DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
1. 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.
2. Claims 1, 2, 4-6, 9, 11-13, 16 and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kleindienst et al, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0069811 (hereinafter Kleindienst) in view of Harrison et al, U.S. Patent No. 7,695,441 (hereinafter Harrison).
Regarding claim 1, Kleindienst discloses a user device (from paragraph 0051, see While in some cases the MLDD test 100 can be performed using specialized audiology testing equipment, in other cases the MLDD test 100 can be conveniently performed using a personal computer (e.g., a desktop, a laptop, tablet, a smart phone, and the like). In other words, in some embodiments the MLDD test 100 can comprise computer-coded executable instructions that can be run on a computing device such as a personal computer. In some such embodiments, the participant can wear headphones that are connected with the personal computer, and the executable instructions of MLDD test 100 can be functioning on the personal computer. The participant can interact with the personal computer, for example, by inputting participant responses via the user interface of the personal computer. The MLDD test 100 functioning on the personal computer can automatically transition from one sub-portion to another, from one test portion to another, and from one ear to another) comprising a user interface and an audio output, the user device being configured to perform a hearing training method by:
providing a background audio signal and a target audio signal using the audio output, the target audio signal at least partially overlapping with the background audio signal, and the target audio signal defining information to be determined by a user (from paragraph 0008, see In one implementation, a method of testing a participant's ability to accurately detect speech in the presence of background noise includes: (a) audibly presenting a first series of single-digit numbers to a first ear of the participant while a first background noise at a first signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is audibly presented to the first ear but not to a second ear of the participant; (b) receiving, from the participant, a first group of results that reflect the participant's attempt at accurately reproducing the first series of single-digit numbers; (c) audibly presenting a second series of single-digit numbers to the first ear while a second background noise at a second SNR is audibly presented to the first ear and to the second ear; and (d) receiving, from the participant, a second group of results that reflect the participant's attempt at accurately reproducing the second series of single-digit numbers);
wherein one or both of the background audio signal and target audio signal comprises binaural audio (from paragraph 0027, see The MLDD test measures the masking level difference (MLD) and the binaural release from masking effect, which happens at the level of the auditory nerve and the lower brainstem. The MLD is the psychoacoustic phenomenon involving the change in threshold between two test conditions (e.g., interaural phase differences of signal or noise, or monotic versus diotic conditions). The binaural release from masking is the improvement in function between the diotic versus monotic condition, or the antiphasic versus homophasic conditions. In other words, the ability of the ear to detect the desired signal in the presence of masking presented to both ears versus signal and noise in only one ear, or when the signal and noise are in or out of phase from each other. The ability for the ear to improve detection through the release from masking effect is thought to occur at the level of the brainstem, and thus, is potentially a good measure for ear disease, such as brainstem lesions or central nervous pathology below the auditory cortex, such as multiple sclerosis);
receiving, at the user interface, a user input corresponding to a user assessment of the information defined by the target audio signal (from paragraph 0044, see The participant's responses 124a, 124b, 124c, and 124d can be made/registered in the form of written responses, oral responses, button-pushing responses (e.g., through a user interface), and by any other suitable form); and
providing feedback to the user based on the user assessment indicated by the user input (from paragraph 0051, see At the end of the MLDD test 100, the personal computer can calculate the participant's score and present various graphical and/or numerical results. In some cases, verbal descriptions pertaining to the participant's performance, and/or an analysis of the participant's hearing abilities, can also be presented by the personal computer);
wherein the information defined by the target audio signal comprises: a content of the target audio signal (from abstract, see the understanding of speech presented within a background of noise); and/or,
a similarity and/or a relationship to a second target audio signal.
Still on the issue of claim 1, Kleindienst does not clearly teach:
based on determining that the user assessment indicated by the user input corresponds to the information defined by the target audio signal, the user device is configured to increase a difficulty of the hearing training for subsequent iterations; and/or,
based on determining that the user assessment indicated by the user input does not correspond to the information defined by the target audio signal, the user device is configured to decrease a difficulty of the hearing training for subsequent iterations.
