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 with traverse of Group I (claims 21-42) in the reply filed on 2/18/2022 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the inventions do not differ significantly. This is not found persuasive because Group I (claims 21-42, Figure 2A, [0037], [0038] involves fitting and programming a medical implant system such as cochlear implants. Group I will therefore require searching for a classification 607/55-57, H04R25/606, H04R2225/67. However, Group II (claims 43-48) is drawn to a remote handheld device controlling different functions of a conventional hearing device (BTE or ITE or earphone etc.), See applicant’s specification on [0005]- [0006] and is classified in 381/314, H04R25/558, H04R1/1008. The inventions require a different field of search and thus, the requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claims 43-48 are withdrawn.
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 21 recites the limitation " inputting data into the phone” in lines 5-6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 21, 31, 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Litvak et al. (US 20150051654), hereinafter “Litvak”.
As to Claim 21, Litvak teaches a method ( a method and system for programming a cochlear implant system, abstract, Figure 1) comprising: automatically obtaining data pertaining to the sensory device ( programming device 120 may direct cochlear implant device 104 and/or receiver 124 to apply stimulation to a patient, record an evoked response that occurs in response to the stimulation, and perform one or more predetermined actions in accordance with the evoked response.[0034]) thus, the programming device 120 is obtaining evoked responses and thus “data pertaining to the stimulation” of the cochlear implant “ automatically” since it does not require an action from the user, See applicant’s specification on [0127]) ; automatically changing a display on a hand-held electronic device based on the obtained data; ( programming device that may be a handheld device or mobile device e.g. mobile phone includes one or more graphical user interfaces ("GUIs") (e.g., by presenting the one or more GUIs by way of a display screen) with which a clinician or other user may interact.[0033].Since the programming device is presenting one or more GUI’s on the display screen based on obtained data pertaining to the stimulation of cochlear implant, it is equivalent to “ automatically changing a display on hand-held device.
and enabling the adjustment of a setting on the sensory device by inputting data into the phone, [0034] teaches programming device performs one or more predetermined actions in accordance with the evoked responses and [0058] teaches the programming device 120 adjusts one or more control parameters governing the operation of the cochlear implant system... for example increasing an amplitude of stimulation being provided to the user or take any other action, [0066] thus teaching “ enabling the adjustment of a setting on the sensory device by inputting data into the phone.”
As to Claim 31, Litvak teaches the limitations of Claim 21 and the action of enabling the adjustment of the setting on the sensory device by inputting
data into the hand-held electronic device includes inputting data into buttons of the hand-held electronic device( Litvak teaches programming device that may be a fitting station, a personal computer, a laptop computer, a handheld device, a mobile device e.g. mobile phone includes one or more graphical user interfaces ("GUIs") (e.g., by presenting the one or more GUIs by way of a display screen) with which a clinician or other user may interact.[0033], thus implicitly teaching the “buttons” or keys of the personal computer or laptop computer or of the mobile phone”.
As to Claim 42, Litvak teaches the limitations of Claim 21 and the sensory device is not a conventional hearing aid, as a programming device configured to be located external to a cochlear implant patient and communicatively coupled to a cochlear implant system associated with the patient. See at least abstract, and also see applicant’s specification [0005] “ Conventional hearing aids rely on principles of air conduction to transmit acoustic signals to the cochlea.”
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
1. Claims 22, 23, 30, 32, 33,36, 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Litvak (US20150051654A1) in view of Fleizach et al. (US20130329924).
As to Claim 22, Litvak teaches the limitations of Claim 21 and regarding the following: but does not explicitly teach wherein: the hand-held electronic device is a smartphone; the display is a touchscreen display; and the action of enabling the adjustment of the setting on the sensory device by inputting data into the phone includes inputting data into the changed touchscreen display, Litvak teaches programming device that may be a handheld device or mobile device e.g. mobile phone includes one or more graphical user interfaces ("GUIs") (e.g., by presenting the one or more GUIs by way of a display screen) with which a clinician or other user may interact.[0033]. Litvak does not explicitly teach the display is touch screen and.. inputting data into the phone includes inputting data into the changed touchscreen display. However, smart phones having a touch screen to navigate GUI’s where users can navigate onscreen buttons, icons and menus using a touchscreen display is well-known in the art. However, Fleizach in related field (remotely controlling hearing aid device) teaches a method of controlling a hearing device setting data via an interactive interface of the control device where the interface is a touch screen display. The control device can automatically change the settings based on a determined current environment to be a stored program optimized to the current environment. See at least abstract, [0047]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to use a well-known smart phone device having a touch screen to adjust the control parameters of the hearing device in real time. See at least Fleizach on Figures 8a-10b.
