Patent Application 18366987 - SOUND REPRODUCTION SYSTEM AND RELATED PROCESS - Rejection

Patent Application 18366987 - SOUND REPRODUCTION SYSTEM AND RELATED PROCESS

Title: SOUND REPRODUCTION SYSTEM AND RELATED PROCESS

Application Information

• Invention Title: SOUND REPRODUCTION SYSTEM AND RELATED PROCESS
• Application Number: 18366987
• Submission Date: 2025-05-13T00:00:00.000Z
• Effective Filing Date: 2023-08-08T00:00:00.000Z
• Filing Date: 2023-08-08T00:00:00.000Z
• National Class: 381
• National Sub-Class: 074000
• Examiner Employee Number: 82527
• Art Unit: 2695
• Tech Center: 2600

Rejection Summary

• 102 Rejections: 0
• 103 Rejections: 5

Cited Patents

No patents were cited in this rejection.

Office Action Text

    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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. 

The following is a quotation of pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.

The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art.  The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. 

The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art.  The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. 

As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A)	the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; 
(B)	the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and 
(C)	the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. 


Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. 
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. 
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.

Thus, the limitation herein “converter means for processing digital signals that are sent within said bidirectional communication serial BUS” is thus read and interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA  35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. 


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.


Claim(s) 1-10 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 1 line 5 recites the limitation "the bidirectional type" in regard to transceiver .  There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.

Claim 1 line 7 recites the limitation "parameters" in regard to canalphone.  There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.

Claim 2 line 1 recites the limitation "multimedia element" in regard to the system  There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.

Claim 4 line 2 recites the limitation "processing media" in regard to the system  There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.

Claim 9 line 2 recites the limitation "first button, second button, third button" in association with the interface.  There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.

Claim(s) 1, 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raft (US 11,838,718 B2) and Chi et al. (US 7,924,960 B1) and Rodriquez (US 11, 259,164 B2) and Holter (US 11,076,248 B2) and Fontana et al. (US 10,827, 259 B2). 

A sound reproduction system of a signal, comprising: at least a first canalphone configured for receiving a signal, converting said digital signal to an analog signal, and subsequently reproducing said analog signal (fig.1 (18/22); col.4 line 40-55; col.9 line 35-45); the system further comprising a transceiver connected to said first canalphone and with a bidirectional type, said transceiver configured to receive said digital signal and transmit a  corresponding signal to said at least one first canalphone, and to receive, from said at least one first canalphone, further microphone signals and digital commands (fig.1 (24); col.8 line 43-47 & col.9 line 25-45) .

However, Raft et al. never specify that the canalphone to receive digital signal and convert to analog signal and the transceiver connected via a multiplexed digital data channel, of the bidirectional type and the transceiver to transmit the digital signal to the canalphone.  

	However, Chi et al. disclose of similar aspect related to a device to receive digital signal and convert to analog signal and a transceiver connected via a certain digital data channel, of and the transceiver to transmit the digital signal to the device (fig.3 (44); col.1 line 20-30; col.6 line 1-45). Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the prior art by replacing the canalphone for such specific device to receive digital signal and convert to analog signal and a transceiver connected via a certain digital data channel, of and the transceiver to transmit the digital signal to the device so as to provide a much more efficient amplifier with greater potential of level in comparison to analog amplifier. 


	Although, none of the combined teaching of Raft and chi et al. as a whole, specify of the transceiver connected via a multiplexed digital data channel,  however, the concept of a device being connected via a multiplexed digital data channel is noted in Rodriguez (col.1 line 55-col.2 line 5). Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the connection associated with channel signal by adding such specific transceiver to connected via a multiplexed digital data channel so as to reduce interference related to separate channel transmission. 

In addition, none of the combined teaching disclose of the system to control, store, and modify said parameters. But, Holter et al. disclose of the similar system to control, store, and modify various parameters (col.3 line 15-60; fig.3-4).thus ,one of the ordinary skills int eh art could have modified the prior art by adding such noted system to control, store, and modify said parameters so as to provide a user with safe and reliable communication in a high noise environment. 

	However, none of the mentioned prior art disclose of a first processing means of digital signals sent and transmitted by said transceiver;  but it shall be noted fontana disclose of a digital communication wherein  a first processing means of digital signals sent and transmitted by a device (fig.1 (102); abstract; col.3 line 5-30). Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the prior art by adding such digital communication wherein first processing means of digital signals sent and transmitted by said device so as to provide a more robust and unrestrained signal source to the processing unit. 

The combined teaching further disclose of the bidirectional communication serial BUS connecting said transceiver to said at least one first canalphone (Raft-fig.1 (28); col.8 line 45-50);  converter means for processing digital signals that are sent within said bidirectional communication serial BUS (fontana-(fig.1 (102); abstract; col.3 line 5-30); second processing means placed downstream of said converter means and connected to at least one class D amplifier, said at least one class D amplifier incorporated into at least one respective canalphone and configured for performing conversion of the digital signals output by said processing means into analog signals (chi-(fig.3 (44); col.1 line 20-30; col.6 line 1-45).

4. The system according to claim 1, wherein microphone signals taken from at least a first microphone are sent to said processing media (Raft-fig.1 (16/24);col.9 line 10-35).  

Claim(s) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raft (US 11,838.718 B2) and Chi et al. (US 7,924,960 B1) and Rodriquez (US 11, 259,164 B2) and Holter (US 11,076,248 B2) and Fontana et al. (US 10,827, 259 B2) and Pontoppidan (US 9,565,502 B2).