All the same, Harrison discloses:
based on determining that the user assessment indicated by the user input corresponds to the information defined by the target audio signal, the user device is configured to increase a difficulty of the hearing training for subsequent iterations (from column 24, see Otherwise, if the response was scored as speech correctly heard, then the speech reception threshold module decreases the intensity by an amount equal to the descending interval at step 1132); and/or,
based on determining that the user assessment indicated by the user input does not correspond to the information defined by the target audio signal, the user device is configured to decrease a difficulty of the hearing training for subsequent iterations (from column 24, see the speech reception threshold module determines whether the response was scored as speech correctly heard. If the response was scored a speech not correctly heard, then at step 1131, the speech reception threshold module increases the intensity by an amount equal to the ascending interval).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kleindienst with:
based on determining that the user assessment indicated by the user input corresponds to the information defined by the target audio signal, the user device is configured to increase a difficulty of the hearing training for subsequent iterations; and/or,
based on determining that the user assessment indicated by the user input does not correspond to the information defined by the target audio signal, the user device is configured to decrease a difficulty of the hearing training for subsequent iterations.
This modification would have improved accuracy by reducing the chance of a lucky guess as suggested by Harrison.
Regarding claim 2, Kleindienst discloses the content of the target audio signal comprises a linguistic content of speech within the target audio signal (from paragraph 0033, see The MLDD test uses single digits (e.g., 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9), created using the IBM speech software. Test items are grouped into sets. In one example embodiment of the MLDD test, a set of four digits are presented to one ear with either noise in the same ear, or noise in both ears. The set of digits is followed by a five second response period. The participant's task involves listening to the four digits presented individually to the left and right ear, and then repeating the digits back (in order) during the response period. The digits are presented in the presence of background noise with varying signal-to-noise ratios. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is the difference between the level of the signal and the level of the background noise. The MLDD test measures performance at four different SNRs providing moderate levels of masking. In some embodiments, a goal of the test is to determine the level at which the participant can correctly identify 50% of the digits).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Kleindienst and Harrison discloses the information defined by the target audio signal corresponds to a target visual component within a plurality of different visual components within a training environment (from column 22 of Harrison, see The speech reception threshold module then presents a set of randomly chosen pictures to the patient along with the words for the pictures. In some embodiments, the same set of randomly chosen pictures is used for the entire test, although it is possible to use more than one set).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Kleindienst and Harrison discloses the user device further configured to provide two or more target audio signals using the audio output, wherein the user input indicates whether the user believes said two or more target audio signals are similar and/or related (from column 25, see The speech discrimination module thereafter determines how well the patient is able to discern between similar sounding words).
Regarding claim 6, Kleindienst discloses the user device further configured to analyze the user input received at the user interface to determine whether the user assessment indicated by the user input corresponds to the information defined by the target audio signal (from paragraph 0051, see At the end of the MLDD test 100, the personal computer can calculate the participant's score and present various graphical and/or numerical results. In some cases, verbal descriptions pertaining to the participant's performance, and/or an analysis of the participant's hearing abilities, can also be presented by the personal computer).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Kleindienst and Harrison discloses the user device further configured to vary the difficulty of the hearing training periodically in response to a user meeting a predetermined threshold of successful or unsuccessful user inputs across a plurality of sequential iterations (from column 22 of Harrison, see For each subsequent intensity level, two or more responses are needed, whether correct or incorrect, before threshold detection is initiated).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Kleindienst and Harrison discloses the user device further configured to perform a standardized hearing test as a preliminary step, wherein based on a result of the standardized hearing test, the user device is further configured to vary: a difficulty of the hearing training (from column 24 of Harrison, see If the response was scored a speech not correctly heard, then at step 1131, the speech reception threshold module increases the intensity by an amount equal to the ascending interval. Otherwise, if the response was scored as speech correctly heard, then the speech reception threshold module decreases the intensity by an amount equal to the descending interval at step 1132. Thereafter, the speech reception module returns to step 1109 to present the next word), the content and/or one or more properties of the target audio signal, background audio signal and/or a mode of the hearing training.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Kleindienst and Harrison discloses a display, wherein the user device is further configured to display a training environment to a user using the display, and wherein the training environment comprises: an image, a video, augmented reality and/or virtual reality (from column 22 of Harrison, see The speech reception threshold module then presents a set of randomly chosen pictures to the patient along with the words for the pictures. In some embodiments, the same set of randomly chosen pictures is used for the entire test, although it is possible to use more than one set.
