DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 10-22 in the reply filed 06 July 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-9 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected set of apparatus claims, there being no allowable generic of linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 06 July 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 29 is 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.
Regarding claim 29, the term “substantially” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 10-13, 15-17 and 19-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Flynn (US 20140270291 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Flynn teaches an apparatus comprising:
Receiving audio data from a sound source (“stimulation signal”, paragraph [0010], Fig. 5);
Generating, in response to the audio data, first control signals (sound signals 510A, paragraph [0063]) configured to control generation of first sound vibrations by a first transducer (primary transducer 502A, paragraph [0065], Fig. 5);
Generating, in response to the audio data, second control signals (sound signals 510B, paragraph [0063]) configured to control generation of second sound vibrations by a second transducer (primary transducer 502B, paragraph [0064], Fig. 5) spaced from the first transducer (space between transducers shown in Fig. 5);
Transmitting the first control signals to the first transducer (first signal sent to the first transducer 502A shown in Fig. 5);
Transmitting the second control signals to the second transducer (second signal sent to the second transducer 502B shown in Fig. 5); and
Adjusting a gain and/or a phase of the first and/or second sound vibrations in a range of vibrational frequencies (“first vibration is based on first calibration signal”, paragraph [0012]) to adjust a sound magnitude and/or a sound source location perceived by a recipient of the first and second sound vibrations (“both hearing prostheses 502A and 502B are providing a calibration stimulation simultaneously…at a different frequency”, paragraph [0071]).
Regarding claim 11, Flynn teaches the first transducer (first transducer 502A) being configured to be in mechanical communication with a first location of a recipient’s body and the second transducer (second transducer 502B) being configured to be in mechanical communication with a second location of the recipient’s body (both transducers shown at two different locations on the body in Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 12, Flynn teaches the first location being closer to a first ear of the recipient’s body than to a second ear of the recipient’s body and the second location is closer to the second ear than the first ear (“a first vibration-based hearing prosthesis 302A is coupled to the left side of a recipient’s head and a second vibration-based hearing prosthesis 302B is coupled to the right side of a recipient’s head”, paragraph [0039]; Fig. 3A).
Regarding claims 13, 16 and 17, Flynn teaches adjusting gain and/or a phase comprises reducing a gain of the first sound vibrations and inverting the phase of the first sound vibrations (“adjusting the gain table in order to reduce feedback”, paragraph [0061]) in the range of vibrational frequencies.
Regarding claim 19, Flynn teaches the first transducer and the second transducer being components of a bilateral bone conduction auditory prosthesis (“bone-conduction prosthesis”, paragraph [0024]) and said adjusting a gain and/or a phase is performed during a fitting procedure of the bilateral bone conduction auditory prosthesis to the recipient (paragraph [0063]).
Regarding claim 20, Flynn teaches a non-transitory computer readable storage medium having stored thereon a computer program (“computer 520”, paragraph [0063]) that instructs a computer system to adjust a transfer function of at least one bone conduction actuator of a bilateral bone conduction system by at least:
Receiving audio data from a sound source (“stimulation signal”, paragraph [0010], Fig. 5);
Generating, in response to the audio data, first control signals (first sound signal 510A) configured to control generation of first sound vibrations by a first bone conduction actuator (primary transducer 502A, Fig. 5);
Generating, in response to the audio data, second control signals (second sound signal 510B) configured to control generation of second sound vibrations by a second bone conduction actuator (second transducer 502B, Fig. 5) spaced from the first bone conduction actuator (space between transducers shown in Fig. 5);
Transmitting the first control signals to the first bone conduction actuator (first signal sent to the first transducer 502A shown in Fig. 5);
Transmitting the second control signals to the second bone conduction actuator (second signal sent to the second transducer 502B shown in Fig. 5); and
Adjusting a gain and/or a phase of the first and/or second sound vibrations in a range of vibrational frequencies (“first vibration is based on first calibration signal”, paragraph [0012]) to adjust a sound magnitude and/or a sound source location perceived by a recipient of the first and second sound vibrations (“both hearing prostheses 502A and 502B are providing a calibration stimulation simultaneously…at a different frequency”, paragraph [0071]).
Regarding claim 21, Flynn teaches the first bone conduction actuator (first transducer 502A) being configured to be in mechanical communication with a first location of a recipient’s body and the second bone conduction actuator (second transducer 502B) being configured to be in mechanical communication with a second location of the recipient’s body (both transducers shown at two different locations on the body in Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 22, Flynn teaches the first bone conduction actuator and the second bone conduction actuator (“bone-conduction prosthesis”, paragraph [0024]) being components of a bilateral bone conduction auditory prosthesis and said adjusting a gain and/or phase is performed during a fitting procedure of the bilateral bone conduction auditory prosthesis to the recipient (paragraph [0063]).
Regarding claims 23-25 and 27, Flynn teaches the first and second transducers being first and second bone conduction transducers that are located on the recipient’s head (“a first vibration-based hearing prosthesis is coupled to the left side of a recipient’s head, and a second vibration-based hearing prosthesis is coupled to the right side of a recipient’s head”, paragraph [0008]), adjusting a phase difference in a range of vibrational frequencies between auditory vibrations from the first and second bone conduction transducers to increase loudness perceived by the recipient (“the left vibration-based hearing prosthesis receives a sound and responsively provides a stimulus to the recipient. The right vibration-based hearing prosthesis may receive both (i) a second sound and (ii) a portion of the stimulus provided by the left vibration-based hearing prosthesis. The right vibration-based hearing prosthesis then responsively creates a second stimulus based on the combination of both (i) the second sound”, paragraph [0009]), adjusting a gain in the range of vibrational frequencies of the auditory vibrations from at least one of the first and second bone conduction transducers so that the recipient perceives receiving the sound from a front spatial direction (“the feedback loop may continue if the left vibration-based hearing prosthesis then receives a portion of the second stimulus (created by the right vibration-based hearing prosthesis). When fitting a bilateral system, the conventional practice is for the audiologist to reduce the prescribed gain for each unit by around 3 dB, to prevent the recipient from hearing excessive loudness”, paragraph [0009]).
Regarding claim 26, Flynn teaches reducing feedback comprising lowering the gain on the one of the first and second bone conduction transducers that generates more perceived feedback than the other of the first and second bone conduction transducers (“adjusting the stimulation parameter includes adjusting a pre-filtering frequency response of a feedback reduction algorithm. The feedback reduction algorithm may be configured to reduce static and dynamic feedback. The feedback reduction algorithm reduce static feedback based at least in part of the bilateral feedback measurement disclosed herein”, paragraph [0061]).
Regarding claim 28, Flynn teaches assessing system performance using pure tone audiometry or synchronized wide band signals (“an audiologist, may determine the particular calibration signal, based on a hearing impairment of a prosthesis recipient”, paragraph [0046]). The audiologist would perform pure tone audiometry to evaluate the patient’s hearing.
Regarding claim 29, Flynn teaches using the first and second bone conduction transducers comprising concurrently generating and transmitting auditory vibrations from the first and second bone conduction transducers (“each prosthesis measures local feedback (unilateral feedback) as well. In yet further embodiments, both prostheses provide stimulation at the same time. Thus, in this embodiment, all feedback measurements are made substantially simultaneously”, paragraph [0062]), the auditory vibrations indicative of at least one substantially pure tone and said assessing system performance comprises comparing loudness and/or spatial balance of the sound perceived by the recipient to loudness and/or spatial balance of the sound perceived by the recipient when only a single bone conduction transducer is used to generate and transmit auditory vibrations (“audiologist to reduce the prescribed gain for each unit by around 3 dB, to prevent the recipient from hearing excessive loudness”, paragraph [0009]).
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.
Claims 14 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Flynn in view of Facteau (US 9544675 B2).
Regarding claim 14 and 18, Flynn does not teach reducing the gain to zero, and wherein the first frequency is greater than or equal to zero and the second frequency being greater than or equal to 200 Hz and less than 2kHz. The Examiner notes that Applicant does not present any criticality for the claimed ranges.
However, Facteau teaches a method of a reducing frequency to be below 200 Hz (“contact transducer assembly may be configured to produce wide bandwidth vibrations…may comprise low frequencies below 200 Hz and high frequencies above 6 kHz”, Col. 2, lines 53-57).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have recognized that the range of the first frequency being greater than or equal to zero and the second frequency being greater than or equal to 200 Hz and less than 2kHz would be subject to optimization within the claimed range by routine experimentation with a reasonable expectation of success in order to obtain the necessary frequency for the patient. Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to choose the instantly claimed ranges through process optimization, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. See MPEP 2144.05 II and in re Boesch, 205 USPQ 215 (1980).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LARA LINH TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3598. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30am-5:00pm M-F.
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, Alexander Valvis can be reached at 5712724233. 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.
/L.L.T./Examiner, Art Unit 3791 /ALEX M VALVIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights