Detailed Action
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . See 35 U.S.C. § 100 (note).
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 11, 13–15, 17–19, 21, 22 and 24–29 are currently pending.
Continued Examination
A request for continued examination under 37 C.F.R. § 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 1.17(e), was filed in this Application on 26 May 2026 after the Final Rejection (24 February 2026). Since this Application is eligible for continued examination under 37 C.F.R. § 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 26 May 2026 has been entered.
Art Rejections
Obviousness
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.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 11, 13, 21, 22, 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of US Patent Application Publication 2020/0288253 (published 10 September 2020) (“De Haan”); US Patent Application Publication 2008/0231286 (published 25 September 2008) (“Tsunekazu”); US Patent Application Publication 2010/0272272 (published 28 October 2010) (“Müller”); John Caldwell, Analog, Active Crossover Circuit for Two-Way Loudspeakers, in TI Precision Designs: Verified Design (December 2013) (“Caldwell”) and US Patent Application Publication 2024/0371351 (filed 01 May 2023) (“Miller”).
Claims 13 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of De Haan; Tsunekazu; Müller; Caldwell; Miller and US Patent Application Publication 2025/0097654 (filed 19 September 2023) (“Higgins”).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of De Haan; Higgins and Caldwell.
Claims 15 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of De Haan; Higgins; Caldwell and Tsunekazu.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of De Haan; Higgins; Caldwell and Müller.
Claims 17–19, 26 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of De Haan and Tsunekazu.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of De Haan; Tsunekazu; Müller and Caldwell
Claim 1 is drawn to “a hearing aid.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed hearing aid and the De Haan reference.
Claim 1
The De Haan Reference
1. A hearing aid, comprising:
The De Haan reference similarly describes a hearing device HD corresponding to the claimed hearing aid. De Haan at Abs., ¶ 129, FIG.1A.
“a control module comprising:
De Haan’s hearing device HD similarly includes a behind-the-ear (BTE) unit having a controller module formed by selector CNT-SEL. Id. at ¶¶ 137, 138, FIG.1B.
“electronics for communicating with a first driver module and a second driver module,
Hearing device HD includes corresponding electronics, such as configuration extractor CNF, which communicates with various types of detachable ITEs, corresponding to the claimed first and second driver modules. Id.
“wherein the electronics include:
“a first resistor configured to couple a feedback microphone in the first driver module or the second driver module with a voltage connector; and
“a second resistor configured to connect the feedback microphone in the first driver module or the second driver module with a digital input/output connector; and
De Haan does not describe the specific electronics included in CNF and does not describe the claimed first and second resistors coupled as claimed between a feedback microphone with a voltage connector and a digital input/output connector.
“an interconnect configured to interchangeably connect with the first driver module and the second driver module,
HD includes a connector CON corresponding to the claimed interconnect. Id. De Haan describes interchangeably connecting a first type of ITE and a second type of ITE with connector CON. Id. at ¶¶ 1, 122, 123.
“wherein the electronics are configured to measure a frequency response of a connected one of the first driver module or the second driver module to determine which of the first driver module or the second driver module is connected, and,
Configuration extractor CNF measures physical properties of a connected ITE. For example, CNF detects electrical shorting between connectors and noise characteristics of electrical devices included in the connected ITE. Id. at ¶¶ 24, 25, 142–145, FIGs.1B, 2B, 3B, 4B. CNF is able to determine the type of connected ITE based on the detected characteristics. Id.
De Haan further describes measuring frequency domain characteristics of a sensor, but does not expressly characterize this measurement as a measurement of frequency response as claimed. Id. at ¶¶ 123, 148.
“in response to the determination, adjust one or more settings at the hearing aid,
CNT-SEL then routes signals accordingly and signal processing based on the type of ITE connected to connector CON. Id. at ¶ 138.
“wherein adjusting the one or more settings at the hearing aid includes:
“increasing a low frequency band for an audio signal in response to detecting a first driver in the connected one of the first driver module or the second driver module,
“increasing a high frequency band for an audio signal in response to detecting a second driver in the connected one of the first driver module or the second driver module, wherein the second driver is smaller than the first driver,
De Haan similarly describes adjusting hearing aid settings based on the type of driver detected to be part of the connected ITE. Id. at ¶¶ 123, 138.
The De Haan reference, however, does not elaborate on how to adjust a hearing aid based on detected receiver type. Accordingly, De Haan does not anticipate increasing a low-frequency band of an audio signal when a large driver is detected and increasing a high-frequency band of an audio signal when a small driver is detected.
“enabling active noise reduction (ANR) functionality in the electronics based on detecting a feedback microphone connection and a feedforward microphone connection in the first driver module, and
“disabling ANR functionality in the electronics based on failing to detect a feedback microphone connection and a feedforward microphone connection in the second driver module.”
De Haan describes detecting microphones in an ITE and routing signals to selectively enable/disable active noise cancellation in certain situations, but not others. Id. at ¶¶ 28, 160. For example, an ITE with two microphones is used during the daytime for ANC while an ITE with two other types of sensors is used at nighttime for detecting sleep disorders. Id.