Regarding claim 13, Kleindienst discloses the target audio signal comprises one or more of human speech, an animal call, traffic noises, a music instrument, nature sounds, ambient noises, or synthesized sound effects (from paragraph 0033, see The MLDD test uses single digits (e.g., 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9), created using the IBM speech software. Test items are grouped into sets. In one example embodiment of the MLDD test, a set of four digits are presented to one ear with either noise in the same ear, or noise in both ears. The set of digits is followed by a five second response period. The participant's task involves listening to the four digits presented individually to the left and right ear, and then repeating the digits back (in order) during the response period. The digits are presented in the presence of background noise with varying signal-to-noise ratios. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is the difference between the level of the signal and the level of the background noise. The MLDD test measures performance at four different SNRs providing moderate levels of masking. In some embodiments, a goal of the test is to determine the level at which the participant can correctly identify 50% of the digits).
Regarding claim 16, Kleindienst discloses the user device is a smart user device (from paragraph 0051, While in some cases the MLDD test 100 can be performed using specialized audiology testing equipment, in other cases the MLDD test 100 can be conveniently performed using a personal computer (e.g., a desktop, a laptop, tablet, a smart phone, and the like).
Regarding claim 19, Kleindienst discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions which when read by a processor cause a user device (from paragraph 0051, see While in some cases the MLDD test 100 can be performed using specialized audiology testing equipment, in other cases the MLDD test 100 can be conveniently performed using a personal computer (e.g., a desktop, a laptop, tablet, a smart phone, and the like). In other words, in some embodiments the MLDD test 100 can comprise computer-coded executable instructions that can be run on a computing device such as a personal computer. In some such embodiments, the participant can wear headphones that are connected with the personal computer, and the executable instructions of MLDD test 100 can be functioning on the personal computer. The participant can interact with the personal computer, for example, by inputting participant responses via the user interface of the personal computer. The MLDD test 100 functioning on the personal computer can automatically transition from one sub-portion to another, from one test portion to another, and from one ear to another) comprising a user interface and an audio output to perform a hearing training method, comprising the steps of:
providing a background audio signal and a target audio signal using the audio output, the target audio signal at least partially overlapping with the background audio signal, and the target audio signal defining information to be determined by a user (from paragraph 0008, see In one implementation, a method of testing a participant's ability to accurately detect speech in the presence of background noise includes: (a) audibly presenting a first series of single-digit numbers to a first ear of the participant while a first background noise at a first signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is audibly presented to the first ear but not to a second ear of the participant; (b) receiving, from the participant, a first group of results that reflect the participant's attempt at accurately reproducing the first series of single-digit numbers; (c) audibly presenting a second series of single-digit numbers to the first ear while a second background noise at a second SNR is audibly presented to the first ear and to the second ear; and (d) receiving, from the participant, a second group of results that reflect the participant's attempt at accurately reproducing the second series of single-digit numbers);
wherein one or both of the background audio signal and target audio signal comprises binaural audio (from paragraph 0027, see The MLDD test measures the masking level difference (MLD) and the binaural release from masking effect, which happens at the level of the auditory nerve and the lower brainstem. The MLD is the psychoacoustic phenomenon involving the change in threshold between two test conditions (e.g., interaural phase differences of signal or noise, or monotic versus diotic conditions). The binaural release from masking is the improvement in function between the diotic versus monotic condition, or the antiphasic versus homophasic conditions. In other words, the ability of the ear to detect the desired signal in the presence of masking presented to both ears versus signal and noise in only one ear, or when the signal and noise are in or out of phase from each other. The ability for the ear to improve detection through the release from masking effect is thought to occur at the level of the brainstem, and thus, is potentially a good measure for ear disease, such as brainstem lesions or central nervous pathology below the auditory cortex, such as multiple sclerosis);
receiving, at the user interface, a user input corresponding to a user assessment of the information defined by the target audio signal (from paragraph 0044, see The participant's responses 124a, 124b, 124c, and 124d can be made/registered in the form of written responses, oral responses, button-pushing responses (e.g., through a user interface), and by any other suitable form); and
providing feedback to the user based on the user assessment indicated by the user input (from paragraph 0051, see At the end of the MLDD test 100, the personal computer can calculate the participant's score and present various graphical and/or numerical results. In some cases, verbal descriptions pertaining to the participant's performance, and/or an analysis of the participant's hearing abilities, can also be presented by the personal computer);
wherein the information defined by the target audio signal comprises: a content of the target audio signal (from abstract, see the understanding of speech presented within a background of noise); and/or,
a similarity and/or a relationship to a second target audio signal.
