The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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, 3, 9, 11, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dougherty et al. (US 10,284,991).
Regarding claims 1, 9, and 17, Dougherty discloses a method, a non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions that when executed by at least one processor individually or collectively cause an electronic device to perform the method (see col. 21, line 66, through col. 24, line 37), and a user equipment (UE) 202 for enhancing surround sound in an environment of a plurality of speakers 204a – 204h (see figure 2, for example), the UE 202 comprising at least at least one processor and memory storing one or more instructions when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively cause the UE 202 to perform the method, comprising: generating a position map of the plurality of speakers 204a – 204h based on respective position coordinates of each of the plurality of speakers 204a – 204h (see fig. 4 regarding a generated position map of speakers 404a – 404h based on respective position coordinates of each of the speakers, e.g., speaker 404f being at coordinates X5, Y2, Z4; see also, fig. 3 and col. 9, lines 54-58, regarding “resulting timing delays are used to calculate telemetry for determining relative locations of the loudspeakers (e.g., with respect to the audio processing device/component or with respect to a listening location of a user)”; determining one or more equalized audio channels associated with each of the plurality of speakers 204a – 204h (see col. 8, lines 43-48, regarding “the audio device can determine the gain, delay, and equalization (EQ) of the frequency response that needs to be applied to each loudspeaker to compensate for different loudspeakers distances to the listener and to correct the effects of the room acoustics so that a better listening experience can be obtained”), wherein the one or more equalized audio channels indicate homogenous frequencies associated with each of the plurality of speakers 204a – 204h (note that by adjusting the equalization of each speaker in the surround sound system, the frequency response of each speaker’s output is fine-tuned so that the combined sound from all the speakers match the intended tonal balance and avoids unwanted peaks or dips in the audio spectrum (i.e., homogenous frequencies as claimed)); allocating the one or more equalized audio channels to one or more of the plurality of speakers 204a – 204h based on the position map (see fig. 7 and col. 19, lines 57-59, regarding “a channel mapping of the plurality of wireless loudspeakers is determined based on the location by a channel mapping component (706)”; see also, col. 16, lines 39-44, regarding “the wireless loudspeakers system can uniquely determine the locations of each of the six wireless loudspeakers in the 5.1 configuration to one of the audio channels (L, C, R, SR, SL, and LFE) which in turn may be utilized to determine audio channel mapping as described herein”); and adjusting an audio intensity of the plurality of speakers 204a – 204h based on the position map (see col. 8, lines 43-48, regarding “the audio device can determine the gain, delay, and equalization (EQ) of the frequency response that needs to be applied to each loudspeaker to compensate for different loudspeakers distances to the listener and to correct the effects of the room acoustics so that a better listening experience can be obtained”).
Regarding claims 3 and 11, the position map is generated based on an orientation of the UE 202 being connected with the plurality of speakers for transmitting a sound signal. See col. 10, lines 6-10, regarding “wireless transceiver 208 of audio processing component 202 is configured to provide/transmit wireless audio transmission signals 218 to plurality of wireless loudspeakers 204a – 204h in acoustic space 222”. See also, fig. 3 and col. 9, lines 54-58, regarding “resulting timing delays are used to calculate telemetry for determining relative locations of the loudspeakers (e.g., with respect to the audio processing device/component or with respect to a listening location of a user)”.
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.
Claims 2, 8, 10, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dougherty et al. (US 10,284,991) considered with Davis et al. (US 2023/0319475).
Dougherty discloses the invention as claimed, including generating a position map of the plurality of speakers based on respective position coordinates of each of the plurality of speakers (see fig. 4, for example) and calculating angle and distance for each of the plurality of speakers to determine locations of each of the plurality of speakers (see col. 17, lines 50-63), but fails to specifically teach that the generating the position map further comprises: obtaining an ultra-wide band (UWB) data for the plurality of speakers; calculating a respective angle of arrival and a respective distance for each of the plurality of speakers based on the UWB data; and determining the respective position coordinates of each of the plurality of speakers based on the respective angle of arrival and the respective distance for each of the plurality of speakers. Davis discloses an audio system including obtaining ultra-wide band (UWB) data for a plurality of speakers 108, 114 and calculating respective angle of arrival and distance for each of the plurality of speakers 108, 114 based on the UWB data, in the same field of endeavor, for the purpose of determining the respective locations of the plurality of speakers 108, 114 relative to an audio controller 104, 122 located at a listening position of a user (see fig. 1, and para. 0023, 0030).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Dougherty, in view of Davis, such that the generating the position map further comprises: obtaining an ultra-wide band (UWB) data for the plurality of speakers; calculating a respective angle of arrival and a respective distance for each of the plurality of speakers based on the UWB data; and determining the respective position coordinates of each of the plurality of speakers based on the respective angle of arrival and the respective distance for each of the plurality of speakers. A practitioner in the art would have been motivated to do this for the purpose of determining the respective position coordinates of each of the plurality of speakers based on respective angle of arrival and distance for each of the plurality of speakers based on UWB data as taught by Davis.
Regarding claims 8 and 16, the adjusting the audio intensity of the plurality of speakers comprises: determining a respective gain value of each of the plurality of speakers; obtaining the respective distance of each of the plurality of speakers; calculating a respective audio intensity of each of the plurality of speakers based on the respective gain value and the respective distance of each of the plurality of speakers; and adjusting the respective audio intensity of each of the plurality of speakers to obtain an equal audio intensity of each of the plurality of speakers. See Dougherty, col. 8, lines 43-48, regarding “the audio device can determine the gain, delay, and equalization (EQ) of the frequency response that needs to be applied to each loudspeaker to compensate for different loudspeakers distances to the listener and to correct the effects of the room acoustics so that a better listening experience can be obtained”. See also, Davis, para. 0028, regarding “in aspects of audio level adjustment based on UWB, the audio controller 122 can communicate audio adjustment instructions 134 to one or more devices in the environment 102, such as based on the determined device location(s) 124 of the wireless device. The audio adjustment instructions 134 may be generated to initiate a sound level adjustment of audio emitting from speakers in the environment 102, such as the audio 110 emitting from the speaker 108 and/or the audio 116 emitting form the speaker 114”.
Claims 4-7 and 12-15 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references cited on the PTO-892 each disclose a system for dynamic multi-speaker optimization.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL W HUBER whose telephone number is (571)272-7588.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Duc Nguyen, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-7503. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/PAUL W HUBER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2691
pwh
July 9, 2026
Prosecution Insights