De Haan, however, does not characterize one of the microphones as a feedback microphone and the other as a feedforward microphone.
Table 1
The foregoing table shows that the De Haan reference describes a hearing device that corresponds closely to the claimed hearing aid. De Haan does not anticipate the claimed invention, however, because De Haan does not describe the claimed resistors of the electronics. De haan does not describe measuring a frequency response.
Resistors for Connecting to a Feedback Microphone
In one embodiment, De Haan’s CNF performs a simple binary logic detection of whether or not an ITE includes a microphone1 connected to a particular wire or not. De Haan’s CNF, for example, detects a voltage on a line and compares it against an expected voltage level. If a microphone is present, there will be a voltage drop. If a microphone is not present, there will be no voltage drop because the line is shorted to a power rail, such as the -VDD rail. De Haan omits a detailed description of the circuitry used to implement the CNF.
The Tsunekazu reference teaches and suggests detailed information on how to implement a digital interface for detecting logic signals from a connected peripheral. Tsunekazu at ¶ 2, 139–159, FIG.7. For example, a controller includes a CPU 720 having a set of digital inputs D, or DIO connectors, that are connected to a set of sensor switches 711. Id. The switches toggle between a logic high and a logic low state. Id. To detect the switch state, Tsunekazu’s controller provides a sensing voltage Vb over wires 705 through first feeding resistors 733 (corresponding to the claimed first resistor). Id. Second resistors 731 (corresponding to the claimed second resistor) further connect switches 711 to respective digital inputs D (DIO connector) of CPU 720. Id. In this way, CPU 720 detects the high and low states of the switches by detecting the voltage at each digital input D. See id. When a switch is open, or logic low, a voltage will be detected at input D based on a voltage across second resistor 731 that is influenced by the voltage divider formed by resistors 733, 734, 735 and 713. See id. However, when a switch is closed, or logic high, the voltage across second resistor 731 will be determined by a voltage divider formed by resistors 733, 734, 735, 713 and 712. See id.
Read in light of De Haan, Tsunekazu reasonably teaches and suggests implementing De Haan’s CNF circuitry with a first resistor and a second resistor as claimed to detect the presence/absence of a microphone in a connected ITE piece—in particular, determining if a microphone pin is shorted to a voltage source or loaded by a microphone. In the case a connected ITE piece includes a microphone, a voltage will develop across a second resistor (e.g., Tsunekazu’s resistor 731) that is influenced by a voltage divider formed by a first feed resistor (e.g., Tsunekazu’s resistor 733) and De Haan’s microphone. See Tsunekazu at FIG.7; De Haan at FIG.1B. Otherwise, the voltage sensed at input D across a second resistor (e.g., Tsunekazu’s resistor 731) will be based strictly on a power rail, such as De Haan’s VDD rail, such that the voltage across the second resistor will be based on the rail voltage without being lowered by a voltage divider. See Tsunekazu at FIG.7; De Haan at FIG.2B.
Measuring Frequency Response of a Connected Driver Module
De Haan describes the measurement of a sensor’s frequency-dependent impedance without specifying the measurement of frequency response. De Haan at ¶¶ 123, 148. The Müller reference, however, further teaches and suggests identifying a particular type of audio device, such as a speaker, by measuring its frequency response directly by applying a swept frequency across the device and measuring its response. Müller at ¶¶ 119–124, FIGs.11a, 11b. This would have reasonably suggested modifying De Haan to also measure a frequency response of a connected sensor in order to characterize the sensor.
Increasing Audio Frequency Band Based on Size of Detected Driver
De Haan describes adjusting the fitting settings or software configuration based on receiver type. De Haan at ¶ 123. One of ordinary skill in the field of hearing aids would have understood the term “fitting settings” as a reference to the frequency-dependent gain settings established by an audiologist (or program) during a hearing aid fitting to match a hearing aid to a user’s hearing loss. See id. at ¶ 101 (describing fitting a hearing aid to a user’s audiogram). In context then, De Haan describes adjusting frequency-dependent gains based on the detected type of receiver. De Haan, however, does not go so far as to recommend specific types of frequency adjustment based on detected receiver size.
The Müller reference further teaches that by detecting a receiver’s frequency response, it is possible to characterize the receiver’s size. Müller at ¶ 14. The Caldwell reference further describes an audio design principle of adjusting the frequency response of an input signal to match the characteristics of a driver. Caldwell at p. 3, ¶ 1, FIG.2. In particular, the Caldwell reference describes an active crossover circuit typically used in a two-way speaker system having a tweeter and a woofer. Id. An input audio signal is buffered and filtered by a high-pass filter to produce a high-frequency signal that feeds a tweeter. Id. The audio signal is also buffered and filtered by a low-pass filter to produce a low-frequency signal that feeds a woofer. Id. One of the purposes of the crossover is to protect the tweeter from damage due to low-frequency signals (e.g., overexcursion) and to prevent distortion in the woofer from high-frequency signals. Id. at p.7, ¶ 1.