Still on the issue of claim 19, Kleindienst does not clearly teach:
based on determining that the user assessment indicated by the user input corresponds to the information defined by the target audio signal, the user device is configured to increase a difficulty of the hearing training for subsequent iterations; and/or,
based on determining that the user assessment indicated by the user input does not correspond to the information defined by the target audio signal, the user device is configured to decrease a difficulty of the hearing training for subsequent iterations.
All the same, Harrison discloses:
based on determining that the user assessment indicated by the user input corresponds to the information defined by the target audio signal, the user device is configured to increase a difficulty of the hearing training for subsequent iterations (from column 24, see Otherwise, if the response was scored as speech correctly heard, then the speech reception threshold module decreases the intensity by an amount equal to the descending interval at step 1132); and/or,
based on determining that the user assessment indicated by the user input does not correspond to the information defined by the target audio signal, the user device is configured to decrease a difficulty of the hearing training for subsequent iterations (from column 24, see the speech reception threshold module determines whether the response was scored as speech correctly heard. If the response was scored a speech not correctly heard, then at step 1131, the speech reception threshold module increases the intensity by an amount equal to the ascending interval).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Kleindienst with:
based on determining that the user assessment indicated by the user input corresponds to the information defined by the target audio signal, the user device is configured to increase a difficulty of the hearing training for subsequent iterations; and/or,
based on determining that the user assessment indicated by the user input does not correspond to the information defined by the target audio signal, the user device is configured to decrease a difficulty of the hearing training for subsequent iterations.
This modification would have improved accuracy by reducing the chance of a lucky guess as suggested by Harrison.
Regarding claim 20, Kleindienst discloses the user device is a smartphone, tablet, laptop, personal computer, or an AR and/or VR system (from paragraph 0051, see While in some cases the MLDD test 100 can be performed using specialized audiology testing equipment, in other cases the MLDD test 100 can be conveniently performed using a personal computer (e.g., a desktop, a laptop, tablet, a smart phone, and the like).
Claim 21 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 2.
3. Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kleindienst combined with Harrison in further view of ARTHI S ET AL: “Binaural Spatial Audiometry Screening Using Android Mobile Device Audio 1/0 Facility”, 2000 NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COMMUNICAITONS (NCC), IEEE, 21 February 2020 (2020-02-21), pages 1-6 (hereinafter Arthi).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Kleindienst and Harrison does not explicitly teach the background audio signal comprises one or more of human speech, an animal call, traffic noises, a music instrument, weather noises, water noises, nature sounds, synthesized sounds, ambient noises, white noise, or synthesized sound effects. All the same, Arthi discloses the background audio signal comprises one or more of human speech, an animal call, traffic noises, a music instrument, weather noises, water noises, nature sounds, synthesized sounds, ambient noises, white noise, or synthesized sound effects (from page 5, see We used a surround recording of City Sound Germany-Munich, where multiple sources like moving van, busy road, walking people are present). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the combination of Kleindienst and Harrison wherein the background audio signal comprises one or more of human speech, an animal call, traffic noises, a music instrument, weather noises, water noises, nature sounds, synthesized sounds, ambient noises, white noise, or synthesized sound effects as taught by Arthi. This modification would have improved the system’s flexibility by creating a variety of virtual listening environments for audio assessment as suggested by Arthi.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of references does not explicitly teach the background audio signal comprises a plurality of sounds that at least partially overlap. All the same, Arthi discloses the background audio signal comprises a plurality of sounds that at least partially overlap (from page 5, see We used a surround recording of City Sound Germany-Munich, where multiple sources like moving van, busy road, walking people are present). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the combination of references wherein the background audio signal comprises a plurality of sounds that at least partially overlap as taught by Arthi. This modification would have improved the system’s flexibility by creating a variety of virtual listening environments for audio assessment as suggested by Arthi.
Allowable Subject Matter
4. Claim 10 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
5. Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are deemed to be moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
6. Applicant’s amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLISA ANWAH whose telephone number is 571-272-7533. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 8.30 AM to 6 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Carolyn Edwards can be reached on 571-270-7136. The fax phone numbers for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned are 571-273-8300 for regular communications and 571-273-8300 for After Final communications.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is 571-272-2600.
Olisa Anwah
Patent Examiner
September 29, 2026
/OLISA ANWAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2692
Prosecution Insights