DETAILED ACTION
Applicant' s arguments, filed 06/22/2026 have been fully considered. The following rejections and/or objections are either reiterated or newly applied. They constitute the complete set presently being applied to the instant application.
Applicants have amended their claims, filed 02/13/2024, and therefore rejections newly made in the instant office action have been necessitated by amendment.
Claims 1-3, and 5-20 are the current claims hereby under examination.
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 1-3 and 5-18 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 recites “an output from at least one of a motion sensor or a heart rate sensor” but it is unclear if these sensor are part of the claimed device or if the processor is receiving the outputs from external sensors. It is unclear if the claim requires such sensors to be part of the hearing device. For the purposes of this examination, the claim is interpreted as requiring one of the motion or heart rate sensor. This rejection and interpretation are further applied to the similar limitations of claim 14 as it is unclear if the motion/heart rate sensor are part of the claimed system but external to the hearing device, part of the hearing device, or not part of the claimed system and the processor merely receives data from the sensors.
This rejection is not applied to claim 19 as the method step appears to clearly indicate that the motion/heart rate sensors are not part of the hearing device but are required by the method.
Claims 2-3 and 5-13 are rejected by virtue of their dependence on claim 1.
Claims 15-18 are rejected by virtue of their dependence on claim 14.
Claim 10 recites “customized to fit” but it is unclear if this recitation is intended to convey some form of molding process to customize the device to a particular user or if any device which fits in the ear may be considered “customized to fit”. For the purposes of this examination, the limitation will be interpreted as “configured to fit” such that any device that fits in the ear is “customized” for such a purpose.
Claim 12 recites “determine a situation in which the first temperature sensor and the second temperature sensor are exposed to an equal temperature; and calibrate the first temperature sensor and the second temperature sensor relative to the equal temperature” but it is unclear what such a determination entails. It is unclear what factors are considered or what measurements taken by sensors would provide an indication that the first and second temperature sensors are exposed to an equal temperature. It is further unclear what the calibration operation entails. It is unclear what “calibrate the first temperature sensor and the second temperature sensor relative to the equal temperature” intends to convey. It is unclear what the calibrating the sensors relative to the equal temperature entails and how such an equal temperature is determined. For the purposes of this examination, the limitation will be interpreted as any calibration method applied to the sensors using a known temperature.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-10, and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Larsen US Patent Application Publication Number US 2019/0373377 A1 hereinafter Larsen in view of Honeywell US Patent Application Publication Number US 2017/0211993 A1 hereinafter Honeywell.
Regarding claim 1, Larsen teaches a hearing device configured to be at least partially inserted into an ear canal of a user (Abstract; Paragraph 0009: the housing configured to be positioned at least partially in the ear canal of the user), the hearing device comprising:
a first temperature sensor configured to detect an ear canal temperature within the ear canal (Paragraphs 0007, 0019, and 0048-0049: the temperature sensor in the in the ear part of the device is arranged in the ear canal and measured temperature in the ear canal);
a second temperature sensor configured to detect ambient temperature outside of the ear canal (Paragraphs 0019, 0048, and 0059: the reference temperature sensor included in the behind the ear portion and/or on the faceplate of the in the ear style devices); and
a processor (Paragraph 0048: a temperature processor) configured to:
determine a work status of the user based on an output from at least one of a motion sensor or a heart rate sensor, the work states indicative of whether the user is in an active state or a resting state (Paragraphs 0017 and 0024: the motion sensor provides indication of movement of the user, or a work status, of the user and may use this measured movement in the estimation of core body temperature; Paragraphs 0053 and 0061: the motion is used to detect if the user is active such as walking or not which is used by the core temperature determination algorithm. Heart rate may also be considered by the algorithm); and
determine a core body temperature of the user based on the ear canal temperature detected by the first temperature sensor, the ambient temperature detected by the second temperature sensor, and the work status of the user (Paragraphs 0048-0049: the core body temperature is estimated based on the temperature from the sensors inside the ear canal and the reference temperature sensors outside the ear canal; Paragraphs 0017, 0024, and 0053: movement and heart rate may also be considered in the temperature calculation).
