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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention I, claims 1-12 in the reply filed on 06/02/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the election requirement of 04/01/2025 fails to establish the alleged inventions are independent and distinct from each other, and the election requirement fails to establish there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction is not required. This is not found persuasive because the election requirement does establish that the alleged inventions are independent from each other. Applicant points to inventions I and II and states that the election requirement only states that "the process for using the product as claimed can be practiced with another materially different product that is not an interactive hearing services kiosk" and as such does not identify another such device, even though the burden is on the examiner to provide an example. MPEP 806.05(h) states that though the burden is on the examiner to provide an example, the example need not be documented. Therefore, in stating that the process for using the product as claimed can be practiced with another materially different product that is not an interactive hearing services kiosk, with respect to inventions I and II, this demonstrates that inventions I and II are independent from one another because the product of invention I is not recited and thus not required in the process of invention II, and thus another product could be used in the process of invention II. Regardless, the method of claim 13 can be performed in an outdoor environment without the use of any kiosk. With regard to applicant's argument that the election requirement fails to establish there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction is not required, this argument is found to be unpersuasive because there would be an undue burden on the examiner to consider invention I, claims 1-12, invention II, claims 13-19, and invention III, claim 20 because claims 1-12 pertain to an interactive hearing services kiosk, while claims 13-19 pertain to a method of generating prompts, instructing a display, receiving responses, validating input, and generating recommendations based upon the validated input, and claim 20 pertains to a computer readable storage medium comprising computer code instructions for generating prompts, displaying prompts, receiving input, validating input and generating recommendations based on the validated input. The differences between claims 1-12, 13-19, and 20 would require the inventions to have a different field of search, such as searching different classes/subclasses, or employing different search queries for each invention which poses an undue burden on the examiner.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
This Office Action is responsive to the Reply to Office Action filed 06/02/2025. Claims 1-20 are currently pending, with claims 13-20 being withdrawn from consideration.
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 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) 1-10 & 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication 2016/0337769, hereinafter referenced as "Siddhartha" in view of US Patent Application Publication 2014/0330579 --as cited by applicant--, hereinafter referenced as "Cashman".
With respect to claim 1, Siddhartha teaches a method for fitting a hearing device and an arrangement for fitting the hearing device that comprises a controller 6 (i.e., a fitting system) (see Siddhartha, par 0087-0088, 0091, fig. 1), wherein the controller is configured to: display, via a user interface 4 (i.e., a touch screen with 2D inputs) (see Siddhartha, par 0078, 0085-0089, fig. 1) , a first set of one or more prompts that are associated with one or more hearing services; receive a first input that is responsive to the first set of one or more prompts, the input including at least one response via the one or more media devices; validate the first input; and generate one or more recommendations based on a validated first input (i.e., a fitter 5 and a user 1 collaboratively fit a hearing device 2,3 to the user 1, wherein the fitter 5 first selects a parameter or several parameters to be adjusted for the hearing device 2,3, then gives the parameter/parameters starting values via an input unit of the fitting system 6, and after those parameters are adjusted on the hearing device of the user 1, with feedback of the user 1 using the hearing device 2,3, the parameter(s) is/are updated as needed for the user 1 by the fitter 5 who gives recommendations for the parameter/parameters based upon the user’s 1 feedback) (see Siddhartha, par 0090-0126, figs. 1 & 2).
While Siddhartha teaches the user interface 4 and the fitting system 6 being separated by a wall (par 0088), Siddhartha fails to teach an interactive kiosk, comprising: one or more walls configured to define a space; a first door providing access to the space; one or more media devices; and one or more user display screens, at least one of the one or more user display screens is located on the outside of at least one of the one or more walls of the kiosk so as to define an outside display screen.
Cashman teaches a medical kiosk that comprises one or more walls configured to form all or a portion of the sides of the enclosure of the medical kiosk (see Cashman, par 0012, 0019, 0038, figs. 1 & 2), one or more doors or entry points that enable a patient to enter and/or exit the enclosed space of the medical kiosk (see Cashman, par 0012, 0019, 0028, 0038, 0042, 0160-0161, figs. 1 & 2), one or more media devices (i.e., a camera, tablet computer, iPad, speaker, microphone, a keyboard, Bluetooth devices, or headphones) (see Cashman, par 0022, 0025, 0030, 0033-0034, 0036-0037, 0047, 0062, 0164, see fig. 5), and one or more user display screens (see Cashman, par 0029-0030, 0037, 0168-0169), wherein at least one of the one or more user display screens is located on the outside of at least one of the one or more walls of the medical kiosk so as to define an outside display screen (i.e., the display screen is on the interior and/or exterior of the kiosk) (see Cashman, par 0029). The medical kiosk can provide medical services to address/treat hearing loss and further comprises equipment such as an audiometer to test hearing and an otoscope for examining an ear drum or external ear canal (see Cashman, par 0011, 0028).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Siddhartha such that it employs an interactive kiosk comprising one or more walls configured to define a space; a first door providing access to the space; one or more media devices; and one or more user display screens, at least one of the one or more user display screens is located on the outside of at least one of the one or more walls of the kiosk so as to define an outside display screen because an interactive kiosk comprising the aforementioned features enables convenient, desirable, timely and cost effective medical care for a patient (see Cashman, par 0005-0009).
