E
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 Objections
Claims 23 and 24 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 2 and 3 of claim 23 and line 1 of claim 24, the term “the headphones” is recited. Applicant is suggested to amend “the headphones” to “the headphone” for clarity and consistency with the antecedent basis established in the base claim 20, “a headphone”.
Allowable Subject Matter
Regarding independent claim 1, the closest prior art of record are Horbach (US 20130236023 A1) and Ray et al. (US 20140254828 A1).
Horbach discloses:
A process for tuning a headphone, comprising the steps of (equalization is tuning, The system for headphone equalization contains the tuning process, see “A system for headphone equalization…”, Abstract):
analyzing a baseline audio profile for a lower range reference frequency and a midrange reference frequency (Processor in communication with the memory comprising predetermined signals is analyzing; predetermined tone burst reference signals is a baseline profile, see “ A computing system comprising: a processor; a memory in communication with the processor, the memory comprising predetermined tone burst reference signals ”, claim 1, pg. 9; Reference signal is reference frequency in center frequencies, see [0052]: “FIG. 3 is an example of the center frequencies (fc) divided into sub-bands of frequencies…Within each of the sub-bands is a tone burst reference signal 320 (fref)”; Center frequencies range from 50 to 10kHz covering lower range frequency and midrange frequency, therefore reference frequencies include lower range frequency and midrange frequence, see [0051] : “fc [1:23]=[50 150 250 350 450 570 700 840 1000 1170 1370 1600 1850 2150 2500 2900 3400 4000 4800 5800 7000 8500 10500] Hz”);
generating a tone at the adjusted amplitude of the lower range reference frequency and a tone at an initial amplitude of a midrange tuned frequency from a user sound profile (A tone burst reference signal’s loudness can be adjusted, see [0008]: “…a tone burst reference signal may be provided to drive a headphone transducer, followed by a tone burst test signal. A user may listen and compare the two signals, and adjust a loudness of the tone burst test signal until the two signals are perceived by the user as having about equal loudness”; predetermined tone burst test signals are a user sound profile, “predetermined” means the amplitude of the tone test signals is “initial”, [0005] : “A computing system for headphone equalization may use predetermined tone burst reference signals in conjunction with predetermined tone burst test signals during a user specific audio test”; at least 350Hz in index location 4 is a tone burst reference signal corresponding to the lower range reference frequency, and at least the ton burst test signal 840 Hz in index location 8 is a midrange tuned frequency at an initial amplitude, see [0053] : “ in FIG. 3 in the first sub-band 308, the tone burst reference signal 320 (.fref) is in index location 4 at a frequency of 350 Hz, and the tone burst test signals 322 (tefr) are in index locations 1, 2, 3 and 5, 6, 7, 8, at corresponding frequencies of 50 Hz, 150 Hz, 250 Hz, 450 Hz, 570 Hz, 700 Hz, and 840 Hz to form the surrounding trial set”);
“modifying the initial amplitude of the midrange tuned frequency within the user sound profile… the adjusted amplitude of the lower range reference frequency…the initial amplitude of the midrange tuned frequency” (a tone burst test signal is within the user sound profile, and it contains the midrange tuned frequency with initial amplitude as set forth above, the initial amplitude, i.e. loudness can be modified, see [0008]: “…a tone burst reference signal may be provided to drive a headphone transducer, followed by a tone burst test signal. A user may listen and compare the two signals, and adjust a loudness of the tone burst test signal until the two signals are perceived by the user as having about equal loudness”, for “the adjusted amplitude of the lower range reference frequency” and “the initial amplitude of the midrange tuned frequency”, please see the explanation as set forth above).