Larsen fails to further disclose the device wherein the first temperature sensor comprising an infrared (IR) thermometer coupled to a hollow core optical waveguide configured to guide IR radiation from within the ear canal to the IR thermometer, the hollow core optical waveguide having a covering on a distal end to provide ingress protection against earwax
Honeywell teaches an apparatus for measuring body core temperature includes a light guide with an internally reflective tube. The light guide is coupled to an earpiece (Abstract). Thus, Honeywell falls within the same field of endeavor as Applicant’s invention.
Honeywell teaches a system for determining core body temperature that utilizes infrared sensors that detect infrared radiation from an infrared source. The device includes a light guide which can be a hollow tube which connects the infrared sensor to the infrared source. The light guide may include a lens at the entrance which may serve to alter the field of view for the light guide in a desired manner and also serves to keep debris and contaminants from entering the hollow light guide (Paragraph 0028). The light guide allows the thermopile to be located outside of the ear canal and thus the thermopile is able to be larger with a higher sensitivity than would otherwise be possible if it was located within the ear canal (Paragraph 0015). Honeywell further teaches that linear regression analysis may be used to determine an equation for determining core body temperature from the measured infrared radiation (Paragraph 0024).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to implement the infrared sensor with hollow core optical waveguide with a covering lens and linear regression analysis taught by Honeywell into the device of Larsen because the use of an infrared thermal sensor is a simple substitution of one known element (the temperature sensor of Larson) with another known element (the temperature sensor of Honeywell) with no surprising technical effect. Additionally, the incorporation of the hollow optical waveguide and covering lens of Honeywell allows the device of modified Larsen to utilize a larger and more sensitive thermopile for infrared sensing and prevents the waveguide from becoming contaminated as taught by Honeywell (Paragraphs 0015 and 0028). Finally, the use of linear regression analysis to determine the core body temperature is a simple substitution of one known element (the calculation method of Larsen) for another known element (the calculation method of Honeywell) with no surprising technical effect.
Regarding claim 2, Larsen in view of Honeywell teaches the hearing device of claim 1. Modified Larsen further teaches the hearing device wherein the processor is further configured to determine the core body temperature of the user based on a heart rate of the user (Paragraphs 0048 and 0061-0063: the hearing aid can include additional sensors to determine parameters such as heart rate and may further include these additional measurements in the algorithm to improve accuracy of core body temperature calculation).
Regarding claims 3 and 5, Larsen in view of Honeywell teaches the hearing device of claim 1. Modified Larsen further teaches the hearing device wherein the determining of the core body temperature includes using a linear regression model to estimate the core body temperature; the hollow core optical waveguide is configured to enhance coupling efficiency of IR radiation from tissue in the ear canal to the IR thermometer.
Honeywell teaches an apparatus for measuring body core temperature includes a light guide with an internally reflective tube. The light guide is coupled to an earpiece (Abstract). Thus, Honeywell falls within the same field of endeavor as Applicant’s invention.
Honeywell teaches a system for determining core body temperature that utilizes infrared sensors that detect infrared radiation from an infrared source. The device includes a light guide which can be a hollow tube which connects the infrared sensor to the infrared source. The light guide may include a lens on the distal end to alter the acceptance angel of incident light to a desired degree and prevent contamination of the waveguide (Paragraph 0028). The light guide allows the thermopile to be located outside of the ear canal and thus the thermopile is able to be larger with a higher sensitivity than would otherwise be possible if it was located within the ear canal (Paragraph 0015). Honeywell further teaches that linear regression analysis may be used to determine an equation for determining core body temperature from the measured infrared radiation (Paragraph 0024).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to implement the infrared sensor with hollow core optical waveguide and linear regression analysis taught by Honeywell into the device of Larsen because the use of an infrared thermal sensor is a simple substitution of one known element (the temperature sensor of Larson) with another known element (the temperature sensor of Honeywell) with no surprising technical effect. Additionally, the incorporation of the hollow optical waveguide of Honeywell allows the device of modified Larsen to utilize a larger and more sensitive thermopile for infrared sensing as taught by Honeywell (Paragraph 0015). Finally, the use of linear regression analysis to determine the core body temperature is a simple substitution of one known element (the calculation method of Larsen) for another known element (the calculation method of Honeywell) with no surprising technical effect.