Applied to De Haan, the Caldwell reference reasonably suggests modifying fitting based on the detected size of an ITE receiver. Larger drivers (e.g., woofers) should be provided with signals whose low band is increased over its high band and smaller drivers (e.g., tweeters) should be provided with signals whose high-band is increased over its low band. Thus, when signals are amplified to correct a user’s hearing loss, larger drivers will be driven with audio signals that have an increased low frequency band and smaller drivers will be driven with audio signals that have an increased high frequency band. One of ordinary skill would have reasonably predicted that doing so would prevent distortion in the larger driver and would have prevented damage to the smaller driver.
Feedforward and Feedback Microphones Used for ANC/ANR
De Haan describes ITE modules as having different numbers and types of sensors. De Haan at ¶¶ 28, 160. One type of ITE includes two microphones used for active noise cancellation (ANC), or equivalently ANR. Id. Though it is conventional to include a feedforward microphone and a feedback microphone in an ANC system, De Haan does not characterize the microphones as feedforward and feedback microphones.
The Miller reference describes an ear-worn hearing device that one of ordinary skill would have found relevant to De Haan because it describes an ITE-style hearing aid capable of performing active noise cancellation. Miller at Abs., ¶¶ 2, 3, 15, 28, FIGs.1, 8. In particular, Miller’s device includes an active occlusion reduction system configured to simultaneously provide occlusion reduction and active noise cancellation/reduction. Id. Miller’s device achieves noise cancellation by forming an anti-sound signal based on feedback from a feedback microphone 133 located in the user’s ear canal and a feedforward microphone 142 located outside the user’s ear canal and facing the ambient environment. Id.
The teachings of Miller are a prior art example of an ANC-compatible ITE that provide a reasonable blueprint for embodying at least one of Miller’s ANC-compatible ITEs with a feedforward microphone and a feedback microphone as claimed. Thus, when De Haan’s hearing aid detects an ITE with two microphones, it will enable ANC. See De Haan at ¶ 160. But when De Haan’s hearing aid detects a different ITE without the feedforward and feedback microphones, the hearing aid will not enable ANC, but will enable a different function, such as sleep disorder tracking. See id. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the De Haan, the Tsunekazu, the Müller, the Caldwell and the Miller references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 2 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the first driver module and the second driver module differ in one or more characteristics including driver type.”
Each ITE part, corresponding to one of the claimed first and second driver modules, differs in the number and types of components they include. De Haan at ¶¶ 122, 139, FIGs.1B, 2B, 3B, 4B, 6. De Haan recognizes each ITE part may include drivers of different types. Id. at ¶ 123. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the De Haan, the Tsunekazu, the Müller, the Caldwell and the Miller references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 22 depends on claim 2 and further requires the following:
“wherein the control module is configured to send a test signal to the connected first driver module or the second driver module to determine respective characteristics of the connected first driver module or the second driver module, wherein the test signal includes a chime and is sent in response to detecting connection of the first driver module or the second driver module.”
The Müller reference likewise teaches and suggests determining a frequency response of an audio device by using a frequency generator to sweep a test frequency over the audio device and measuring the device’s response with a peak/RMS circuit. Müller at ¶¶ 119–124, FIGs.11a, 11b.
The Müller reference likewise teaches and suggests determining a frequency response of an audio device by using a frequency generator to sweep a test frequency, or chime, over the audio device and measuring the device’s response with a peak/RMS circuit. Müller at ¶¶ 119–124, FIGs.11a, 11b. According to Müller, the test should be issued automatically after an audio device is connected to a hearing aid, suggesting automatically detecting the audio device’s connection prior to testing. See id. at ¶ 75, FIG.2 (steps S3, S4). For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the De Haan, the Tsunekazu, the Müller, the Caldwell and the Miller references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 4 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the electronics provide a processed audio signal to the connected one of the first driver module or the second driver module.”
De Haan’s electronics include a signal processing unit SPU that similarly provides processed audio signals to a connected ITE. De Haan at ¶ 137, FIG.1B. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the De Haan, the Tsunekazu, the Müller, the Caldwell and the Miller references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 5 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the first driver module includes first wiring for coupling the first driver module to the interconnect and the second driver module includes second wiring for coupling the second driver module to the interconnect, wherein the electronics are configured to measure the frequency response of the connected one of the driver modules via the corresponding wiring.”
Each of De Haan’s ITE units includes its own wiring for coupling to the interconnect CON of the BTE unit. De Haan at ¶ 130, FIGs.1B, 2B, 3B, 4B. According to the rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, it would have been obvious to connect a frequency generator and peak/RMS device to a connected audio device in order to determine the device’s frequency response. Applied to De Haan, this teaching from Müller suggests using De Haan’s wiring for frequency response measurement. Compare De Haan at FIG. 1B (depicting wires that connect a BTE with an ITE) with Müller at FIG.11a (depicting a frequency generator and peak/RMS device wired with an ITE component). For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the De Haan, the Tsunekazu, the Müller, the Caldwell and the Miller references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 8 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the first driver module and the second driver module are in-ear driver modules, wherein the first driver module and the second driver module include receiver-in-canal (RIC) modules, and wherein the control module includes a behind-the-ear (BTE) module.”