As to Claim 23, Litvak in view of Fleizach teaches the limitations of Claim 22, but wherein: the sensory device is a hearing prosthesis ( hearing prosthesis such as cochlear implant of Litvak (abstract) or hearing device 205 of Fleizach on Figure 1); the data pertaining to the sensory device is data pertaining to usage of the sensory device ( Fleizach teaches the control device automatically changes the settings of hearing device bade on the current environment of the hearing device, [011]) ; the data pertaining to usage of the hearing device includes data corresponding to different periods of the recipient's hearing journey with the hearing device, the hearing device can be set to a stored program optimized to a specific environment. The hearing device can be configured to determine the current environment of the hearing device and determine whether another available stored program is better suited for the current environment and, if so, send a command to change the stored program to the program better suited for the current environment. The current environment can be determined in numerous ways. For example, the environment can be determined based on the location of the hearing device which can be assumed based on the location of the control device connected to the hearing device. It can also be determined from another device connected to the control device. For example, if the control device is connected to a car, it can be determined that the environment of the hearing device is in a car, thus teaching the usage period of the hearing device) ; Fleizach further teaches and the action of automatically changing a touchscreen display includes changing the touchscreen display from a first touchscreen display to a second touchscreen display having more complexity than the first touchscreen display, ( [0012] teaches the control device can also be configured to initiate a quick mode that allows the settings on the hearing device to be viewed and changed quickly. For example, quick mode can be configured to initiate upon receiving a special input on buttons of the control device. For example three clicks of the home button within a specified time. Once initiated, quick mode can present a streamlined version of the setting interface where multiple related setting can be displayed as one setting and adjusted as one setting. For example, the sound to a left and right ear can be combined into one combined volume and adjusted as one setting. Further, quick mode can override controls of the control device that change settings of the control device to receive input used to change settings of the hearing device. For example, a button configured to increase the volume on the control device, when selected, can send a command to the hearing device to increase the volume on the hearing device. Also see Figures 10a and 10b.
As to Claim 30, Litvak in view of Fleizach teaches the limitations of Claim 22, and the action of automatically obtaining data is executed via the smartphone, Litvak teaches programming device that may be a handheld device or mobile device e.g. mobile phone includes one or more graphical user interfaces ("GUIs") (e.g., by presenting the one or more GUIs by way of a display screen) with which a clinician or other user may interact.[0033] and [0034] teaches programming device performs one or more predetermined actions in accordance with the evoked responses and [0058] teaches the programming device 120 adjusts one or more control parameters governing the operation of the cochlear implant system... for example increasing an amplitude of stimulation being provided to the user or take any other action, [0066]. Fleizach teaches a control device on Figures 8a-10b of setting interface of the control device, Figure 2. [0010], [011].
As to Claim 32, Litvak in view of Fleizach teaches the limitations of Claim 22, and the data pertaining to the sensory device is data pertaining to an ambient environment scene to which the sensory device is exposed, Fleizach teaches [0076] FIG. 6 illustrates an exemplary method embodiment of changing the settings of the hearing device based on the determined current environment. Each stored program can be optimized to perform best in a particular environment. For example, a program can be optimized for an environment such as a theater, car, concert, restaurant, party, etc. [0077] Once the status data has been received, the method next determines the current environment 610 of the hearing device.
