Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 04, 2026
Application No. 19/044,237

METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR AN ULTRASONIC EMITTER SYSTEM FLOOR AUDIO UNIT

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Feb 03, 2025
Priority
Nov 22, 2013 — provisional 61/907,797 +7 more
Examiner
ADDY, THJUAN KNOWLIN
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Voyetra Turtle Beach Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
10m
Est. Remaining
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allowance Rate
990 granted / 1108 resolved
+29.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
1120
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.7%
-29.3% vs TC avg
§103
19.7%
-20.3% vs TC avg
§102
44.0%
+4.0% vs TC avg
§112
3.9%
-36.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1108 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . Specification Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details. The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided. The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it uses a phrase which can be implied. For instance, line 1 recites “Methods and systems are provided for audio devices …”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 21-40 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The invention as claimed is not disclosed nor rendered obvious in view of any prior art. As to independent claims 21 and 32, all prior art fail to teach or suggest, alone or in combination, the recited system and method. However, claims 21-40 are currently rejected under a nonstatutory double patenting rejection. A response is respectfully requested of Applicant. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 21-31 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,342. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,342 recites “A system comprising: one or more audio output components; a positioning determination circuit configured to determine positioning information associated with positioning of a user … and a controller configured to control the one or more audio output components based on the determined positioning information; wherein the controlling comprises providing a three-dimensional audio environment according to the user”, and claim 21 of the present application recites “A system comprising: one or more audio output components; one or more sensors configured to generate sensory data relating to a user; and one or more control circuits configured to control the one or more audio output components based on positioning information associated with positioning of the user; wherein the positioning information is generated or adjusted based on the sensory data, and wherein the controlling comprises providing a three-dimensional audio environment according to the user”. U.S. Patent 12,219,342 A system comprising: one or more audio output components; a positioning determination circuit configured to determine positioning information associated with positioning of a user … Application 19/044,237 A system comprising: one or more audio output components; one or more sensors configured to generate sensory data relating to a user … Claims 32-40 recite similar limitations as claims 21-31, therefore, claims 32-40 are also rejected under the current double patenting rejection as claims 21-31 above. Claims 32-40 are rejected under the current double patenting rejection, as being unpatentable over claim 12 of U.S. Patent No. 12,219,342. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Freeman (US Patent 5,682,196) teaches a three-dimensional video presentation system providing interactive 3D presentation with personalized audio responses for multiple viewers. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THJUAN KNOWLIN ADDY whose telephone number is (571)272-7486. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30AM - 5:00PM Mon-Fri. 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, Ahmad Matar can be reached at (571) 272-7488. 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. /THJUAN K ADDY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 03, 2025
Application Filed
Sep 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12739543
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MOUNTING DEVICES TO A FLAT SCREEN VIDEO MONITOR
2y 9m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12707189
Display Device
1y 10m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12694341
CONTEXTUAL AWARENESS SUBSYSTEM FOR AUGMENTED HEARING
2y 8m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12688875
COMMUNICATION APPARATUS, CONTROL METHOD FOR COMMUNICATION APPARATUS, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12689862
HEARING AID CONTROL METHOD, AND HEARING AID DEVICE AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 2m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
89%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+6.3%)
2y 5m (~10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1108 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month