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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on July 11, 2025 was filed before the mailing date of a first Office action on the merits. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Missing invention title
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the content" in lines 2 and 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitations "the contents" in line 2 and "the music signal" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitations in the claim.
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable by Kawamoto, US Pub. 2015/0087225 A1 (hereinafter Kawamoto) [included in IDS 07/11/2025].
Regarding Claim 1, Kawamoto teaches a display device (Kawamoto: Fig. 2, display device 41), comprising: a microphone (Kawamoto: [0037] and Fig. 2, where an input/output device 42 includes a microphone); a controller configured to receive a microphone-on command from a remote-control device to control the microphone to be turned on (Kawamoto: [0040], where in step S11, the input/output device 42 of the terminal 35 is operated. The input/output device 42 includes a recording button which is pressed by a user to record music and also includes a microphone for inputting music. If this button is pressed in step S11, then music is input via the microphone); and a display configured to display music information searched based on audio recorded by the microphone from a time of receiving the microphone-on command (Kawamoto: Fig. 5 and [0051], where FIG.5 is a flowchart illustrating the process of acquiring information associated with the music…This process starts when the user operates a particular button on the input/output device; [0061], where the controller 43 stores the received detailed information on the storage device 46. In this case, the title of the music is displayed on the display device 41. The detailed information transmitted from the server 15 to the terminal 35 includes not only music data but also other information such as the title of the music).
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawamoto in view of Wang, US Pub. 2013/0243205 A1 (hereinafter Wang1).
Regarding Claim 2, Kawamoto teaches the display device of Claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to: display the music information searched based on the audio recorded by the microphone. However, Kawamoto fails to explicitly disclose that it is from a time of receiving a content recommendation command that executes a content recommendation menu. Wang1 from a similar endeavor teaches a content recommendation command that executes a content recommendation menu (Wang1: [0029], where once a media object within the media stream has been identified, identity information and other metadata may be reported back to the client device 104; [0030], where metadata may also comprise data and hyperlinks to other related content and services, including recommendations, ads, offers to preview, bookmark, and buy musical recordings, videos, concert tickets, and bonus content; as well as to facilitate browsing, exploring, discovering related content on the world wide web).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kawamoto in view of Wang1 such that displaying the music information searched based on the audio recorded by the microphone could occur from a time of receiving a content recommendation command that executes a content recommendation menu. This can improve the user experience since identified music can be used to display recommendations throughout the interface, targeting the user with their interests.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawamoto in view of Mike Murphy (“Hey Siri, What Song is This?”) (hereinafter Murphy).
Regarding Claim 3, Kawamoto teaches the display device of Claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the controller is configured to: based on receiving an activation word that activates the display device, display the music information searched based on the audio recorded by the microphone from a time of receiving the activation word. Murphy from a YouTube video demonstrates activating Siri, Apple’s voice-controlled virtual assistant, by saying “Hey Siri,” and then asking “What song is playing?” Siri then listens to the music playing from an external source through his microphone, and displays the song and music information (Murphy: 0:09-0:21/1:13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kawamoto in view of Murphy such that the display device can be activated by an activation word, and display the music information searched based on the audio recorded by the microphone from a time of receiving the activation word. This makes searching for a certain song more straightforward by enabling hands-free operation, improving the user experience.
Claim(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawamoto in view of Wang et al., US Pub. 6990453 B2 (hereinafter Wang2).
Regarding Claim 4, Kawamoto teaches the display device of Claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the controller is configured to: generate multiple audio files by starting recording multiple times from the time of receiving the microphone-on command, and display the music information searched based on at least one of the multiple audio files. Wang2 from a similar endeavor teaches generating multiple audio files by starting recording multiple times from the time of receiving the microphone-on command, and displaying the music information searched based on at least one of the multiple audio files (Wang2: Col 21, lines 64-67 to Col 22, lines 1-7, where a microphone or other source of sound is continually sampled into a buffer to obtain a record of the previous N seconds of sound. The contents of the sound buffer are periodically analyzed to ascertain the identity of the sound content. The sound buffer can have a fixed size or it can grow in size as the sound is sampled, referred to herein as sequentially growing segments of the audio sample. A report is made to indicate the presence of identified sound recordings. For example, a log file can be collected, or a display can be shown on a device indicating information about the music).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kawamoto in view of Wang2 such that the display device of Claim 1 can generate multiple audio files by starting recording multiple times from the time of receiving the microphone-on command, and display the music information searched based on at least one of the multiple audio files. This would improve music search accuracy in case previous recording attempts are unclear, ensuring that the correct music information will be displayed to the user.