As to Claim 33, Litvak in view of Fleizach teaches the limitations of Claim 22, wherein: the data pertaining to the ambient environment scene is data pertaining to a sound environment to which the sensory device is exposed; wherein the sensory device is a hearing device; and the action of automatically changing the display on the phone results in a display that enables a user of the sensory device to make an adjustment to the sensory device to accommodate the sound environment, Fleizach teaches on [0059]-[0060] the hearing device 205 can be configured to monitor for specific sounds and alert the user upon detection of the specific sound. For example, the hearing device 205 can be configured to detect a door bell and provide the user with a notification that the sound was received. The HDC module 240 can be configured to change settings for this functionality based on the determined environment of the user. For example, the HDC module 240 can be configured to set the hearing device 205 to monitor for sirens when it is determined that the user is in a car. Alternatively, the HDC module 235 can be configured to set the hearing device 205 to monitor for the doorbell when it is determined that the user is at home. [0060] The HDC module 240 can also be configured to initiate a remote listen mode. The control device 210 can include a remote listen module 245 configured to set the control device 210 to be the audio data source for the hearing device 205 and receive and transmit audio data to the hearing device 205.
As to Claim 36, Litvak in view of Fleizach teach limitations of Claim 22 and regarding the following: not explicitly teach the sensory device is a hearing device; the data pertaining to the sensory device is data indicative of the hearing device being exposed to speech content; and the action of automatically changing the display on the phone results in a display that enables a user of the sensory device to adjust the functionality of the hearing device to a speech mode, on [0060] the HDC module 240 can also be configured to initiate a remote listen mode ( thus. The control device 210 can include a remote listen module 245 configured to set the control device 210 to be the audio data source for the hearing device 205 and receive and transmit audio data to the hearing device 205. For example, the remote listen module 245 can receive audio data from a microphone connected to the control device 210 and transmit the audio data to the hearing device 205. In some embodiments, the microphone can be an integral microphone incorporated into the control device 210, in some embodiments the microphone can be an external microphone connected to the control device 210 wirelessly or through a wired connection. A user can thus initiate remote listen mode and place the microphone in a desired location and hear the captured sound on the hearing device 205. This can be useful in numerous settings such as in a large classroom or lecture hall. A user can place the microphone at the front of the room and clearly hear the audio even when seated in the back of the room, the user can initiate “Remote listen mode, 1105” to listen to the speech in a lecture hall.
As to Claim 41, Litvak teaches the limitations of Claim 21 but does not explicitly teach the sensory device is a device that relies on a principle of air conduction to transmit acoustic signals to a user of the sensory device. However, programming devices external to an air conduction hearing device or hearing device such as BTE or over the ear hearing devices, earphones etc. which are not implanted surgically to the users are well-known in the art. However, Fleizach in related field (programmable hearing devices) teaches hearing devices [0006] placed inside the ear of the user (thus not cochlear implants, as specified by the applicant’s specification on [0005] and [0006] air conduction hearing aids are not cochlear implants) and a remote control to control the parameters of the hearing device. See at least abstract, Figure 2. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to remotely control an air conduction hearing aids that are worn in the ear of the user instead of medical implants such as cochlear implants to serve variety of individuals depending on the severity of their hearing loss.
Claims 34, 35, 37 and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Litvak (US20150051654A1) in view of Fleizach et al. (US201303299924) in further view of Kim et al. (US20140233774), hereinafter “ Kim”.
As to Claim 34, Litvak in view of Fleizach teaches the limitations of Claim 33 but does not explicitly teach wherein: the sound environment is a large background noise content environment; and the display that enables the user to make the adjustment to accommodate the sound environment is a beamforming control application. However, Kim in related field (programmable hearing aid) teaches a he controller 110 may determine a surrounding condition from the captured photo using at least one algorithm and generate a control signal to control hearing mode of the hearing aid based on the surrounding condition. The control signal may include at least one of absolute sound level information, signal envelope information, spectral content information, and directional microphone information. The information included in the control signal are parameters to change or select a hearing mode according to the surrounding condition. The information is used to classify hearing environments into proper modes. The absolute sound level information indicates a standard reference sound level; the signal envelope information indicates an envelope of a detected sound signal; the spectral content information indicates what resulted from frequency analysis of a detected signal; and the directional microphone information indicates beamforming information for identifying a sound originated from a particular thing or person from among various detected sounds. In various embodiments of the present disclosure, the parameters are used to determine the surrounding condition. In an embodiment, the control signal includes at least one parameter to be adjusted according to respective hearing modes. The parameter may include feedback canceller, noise reduction, wide dynamic range compression (WDRC), adaptive directional mic etc. See at least [0104]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to further provide the controller capable of performing beamforming on the environment of the hearing aid to identify a sound originated from a particular thing or person from among various detected sounds.