De Haan describes each ITE as a receiver-in-the-ear (RITE) device located in the canal and connected with an BTE module. De Haan at ¶ 122, FIGs.1A, 1B. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the De Haan, the Tsunekazu, the Müller, the Caldwell and the Miller references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 11 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein when the second driver module is connected with the interconnect, at least a portion of wiring in the second driver module is shorted, and
“wherein when the second driver module is connected with the interconnect, at least one microphone wire is shorted to a microphone power wire.”
De Haan describes measuring the electrical properties of each ITE by monitoring for short circuits between pairs of wires in each ITE. De Haan at ¶¶ 142–145, FIGs.1B, 2B, 3B, 4B. When a microphone element is not present, an ITE will produce a supply voltage at the BTE’s CNF due to the shorting between a supply voltage and a microphone terminal. See id. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the De Haan, the Tsunekazu, the Müller, the Caldwell and the Miller references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 13 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the first driver module includes a moving coil driver, wherein the first driver module is capable of providing acoustic noise reduction (ANR) functionality and enables full bandwidth audio output, and wherein the second acoustic assembly include a balanced armature (BA) driver.”
The De Haan reference recognizes that each ITE may include a different type of receiver, or driver. De Haan at ¶ 123. De Haan does not describe a first ITE with a moving coil driver and a second ITE with a balanced armature driver. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have immediately known from at least the Higgins reference that ITEs capable of being selectively connected to an BTE unit are variously formed with moving coil drivers and balanced armatures. Higgins at ¶¶ 52, 53, 65, 83, FIGs.1, 3. It would have been obvious to have implemented some ITEs with moving coil drivers and some ITEs with balanced armatures. The use of a moving coil driver by itself would be understood by one of ordinary skill as using the full bandwidth audio output of the driver—namely, specific drivers are not used for limited frequency bands. The provision of a single moving coil driver by itself would be understood by one of ordinary skill as using the full bandwidth audio output of the driver—namely, specific drivers are not used for limited frequency bands as would be done in a two-way system. See Caldwell.
The Higgins reference further teaches and suggests including active noise cancellation in an ITE unit based on signals sensed and reproduced by the sensors and receiver in the ITE unit. Higgins at ¶ 28, 86. This would have further suggested modifying De Haan’s hearing device HD to further include active noise cancellation/reduction. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the De Haan, the Tsunekazu, the Müller, the Caldwell, the Miller and the Higgins references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 21 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the measured frequency response is configured to indicate a distinct type of driver in the first driver module as compared with the second driver module.”
The rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of measuring an audio device’s frequency response in order to distinguish a particular type of audio device among similar kinds of audio devices, such as different types of microphones or speakers. See De Haan at ¶¶ 123, 148; Müller at ¶ 10. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the De Haan, the Tsunekazu, the Müller, the Caldwell and the Miller references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 27 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the second driver module includes a housing containing a balanced armature (BA) driver and defining an acoustic chamber in front of the BA driver.”
The De Haan reference recognizes that each ITE may include a different type of receiver, or driver. De Haan at ¶ 123. De Haan does not describe a first ITE with a moving coil driver and a second ITE with a balanced armature driver. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have immediately known from at least the Higgins reference that ITEs capable of being selectively connected to an BTE unit are variously formed with moving coil drivers and balanced armatures. Higgins at ¶¶ 52, 53, 65, 83, FIGs.1, 3. It would have been obvious to have implemented some ITEs with moving coil drivers and some ITEs with balanced armatures as described by Higgins. For example, Higgins’s ITE module 12 includes an enclosure 22, or housing, that includes a BA driver 104 and a port 48, or acoustic chamber, in front of the BA driver. Id. at ¶¶ 83, FIGs.2, 3, 8. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the De Haan, the Tsunekazu, the Müller, the Caldwell, the Miller and the Higgins references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 14 is drawn to “a hearing aid.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed hearing aid and the De Haan reference.
Claim 14
The De Haan Reference
“14. A hearing aid comprising:
The De Haan reference similarly describes a hearing device HD corresponding to the claimed hearing aid. De Haan at Abs., ¶ 129, FIG.1A.
“a first receiver-in-canal (RIC) module comprising a first driver module;
De Haan’s hearing device HD includes a set of varying ITE device s as in-ear devices, in particular, ones including a receiver in the ear. Id. at ¶ 122.
“a behind-the-ear (BTE) module comprising electronics for communicating with the first RIC module; and
De Haan’s hearing device HD similarly includes a behind-the-ear (BTE) unit having electronics, such as configuration extractor CNF, which communicates with various types of detachable ITEs, corresponding to the claimed first and second driver modules. Id. at ¶¶ 137, 138, FIG.1B.
“an interconnect for connecting the first RIC module and the BTE module, wherein the interconnect is configured to interchangeably connect with the first RIC module and a second RIC module having a second driver module, [[and]]
HD includes a connector CON corresponding to the claimed interconnect. Id. De Haan describes interchangeably connecting a first type of ITE and a second type of ITE with connector CON. Id. at ¶¶ 1, 122, 123.
“wherein the electronics are configured to measure a physical property of a connected one of the first RIC module or the second RIC module to determine which of the first RIC module or the second RIC module is connected, and,
Configuration extractor CNF measures physical properties of a connected ITE. For example, CNF detects electrical shorting between connectors and noise characteristics of electrical devices included in the connected ITE. Id. at ¶¶ 24, 25, 142–145, FIGs.1B, 2B, 3B, 4B. CNF is able to determine the type of connected ITE based on the detected characteristics. Id.
“in response to the determination, adjust one or more settings at the hearing aid, and
CNT-SEL then routes signals accordingly and signal processing based on the type of ITE connected to connector CON. Id. at ¶ 138.
“wherein the first RIC module is capable of providing acoustic noise reduction (ANR) functionality and enables full bandwidth audio output, and the second RIC module includes a balanced armature (BA) driver,
The De Haan reference recognizes that each ITE may include a different type of receiver, or driver. De Haan at ¶ 123. De Haan does not describe a first ITE with a moving coil driver and a second ITE with a balanced armature driver.
“the second RIC module including a housing defining an acoustic chamber in front of the BA driver.”
De Haan also does not describe a second RIC module with a housing that defines an acoustic chamber in front of a BA driver.
Table 2
The De Haan reference recognizes that each ITE may include a different type of receiver, or driver. De Haan at ¶ 123. De Haan does not describe a first ITE with a moving coil driver and a second ITE with a balanced armature driver. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have immediately known from at least the Higgins reference that ITEs capable of being selectively connected to an BTE unit are variously formed with moving coil drivers and balanced armatures. Higgins at ¶¶ 52, 53, 65, 83, FIGs.1, 3. It would have been obvious to have implemented some ITEs with moving coil drivers and some ITEs with balanced armatures. For example, Higgins’s ITE module 12 includes an enclosure 22, or housing, that includes a BA driver 104 and a port 48, or acoustic chamber, in front of the BA driver. Id. at ¶¶ 83, FIGs.2, 3, 8. The provision of a single moving coil driver by itself would be understood by one of ordinary skill as using the full bandwidth audio output of the driver—namely, specific drivers are not used for limited frequency bands as would be done in a two-way system. See Caldwell.
The Higgins reference further teaches and suggests including active noise cancellation in an ITE unit based on signals sensed and reproduced by the sensors and receiver in the ITE unit. Higgins at ¶ 28, 86. This would have further suggested modifying De Haan’s hearing device HD to further include active noise cancellation/reduction. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the De Haan, the Higgins and the Caldwell references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 15 depends on claim 14 and further requires the following:
“wherein the electronics measure a voltage response of the connected one of the first RIC module or the second RIC module to determine which of the first RIC module or the second RIC module is connected,
“wherein the electronics include:
“a digital input/output (DIO) connector,
“a first resistor configured to connect a feedback microphone in the first RIC module or the second RIC module for measuring the voltage response, and
“a second resistor configured to connect the feedback microphone in the first RIC module or the second RIC module to the DIO connector.”
Claim 28 depends on claim 15 and further requires the following:
“wherein the DIO is configured to perform at least one of:
“detect a voltage across the second resistor due to a shorted connection between the feedback microphone and microphone power, or
“detect a voltage from the feedback microphone as approximately one-half a voltage of the microphone power.”
Claims 15 and 28 are analyzed together. De Haan describes measuring the electrical properties of each ITE by monitoring for short circuits between pairs of wires in each ITE. De Haan at ¶¶ 142–145, FIGs.1B, 2B, 3B, 4B. When a microphone element is not present, an ITE will produce a supply voltage at the BTE’s CNF due to the shorting between a supply voltage and a microphone terminal. See id.
In one embodiment, De Haan’s CNF performs a simple binary logic detection of whether or not an ITE includes a microphone connected to a particular wire or not. De Haan’s CNF, for example, detects a voltage on a line and compares it against an expected voltage level. If a microphone is present, there will be a voltage drop. If a microphone is not present, there will be no voltage drop because the line is shorted to a power rail, such as the -VDD rail. De Haan omits a detailed description of the circuitry used to implement the CNF.
The Tsunekazu reference teaches and suggests detailed information on how to implement a digital interface for detecting logic signals from a connected peripheral. Tsunekazu at ¶ 2, 139–159, FIG.7. For example, a controller includes a CPU 720 having a set of digital inputs D, or DIO connectors, that are connected to a set of sensor switches 711. Id. The switches toggle between a logic high and a logic low state. Id. To detect the switch state, Tsunekazu’s controller provides a sensing voltage Vb over wires 705 through first feeding resistors 733 (corresponding to the claimed first resistor). Id. Second resistors 731 (corresponding to the claimed second resistor) further connect switches 711 to respective digital inputs D (DIO connector) of CPU 720. Id. In this way, CPU 720 detects the high and low states of the switches by detecting the voltage at each digital input D. See id. When a switch is open, or logic low, a voltage will be detected at input D based on a voltage across second resistor 731 that is influenced by the voltage divider formed by resistors 733, 734, 735 and 713. See id. However, when a switch is closed, or logic high, the voltage across second resistor 731 will be determined by a voltage divider formed by resistors 733, 734, 735, 713 and 712. See id.