Regarding claims 6-7 Larsen in view of Honeywell teaches the hearing device of claim 5. Modified Larsen fails to further disclose the hearing device wherein the hollow core optical waveguide has a funnel shape or a tube shape.
Honeywell teaches that the end of light guide that interrogates the infrared source may have a variety of shapes. The shapes include a flared, or funnel, shape. Honeywell teaches that the particular shape and dimensions of the light guide are a matter of routine optimization and experimentation to best fit the light guide for the particular use case since the size, shape, and reflectivity of the light guide can be altered to change the acceptable angle of incidence of reflected light which alters the thermopiles field of view (Paragraphs 0032-0034; Figs. 4-7). The light guide may further be a tube (Paragraph 0028).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to implement the variable shape of the light guide as taught by Honeywell into the device of modified Larsen because Honeywell teaches that the shape and other factors of the hollow light guide may be optimized for the particular use case of the light guide and may be optimized to increase or decrease the desired field of view of the infrared sensor.
Regarding claim 8, Larsen in view of Honeywell teaches the hearing device of claim 1. Modified Larsen further teaches the hearing device wherein: the hearing device further includes a housing having a faceplate that is configured to face outside of the ear canal when the hearing device is worn by the user; and the second temperature sensor is positioned on the faceplate (Paragraph 0059: the device may be an in-the-ear (ITE) style device and the ambient temperature sensor may be arranged on the faceplate of the device).
Regarding claim 9, Larsen in view of Honeywell teaches the hearing device of claim 1. Modified Larsen further teaches the hearing device, further comprising a behind-the-ear (BTE) component, wherein the second temperature sensor is positioned on the BTE component (Paragraphs 0048 and 0052).
Regarding claim 10, Larsen in view of Honeywell teaches the hearing device of claim 1. Modified Larsen further teaches the hearing device, wherein the hearing device is customized to fit at least partially within the ear canal of the user (Paragraphs 0048-0049 and 0059: the hearing device is configured to fit at least partially in the ear canal and is thus considered “customized” to fit at least partially in the ear canal of the user).
Regarding claim 13, Larsen in view of Honeywell teaches the hearing device of claim 1. Modified Larsen further teaches the hearing device further comprising the motion sensor, wherein the determining of the work status is based on information received from the motion sensor (Paragraphs 0017 and 0024: the motion sensor provides indication of movement, or a work status, based on the measured motion, or activity level, of the user).
Regarding claim 14, Larsen discloses a system (Abstract; Paragraph 0016: the hearing device and external device) comprising:
a hearing device configured to be at least partially inserted into an ear canal of a user (Abstract; Paragraph 0009: the housing configured to be positioned at least partially in the ear canal of the user), the hearing device comprising:
a first temperature sensor configured to detect ear canal temperature within the ear canal (Paragraphs 0007, 0019, and 0048-0049: the temperature sensor in the in the ear part of the device is arranged in the ear canal and measured temperature in the ear canal); and
a second temperature sensor configured to detect ambient temperature outside of the ear canal (Paragraphs 0019, 0048, and 0059: the reference temperature sensor included in the behind the ear portion and/or on the faceplate of the in the ear style devices); and
a processor (Paragraph 0048: a temperature processor) configured to:
determine a work status of the user based on an output from at least one of a motion sensor or a heart rate sensor, the work states indicative of whether the user is in an active state or a resting state (Paragraphs 0017 and 0024: the motion sensor provides indication of movement of the user, or a work status, of the user and may use this measured movement in the estimation of core body temperature; Paragraphs 0053 and 0061: the motion is used to detect if the user is active such as walking or not which is used by the core temperature determination algorithm. Heart rate may also be considered by the algorithm); and
determine a core body temperature of the user based on the ear canal temperature detected by the first temperature sensor, the ambient temperature detected by the second temperature sensor, and the work status of the user (Paragraphs 0048-0049: the core body temperature is estimated based on the temperature from the sensors inside the ear canal and the reference temperature sensors outside the ear canal; Paragraphs 0017, 0024, and 0053: movement and heart rate may also be considered in the temperature calculation).