With respect to claim 2, Siddhartha as modified by Cashman teaches the interactive hearing services kiosk of claim 1, and further teaches a user display screen that is located on the inside of the at least one of the one or more walls of the kiosk so as to define an inside display screen (i.e., the display screen is on the interior and/or exterior of the kiosk) (see Cashman, par 0029).
With respect to claim 3, Siddhartha as modified by Cashman teaches the interactive hearing services kiosk of claim 2, and Siddhartha as modified by Cashman further teaches the controller is configured to: display, via the inside display screen (i.e., the display screen is on the interior and/or exterior of the kiosk) (see Cashman, par 0029), a second set of one or more prompts that are associated with one or more hearing services; receive a second input that is responsive to the second set of one or more prompts, the second input including at least one response via the one or more media devices (i.e., a camera, tablet computer, iPad, speaker, microphone, a keyboard, Bluetooth devices, or headphones) (see Cashman, par 0022, 0025, 0030, 0033-0034, 0036-0037, 0047, 0062, 0164, see fig. 5); validate the second input; generate one or more recommendations based on a validated second input; and program one or more of a hearing device, a hearing instrument, a hearing aid, a hearing prosthesis, a hearing protection device, and/or a hearing system based on the one or more recommendations (i.e., a fitter 5 and a user 1 collaboratively fit a hearing device 2,3 to the user 1, wherein the fitter 5 first selects a parameter or several parameters to be adjusted for the hearing device 2,3, then gives the parameter/parameters starting values via an input unit of the fitting system 6, and after those parameters are adjusted on the hearing device of the user 1, with feedback of the user 1 using the hearing device 2,3, the parameter(s) is/are updated as needed (i.e., as many times as needed) for the user 1 by the fitter 5 who gives recommendations for the parameter/parameters based upon the user’s 1 feedback) (see Siddhartha, par 0090-0126, figs. 1 & 2).
With respect to claim 4, Siddhartha as modified by Cashman teaches the interactive hearing services kiosk of claim 3, and Siddhartha as modified by Cashman further teaches the one or more media devices comprises one or more speakers that are configured to simulate one or more acoustic environments for a predetermined time duration (see Siddhartha, par 0027-0030, 0064-0067, 0089, 0113-0119, Cashman, par 0030, 0034, 0037, 0042, 0047, 0164, 0170), the one or more acoustic environments associated with a hearing evaluation to program one or more of a hearing device, a hearing instrument, a hearing aid, a hearing prosthesis, a hearing protection device, and/or a hearing system based on the second set of one or more prompts that are presented on the inside display screen (see Siddhartha, par 0007-0019, 0027-0030, 0064-0067, 0089, 0113-0119).
With respect to claim 5, Siddhartha as modified by Cashman teaches the interactive hearing services kiosk of claim 2, and Siddhartha as modified by Cashman further teaches the controller is further configured to prompt a user for the first input responsive to a first evaluation that is presented on the outside display screen, and prompt the user for a second input responsive to a second evaluation that is presented on the inside display screen, the second evaluation including one or more queries than that belonging to the first evaluation (i.e., a fitter 5 and a user 1 collaboratively fit a hearing device 2,3 to the user 1, wherein the fitter 5 first selects a parameter or several parameters to be adjusted for the hearing device 2,3, then gives the parameter/parameters starting values via an input unit of the fitting system 6, and after those parameters are adjusted on the hearing device of the user 1, with feedback of the user 1 using the hearing device 2,3, the parameter(s) is/are updated as needed for the user 1 by the fitter 5 who gives recommendations for the parameter/parameters based upon the user’s 1 feedback) (see Siddhartha, par 0090-0126, figs. 1 & 2, see Cashman, par 0029, wherein the medical kiosk comprises a display screen on the exterior of the kiosk).
With respect to claim 6, Siddhartha as modified by Cashman teaches the interactive hearing services kiosk of claim 3, and Siddhartha further teaches the controller is further configured to detect and identify the one or more of the hearing device, the hearing instrument, the hearing aid, the hearing prosthesis, the hearing protection device, and/or the hearing system via at least one selected from the group of near field communication, radio frequency identification, Bluetooth ®, or Wi-Fi ® (see Siddhartha, par 0086).
With respect to claim 7, Siddhartha as modified by Cashman teaches the interactive hearing services kiosk of claim 3, and Siddhartha further teaches the controller is further configured to securely connect to a remote system and program the one or more of the hearing device, the hearing instrument, the hearing aid, the hearing prosthesis, the hearing protection device, and/or the hearing system based on received input from the remote system, the received input based on one or more hearing device configuration parameters of the one or more recommendations (see Siddhartha, par 0020-0021, 0046, 0085, 0088-0089).