Read in light of De Haan, Tsunekazu reasonably teaches and suggests implementing De Haan’s CNF circuitry with a first resistor and a second resistor as claimed to detect the presence/absence of a microphone in a connected ITE piece—in particular, determining if a microphone pin is shorted to a voltage source or loaded by a microphone. In the case a connected ITE piece includes a microphone, a voltage will develop across a second resistor (e.g., Tsunekazu’s resistor 731) that is influenced by a voltage divider formed by a first feed resistor (e.g., Tsunekazu’s resistor 733) and De Haan’s microphone. See Tsunekazu at FIG.7; De Haan at FIG.1B. Otherwise, the voltage sensed at input D across a second resistor (e.g., Tsunekazu’s resistor 731) will be based strictly on a power rail, such as De Haan’s VDD rail, such that the voltage across the second resistor will be based on the rail voltage without being lowered by a voltage divider. See Tsunekazu at FIG.7; De Haan at FIG.2B. Thus, a digital input/output connector (DIO) will detect a short between a microphone rail and a power rail. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the De Haan, the Higgins, the Caldwell and the Tsunekazu references makes obvious all limitations of the claims.
Claim 24 depends on claim 14 and further requires the following:
“wherein the electronics measure a frequency response of the connected one of the first RIC module or the second RIC module to determine which of the first RIC module or the second RIC module is connected.”
De Haan describes the measurement of a sensor’s frequency-dependent impedance without specifying the measurement of frequency response. De Haan at ¶¶ 123, 148. The Müller reference, however, further teaches and suggests identifying a particular type of audio device, such as a speaker, by measuring its frequency response directly by applying a swept frequency across the device and measuring its response. Müller at ¶¶ 119–124, FIGs.11a, 11b. This would have reasonably suggested modifying De Haan to also measure a frequency response of a connected sensor in order to characterize the sensor. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the De Haan, the Higgins, the Caldwell and the Müller references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 17 is drawn to “an acoustic assembly.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed acoustic assembly and the De Haan reference.
Claim 17
The De Haan Reference
“17. An acoustic assembly, comprising:
The De Haan reference similarly describes an acoustic assembly. De Haan at Abs., ¶ 129, FIG.1A.
“a first driver module;
De Haan’s hearing device HD includes a set of varying ITE device s as in-ear devices, in particular, ones including a receiver in the ear. Id. at ¶ 122.
“a control module comprising electronics for communicating with the first driver module; and …
De Haan’s hearing device HD similarly includes a behind-the-ear (BTE) unit having a controller module formed by selector CNT-SEL. Id. at ¶¶ 137, 138, FIG.1B.
“wherein the electronics include:
“a first resistor configured to couple a feedback microphone in the first driver module or the second driver module with a voltage connector; and
“a second resistor configured to connect the feedback microphone in the first driver module or the second driver module with a digital input/output connector, and
De Haan does not describe the specific electronics included in CNF and does not describe the claimed first and second resistors coupled as claimed between a feedback microphone with a voltage connector and a digital input/output connector.
“an interconnect for connecting the first driver module and the control module, wherein the interconnect is configured to interchangeably connect with the first driver module and a second driver module,
HD includes a connector CON corresponding to the claimed interconnect. Id. De Haan describes interchangeably connecting a first type of ITE and a second type of ITE with connector CON. Id. at ¶¶ 1, 122, 123.
“wherein the first driver module and the second driver module differ in one or more characteristics, [[and]] …
“wherein the electronics are configured to measure a physical property of a connected one of the first driver module or the second driver module to determine which of the first driver module or the second driver module is connected, and,
Configuration extractor CNF measures physical properties of a connected ITE. For example, CNF detects electrical shorting between connectors and noise characteristics of electrical devices included in the connected ITE. Id. at ¶¶ 24, 25, 142–145, FIGs.1B, 2B, 3B, 4B. CNF is able to determine the type of connected ITE based on the detected characteristics. Id.
“in response to the determination, adjust one or more settings at the hearing aid, and
CNT-SEL then routes signals accordingly and signal processing based on the type of ITE connected to connector CON. Id. at ¶ 138.
“wherein the electronics are contained within the control module.”
De Haan similarly locates CNF in the BTE. Id. at ¶ 137, FIG.1B.
Table 3
In one embodiment, De Haan’s CNF performs a simple binary logic detection of whether or not an ITE includes a microphone connected to a particular wire or not. De Haan’s CNF, for example, detects a voltage on a line and compares it against an expected voltage level. If a microphone is present, there will be a voltage drop. If a microphone is not present, there will be no voltage drop because the line is shorted to a power rail, such as the -VDD rail. De Haan omits a detailed description of the circuitry used to implement the CNF.