Regarding Claim 5, Kawamoto teaches the display device of Claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the controller is configured to: generate multiple audio files by starting recording at a preset interval from the time of receiving the microphone-on command, and display the music information searched based on at least one of the multiple audio files. Wang2 from a similar endeavor teaches generating multiple audio files by starting recording at a preset interval from the time of receiving the microphone-on command, and displaying the music information searched based on at least one of the multiple audio files (Wang2: Col 21, lines 64-67 to Col 22, lines 1-7, where a microphone or other source of sound is continually sampled into a buffer to obtain a record of the previous N seconds of sound. The contents of the sound buffer are periodically analyzed to ascertain the identity of the sound content. The sound buffer can have a fixed size or it can grow in size as the sound is sampled, referred to herein as sequentially growing segments of the audio sample. A report is made to indicate the presence of identified sound recordings. For example, a log file can be collected, or a display can be shown on a device indicating information about the music).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kawamoto in view of Wang2 such that the display device of Claim 1 can generate multiple audio files by starting recording at a preset interval from the time of receiving the microphone-on command, and display the music information searched based on at least one of the multiple audio files. This would improve the user experience by allowing a more seamless music discovery, since being able to record multiple clips can increase the chances of successfully identifying the music.
Claim(s) 6-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawamoto in view of Wang2, and further in view of Bilobrov, US Pub. 9679583 B2 (hereinafter Bilobrov).
Regarding Claim 6, the combined teaching of Kawamoto and Wang2 discloses the display device of Claim 5, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the controller is configured to: display the music information based on an audio file selected based on at least one of a silent section ratio or an SNR (Signal to Noise Ratio) level of each of the multiple audio files. Bilobrov from a similar endeavor teaches identifying audio signals and determining whether silence is included in an audio sample based on an audio characteristic threshold, directly teaching silent section ratio assessment of audio files (Bilobrov: Fig. 3, Col. 1, lines 63-67, and Col. 2, lines 1-3, where the audio identification system performs one or more methods to account for silence within a sample of an audio signal during generation of a test audio fingerprint using the sample. In various embodiments, the audio identification system determines whether silence is included in the sample based on an audio characteristic threshold. Portions of the sample that do not meet the audio characteristic threshold are determined to include silence). Additionally, Wang2 teaches selecting the highest quality audio segment and displaying it to the user (Wang2: Col. 21, lines 24-41 and 37-38, where if sufficient data has been collected to identify the sound recording unambiguously, e.g., if the number of points in an offset bin of one of the sound files exceeds a high threshold or exceeds the next highest sound file score, then data acquisition can be terminated and the result announced. Once the correct sound has been identified, the result is reported to a user or system by any suitable method…. The reported results can include identifying information of the sound such as the name and artist of a song).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kawamoto in view of Wang2 and Bilobrov such that the display device of Claim 5 can display the music information based on an audio file selected based on at least one of a silent section ratio or an SNR (Signal to Noise Ratio) level of each of the multiple audio files. This would improve music search accuracy by selecting the clearest audio.
Regarding Claim 7, the combined teaching of Kawamoto, Wang2, and Bilobrov discloses the display device of Claim 6, wherein the controller is configured to: display the music information based on an audio file of which the silent section ratio is less than a preset reference ratio among the multiple audio files (Bilobrov: Col 3, lines 1-4, where silence within an obtained audio signal is identified based on the audio signal having audio characteristics below a threshold audio characteristic level).
Regarding Claim 8, the combined teaching of Kawamoto, Wang2, and Bilobrov discloses the display device of Claim 6, wherein the controller is configured to: display the music information based on an audio file of which the SNR level is higher than a preset reference level among the multiple audio files (Bilobrov: Fig. 4, Col. 10, lines 65-67 and Col. 11, lines 1-8, where the analysis module 108 replaces the portions of the sample 104 including silence with additive audio. The additive audio may have audio characteristics that meet or exceed the audio characteristic threshold, so the additive audio masks the silence in the identified portions of the sample 104. By masking silence with the additive audio, the audio identification system 100 reduces the likelihood of false positives due to incorrect matching of the silent portions of a resulting audio test fingerprint 115 to the silent portions of a reference audio fingerprint).
