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 .
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 1-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1-18 of prior U.S. Patent No. 11996078. This is a statutory double patenting rejection.
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.
Claims 1, 2, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ku (US 10244306).
Regarding claim 1, Ku teaches a method comprising: combining a playback audio signal with a feedback signal from a feedback microphone to provide a first combined signal (in various examples, any of the playback signal 410, the feedforward anti-noise signal 128, and/or the feedback anti-noise signal 148 may be combined, e.g., by a combiner 420, to generate a driver signal 132, d(t), to be provided to the driver 130., col 5, ln 60-64, fig 4);; and providing the driver command signal to an acoustic transducer for transduction to acoustic energy (d(t) sent to speaker 130, fig 5); and comparing the first combined signal with the feedback signal to detect a feedback instability (A correlation measurement 516 is made between the feedback signal 142 and the reference signal 512, to quantify their similarity, and if their similarity meets a threshold 518, an instability is indicated by the instability indicator 520, which is an output signal of the comparator 510., col 7, ln 49-54) based upon the comparison (compare 510; at least one example of a comparator 510 is illustrated, suitable for comparing whether the feedback signal 142 is related to the driver signal 132 by an inverse of the feedback transfer function 146. Col 7, ln 39-44; fig 5).
Although Ku does not teach filtering the first combined signal with a feedback filter to provide a driver command signal, it would have been obvious to filter the signal with a high pass filter for blocking DC or a low pass filter for blocking ultrasonic with the motivation of blocking DC or radio interference that could cause audible artefacts as is well-known in the art.
Regarding claim 2, Ku teaches the method of claim 1, wherein combining the playback audio signal with the feedback signal comprises filtering the playback audio signal with an equalization filter to provide a filtered playback signal and combining the filtered playback signal with the feedback signal to provide the first combined signal (inherent filter in wireless interface 314 for receiving playback signal, col 5, ln 31-36).
Regarding claim 6, Ku teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising, in response to detecting the feedback instability, filtering the driver command signal with a first notch filter to provide a filtered driver command signal, and providing the filtered driver command signal to an acoustic transducer for transduction to acoustic energy (mute in a frequency band, col 9, ln 58- col 10, ln 41).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ku and Vilermo (US 20150280669).
Regarding claim 3, Ku teaches the method of claim 2.
Although Ku does not teach wherein combining the playback audio signal with the feedback signal further comprises filtering a feedforward signal from a feedforward microphone with an aware mode filter to provide an aware mode signal; and combining the aware mode signal, the filtered playback signal, and the feedback signal to provide the first combined signal, Vilermo teaches combining a hear-through mode along with an ANC mode (differentiating by frequency) at the same time (Vilermo, [0006]) and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to implement in Ku since doing so is the use of a known technique to improve a similar system in the same way.
Regarding claim 4, Ku and Vilermo teach the method of claim 3, wherein combining the playback signal with the feedback signal further comprises filtering the feedforward signal with a feedforward filter to provide a feedforward noise cancellation signal (a feedforward transfer function 126, Kff, to produce a feedforward anti-noise signal 128, col 5, ln 53-57); and combining the feedforward noise cancellation signal, the aware mode signal, and the filtered playback signal with the feedback signal to provide the first combined signal (fig 5).
Regarding claim5, Ku and Vilermo teach the method of claim 4, wherein combining the playback signal with the feedback signal further comprises combining the feedforward noise cancellation signal, the aware mode signal, and the filtered playback signal to provide a second combined signal; and combining the second combined signal with the feedback signal to provide the first combined signal (fig 5).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kile Blair whose telephone number is (571)270-3544. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Duc Nguyen can be reached at 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 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.
/KILE O BLAIR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2691
Prosecution Insights