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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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 Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957); and In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the conflicting claims 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 1-11 are provisionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 19180530. This is a provisional double patenting rejection since the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 6-8, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by TSINGOS et al. (NPL Pub. No. XP059142395, "Perceptual audio rendering of complex virtual environments", ACM TRANSACTIONS ON GRAPHICS, ACM, NY, US, vol. 23, no. 3, 1 August 2004, pages 249-258).
Regarding claims 1 and 10, with respect to Figures 1-3, TSINGOS teaches an acoustic processing device comprising:
a circuit (fig.3; Section 7, 2nd paragraph); and
a memory, wherein using the memory, the circuit:
obtains sound space information on a sound space (fig. 3: audio scene
description);
obtains, based on the sound space information, a characteristic regarding a first sound, the first sound being a sound generated from a sound source in the sound space (fig. 3: Section 4.1, positions of sources); and
controls, based on the characteristic regarding the first sound, whether to select a second sound generated in the sound space in response to the first sound (Section 4.3).
Regarding claim 6, TSINGOS teaches wherein the circuit: obtains a threshold value indicating a sound volume corresponding to a boundary that demarcates whether a sound is audible (Sections 4.2 and 4.3);
calculates a sound volume of the second sound based on the characteristic regarding the first sound (Sections 4.2 and 4.3); and
selects the second sound when the sound volume of the second sound is greater than the threshold value (Sections 4.2 and 4.3).
Regarding claim 7, TSINGOS teaches wherein the sound space information includes information on the sound source in the sound space, and the circuit: obtains a signal of the first sound (Sections 4.2, 4.3, 6.2 and 7);
calculates a plurality of second sounds based on the sound space information, the signal of the first sound, and a position of a listener in the sound space, the plurality of second sounds each being the second sound (Sections 4.2, 4.3, 6.2 and 7);
obtains the characteristic regarding the first sound from the information on the sound source (Sections 4.2, 4.3, 6.2 and 7); and
selects, from the first sound and the plurality of second sounds, one or more sounds to be processed to which binaural processing is to be applied, by controlling, based on the characteristic regarding the first sound, whether to select each of the plurality of second sounds as a sound to which the binaural processing is to be applied (Sections 4.2, 4.3, 6.2 and 7).
Regarding claim 8, TSINGOS teaches wherein the circuit applies binaural processing to the first sound and the second sound selected, the characteristic regarding the first sound is obtained in accordance with an update of the sound space information, and the update of the sound space information is performed less frequently than the binaural processing is (fig.3; Section 3, the sound space information is obtained for each frame of 20 to 30 ms, while it is implicit that the binaural processing is performed for each time sample).
Regarding claim 11, TSINGOS teaches a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium having recorded thereon a program for causing a PC [i.e., computer] to execute the acoustic processing method (fourth, sixth, seventh paragraphs of Section 1, on pages 250-251, third, furth paragraphs under “spatial audio rendering”, last three paragraphs of sections 4.1, section 7).
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 2-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TSINGOS et al. (NPL Pub. No. XP059142395, "Perceptual audio rendering of complex virtual environments", ACM TRANSACTIONS ON GRAPHICS, ACM, NY, US, vol. 23, no. 3, 1 August 2004, pages 249-258).
Regarding claim 2, TSINGOS does not specifically teach wherein the characteristic regarding the first sound is a characteristic indicating, in chronological order, a plurality of sets that each include: a duration for which an amplitude value of the first sound is a representative amplitude value, and the representative amplitude value for the duration. Examiner takes an official notice that wherein the characteristic regarding the first sound is a characteristic indicating, in chronological order, a plurality of sets that each include: a duration for which an amplitude value of the first sound is a representative amplitude value, and the representative amplitude value for the duration is well known in the art. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify TSINGOS to incorporate the feature of wherein the characteristic regarding the first sound is a characteristic indicating, in chronological order, a plurality of sets that each include: a duration for which an amplitude value of the first sound is a representative amplitude value, and the representative amplitude value for the duration in TSINGOS’s invention in order to provide proper amplitude information of the first sound.
Regarding claim 3, TSINGOS does not specifically teach wherein the representative amplitude value is a value of a ratio of a sound volume of the first sound to a predetermined reference sound volume. Examiner takes an official notice that wherein the representative amplitude value is a value of a ratio of a sound volume of the first sound to a predetermined reference sound volume is well known in the art. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify TSINGOS to incorporate the feature of wherein the representative amplitude value is a value of a ratio of a sound volume of the first sound to a predetermined reference sound volume in TSINGOS’s invention in order to provide proper benefit of having amplitude value as a value of a ratio of a sound volume of the first sound to a predetermined reference sound volume.
Regarding claim 4, TSINGOS does not specifically teach wherein the characteristic regarding the first sound is a characteristic indicating a duration of a state in which an amount of variation in a frequency characteristic is lower than a predetermined threshold value. Examiner takes an official notice that wherein the characteristic regarding the first sound is a characteristic indicating a duration of a state in which an amount of variation in a frequency characteristic is lower than a predetermined threshold value is well known in the art. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify TSINGOS to incorporate the feature of wherein the characteristic regarding the first sound is a characteristic indicating a duration of a state in which an amount of variation in a frequency characteristic is lower than a predetermined threshold value in TSINGOS’s invention in order to provide a particular indication of a duration of a state in which an amount of variation in a frequency characteristic is lower than a predetermined threshold value.
Regarding claim 5, TSINGOS does not specifically teach wherein the characteristic regarding the first sound is a characteristic indicating, in chronological order, a plurality of sets that each include: a duration of a state in which an amount of variation in a frequency characteristic is lower than a predetermined threshold value, and the frequency characteristic for the duration. Examiner takes an official notice that wherein the characteristic regarding the first sound is a characteristic indicating, in chronological order, a plurality of sets that each include: a duration of a state in which an amount of variation in a frequency characteristic is lower than a predetermined threshold value, and the frequency characteristic for the duration is well known in the art. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify TSINGOS to incorporate the feature of wherein the characteristic regarding the first sound is a characteristic indicating, in chronological order, a plurality of sets that each include: a duration of a state in which an amount of variation in a frequency characteristic is lower than a predetermined threshold value, and the frequency characteristic for the duration in TSINGOS’s invention in order to provide characteristic regarding the first sound that conveniently indicates, in chronological order, a plurality of sets that each include: a duration for which an amplitude value of the first sound is a representative amplitude value; and the representative amplitude value for the duration.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over TSINGOS et al. (NPL Pub. No. XP059142395, "Perceptual audio rendering of complex virtual environments", ACM TRANSACTIONS ON GRAPHICS, ACM, NY, US, vol. 23, no. 3, 1 August 2004, pages 249-258) in view of Oudeyer (U.S. Pub. No. 2003/0093280).
Regarding claim 9, TSINGOS does not specifically teach that the audible noise of members of the audience does not include applause from members of the audience. Oudeyer teaches that the audible noise of members of the audience does not include applause from members of the audience (paragraphs 0011-0015). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify TSINGOS to incorporate the feature of the audible noise of members of the audience not to include applause from members of the audience in TSINGOS’s invention as taught by Oudeyer. The motivation for the modification is to do so in order to provide selectively modification at least one elementary sound portion thereof prior to delivering the sound.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MD S ELAHEE whose telephone number is (571)272-7536. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday thru Friday; 8:30AM to 5:00PM EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Carolyn R. Edwards can be reached on 571-272-7547136. 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/MD S ELAHEE/
MD SHAFIUL ALAM ELAHEE
Primary Examiner,
Art Unit 2694
September 19, 2026
