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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on February 18, 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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, 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Matsui et al. (US 2010/0183163 A1).
As to claim 1, Matsui discloses a communication device [Device 1-1 on FIG. 1] that is configured to loudly produce a predetermined reproduction sound to a vicinity and enables a person in the vicinity and a remote utterer [Device 1-2 on FIG. 1] to communicate with each other, the communication device [§0031] comprising:
a first adder that adds the reproduction sound to a communication sound of the remote utterer and outputs the communication sound additionally including the reproduction sound to a speaker [“The audio communication terminal device receives the audio signal transmitted in the above manner, and outputs it from the speaker. Additionally, similarly, audio picked up and obtained by the microphone in the place is transmitted to the audio communication terminal device by the audio communication terminal device. “ §0032-0033]; and
an acoustic echo canceler that cancels, on the basis of the communication sound to serve as a reference signal, an echo component of the communication sound contained in an input signal acquired by a microphone configured to collect a sound in the vicinity [“The loudspeaker-based telephony system is typically provided with an echo canceller that avoids or reduces the occurrence of such an echo phenomenon. The audio signal processing unit is configured so as to have a signal processing function serving as this echo canceller.” §0039].
As to claim 18, Matsui discloses the communication device according to claim 1, further comprising: a communicator that receives the reproduction sound sent from a remote communication device [“The audio communication terminal device receives the audio signal transmitted in the above manner, and outputs it from the speaker. This allows the conference participants in the place to listen to the voices of the conference participants in the place.” §0031].
As to claim 19, Matsui discloses a communication method for a communication device that is configured to loudly produce a predetermined reproduction sound to a vicinity and enables a person in the vicinity and a remote utterer to communicate with each other [§0031], the communication method comprising:
adding the reproduction sound to a communication sound of the remote utterer and outputting the communication sound additionally including the reproduction sound to a speaker [“The audio communication terminal device receives the audio signal transmitted in the above manner, and outputs it from the speaker. Additionally, similarly, audio picked up and obtained by the microphone in the place is transmitted to the audio communication terminal device by the audio communication terminal device. “ §0032-0033]; and
canceling, on the basis of the communication sound to serve as a reference signal, an echo component of the communication sound contained in an input signal acquired by a microphone configured to collect a sound in the vicinity [“The loudspeaker-based telephony system is typically provided with an echo canceller that avoids or reduces the occurrence of such an echo phenomenon. The audio signal processing unit is configured so as to have a signal processing function serving as this echo canceller.” §0039].
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claim(s) 3 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsui in view of Abe et al. (US 2014/0072118 A1).
As to claim 3, Matsui discloses the communication device according to claim 1, but fails to disclose a first sound volume.
However, Abe teaches further comprising: a first sound volume adjuster that adjusts a sound volume of the reproduction sound and outputs the reproduction sound having the adjusted sound volume to the first calculator [“A sound outputted from the speaker, wherein the adding unit includes a first sound volume adjusting unit which adjusts a sound volume of the first audio signal. “ §0036].
Matsui and Abe are analogous because they are all directed to echo cancellation management system. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found obvious to modify Matsui reference with the teaching of Abe, so that the echo cancellation would include the sound volume adjusting unit in the echo cancellation system of Matsui, would have been combined into an audible sound, for the obvious purpose of providing the system having a bearable sound, by combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 4, Matsui discloses the communication device according to claim 1, but fails to disclose an automatic gain controller.
However, Abe teaches further comprising: an automatic gain controller that automatically adjusts a sound volume indicated by an output signal from the acoustic echo canceler [“A sound outputted from the speaker, wherein the adding unit includes a first sound volume adjusting unit which adjusts a sound volume of the first audio signal. “ §0036].
Matsui and Abe are analogous because they are all directed to echo cancellation management system. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found obvious to modify Matsui reference with the teaching of Abe, so that the echo cancellation would include the sound volume adjusting unit in the echo cancellation system of Matsui, would have been combined into an audible sound, for the obvious purpose of providing the system having a bearable sound, by combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsui in view of Shoor (US 8,077,642 B2).
As to claim 20, Matsui discloses loudly producing a predetermined reproduction sound to a vicinity and enabling a person in the vicinity and a remote utterer to communicate with each other §0032, the communication program comprising:
causing a computer to serve as: a first adder that adds the reproduction sound to a communication sound of the remote utterer and outputs the communication sound additionally including the reproduction sound to a speaker [“The audio communication terminal device receives the audio signal transmitted in the above manner, and outputs it from the speaker. Additionally, similarly, audio picked up and obtained by the microphone in the place is transmitted to the audio communication terminal device by the audio communication terminal device. “ §0032-0033]; and
an acoustic echo canceler that cancels, on the basis of the communication sound to serve as a reference signal, an echo component of the communication sound contained in an input signal acquired by a microphone configured to collect a sound in the vicinity [“The loudspeaker-based telephony system is typically provided with an echo canceller that avoids or reduces the occurrence of such an echo phenomenon. The audio signal processing unit is configured so as to have a signal processing function serving as this echo canceller.” §0039].
Matsui fails to disclose a non-transitory computer readable recording medium storing a communication program.
However, Shoor teaches a non-transitory computer readable recording medium storing a communication program [“Embodiments of the invention may also be implemented as instructions stored on a machine-readable medium.” Column 2, lines 3-10].
Matsui and Shoor are analogous because they are all directed to echo cancellation management system. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found obvious to modify Matsui reference with the teaching of Shoor, so that the echo cancellation would include the computer readable medium in the echo cancellation system of Matsui, would have been combined into a clean signal call, for the obvious purpose of providing the system a computer readable to save the instructions, by combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 5-17 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form.
Tachi (US 20220293079 A1) discloses a signal e(z) obtained by subtracting echo-canceling sound from an output of a second microphone is used as an error of an echo cancellation adaptive filter and a noise cancellation adaptive filter, and an output of a first sound source device is added to the signal e(z) and output from a first speaker.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GERALD GAUTHIER whose telephone number is (571)272-7539. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM to 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 R 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.
/GERALD GAUTHIER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2692
August 10, 2026
Prosecution Insights