Regarding Claim 9, the combined teaching of Kawamoto, Wang2, and Bilobrov discloses the display device of Claim 6, wherein the controller is configured to: obtain an order of audio files to be used for music search based on at least one of the silent section ratio and the SNR level of each of the selected audio files (Wang2: Col. 4, lines 12-13, where the files can be ranked by probability and searched in order of the ranking; Bilobrov: Fig. 3 and Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kawamoto in view of Wang2 and Bilobrov such that the display device of Claim 6 is configured to obtain an order of audio files to be used for music search based on at least one of the silent section ratio and the SNR level of each of the selected audio files. Ranking the audio files by their quality metric, rather than randomly selecting one, would maximize the probability of identifying the music correctly and minimize unnecessary queries.
Regarding Claim 10, the combined teaching of Kawamoto, Wang2, and Bilobrov discloses the display device of Claim 9, wherein the controller is configured to: obtain an audio file having a smallest ratio of the silent section among the selected audio files as a first audio file used in a first priority for the music search, and obtain an audio file having a greatest ratio of the silent section after the first audio file as an audio file used in a second priority for the music search (Kawamoto: [0038], where a processor 45 includes a filter for reducing noise contained in the memory; Wang2: Col. 4, lines 12-13, where the files can be ranked by probability and searched in order of the ranking; Bilobrov: Col. 1, lines 26-33, where conventional audio identification schemes often match a test audio fingerprint including silence to a reference audio fingerprint that also includes silence even when non-silent portions of the respective audio signals significantly differ. These false positive occur because many conventional audio identification schemes incorrectly determine that the silent portions of the audio signals are indicative of the audio signals being similar; Bilobrov: Col. 8, lines 22-30, where the analysis module 108 identifies 315 a portion of the sample 104 as including silence if audio characteristics of the portion do not exceed an audio characteristic threshold. For example, the analysis module 108 identifies 315 a portion of the sample 104 as including silence if the portion has an amplitude that does not exceed an amplitude thresh old. As another example, the analysis module 108 identifies 315 a portion of the sample 104 as including silence if the portion has less than a threshold power).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kawamoto in view of Wang2 and Bilobrov such that the display device of Claim 9 is configured to: obtain an audio file having a smallest ratio of the silent section among the selected audio files as a first audio file used in a first priority for the music search, and obtain an audio file having a greatest ratio of the silent section after the first audio file as an audio file used in a second priority for the music search. By combining Kawamoto’s music search display device, Wang2’s file ranking search system, and Bilobrov’s silence-ratio-based audio analysis, the audio files can be ranked in ascending order of silent section ratio since high silence content causes false positives and failed identification. Trying the least-silent file first maximizes the probability of correct music identification on the first search attempt, and then the file with the next greatest silence content would be the natural second priority.
Regarding Claim 11, the combined teaching of Kawamoto, Wang2, and Bilobrov discloses the display device of Claim 9, wherein the controller is configured to: obtain an audio file having a greatest SNR level among the selected audio files as a first audio file used in a first priority for the music search, and obtain an audio file having a smallest SNR level after the first audio file as an audio file used in a second priority for the music search (Bilobrov: Col. 3, lines 1-4, silence within an obtained audio signal is identified based on the audio signal having audio characteristics below a threshold audio characteristic level; Col. 10, lines 59-62, where a portion of the sample 104 is identified 415 as including silence if the portion of the sample 104 includes audio characteristics (e.g., amplitude, power, etc.) that do not meet a particular audio characteristic threshold).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kawamoto in view of Wang2 and Bilobrov such that the display device of Claim 9 is configured to: obtain an audio file having a greatest SNR level among the selected audio files as a first audio file used in a first priority for the music search, and obtain an audio file having a smallest SNR level after the first audio file as an audio file used in a second priority for the music search. Amplitude and power relative to a threshold are the direct components of SNR, so selecting audio whose amplitude or power meets Bilobrov’s threshold is equivalent to selecting audio whose SNR exceeds a preset reference level. By combining Kawamoto’s music search display device, Wang2’s file ranking search system, and Bilobrov’s SNR audio analysis, the audio files can be ranked and searched accordingly to maximize the probability of correct music identification on the first search attempt, similar to Claim 10 (replace silence ratio with SNR).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawamoto in view of Ishihara, US Pub. 2012/0045065 A1 (hereinafter Ishihara).
