and suggests configuring DJ equipment to also process live recorded audio from any type of source, including musical instruments. Morsy II at ¶¶ 53, 78. Applying this teaching to Morsy, one of ordinary skill would have reasonably connected Morsy’s DJ equipment to a microphone or instrument line-in corresponding to any known type of musical instrument and decomposed the input into a set of independent tracks. Morsy’s GUI would be updated with information about the tracks and a user would identify an instrument to adjust by manipulating a corresponding fader. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Morsy and the Morsy II references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 8 depends on claim 7, and further requires the following:
“wherein the music device to which the playback device is currently connected comprises at least one of a microphone, or a musical instrument device.”
The obviousness rejection of claim 7, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of modifying Morsy’s DJ equipment 10 to be connected to a microphone or instrument line-in in order to process live streaming audio. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Morsy and the Morsy II references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 9 depends on claim 7, and further requires the following:
“wherein the to-be-processed track determination submodule is further configured to: based on the music device to which the playback device is currently connected, determine a track signal corresponding to the music device; and
“use the track signal corresponding to the music device as the to-be-processed track signal.”
Morsy’s recombination unit 32 similarly includes software that corresponds to the claimed to-be-processed track determination submodule by receiving a user input and determining which track to adjust. Morsy at ¶¶ 113, 115, 149, FIGs.1, 2. For example, a user may manipulate a volume control knob for a first decomposed track or a second decomposed track. See id. User input software will determine which track to control based on the user’s input. See id. Another piece of software corresponding to the claimed track processing submodule will then adjust the volume of the track corresponding to the user-manipulated volume control knob. Id. at ¶¶ 127, FIG.2. And software corresponding to the claimed track synthesis submodule will synthesize the adjusted track with all other tracks to create a mixed output track. Id. at ¶ 128, FIG.2. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Morsy and the Morsy II references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 10 depends on claim 9, and further requires the following:
“wherein the track processing submodule is configured to adjust a volume level of the to-be-processed track signal to zero to generate the processed track signal.”
Morsy similarly describes muting, or setting a volume level to zero, a track. Morsy at ¶ 159. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Morsy and the Morsy II references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 17 depends on claim 15, and further requires the following:
“wherein the target instruction comprises a music device to which the playback device is currently connected.”
The Morsy reference describes receiving a set of audio files or audio from a streaming source, such as the Internet. Morsy at ¶ 49. Decomposition units 38, 40 decompose the input into a set of independent tracks. Id. at ¶ 124, FIG.2. 49A user then inputs commands through faders 26 that identify a specific decomposed track to modify and an amount by which to adjust the track. See id. at ¶¶ 127, 172, FIGs.1, 2, 14, 16 (describing faders and displayed labels that correspond to each channel).
While Morsy describes processing pre-recorded and streaming audio, Morsy does not describe receiving and processing other types of streaming audio, such as audio received from a microphone or instrument line-in input. Accordingly, Morsy does not describe an instruction that comprises the use of any mechanism for determining a music device (e.g., a microphone or instrument line-in) to which device 10 is currently connected.
The Morsy II reference, however, teaches and suggests configuring DJ equipment to also process live recorded audio from any type of source, including musical instruments. Morsy II at ¶¶ 53, 78. Applying this teaching to Morsy, one of ordinary skill would have reasonably connected Morsy’s DJ equipment to a microphone or instrument line-in corresponding to any known type of musical instrument and decomposed the input into a set of independent tracks. Morsy’s GUI would be updated with information about the tracks and a user would identify an instrument to adjust by manipulating a corresponding fader. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Morsy and the Morsy II references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 18 depends on claim 17, and further requires the following:
“wherein the music device to which the playback device is currently connected comprises at least one of a microphone, or a musical instrument device.”
The obviousness rejection of claim 7, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of modifying Morsy’s DJ equipment 10 to be connected to a microphone or instrument line-in in order to process live streaming audio. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Morsy and the Morsy II references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 19 depends on claim 17, and further requires the following:
“further comprising: determining, based on the music device to which the playback device is currently connected, a track signal corresponding to the music device; and using the track signal corresponding to the music device as the to-be-processed track signal.”
Morsy’s recombination unit 32 similarly includes software that corresponds to the claimed to-be-processed track determination submodule by receiving a user input and determining which track to adjust. Morsy at ¶¶ 113, 115, 149, FIGs.1, 2. For example, a user may manipulate a volume control knob for a first decomposed track or a second decomposed track. See id. User input software will determine which track to control based on the user’s input. See id. Another piece of software corresponding to the claimed track processing submodule will then adjust the volume of the track corresponding to the user-manipulated volume control knob. Id. at ¶¶ 127, FIG.2. And software corresponding to the claimed track synthesis submodule will synthesize the adjusted track with all other tracks to create a mixed output track. Id. at ¶ 128, FIG.2. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Morsy and the Morsy II references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 20 depends on claim 19, and further requires the following:
“further comprising, adjusting, by the track processing submodule a volume level of the to-be-processed track signal to zero to generate the processed track signal.”
Morsy similarly describes muting, or setting a volume level to zero, a track. Morsy at ¶ 159. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Morsy and the Morsy II 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 C.F.R. § 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
6/11/2026
Prosecution Insights