The system according to claim 1, but none of the prior art disclose as wherein said parameters of said multimedia element are: delays, frequencies, volume, and balance of said signal between left and right ears of said user.  

However, Pontoppidan disclose of certain parameters of said multimedia element are: delays, and volume of said signal between left and right ears of said user (col.5 line 10-25). Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the prior art by adding among the parameters of said multimedia element are: delays, and balance of said signal between left and right ears of said user so as to determined the localized sound associated with the received signal. 

	Although, the overall art, never specify of the parameter as being frequencies, balance, However, the examiner takes official notice the concept of having frequencies and balance as parameters are well known in the art. Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the art by adding such noted parameter as being frequencies, volume for achieving the same result as to determine the localized sound associated with the received signal. 


The system according to claim 1, but none of the prior art disclose as further comprising an interface for customization management and modification of said parameters, said interface located downstream of said transceiver.  

However, the concept of having an interface for customization management and modification of said parameters, said interface located downstream of said transceiver is noted therein (col.20 line 40-67; fig.4). thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the art by adding such noted interface for customization management and modification of said parameters, said interface located downstream of said transceiver so as to enable the user to localized sound according to its physiological condition. 



Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raft (US 11,838.718 B2) and Chi et al. (US 7,924,960 B1) and Rodriquez (US 11, 259,164 B2) and Holter (US 11,076,248 B2) and Fontana et al. (US 10,827, 259 B2) and Ozluturk (US 11,699,425 B2).

The system (100) according to claim 1, but none of the prior art disclose such aspect related to wherein said transceiver comprises at least a second microphone integrated and configured to pick up signals emitted in the proximity of a user of the system and direct them to said canalphone.  

However, Ozluturk disclose of a similar system wherein a device comprises at least a second microphone integrated and configured to pick up signals emitted in the proximity of a user of the system and direct them to said output device (fig.5 (510); fig.10; col.8 line 30-35). Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the prior art by adding to  the transceiver such second microphone integrated and configured to pick up signals emitted in the proximity of a user of the system and direct them to said output device so as to allow the user to hear appropriate ambient sound associated nearby. 


6. The system (100) according claim 5, wherein said transceiver comprises a first button configured to allow listening to what is captured by said first and/or second microphone, a second button configured to allow listening to what is stored in said transceiver, and a third button configured to allow control, selection, and modification of what is stored in said transceiver (Oz-fig.10).  


Claim(s) 7  is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raft (US 11,838.718 B2) and Chi et al. (US 7,924,960 B1) and Rodriquez (US 11, 259,164 B2) and Holter (US 11,076,248 B2) and Fontana et al. (US 10,827, 259 B2) and Heineman (US 11,451,913 B2).


The system according to claim 1, but the prior art never specify as wherein the multiplexed digital data channel further comprises a power signal for said at least one first canalphone. 

However, Heineman disclose of a similar aspect wherein a multiplexed digital data channel further comprises a power signal for said at least one first output device (col.14 line 40-55). Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the prior art by adding such aspect related to multiplexed digital data channel further comprises a power signal for said at least one first output device so as to facilitate easier transport over a medium. 

 Claim(s) 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Raft (US 11,838.718 B2) and Chi et al. (US 7,924,960 B1) and Rodriquez (US 11, 259,164 B2) and Holter (US 11,076,248 B2) and Fontana et al. (US 10,827, 259 B2) and Kulavik et al.(US 12,035,097 B2).

A method for sound reproduction by the system according to claim 1, but none of the mentioned prior art overall disclose of method comprising: A. interacting, by the user during an initialization phase, on said transceiver and modifying said parameters to achieve a specific adaptation of said system; B. customizing, in a customization phase, and storing of said parameters as modified, wherein initialization phase and customization phase are either sequential or concurrent. 

However, Kulavik et al. disclose of similar method including interacting, by the user during an initialization phase, on said transceiver and modifying said parameters to achieve a specific adaptation of said system; B. customizing, in a customization phase, and storing of said parameters as modified (fig.5 (506); col.11 line 39-50 & col.12 line 35-60). Thus, one of the ordinary skills in the art could have been modified the art by adding aspect related to interacting, by the user during an initialization phase, on said transceiver and modifying said parameters to achieve a specific adaptation of said system; B. customizing, in a customization phase, and storing of said parameters as modified so as to modify the audio effect as per user’s personal characteristic.

The prior art further disclose of method as wherein initialization phase and customization phase are either sequential or concurrent (Ku-col.11 line 39-50 & col.12 line 35-60).
 
The process according to claim 8, wherein said initialization phase, the user interacts on said transceiver via certain manual buttons (col.11 line 25-30).

But, Kulavik et al. failed to disclose of the interface which include such aspect related to first button, second button and third button and/or interface, but one of the ordinary skills in the art could have modified the art by adding the noted aspect relate to various buttons wherein said first button, second button and third button and/or interface for achieving the same result as producing the audio effect as per user’s personal characteristic. 

  
The method according to claim 8, wherein the customization phase comprises all or some of: (a) emitting typical or stored signals from said transceiver and changing said parameters; b) emitting pre-recorded, user-specific signals from said interface to said transceiver and then to said canalphone and possible customisation of said parameters; and c) collecting music or sound signals via said first and/or second microphone and customizing said parameters (Ku-col.11 line 60-col.12 line 15).  

Conclusion


Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DISLER PAUL whose telephone number is (571)270-1187. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-6:00 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, Chin, Vivian can be reached at  (571) 272-7848. 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.





/DISLER PAUL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695