The Tsunekazu reference teaches and suggests detailed information on how to implement a digital interface for detecting logic signals from a connected peripheral. Tsunekazu at ¶ 2, 139–159, FIG.7. For example, a controller includes a CPU 720 having a set of digital inputs D, or DIO connectors, that are connected to a set of sensor switches 711. Id. The switches toggle between a logic high and a logic low state. Id. To detect the switch state, Tsunekazu’s controller provides a sensing voltage Vb over wires 705 through first feeding resistors 733 (corresponding to the claimed first resistor). Id. Second resistors 731 (corresponding to the claimed second resistor) further connect switches 711 to respective digital inputs D (DIO connector) of CPU 720. Id. In this way, CPU 720 detects the high and low states of the switches by detecting the voltage at each digital input D. See id. When a switch is open, or logic low, a voltage will be detected at input D based on a voltage across second resistor 731 that is influenced by the voltage divider formed by resistors 733, 734, 735 and 713. See id. However, when a switch is closed, or logic high, the voltage across second resistor 731 will be determined by a voltage divider formed by resistors 733, 734, 735, 713 and 712. See id.
Read in light of De Haan, Tsunekazu reasonably teaches and suggests implementing De Haan’s CNF circuitry with a first resistor and a second resistor as claimed to detect the presence/absence of a microphone in a connected ITE piece—in particular, determining if a microphone pin is shorted to a voltage source or loaded by a microphone. In the case a connected ITE piece includes a microphone, a voltage will develop across a second resistor (e.g., Tsunekazu’s resistor 731) that is influenced by a voltage divider formed by a first feed resistor (e.g., Tsunekazu’s resistor 733) and De Haan’s microphone. See Tsunekazu at FIG.7; De Haan at FIG.1B. Otherwise, the voltage sensed at input D across a second resistor (e.g., Tsunekazu’s resistor 731) will be based strictly on a power rail, such as De Haan’s VDD rail, such that the voltage across the second resistor will be based on the rail voltage without being lowered by a voltage divider. See Tsunekazu at FIG.7; De Haan at FIG.2B. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the De Haan and the Tsunekazu references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 18 depends on claim 17 and further requires the following:
“A hearing aid comprising the acoustic assembly of claim 17.”
De Haan describes implementing an acoustic assembly in a hearing aid. De Haan at Abs., ¶ 129, FIG.1A. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the De Haan and the Tsunekazu references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 19 depends on claim 17 and further requires the following:
“An automobile audio system or a home audio system comprising the acoustic assembly of claim 17.”
De Haan describes implementing an acoustic assembly in a hearing aid. De Haan at Abs., ¶ 129, FIG.1A. One of ordinary skill would have understood that a hearing aid is a type of automobile audio system because the hearing aid user wears the hearing aid while driving an automobile. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the De Haan and the Tsunekazu references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 25 depends on claim 17 and further requires the following:
“wherein adjusting the one or more settings at the hearing aid includes:
“increasing a low frequency band for an audio signal in response to detecting a first driver in the connected one of the first driver module or the second driver module, and
“increasing a high frequency band for an audio signal in response to detecting a second driver in the connected one of the first driver module or the second driver module, wherein the second driver is smaller than the first driver.”
De Haan describes adjusting the fitting settings or software configuration based on receiver type. De Haan at ¶ 123. One of ordinary skill in the field of hearing aids would have understood the term “fitting settings” as a reference to the frequency-dependent gain settings established by an audiologist (or program) during a hearing aid fitting to match a hearing aid to a user’s hearing loss. See id. at ¶ 101 (describing fitting a hearing aid to a user’s audiogram). In context then, De Haan describes adjusting frequency-dependent gains based on the detected type of receiver. De Haan, however, does not go so far as to recommend specific types of frequency adjustment based on detected receiver size.
The Müller reference further teaches that by detecting a receiver’s frequency response, it is possible to characterize the receiver’s size. Müller at ¶ 14. The Caldwell reference further describes an audio design principle of adjusting the frequency response of an input signal to match the characteristics of a driver. Caldwell at p. 3, ¶ 1, FIG.2. In particular, the Caldwell reference describes an active crossover circuit typically used in a two-way speaker system having a tweeter and a woofer. Id. An input audio signal is buffered and filtered by a high-pass filter to produce a high-frequency signal that feeds a tweeter. Id. The audio signal is also buffered and filtered by a low-pass filter to produce a low-frequency signal that feeds a woofer. Id. One of the purposes of the crossover is to protect the tweeter from damage due to low-frequency signals (e.g., overexcursion) and to prevent distortion in the woofer from high-frequency signals. Id. at p.7, ¶ 1.
Applied to De Haan, the Caldwell reference reasonably suggests modifying fitting based on the detected size of an ITE receiver. Larger drivers (e.g., woofers) should be provided with signals whose low band is increased over its high band and smaller drivers (e.g., tweeters) should be provided with signals whose high-band is increased over its low band. Thus, when signals are amplified to correct a user’s hearing loss, larger drivers will be driven with audio signals that have an increased low frequency band and smaller drivers will be driven with audio signals that have an increased high frequency band. One of ordinary skill would have reasonably predicted that doing so would prevent distortion in the larger driver and would have prevented damage to the smaller driver. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the De Haan, the Tsunekazu, the Müller and the Caldwell references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 26 depends on claim 17 and further requires the following:
“wherein adjusting the one or more settings at the hearing aid includes:
“i) enabling active noise reduction (ANR) functionality in the electronics based on detecting a feedback microphone connection and a feedforward microphone connection in the first driver module and
“ii) disabling ANR functionality in the electronics based on failing to detect a feedback microphone connection and a feedforward microphone connection in the second driver module.”