Larsen fails to further disclose the system wherein the first temperature sensor comprising an infrared (IR) thermometer coupled to a hollow core optical waveguide configured to guide IR radiation from within the ear canal to the IR thermometer, the hollow core optical waveguide having a covering on a distal end to provide ingress protection against earwax
Honeywell teaches a system for determining core body temperature that utilizes infrared sensors that detect infrared radiation from an infrared source. The device includes a light guide which can be a hollow tube which connects the infrared sensor to the infrared source. The light guide may include a lens at the entrance which may serve to alter the field of view for the light guide in a desired manner and also serves to keep debris and contaminants from entering the hollow light guide (Paragraph 0028). The light guide allows the thermopile to be located outside of the ear canal and thus the thermopile is able to be larger with a higher sensitivity than would otherwise be possible if it was located within the ear canal (Paragraph 0015). Honeywell further teaches that linear regression analysis may be used to determine an equation for determining core body temperature from the measured infrared radiation (Paragraph 0024).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to implement the infrared sensor with hollow core optical waveguide with a covering lens and linear regression analysis taught by Honeywell into the system of Larsen because the use of an infrared thermal sensor is a simple substitution of one known element (the temperature sensor of Larson) with another known element (the temperature sensor of Honeywell) with no surprising technical effect. Additionally, the incorporation of the hollow optical waveguide and covering lens of Honeywell allows the device of modified Larsen to utilize a larger and more sensitive thermopile for infrared sensing and prevents the waveguide from becoming contaminated as taught by Honeywell (Paragraphs 0015 and 0028). Finally, the use of linear regression analysis to determine the core body temperature is a simple substitution of one known element (the calculation method of Larsen) for another known element (the calculation method of Honeywell) with no surprising technical effect.
Regarding claim 15, Larsen in view of Honeywell teaches the system of claim 14. Modified Larsen further teaches the system further comprising an external device that is communicatively coupled with the hearing device and is configured to present information associated with the core body temperature to the user (Paragraphs 0014 and 0016: the external device in wired or wireless communication with the temperature processor with a user interface for providing the user with health related information; the external device may be a smartphone).
Regarding claim 16, Larsen in view of Honeywell teaches the system of claim 15. Modified Larsen further teaches the system wherein the processor is included in the external device that is communicatively coupled with the hearing device (Paragraphs 0016 and 0063: the processing requirements of the system may be offloaded to another device such as a smartphone to improve battery life).
Regarding claim 17, Larsen in view of Honeywell teaches the system of claim 14. Modified Larsen further teaches the system further comprising an additional hearing device (Paragraph 0015: hearing aids positioned at opposite ears of a user; Paragraph 0026: two hearing aids may be used with similar sensors arranged in each; Paragraph 0040: the system includes two hearing devices; Paragraph 0062: having two independent sensor systems, one in each ear, to improve accuracy) configured to be at least partially inserted into an additional ear canal of a user, the additional hearing device comprising: a third temperature sensor configured to detect ear canal temperature within the additional ear canal; and a fourth temperature sensor configured to detect ambient temperature outside of the additional ear canal, wherein the processor is further configured to determine an additional value of the work status of the user indicative of an activity level of the user, and to determine an additional core body temperature value of the user based on the ear canal temperature detected by the third temperature sensor, the ambient temperature detected by the fourth temperature sensor, and the additional value of the work status (Paragraphs 0015, 0026, 0040, and 0062: the system may include two hearing devices with similar components and operation. The claimed additional hearing aid is rejected in the same manner as the hearing aid of claim 14 since it includes the same components and Larsen teaches a system with two similar devices. The additional hearing aid is further a mere duplication of parts).
Regarding claim 18, Larsen in view of Honeywell teaches the system of claim 17. Modified Larsen further teaches the system wherein the processor is further configured to determine a core body temperature of the user based on the core body temperature value and the additional core body temperature value (Paragraph 0062: the two independent sensor systems may be considered together to improve accuracy).