Ray discloses adjusting an amplitude of the lower range reference frequency to that of an amplitude of the midrange reference frequency (1000 Hz is the midrange reference frequency. At least 60 Hz is a lower range reference frequency, volume corresponds to amplitude. See [0054]: “from (in this example) 60 Hz to 16000 Hz and adjusts the volume of each tone to match the perceived loudness of the 1000 Hz tone”), Ray also discloses a discrepancy value between the amplitude of a lower range reference frequency and a tuned frequency and modify the discrepancy value so that the tuned frequency is closer to a frequency in a profile (recorded response profile contains tuned frequency, reference equal-loudness contour is the reference frequency including lower range reference, deviation can be discrepancy value in amplitude, see [0055]: “ for each tone, the deviation of the recorded phon level from the corresponding phon level in the reference equal-loudness contour”, also see [0067]: “ …deviation of the recorded response profile will have been measured from a reference equal-loudness contour for a given phon level to produce a first hearing profile in block 1406,”; Based on the deviation / discrepancy, an equalized audio, i.e. midrange tuned frequency recovers/matches, i.e. is closer to the same audio of the same frequency in the equal-loudness contour. Since the processing is with respect to equal-loudness contours, the amplitude is modified, see “…automatically generating a first personalized equalization filter based on the measured deviation of the first hearing profile such that application of the personalized equalization filter to an audio signal played through the personal listening device provides an equalized listening profile that recovers the equal-loudness contour…” , claim 1, pg.9-10, also see [0050]: “By measuring the response profile with respect to equal-loudness contours, a personalized, digital equalization filter is synthesized… provides an equalized audio signal that matches the equal-loudness profile for a given phon level as specified by the reference equal-loudness contour”).
However, None of the closest prior art of record such as Horbach or Ray either alone or in combination with other references teaches the idea of tuning a second midrange frequency’s amplitude to be closer or equal to that of a lower reference frequency, wherein the lower reference frequency has been adjusted with reference to a first midrange reference frequency.
Dependent claims 2 to 19 are allowable for at least the same reasons as the base claim 1.
Independent claim 28 is allowable because the tuning process is substantially the same as independent claim 1.
Dependent claims 29 to 35 are allowable for at least the same reasons as the base claim 28.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 20-22, 25-26 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ray et al. (US 20140254828 A1) in view of Horbach (US 20130236023 A1).
Regarding dependent claim 20, Ray teaches:
An audio tuning system, comprising (personalized equalization system on audio is an
audio tuning system, see [0037}; “…personalized equalization provided by exemplary embodiments… for the effects that any media in the signal path have on the listening experience, such as the frequency response of the audio player…”):
a user-interactable interface having a baseline audio profile that includes a lower range reference frequency having an amplitude equal to an amplitude of a midrange reference frequency (standard equal-loudness contours is used as a baseline audio profile; the sound pressure level or amplitude of around 500Hz, i.e. a lower range reference frequency, and that of 1000Hz, i.e. a midrange reference frequency are equally at 100 dB, see the top 100 phon curve, Fig.2, also see “when the preferred listening device is donned, is measured and recorded relative to predetermined equal-loudness contours (e.g., ISO standard equal-loudness contours)”, Abstract; User interactable interface allows user to adjust parameters with a given an equal-loudness contour, i.e. a baseline profile. Therefore the user interface has the baseline profile, see [0005-0006]: “The method involves measuring a first hearing profile of the listener as a deviation of a first recorded response profile, obtained from a first equal loudness hearing test when the listener is listening through a personal listening device in a personal listening environment, from a first reference equal-loudness contour associated with a first given phon level (e.g., an equal-loudness contour specified by ISO 226:2003) …measuring the first hearing profile of the listener may involve conducting a first equal loudness hearing test including presenting a user interface to the listener, the user interface providing a first set of test tones and allowing the listener to adjust and set the relative volume level of each test tone to a level at which the listener perceives all of the tones to be at the same loudness for the given phon level”);