With respect to claim 8, Siddhartha as modified by Cashman teaches the interactive hearing services kiosk of claim 1, , and Siddhartha as modified by Cashman further teaches the one or more media devices includes one or more selected from the group of a web camera, an audiometer, a video otoscope, a bone conduction transducer, a device configured for real-ear verification, an operator headphone, an operator microphone, a patient headphone, a patient microphone, an electronic signature pad, a patient response button, a push button interface, or a speaker devices (i.e., a camera, tablet computer, iPad, speaker, microphone, keyboard, audiometer, otoscope, Bluetooth devices, or headphones) (see Cashman, par 0011, 0022, 0025, 0028, 0030, 0033-0034, 0036-0037, 0047, 0062, 0164, see fig. 5).
With respect to claim 9, Siddhartha as modified by Cashman teaches the interactive hearing services kiosk of claim 3, and Siddhartha further teaches the controller is further configured to troubleshoot the one or more of the hearing device, the hearing instrument, the hearing aid, the hearing prosthesis, the hearing protection device, and/or the hearing system by controlling adjustment of one or more hearing device configuration parameters of the one or more recommendations (i.e., a fitter 5 and a user 1 collaboratively fit a hearing device 2,3 to the user 1, wherein the fitter 5 first selects a parameter or several parameters to be adjusted for the hearing device 2,3, then gives the parameter/parameters starting values via an input unit of the fitting system 6, and after those parameters are adjusted on the hearing device of the user 1, with feedback of the user 1 using the hearing device 2,3, the parameter(s) is/are updated as needed (i.e., as many times as needed) for the user 1 by the fitter 5 who gives recommendations for the parameter/parameters based upon the user’s 1 feedback) (see Siddhartha, par 0090-0126, figs. 1 & 2).
With respect to claim 10, Siddhartha as modified by Cashman teaches the interactive hearing services kiosk of claim 1, and Siddhartha as modified by Cashman further teaches a user is configured to interact with the kiosk by at least one selected from a group of scanning of one or more QR codes, biometric input, haptic input, or a security code including a predetermined sequence of numbers, symbols, characters (i.e., a fingerprint, retina, or body scanner is used for identification and/or data entry) (see Cashman, par 0014, 0030, 0164).
With respect to claim 12, Siddhartha as modified by Cashman teaches the interactive hearing services kiosk of claim 3, and Siddhartha further teaches the one or more recommendations comprise one or more hearing device configuration parameters that are automatically controlled by the controller, the one or more hearing device configuration parameters including a specific frequency gain of the one or more of the hearing device, the hearing instrument, the hearing aid, the hearing prosthesis, the hearing protection device, and/or the hearing system; feedback adjustments; a plurality of application programs configured to support improved hearing in noisy environments; tinnitus management capabilities of the one or more of the hearing device, the hearing instrument, the hearing aid, the hearing prosthesis, the hearing protection device, and/or the hearing system; or any combination thereof (i.e., a fitter 5 and a user 1 collaboratively fit a hearing device 2,3 to the user 1, wherein the fitter 5 first selects a parameter or several parameters to be adjusted for the hearing device 2,3, then gives the parameter/parameters starting values via an input unit of the fitting system 6, and after those parameters are adjusted on the hearing device of the user 1, with feedback of the user 1 using the hearing device 2,3, the parameter(s) is/are updated as needed (i.e., as many times as needed) for the user 1 by the fitter 5 who gives recommendations for the parameter/parameters based upon the user’s 1 feedback; wherein the adjustable parameters can include volume, left/right balance, tonal balance, frequency compression parameters, or tinnitus masking) (see Siddhartha, par 0037-0043, 0090-0126, figs. 1 & 2).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Siddhartha as modified by Cashman as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US Patent Application Publication 2020/0315544, hereinafter referenced as "Levine".
With respect to claim 11, Siddhartha as modified by Cashman teaches the interactive hearing services kiosk of claim 1, but fails to teach the kiosk is configured to comply with a standard specifying a maximum permissible ambient noise level (MPANL) allowed for audiometric threshold assessment.
Levine teaches a sound interference assessment in a diagnostic hearing health system wherein ambient noise levels are captured during hearing tests to determine whether or not those ambient noise levels comply with maximum permissible ambient noise levels, thereby determining whether the hearing test results may provide false indications about the hearing of a patient taking the hearing test (see Levine, par 0019, 0025-0026, 0028).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Siddhartha as modified by Cashman such that the kiosk is configured to comply with a standard specifying a maximum permissible ambient noise level (MPANL) allowed for audiometric threshold assessment because this would improve the system of Siddhartha as modified by Cashman by ensuring the testing environment in which the hearing test is conducted does not have unwanted ambient noise levels that exceed MPANL standards that could interfere with hearing test results (see Levine, par 0019, 0025-0026, 0028).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Destiny J Cruickshank whose telephone number is (571)270-0187. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9am-6pm.
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, Charles Marmor II can be reached at (571) 272-4730. 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.
/CHARLES A MARMOR II/Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3791
/D.J.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3791