Regarding claim 19, Larsen discloses a method (Abstract) comprising:
obtaining, by a core body temperature processing system (Paragraph 0048: a temperature processor), a first temperature reading from a first temperature sensor provided in a hearing device and configured to detect ear canal temperature within an ear canal of a user of the hearing device (Paragraphs 0007, 0019, and 0048-0049: the temperature sensor in the in the ear part of the device is arranged in the ear canal and measured temperature in the ear canal);
obtaining, by the core body temperature processing system (Paragraph 0048: a temperature processor), a second temperature reading from a second temperature sensor configured to detect ambient temperature outside of the ear canal (Paragraphs 0019, 0048, and 0059: the reference temperature sensor included in the behind the ear portion and/or on the faceplate of the in the ear style devices);
obtaining, by the core body temperature processing system (Paragraph 0048: a temperature processor), a work status of the user based on an output from at least one of a motion sensor or a heart rate sensor, the work states indicative of whether the user is in an active state or a resting state (Paragraphs 0017 and 0024: the motion sensor provides indication of movement of the user, or a work status, of the user and may use this measured movement in the estimation of core body temperature; Paragraphs 0053 and 0061: the motion is used to detect if the user is active such as walking or not which is used by the core temperature determination algorithm. Heart rate may also be considered by the algorithm); and
determining, by the core body temperature processing system (Paragraph 0048: a temperature processor), a core body temperature of the user based on the first temperature reading, the second temperature reading, and the work status of the user (Paragraphs 0048-0049: the core body temperature is estimated based on the temperature from the sensors inside the ear canal and the reference temperature sensors outside the ear canal; Paragraphs 0017 and 0024: movement may also be considered in the temperature calculation).
Larsen fails to further disclose the method wherein the first temperature sensor comprising an infrared (IR) thermometer coupled to a hollow core optical waveguide configured to guide IR radiation from within the ear canal to the IR thermometer, the hollow core optical waveguide having a covering on a distal end to provide ingress protection against earwax.
Honeywell teaches a system for determining core body temperature that utilizes infrared sensors that detect infrared radiation from an infrared source. The device includes a light guide which can be a hollow tube which connects the infrared sensor to the infrared source. The light guide may include a lens at the entrance which may serve to alter the field of view for the light guide in a desired manner and also serves to keep debris and contaminants from entering the hollow light guide (Paragraph 0028). The light guide allows the thermopile to be located outside of the ear canal and thus the thermopile is able to be larger with a higher sensitivity than would otherwise be possible if it was located within the ear canal (Paragraph 0015). Honeywell further teaches that linear regression analysis may be used to determine an equation for determining core body temperature from the measured infrared radiation (Paragraph 0024).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to implement the infrared sensor with hollow core optical waveguide with a covering lens and linear regression analysis taught by Honeywell into the method of Larsen because the use of an infrared thermal sensor is a simple substitution of one known element (the temperature sensor of Larson) with another known element (the temperature sensor of Honeywell) with no surprising technical effect. Additionally, the incorporation of the hollow optical waveguide and covering lens of Honeywell allows the device of modified Larsen to utilize a larger and more sensitive thermopile for infrared sensing and prevents the waveguide from becoming contaminated as taught by Honeywell (Paragraphs 0015 and 0028). Finally, the use of linear regression analysis to determine the core body temperature is a simple substitution of one known element (the calculation method of Larsen) for another known element (the calculation method of Honeywell) with no surprising technical effect.
Regarding claim 20, Larsen in view of Honeywell teaches the method of claim 19. Modified Larsen further teaches the method, further comprising obtaining, by the core body temperature processing system, a heart rate of the user, wherein the core body temperature of the user is further determined based on the heart rate of the user (Paragraphs 0048 and 0061-0063: the hearing aid can include additional sensors to determine parameters such as heart rate and may further include these additional measurements in the algorithm to improve accuracy of core body temperature calculation).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Larsen US Patent Application Publication Number US 2019/0373377 A1 hereinafter Larsen in view of Honeywell US Patent Application Publication Number US 2017/0211993 A1 hereinafter Honeywell as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of LeBoeuf US Patent Application Publication Number US 2008/0146890 A1 hereinafter LeBoeuf.
Regarding claim 11, Larsen in view of Honeywell teaches the hearing device of claim 1. Modified Larsen fails to further teach the hearing device wherein the processor is further configured to direct the hearing device to provide an audio notification that informs the user of the core body temperature.
Larsen discloses that the device may be connected to an external device with a user interface to provide the user with health related information including the estimated core body temperature (Paragraph 0016).
LeBoeuf teaches a wearable apparatus for monitoring various physiological and environmental factors (Abstract). Thus, LeBoeuf falls within the same field of endeavor as Applicant’s invention.
LeBoeuf teaches an earpiece module which serves a biofeedback system for alerting the user. The alerts may be generated if the user is meeting their physiological targets or exceeding safe limits including core body temperature. The feedback may also be used to present processed vital signs collected from the sensors audibly to the user (Paragraph 0078-0079).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to configure the device of modified Larsen to be able to provide feedback through audio or other means through the in-ear hearing device in addition to the user interface of the external device because such feedback may allow the system to be more user friendly and accommodate a wider variety of user types who may be unable to interpret a visual display or may simply prefer an audio output.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Larsen US Patent Application Publication Number US 2019/0373377 A1 hereinafter Larsen in view of Honeywell US Patent Application Publication Number US 2017/0211993 A1 hereinafter Honeywell as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Elbadry US Patent Application Publication Number US 2019/0358387 A1 hereinafter Elbadry.
Regarding claim 12, Larsen in view of Honeywell teaches the hearing device of claim 1. Modified Larsen fails to further disclose the hearing device wherein the processor is further configured to: determine a situation in which the first temperature sensor and the second temperature sensor are exposed to an equal temperature; and calibrate the first temperature sensor and the second temperature sensor relative to the equal temperature.
Elbadry teaches a patient monitoring system having one or more sensors (Abstract). Thus, Elbadry is reasonably pertinent to the problem at hand.
Elbadry teaches the use of a docking station with a medical device wherein the docking station may charge, sterilize, and/or perform calibration processes for the medical device. Elbadry teaches that the calibration processes may include calibrating temperature sensors of the device while it is docked in the docking station using a fluid of known temperature (Paragraph 0110). It is further noted that while Elbadry is directed towards catheter system which utilize fluids, the teachings of using a docking station to calibrate, sterilize, and charge a medical device is applicable to any form medical device.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to implement docking station which calibrates sensors while the device is charging as taught by Elbadry into the device of modified Larsen in order to charge the hearing devices and perform calibration operations on its sensors because the docking station may allow the system to recalibrate and adjust for drift frequently since the station may be a known temperature itself and contain air of a known temperature which provides the sensors of the device with a known value to perform calibrations against and may improve accuracy of the device when in use.
Response to Arguments
With respect to the rejections previously presented under 35 USC 112:
Applicant’s amendments are sufficient to overcome the previously presented 112(a) rejections and the rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments are further sufficient to overcome most of the previously presented rejections but the rejections of claims 10 and 12 have not been addressed. In particular, for claim 10 the limitation “customized” is unclear as to what exactly the customization is meant to entail and for claim 12, it is unclear what a determination of a situation where the sensors are at equal temperature entails and what calibrating the sensors “relative to” the equal temperatures means. Applicant’s amendments have necessitated new grounds of rejection.
With respect to the rejections previously presented under 35 USC 101:
Applicant’s amendments are considered sufficient to incorporate the abstract idea into a practical application. In particular, the added details of the first temperature sensor in combination with the additional sensors present in the hearing device/system is considered to require a particular hearing device that is not well-understood, routine, and/or conventional.
With respect to the rejections previously presented under 35 USC 102:
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. In particular, a further review of Honeywell reveals the teachings if a lens, or cover, which keeps debris and contaminants from entering the hollow waveguide (Honeywell: Paragraph 0028 “When a lens is used, the lens also serves to keep debris and contaminants from entering the hollow light guide”) thus the amended independent claims are newly rejected under 35 USC 103
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US Patent Application Publication Number US 20220014834 A1 (Au) teaches an ITE hearing instrumentality, for use in an ear canal, that includes a housing, a receiver located within the housing, an earpiece on the housing that is configured to mount the housing within the ear canal, and at least one biometric sensor on the earpiece (Abstract)
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW ERIC OGLES whose telephone number is (571)272-7313. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00AM - 5:30PM.
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, Jason Sims can be reached on Monday-Friday from 9:00AM – 4:00PM at (571) 272 – 7540. 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.
/MATTHEW ERIC OGLES/Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/JASON M SIMS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights