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 .
Examiner’s Comments
Sivan (US 20190182415 A1) discloses (para 203) a gravity compensated motion sensor as used in earpieces.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the electrodes of claim 17 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
As per claim 20, the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because a computer program is not patentable.
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.
Claim(s) 1,2,5-17,19,20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Fretz (US 20190116434 A1).
As per claim 1, Fretz discloses a signal processing method, in particular performed by at least one hearing device (fig. 1), the signal processing method comprising:
detecting at least one motion signal of at least one hearing device (para 40, via the accelerometer and other detection means);
processing the at least one motion signal of the at least one hearing device in three individual channels representing three spatial dimensions (x', y', z') of the at least one hearing device (para. 20, 3 axis detectors);
calibrating the orientation of the three spatial dimensions (x', y', z') of the at least one hearing device to a standardized orientation of the head of the user wearing the at least one hearing device (para. 40, calibration orientation);
and determining the amount of motion of the at least one hearing device in at least one of the calibrated orientations of the three spatial dimensions of the at least one hearing device (para. 40, “an accurate and fast acting method, responding more quickly to head movements”, after the above cited calibration).
As per claim 2, the signal processing method according to claim 1, wherein calibrating the orientation of the three spatial dimensions (x', y', z') of the at least one hearing device to the standardized orientation of the head of the user wearing the at least one hearing device comprises:
calibrating the directions of the three spatial dimensions (x', y', z') such that each calibrated spatial dimension (x, y, z) corresponds to a standardized direction (X, Y, Z) relative to the standardized orientation of the head of the user (2) (the calibration of the orientation per para 40, are all relative to the origin with standardized axis directions).
As per claim 5, the signal processing method according to claim 1 further comprising:
controlling and/or regulating (any discernable function in the device to perform the cited functions) the hearing device based on the determined motion ( para 40: a detected head nod/shake can be used to further control the hearing aid 10 per the calibrated dimensions (per the claim1 rejection).
As per claim 6, the signal processing method according to claim 1
Determine a motion pattern (reading in data form the sensors/accelerometers)
Compare the motion pattern with predetermined motion patterns (determining that a nod has occurred per para 40);
And controlling operation based on the detected motion pattern (per the claim 5 rejection).
As per claim 7, the signal processing method according to claim 1, where determining the motion comprising:
Determining if the head of the user is still (required as relative to detecting the nod as cited above, and in para 40)
Determining dominant motion in the x-z plane (detecting the nod as cited above, and in para 40);
Determining turning when the x-y plane dominates
And/or (read as or)
Determining full body motion (not mapped).
As per claim 8, the signal processing method according to claim 1 determining if the amount of motion of the at least one hearing device (1) in at least one of the calibrated spatial dimensions (x, y, z), preferably in a plane of two of the calibrated spatial dimensions (x, y, z), of the at least one hearing device (1) is above or below a predetermined threshold amount within a predetermined time interval (the inherent motion/amplitude threshold in the plane used to detect a nod by the user as cited above).
As per claim 9, the signal processing method according to claim 8, wherein the predetermined threshold is the same or different for at least two of the calibrated spatial dimensions (x, y,z) (the detection of motion as read by the digital processor is above a minimum predetermined threshold for a predetermined period of time in order to be detected within the context of digital signaling).
As per claim 10, the signal processing method according to claim 8 or 9, wherein beamforming
and/or (read as or)
noise reduction (per the function in para 34)
is decreased if the amount of motion on the (para. 34: switched to the microphone of the head set without noise cancelling)
z-axis
and/or (read as or)
in the x-y-plane
is above a predetermined threshold amount within the predetermined time interval (a detected direction of the user per para 34, in the context of a digital processor must be above a particular amplitude for a period of time to be recognized per digital signaling; further, the detection of a nod, turn, or direction determination is defined by an amplitude of motion signal that defines the determined signal, over the period of time/interval defined by the use case in para 34 ).
As per claim 11, the signal processing method according to claim 8, where the amount of beamforming or noise reduction is increased if the amount of motion in the xy plane is below a predetermined threshold amount within the time interval (the alternative state to the reduced noise reduction per the claim 10 rejection).
As per claim 12, the signal processing method according to claim 1 further comprising:
Detecting eye gaze signal (the turn detection per claim 10 rejection),
Determining amount of eye gaze saccades within a time window (the turn detected per the claim 10, 11 rejections are a determination of the amount of 1 gaze saccade over period of time of detection and the period of time per the claim 10 11 rejections )
Operating/regulating the hearing device based on number of saccades (per the claim 10, 11 rejections, where detecting 1 turn leads to the operation as cited in said rejections).
As per claim 13, the signal processing method according to claim 12, wherein the detection of the eye gaze signal, in particular the determination of the amount of eye gaze saccades, is only performed if the amount of motion in the x-y-plane is below a predetermined threshold amount within the predetermined time interval (the detection of the turn must be relative to the lack of motion or still position which is when the motion in the planes is below a predetermined threshold, as that is part of a turn).
As per claim 14, the signal processing method according to claim 1
- detecting at least a first motion signal of a first hearing device (1) of a binaural (para 4, multiple earbuds, means binaural also per para 31, para 19 sensor 38) hearing system (per claim 1 rejection from one of a magnetic detector 38 ); and
- detecting at least a second motion signal of a second hearing device (1) of a binaural hearing system ( gravitational sensor 42 accelerometer 42);
wherein the method further comprises:
- summing or subtracting the first and the second motion signal of the first and the second hearing devices (the affect of earths gravity is the second motion signal that is subtracted from the magnetic detector per para 19: detects the direction of the earth's gravitation and so allows for calculating the true head rotation); and
- determining the absolute amount of motion of the first and the second hearing devices (1) in at least one of the calibrated spatial dimensions (x, y, z) of at least one hearing devices (1) (the true head rotation per the sensor fusion described in para 19 20).
As per claim 15, A hearing device (1), in particular a hearing aid, the hearing device (1) being configured to perform the and/or comprising at least one means for performing a method according to claim 1 (per the claim 1 rejection).
As per claim 16, Hearing device (1) according to claim 15, wherein the hearing device (1) comprises at least one sensor for detecting at least one motion signal, in particular at least one movement and/or acceleration, of the hearing device (per claim 1 and 15 rejections).
As per claim 17, hearing device according to claim 15, wherein the hearing device (1) comprises at least two electrodes (6) for detecting at least one eye gaze signal (each sensor requires at least one electrode in order to interface with a pcb and the digital processor in order to implement the cited functions for the gaze/turn detection cited above).
As per claim 18, Hearing device according to claim 15, wherein the hearing device (1) comprises at least one low-pass filter.
As per claim 19, a binaural hearing system comprising a first and a second hearing device (1), in particular a first and a second hearing aid, the first and the second hearing device (1) being configured to and/or comprising at least one means for performing a perform the method according to claim 1, wherein the binaural hearing system is configured to determine an absolute amount of motion of the first and the second hearing devices (1) in at least one of spatial dimensions (x, y, z) of at least one of the hearing device (1) based on the detected motion signal of the first and second hearing device (1) (per the claim 14 rejection).
As per claim 20, a computer program comprising instructions which, when executed by a device, preferably a hearing device according to any one of the A computer program comprising instructions which, when executed by a device, preferably a hearing device according to any one of the cause the device to perform the signal processing method according to claim 1 (required to implement the devices of the claim 1 rejection).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fretz (US 20190116434 A1).
As per claim 3, Fretz discloses the signal processing method according to claim 1 or 2, but does not specify:
wherein calibrating the orientation of the three spatial dimensions (x', y', z') of the at least one hearing device (1) to the standardized orientation of the head (3) of the user (2) wearing the at least one hearing device (1) comprises:
determining a rotation matrix (R) based on a placement angle (6) of the hearing device (1); and –
applying the rotation matrix (R) to the three spatial dimensions (x', y', z') in order to obtain the calibrated spatial dimensions (x, y, z).
The examiner takes official notice it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of filing to implement the calibration of the 3 axis orientation using matrix processing, where the adjustment/calibration of the 3 direction parameters when implemented in matrix form is a rotation matrix that modifies/calibrates the orientation as cited.
Claim(s) 4,18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fretz (US 20190116434 A1) as applied to claim 1,15 and further in view of Tu et al (US 20170082649 A1).
As per claims 4,18, Fretz discloses the signal processing method according to claim 1 any one of, but does not disclose low-pass filtering of the amount of motion of the at least one hearing device (1) in at least one of the calibrated spatial dimensions (x, y, z).
Tu teaches to low pass filter the amount of motion/sensor output (para. 51: Motion data such as accelerometer or gyroscope data may be filtered (e.g. by a high-pass, low-pass, band-pass, or band-stop filter) in order to improve the quality of motion data.) it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of filing to low pass filter or filter the motion data for the purpose of improving the quality of the data.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER KRZYSTAN whose telephone number is 571-272-7498, and whose email address is alexander.krzystan@uspto.gov
The examiner can usually be reached on m-f 7:30-4:00 est.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone or email are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Fan Tsang can be reached on (571) 272-7547.
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.
/ALEXANDER KRZYSTAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2653
Examiner Alexander Krzystan
March 12, 2026