a headphone in communication with the user-interactable interface to playback the lower range reference frequency(user interface communicates with a headphone for playing back, see [0059-0060] : “…as shown in FIG. 4, the user interface may include controls 410 (e.g., radio button) allowing the user to select a particular ear for the hearing test… to generate personalized hearing profiles (and, therefore, personalized filters) for different types of listening devices that the listener uses with that computing device 100, such as one profile/filter for earbuds, one profile/filter for sound-canceling headphones, one profile/filter for audiophile headphones, one profile/filter for a Bluetooth headset…”; User can select and play reference signal in the reference equal-loudness contour, which includes the lower range reference frequency, e.g. less than or equal to 500 Hz, see [0054]: “FIG. 4 is a schematic diagram of a graphical user interface 400 for conducting the equal-loudness test, in accordance with one exemplary embodiment. In this exemplary embodiment, the listener can select the reference equal-loudness contour for the hearing test via the "select contour" control 402”, also see Fig. 4);
“at least one fader coupled with the user-interactable interface and user-adjustable to alter an…amplitude…for storage in connection with a user sound profile associated with the headphone” (volume control 130 can be part of the user interface and the coupled real or virtual knob or slider etc. can be used for volume adjustment by a user, therefore is at least one fader, see [0038] : “Additionally or alternatively to controlling an output level of the audio interface 140, the volume control 130 (which may be, for example, a real or virtual knob, slider, button, or other control)”; at least a personalized audio equalization filter is a user sound profile and coupled with the listening device, e.g. headphone, see “The invention is directed to synthesizing a personalized audio equalization filter based on an individual's hearing profile when listening to audio signals using a preferred electronic means of transduction and production of the audio signals through headphones, earphones, or loudspeakers” Abstract, also see [0031] : “FIG. 12 is a logic flow diagram for adapting the personalized equalization filter based on the current fit of the listening device…”; user sound profile data can be saved in storage, also see Fig. 4, see [0054]: “The listener saves the profile data at the conclusion of the test via the "save profile" control 406”, also see Fig. 4)
Ray does not teach the underlined limitations wherein “at least one fader coupled with the user-interactable interface and user-adjustable to alter an initial amplitude of a midrange tuned frequency to equal the playback amplitude of the lower range reference frequency for storage in connection with a user sound profile associated with the headphone”.
Horbach teaches the underlined limitations wherein “at least one fader coupled with the user-interactable interface and user-adjustable to alter an initial amplitude of a midrange tuned frequency to equal the playback amplitude of the lower range reference frequency for storage in connection with a user sound profile associated with the headphone” (predetermined tone burst test signals are a user sound profile, “predetermined” means the amplitude of the tone test signals is “initial”, [0005] : “A computing system for headphone equalization may use predetermined tone burst reference signals in conjunction with predetermined tone burst test signals during a user specific audio test”; at least 350Hz in index location 4 is a tone burst reference signal corresponding to the lower range reference frequency, and at least the ton burst test signal 840 Hz in index location 8 is a midrange tuned frequency at an initial amplitude, see [0053] : “ in FIG. 3 in the first sub-band 308, the tone burst reference signal 320 (.fref) is in index location 4 at a frequency of 350 Hz, and the tone burst test signals 322 (tefr) are in index locations 1, 2, 3 and 5, 6, 7, 8, at corresponding frequencies of 50 Hz, 150 Hz, 250 Hz, 450 Hz, 570 Hz, 700 Hz, and 840 Hz to form the surrounding trial set”).
At the time of the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have integrated the system as taught by Horbach in the system as taught by Ray. It would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to “ensure that a frequency response curve over the entire desired frequency range can be reconstructed reliably” (see Horbach: [0049]).
Regarding claim 21, Ray in view of Horbach teaches all the claim limitations previously stated
in claim 20’s 103 rejection.
Ray also teaches the user-interactable interface comprises a graphical user interface (Fig.4 is a graphical user interface, see. Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 22, Ray in view of Horbach teaches all the claim limitations previously stated
in claim 21’s 103 rejection.
Ray also teaches the fader comprises an icon on the graphical user interface or knob (volume control, i.e. fader, can comprise a real knob or a virtual knob, i.e. an icon on the graphical user interface, see [0038] : “Additionally or alternatively to controlling an output level of the audio interface 140, the volume control 130 (which may be, for example, a real or virtual knob, slider, button, or other control)”).