Simlarly, De Haan describes enabling/disabling active noise cancellation depending on whether the ITE includes two or more microphones. See De Haan at ¶¶ 124, 160. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the De Haan and the Tsunekazu references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 29 depends on claim 17 and further requires the following:
“wherein the electronics measure a voltage response of the connected one of the first RIC module or the second RIC module to determine which of the first RIC module or the second RIC module is connected, wherein the electronics include:
“a digital input/output (DIO) connector,
“a first resistor configured to connect a feedback microphone in the first RIC module or the second RIC module for measuring the voltage response, and
“a second resistor configured to connect the feedback microphone in the first RIC module or the second RIC module to the DIO connector.”
De Haan describes measuring the electrical properties of each ITE by monitoring for short circuits between pairs of wires in each ITE. De Haan at ¶¶ 142–145, FIGs.1B, 2B, 3B, 4B. When a microphone element is not present, an ITE will produce a supply voltage at the BTE’s CNF due to the shorting between a supply voltage and a microphone terminal. See id.
In one embodiment, De Haan’s CNF performs a simple binary logic detection of whether or not an ITE includes a microphone connected to a particular wire or not. De Haan’s CNF, for example, detects a voltage on a line and compares it against an expected voltage level. If a microphone is present, there will be a voltage drop. If a microphone is not present, there will be no voltage drop because the line is shorted to a power rail, such as the -VDD rail. De Haan omits a detailed description of the circuitry used to implement the CNF.
The Tsunekazu reference teaches and suggests detailed information on how to implement a digital interface for detecting logic signals from a connected peripheral. Tsunekazu at ¶ 2, 139–159, FIG.7. For example, a controller includes a CPU 720 having a set of digital inputs D, or DIO connectors, that are connected to a set of sensor switches 711. Id. The switches toggle between a logic high and a logic low state. Id. To detect the switch state, Tsunekazu’s controller provides a sensing voltage Vb over wires 705 through first feeding resistors 733 (corresponding to the claimed first resistor). Id. Second resistors 731 (corresponding to the claimed second resistor) further connect switches 711 to respective digital inputs D (DIO connector) of CPU 720. Id. In this way, CPU 720 detects the high and low states of the switches by detecting the voltage at each digital input D. See id. When a switch is open, or logic low, a voltage will be detected at input D based on a voltage across second resistor 731 that is influenced by the voltage divider formed by resistors 733, 734, 735 and 713. See id. However, when a switch is closed, or logic high, the voltage across second resistor 731 will be determined by a voltage divider formed by resistors 733, 734, 735, 713 and 712. See id.
Read in light of De Haan, Tsunekazu reasonably teaches and suggests implementing De Haan’s CNF circuitry with a first resistor and a second resistor as claimed to detect the presence/absence of a microphone in a connected ITE piece—in particular, determining if a microphone pin is shorted to a voltage source or loaded by a microphone. In the case a connected ITE piece includes a microphone, a voltage will develop across a second resistor (e.g., Tsunekazu’s resistor 731) that is influenced by a voltage divider formed by a first feed resistor (e.g., Tsunekazu’s resistor 733) and De Haan’s microphone. See Tsunekazu at FIG.7; De Haan at FIG.1B. Otherwise, the voltage sensed at input D across a second resistor (e.g., Tsunekazu’s resistor 731) will be based strictly on a power rail, such as De Haan’s VDD rail, such that the voltage across the second resistor will be based on the rail voltage without being lowered by a voltage divider. See Tsunekazu at FIG.7; De Haan at FIG.2B. Thus, a digital input/output connector (DIO) will detect a short For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the De Haan, the Higgins, the Caldwell and the Tsunekazu references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Summary
Claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 11, 13–15, 17–19, 21, 22 and 24–29 are rejected under at least one of 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103 as being unpatentable over the cited prior art. 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.
Response to Applicant’s Arguments
Applicant’s Reply (26 May 2026) has substantively amended all the claims. This Office action has been updated accordingly.
Applicant’s Reply at 8–9 further includes comments pertaining to the rejections included in the previous Non-Final Office action. Those comments have been considered, but have been rendered moot by the new grounds of rejection presented in this Office action.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WALTER F BRINEY III whose telephone number is (571)272-7513. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-4:30 pm.
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, Carolyn Edwards can be reached at 571-270-7136. 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.
/Walter F Briney III/
Walter F Briney IIIPrimary ExaminerArt Unit 2692
7/10/2026
1 As shown below, the microphone may be either a feedback or feedforward microphone used in ANC.
Prosecution Insights