Regarding Claim 12, Kawamoto teaches the display device of Claim 1 wherein the controller is configured to: obtain whether to remove a signal other than music included in the audio based on the genre of the content (Kawamoto: [0038], where a processor 45 includes a filter for reducing noise contained in the memory). However, he fails to explicitly disclose wherein the controller is configured to: obtain a genre of the content being displayed on the display from an external server. Ishihara from a similar endeavor teaches obtaining a genre of the content being displayed on the display from an external server (Ishihara: [0071], where the control unit 20 can obtain the genre from a server).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kawamoto in view of Ishihara such that the controller of the display device of Claim 1 is configured to: obtain a genre of the content being displayed on the display from an external server. Signals other than music would interfere with music search accuracy, so obtaining a genre and using that information to decide whether to remove non-music signals would improve music search accuracy in non-music contexts.
Claim(s) 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawamoto in view of Wang2 and Bilobrov, and further in view of Wiseman et al., US Pub. 9384734 B1 (hereinafter Wiseman).
Regarding Claim 13, the combined teaching of Kawamoto, Wang2, and Bilobrov discloses the display device of Claim 11. However, it fails to explicitly disclose wherein the controller is configured to: based on the genre of the contents being not a music-related genre, display the music information searched based on an audio from which a signal other than the music signal included in the audio is removed. Wiseman from a similar endeavor teaches based on the genre of the contents being not a music-related genre, displaying the music information searched based on an audio from which a signal other than the music signal included in the audio is removed (Wiseman: Fig. 2 and Col. 1, lines 50-52, where an audio recognition system uses multiple recognizers to identify results for an audio sample across several content types; Kawamoto: [0038], where a processor 45 includes a filter for reducing noise contained in the memory).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kawamoto in view of Wang2, Bilobrov, and Wiseman such that the controller of the display device of Claim 11 is configured to: based on the genre of the contents being not a music-related genre, display the music information searched based on an audio from which a signal other than the music signal included in the audio is removed. This makes it so that content that is not music-related won’t interfere with music search accuracy.
Regarding Claim 14, the combined teaching of Kawamoto, Wang2, and Bilobrov discloses the display device of Claim 6. However, it fails to explicitly disclose wherein the controller is configured to: perform a music search corresponding to the audio recorded by the microphone in at least one of a plurality of music search engines including an original song search engine and a cover song search engine. Wiseman from a similar endeavor teaches performing a music search corresponding to the audio recorded by the microphone in at least one of a plurality of music search engines including an original song search engine and a cover song search engine (Wiseman: Fig. 2 and Col. 5, lines 46-48, where in FIG. 2, the audio recognition service 100 includes a frontend module 202, a music recognition module 204, a melody recognition module 206).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kawamoto in view of Wang2, Bilobrov, and Wiseman such that the controller of the display device of Claim 6 is configured to: perform a music search corresponding to the audio recorded by the microphone in at least one of a plurality of music search engines including an original song search engine and a cover song search engine. This ensures that a thorough search is conducted, maximizing the chances of song identification.
Regarding Claim 15, the combined teaching of Kawamoto, Wang2, Bilobrov, and Wiseman discloses the display device of Claim 14, wherein the controller is configured to: based on a music search result being not obtained from the original song search engine, perform a music search in the cover song search engine (Wiseman: Fig. 3 and Col. 7, lines 45-55, where upon receiving an audio sample (either a portion of or in its entirety), the music recognition module 204 generates a fingerprint for the audio sample. After generating the fingerprint, the music recognition module 204 attempts to match the fingerprint for the audio sample with a fingerprint stored in the database of reference audio fingerprints. If a match is located, the music recognition module 204 provides a result to the frontend module 202. If a match is not located, the music recognition module 204 does not provide an indication to the frontend module 202; Col. 8, lines 6-12, where the melody recognition module 206 is configured to process a received audio sample in order to determine whether the audio sample is associated with a particular melody, and is one means for performing this function. In particular, the melody recognition module 206 can determine whether the melody of the audio sample matches a portion of a particular music item).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yang et al., US Pub. 2014/0007171 A1 teach identifying music and providing its information through a television.
Moreno, US Pub. 2021/0185415 A1 teaches recording and uploading multiple audio files from the same audio source.
Gratton et al., US Pub. 8245253 B2 teach displaying music information from a television program.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HANNA CHONG whose telephone number is (571)270-0520. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. ET.
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, Nathan Flynn can be reached at (571) 272-1915. 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.
/HANNA CHONG/Examiner, Art Unit 2421
/CYNTHIA M FOGG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2421
Prosecution Insights