Regarding claim 25, Ray in view of Horbach teaches all the claim limitations previously stated
in claim 20’s 103 rejection.
Ray also teaches the graphical user interface comprises an advanced graphical user interface including multiple of the faders (Element 404 comprises of multiple faders, see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 26, Ray in view of Horbach teaches all the claim limitations previously stated
in claim 25’s 103 rejection.
Ray teaches at least a fader as set forth above with respect to claim 20’s 103 rejection, but does not mention about a fader controller. However, it is inherent that there must be a controller which controls the fader, or otherwise, the fader will not be able to function properly.
Regarding claim 27, Ray in view of Horbach teaches all the claim limitations previously stated
in claim 25’s 103 rejection.
Ray also teaches each of the multiple faders is assigned a frequency between 1 kHz and 5 kHz (volume from 60 Hz to 16000 Hz can be adjusted by each faders, which includes the frequency between 1kHz and 5kHz, see [0054] “… the user plays additional tones, one at a time, from (in this example) 60 Hz to 16000 Hz and adjusts the volume of each tone to match the perceived loudness of the 1000 Hz tone”)
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ray et al. (US 20140254828 A1) in view of Horbach (US 20130236023 A1) further in view of Benattar (US 20190028803 A1).
Regarding claim 23, Ray in view of Horbach teaches all the claim limitations previously stated
in claim 20’s 103 rejection.
Ray in view of Horbach does not teach the fader is actuable between a first non-engaged position where no midrange tuned frequency plays back through the headphones and a second engaged position where the midrange tuned frequency plays back through the headphones.
Benattar teaches the fader is actuable between a first non-engaged position where no midrange tuned frequency plays back through the headphones and a second engaged position where the midrange tuned frequency plays back through the headphones (filtration including band pass filtering can be performing on midrange frequency to allow midrange turned frequency pass, see [0140-0142] : “Noise cancellation algorithms, digital signal processing or other filtration either across all channels/all frequencies or by channel or frequency range…Bass, treble, midrange and other equalization settings”; Switch 210 is the fader that toggles between non-engaged(off) or engaged(on) position to play back midrange tuned frequency after band pass filtering through the headphones, see [0288] : “There is an on/off switch 210 that is also a touch control”, also see Fig.2).
At the time of the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have integrated the system as taught by Benattar in the system as taught by Ray in view of Horbach. It would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to “allow a user to wear headphones and specify what ambient audio and source audio will be transmitted to the headphones” (see Benattar: Abstract).
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ray et al. (US 20140254828 A1) in view of Horbach (US 20130236023 A1) further in view of Bonanno (US 20120014553 A1).
Regarding claim 24, Ray in view of Horbach teaches all the claim limitations previously stated
in claim 20’s 103 rejection.
Ray in view of Horbach does not teach a switch actuable to activate one of multiple programmable user sound profiles associated therewith.
Bonanno teaches a switch actuable to activate one of multiple programmable user sound profiles associated therewith (One control can be a switch which activities one of a plurality of associated programmable presets, i.e. user sound profiles, see “a programmable signal processor for individually modifying the audio signals and a memory configured to store a plurality of user-selectable signal-processing parameter settings… The parameter settings collectively form a preset, and one or more user-operable controls can select and activate a preset from the plurality of presets stored in memory”, Abstract).
At the time of the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have integrated the system as taught by Bonanno in the headphone system as taught by Ray in view of Horbach. It would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to “allows for easily testing and quickly adjusting the individual performance characteristics of the headset” (see Bonanno: [0005]).
Conclusion
The prior arts made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Perscheid (US 20200069224 A1) teaches a fader controller(a soundmap can be a fader controller, see [0007] : “A soundmap is then included, which allows simultaneous control over a plurality of the slidebars”).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHIN LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-1460. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 8-5 pm ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Vivian Chin can be reached at 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.
/SHIN LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2695
/VIVIAN C CHIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2695
Prosecution Insights