As to Claim 35, Litvak in view of Fleizach in further view of Kim teaches the limitations of Claim 34 and the sound environment is one of a loud environment or a quiet environment, Kim teaches [0098} teaches the surrounding conditions may include weather conditions, (e.g., whether it rains or snows), landscapes such as mountains, sea, or fields, or some situations such as meetings or concerts. The surrounding conditions may include other various situations, such as a speech in quiet conditions, a speech in noisy conditions, a windy condition, and the like. The portable terminal 100 runs a hearing aid control application in advance to change or select a hearing mode of the hearing aid. and the display that enables the user to make the adjustment to accommodate the sound environment enables the user to adjust a feature of a noise reduction algorithm, [0105] of Kim teaches The noise reduction parameter is used to eliminate or reduce noise generated in a surrounding condition, and may be automatically set based on estimation of surrounding noise.
As to Claim 37, Litvak in view of Fleizach teach limitations of Claim 22 but does not explicitly teach the sensory device is a hearing device; the data pertaining to the sensory device is data indicative of the hearing device being exposed to music; and the action of automatically changing the display on the phone results in a display that provides at least one of a music app or a phone app, wherein the music app and/or phone app are prioritized as a result of the action of automatically changing. However, Kim in related field (programming a hearing aid) teaches taking a photo, generating a control signal to control a hearing mode of the hearing aid according to an analysis of a surrounding condition based on the photo, and transmitting the control signal to the hearing aid. See at least abstract, Figure 6 and [0107] teaches the controller 110 may select one of the hearing modes the hearing aid may offer based on the determined surrounding condition, in operation S614. In various embodiments of the present disclosure, the hearing aid provides multiple hearing modes which may be automatically or manually changed according to respective surrounding conditions. The hearing aid may periodically or randomly transmit or receive signals to or from the portable terminal 100. The portable terminal 100 may be informed of types of hearing mode the hearing aid may offer and a current hearing mode through signals communicated with the hearing aid. The types of hearing mode are stored in the storage 175 and refreshed periodically. The types of hearing mode may be displayed through a dedicated application for controlling a hearing mode of the hearing aid, and may be changed, selected, removed, refreshed, or generated by the user. In an embodiment of the present disclosure, the hearing mode may be selected using the photo captured in operation S610 or selected using a result of matching the captured photo and surrounding sounds detected from the microphone 162 of the portable terminal 100.Further, an analysis menu 880 is selected to o analyze at least one object in the photo is applied and thus at least one object is figured out. After completion of the analysis, the result is displayed for the user to determine whether the analysis result is correct. After the user makes a confirmation or the analysis is complete, a hearing mode provided by the hearing mode menu that corresponds to the analysis result is activated. As shown on Figure 8, a “ concert mode” is activated where the concert mode 832 may be selected for better quality hearing in a condition where musical instruments are being played around the user wearing the hearing aid, as shown in FIG. 7A.[0115]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to provide a remote device which is capable of analyzing the environment to which the user is exposed such as if the user is exposed to a musical environment such as concert and displaying the result to the user ( Figure 8, concert mode) to assist the hearing aid to adapt to the hearing mode that better fits the environment.
