DETAILED ACTION
In the response to this office action, the examiner respectfully requests that support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line numbers in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the examiner in prosecuting this application.
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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description:
Figure 2 shows item 160 not mentioned in the description.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-7 and 11-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) a method of adjusting a noise cancellation setting based in response to detecting presence of a wearable audio device in a vehicle.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation of detecting the presence of the non-occluding wearable audio device in the vehicle is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind as a mental process (e.g., a person can see the device in the vehicle and determines in the mind that such a device is detected). That is, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites additional elements of a vehicle audio system including adjusting a noise cancelation (NC) setting of a non-occluding wearable audio device. These are only is recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than just conventional items used in a conventional manner. The physical ”adjusting” of at least one of the noise cancellation setting (e.g., turning on or turning off the noise cancellation) is an additional element which is considered an extra-solution activity which recites a conventional activity in high level of generality does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements are conventional items used in a conventional manner and/or extra-solution activity. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claim 14 is rejected in an analogous manner to claim 1, given the recited controller, loudspeakers, and microphones are just conventional items used in a conventional manner.
Claims 2-7, 11-13, and 15-18 only further define the mental processes or the type of settings adjusted.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 9, 11, 12, 14-18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Makino et al. (US 20200202837 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Makino discloses a method of controlling a noise cancelation (NC) setting at a vehicle audio system (300 of figure 3, 300 may be in vehicle 200 system, paragraphs [0065] and [0076], 250 of figure 9, 300c of figure 10, also CPU 901 of processor 900 for 100, paragraph [0145]) and an active noise reduction (ANR) setting at a non-occluding wearable audio device (300 of figure 3, 300 may be in earphone system 100, paragraphs [0064] and [0076], 300A and 300B of figures 9 and 10, also CPU 901 of processor 900 for 100, paragraph [0145]), the method comprising:
adjusting at least one of the NC setting at the vehicle audio system (at least see “Third Operation Mode” section starting paragraph [0113], only do low frequency ANC, paragraphs [0118] to [0121], see “Fourth Operation Mode” section starting paragraph [0125], also use earphone mics for ANC) or the ANR setting at the non-occluding wearable audio device (at least see “Third Operation Mode” section starting paragraph [0113], only do high frequency ANC, paragraphs [0118]-[0121], see “Fourth Operation Mode” section starting paragraph [0125], also use engine signals for high frequency ANC, paragraph [0129]) in response to detecting the presence of the non-occluding wearable audio device (paragraph [0102], “For example, in a case where the user who wears the ear hole opening device 100 gets into the vehicle interior of the automobile while reproducing the sound source, the operation described with reference to FIG. 7 is started manually or automatically in coordination with a device (such as a sensor not illustrated) that recognizes that the user has entered the vehicle interior of the automobile (or is in the vehicle interior). Such switching of the operation enables the user to seamlessly have the noise cancellation effect without operating the ear hole opening device 100 or stopping the content being reproduced”, see flowchart of figures 12 and 13, “coupling” phase on left, only couples when the headset is detected in the vehicle).
Regarding claim 2, Makino discloses wherein adjusting the ANR setting includes applying a narrowband feedforward or feedback control (see figure 4 for feedback based on mic, feedforward based on engine, paragraphs [0118] to [0121] for band restricted) to a noise signal at the non-occluding wearable audio device based on an input from a reference sensor (mic or engine sensor see figures 9 and 10), wherein the narrowband noise includes at least one of engine noise or motor harmonics (reason engine sensor exists, paragraphs [0068] to [0070]).
Regarding claim 5, Makino discloses wherein adjusting the ANR setting includes:
buffering detected road noise in an audio output at the non-occluding wearable audio device (see at least “Fourth Operation Mode” section starting paragraph [0125], see figure 10, noise gathered by microphones 140A/B must be buffered at least enough to send wirelessly to 232).
Regarding claim 9, Makino discloses further comprising:
streaming raw audio detected by at least one microphone in the non-occluding wearable audio device to the vehicle audio system for processing (see at least “Fourth Operation Mode” section starting paragraph [0125], see figure 10, noise gathered by microphones 140A/B is sent wirelessly to 232).
Regarding claim 11, Makino discloses wherein in a first frequency band (for operating mode 3, figure 9, section starting paragraph [0113], including “second frequency” and lower, paragraphs [0118] to [0121]), an audio control system in the vehicle is engaged to reduce the detectable noise (paragraphs [0118] to [0121]), and wherein in a second frequency band (for operating mode 3 starting paragraph [0113], including “first frequency” and higher, paragraphs [0120] to [0121]), a control system at the non-occluding wearable audio device is engaged to reduce the detectable noise (paragraphs [0120] to [0121]).
Regarding claim 12, Makino discloses wherein the first frequency band and the second frequency band exclude one another (see paragraph [0124], same if first and second frequency the same, no band overlap).
Regarding claim 14, Makino discloses non-occluding wearable audio device (100 of figures 1, 2, 6-10, see specifically figure 9), comprising:
at least one electro-acoustic transducer (110 of figure 2, 110A or 110B of figure 9);
at least one microphone (140 of figure 2); and
a control system (300 of figure 3, 300A and 300B of figure 9, also CPU 901 of processor 900 for 100, paragraph [0145]) coupled with the at least one electro-acoustic transducer and the at least one microphone (see figures 1-3), the control system programmed to:
adjust an active noise reduction (ANR) setting (see “Third Operation Mode” section starting paragraph [0113], at least use engine signals for high frequency ANC, paragraphs [0120]-[0121]) for audio output to the at least one electro-acoustic transducer in response to detecting use of the non-occluding wearable audio device in a vehicle (paragraph [0102], “For example, in a case where the user who wears the ear hole opening device 100 gets into the vehicle interior of the automobile while reproducing the sound source, the operation described with reference to FIG. 7 is started manually or automatically in coordination with a device (such as a sensor not illustrated) that recognizes that the user has entered the vehicle interior of the automobile (or is in the vehicle interior). Such switching of the operation enables the user to seamlessly have the noise cancellation effect without operating the ear hole opening device 100 or stopping the content being reproduced”, see flowchart of figures 12 and 13, “coupling” phase on left, only couples when the headset is detected in the vehicle).
Regarding claim 15, Makino discloses wherein in a first frequency band (for operating mode 3, figure 9, section starting paragraph [0113], including “second frequency” and lower, paragraphs [0118] to [0121]), an audio control system in the vehicle is engaged to reduce detectable noise by a user in the vehicle (paragraphs [0118] to [0121]), and wherein in a second frequency band (for operating mode 3 starting paragraph [0113], including “first frequency” and higher, paragraphs [0120] to [0121]), the control system at the non-occluding wearable audio device is engaged to reduce the detectable noise by the user in the vehicle (paragraphs [0120] to [0121]).
Regarding claim 16, Makino discloses wherein the first frequency band and the second frequency band overlap (see paragraph [0124]).
Regarding claim 17, Makino discloses wherein the first frequency band and the second frequency band exclude one another (see paragraph [0124], same if first and second frequency the same, no band overlap).
Regarding claim 18, Makino discloses wherein the control system is configured to control engagement and disengagement of a noise cancelation circuit in the audio control system in the vehicle based on detecting noise in the first frequency band or detecting noise in the second frequency band (see figure 11 steps S106 and S112, if no high frequencies found, in “second frequency band”, use ANC 250, else disengage).
Regarding claim 20, Makino discloses wherein the control system is further configured to receive data about a vehicle usage parameter from an audio control system in the vehicle for adjusting the ANR setting (see figure 9 and 10, data about engine is sent from 230 to 150).
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) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Makino et al. (US 20200202837 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Makino discloses wherein the first frequency band is low audio frequencies (paragraphs [0118] to [0121]) and the second frequency band is high frequencies (paragraphs [0120] to [0121]) and they crossover at the same frequency, (see paragraph [0124], ”the first frequency and the second frequency may be the same”).
Although Makino is silent to the exact frequencies, it would have been obvious to the designer that any low and high audio band may be used at their preference. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further comprise wherein the first frequency band is approximately 30 Hertz (Hz) to approximately 500 Hz and the second frequency band is approximately 500 Hz to approximately 3 kilo-Hertz (kHz) in the system of Makino for the benefit of choosing specific audio frequencies for implementation and design discussions that cover the audio spectrum well.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8, 10, and 19 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 DOUGLAS JOHN SUTHERS whose telephone number is (571)272-0563. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8 am -5 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, 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.
/DOUGLAS J SUTHERS/ Examiner, Art Unit 2695
/VIVIAN C CHIN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2695
Prosecution Insights