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 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) 21is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application No. 20180125415 (Reed et al.) in view of U.S. Patent No. 8,958,586 (Preves).
With respect to claim 1, Reed et al. disclose
1 Capturing sound during a first temporal period using a plurality of different electronic devices having sound capture apparatuses, the electronic devices being stationary during the first temporal period, while separately capturing sound using at least one hearing prosthesis.
Reed teaches collecting acoustic data from a hearing prosthesis and other electronic devices used by the recipient. Reed ¶¶ [0031]–[0037], [0050]–[0058].
Reed does not expressly disclose that the additional devices are stationary and include microphones.
Preves teaches off-body devices having microphones that are spatially separated from the hearing aid and may be stationary in the environment. Preves, col. 5, line 63 – Col. 6, line 17.
2 Evaluating data based on an output from at least one of the sound capture apparatuses.
Reed teaches evaluating acoustic and contextual data to assess hearing performance. See Reed [0059]–[0068].
3 Identifying an action to improve perception of sound by the recipient based on the evaluated data.
Reed teaches identifying recommendations and actions to improve hearing performance. Reed [0030], [0063]–[0068] [0081], [0114] and [0116]
Reed further teaches hearing habilitation and rehabilitation actions (see [0008], [0089-0090], [0093-0094], [0099] [0101],[0103] and [0116])
It would have been obvious to incorporate the stationary off-body microphones of Preves into the hearing-performance evaluation system of Reed to obtain acoustic information from multiple locations and thereby improve the accuracy of evaluating hearing performance. It further would have been obvious to employ the rehabilitation actions of Reed so that the system could identify and implement specific interventions to improve hearing outcomes.
With respect to claim 22, note Col. 7, lines 10 – 26 of Preves.
With respect to claim 23, [0065 – 0066] and [0072] of Reed.
With respect to claim 24, note [0050-0058] of Reed.
With respect to claims 25 - 27, note Col. 5, lines 44-67 of Preves.
With respect to claims 28 - 29, (see [0008], [0089-0090], [0093-0094], [0099] [0101],[0103] and [0116]) of Reed.
With respect to claim 30, (see [0124] of Reed.
With respect to claim 41, note the rejection of claim 21 above.
With respect to claim 42, note the rejection of claims 22 and 23 above.
With respect to claim 43, note the rejection of claim 23 above.
With respect to claim 44, note the rejection of claim 24.
With respect to claim 45, note the rejection of claim 28 above.
With respect to claim 46, note the rejection of claim 29 above.
With respect to claims 47 – 48.note the rejections above.
With respect to claims 49-59, mirror the claims above and would rejected similarly. With respect to claim 58 and120 minute aspects. Such is obvious and could be obtained through obvious experimentation.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Note the Figs and Abstracts of the additional references cited on the accompanying 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to William Deane whose telephone number is 571 - 272- 7484. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - FRIDAY from 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Ahmad Matar, can be reached on 571-272-7488.
The official fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571 -273-8300. However, unofficial faxes can be direct to the examiner's computer at 571 273 -7484.
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 https://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).
30May2026
/WILLIAM J DEANE JR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
Prosecution Insights