As to Claim 38, Litvak in view of Fleizach teaches the limitations of Claim 22, but does not explicitly teach the data pertaining to the sensory device is a specific signal containing specific data relating to the ambient environment scene and/or a raw signal; and the phone includes a scene classifier functionality, and the scene classifier functionality is used to determine how to change the display on the phone. However, However, Kim in related field (programmable hearing aid) teaches a controller 110 may determine a surrounding condition from the captured photo using at least one algorithm and generate a control signal to control hearing mode of the hearing aid based on the surrounding condition. The information is used to classify hearing environments into proper modes. 0128] Referring to FIG. 11, if there is an attempt to set up or change a hearing mode of a hearing aid in operation S1110, the hearing aid uses the photo shoot unit 910 to take a photo of the surrounding condition in operation S1112. The surrounding conditions may be a weather condition, such as rain or snow; a landscape such as a mountain, sea, or a field; or a certain situation such as a meeting or a concert. The surrounding condition may be determined by extracting outlines or features of at least one object present in an image or video captured around the user, and may include a concert condition, a crowd condition, a quiet landscape condition, a class condition, a speech condition, a rainy condition or a snowy condition, and any other conditions reflecting various surroundings of the user.[0129] The photo captured in operation S1112 is analyzed in operation S1114. To adaptively change or select a hearing mode to fit the surrounding condition, the controller 950 extracts features of at least one object contained in the captured photo and detects the at least one object from outlines formed of the extracted features. The controller 950 then compares the detected object with objects stored beforehand and determines the surrounding condition based on the comparison result. The controller 950 uses at least one object recognition algorithm to detect at least one object in the captured photo or image to determine the surrounding condition of the user wearing the hearing aid. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to further include a surrounding classifier to control hearing aid modes based on the surrounding conditions.
Claims 39, 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Litvak (US20150051654A1) in view of Kim et al. (US20140233774), hereinafter “Kim”.
As to Claim 39, Litvak teaches the limitations of Claim 21 but does not explicitly teach the action of automatically obtaining data pertaining to the sensory device includes capturing sound to which the sensory device is exposed, wherein the action of capturing sound is executed by the hand-held electronic device. However, Kim in related field ( programming hearing aid device) teaches a controller 110 for controlling a hearing aid device where the controller 110, The controller 110 may determine the surrounding condition from surrounding sounds detected by the microphone 162, generate a control signal to control hearing mode of the hearing aid based on the surrounding condition from the surrounding sounds and the photo, and send the control signal to the hearing aid through the sub-communication module 130 or the multimedia module 140.See at least abstract, [0044], Figure 1. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the programming device such that it can capture the environmental sound to which the implanted patient is exposed to program the prothesis based on the surrounding condition from the surrounding sounds.
As to Claim 40, Litvak teaches the limitations of Claim 21 but does not explicitly teach the action of automatically obtaining data pertaining to the sensory device includes executing a scene classifier action by the sensory device, wherein the sensory device is a hearing device. However, However, Kim in related field (programmable hearing aid) teaches a controller 110 may determine a surrounding condition from the captured photo using at least one algorithm and generate a control signal to control hearing mode of the hearing aid based on the surrounding condition. The information is used to classify hearing environments into proper modes. 0128] Referring to FIG. 11, if there is an attempt to set up or change a hearing mode of a hearing aid in operation S1110, the hearing aid uses the photo shoot unit 910 to take a photo of the surrounding condition in operation S1112. The surrounding conditions may be weather conditions, such as rain or snow; a landscape such as a mountain, sea, or a field; or a certain situation such as a meeting or a concert. The surrounding condition may be determined by extracting outlines or features of at least one object present in an image or video captured around the user, and may include a concert condition, a crowd condition, a quiet landscape condition, a class condition, a speech condition, a rainy condition or a snowy condition, and any other conditions reflecting various surroundings of the user.[0129] The photo captured in operation S1112 is analyzed in operation S1114. To adaptively change or select a hearing mode to fit the surrounding condition, the controller 950 extracts features of at least one object contained in the captured photo and detects the at least one object from outlines formed of the extracted features. The controller 950 then compares the detected object with objects stored beforehand and determines the surrounding condition based on the comparison result. The controller 950 uses at least one object recognition algorithm to detect at least one object in the captured photo or image to determine the surrounding condition of the user wearing the hearing aid. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to further include a surrounding classifier to control hearing aid modes based on the surrounding conditions.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 24-29 and are 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SUNITA JOSHI whose telephone number is (571)270-7227. The examiner can normally be reached 8-3.
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, Duc Nguyen can be reached at 5712727503. 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.
/SUNITA JOSHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2691
Prosecution Insights