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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 2-14 are objected to because of the following informalities: The article “The” should be used since claims 2-14 are dependent claims. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-4, 6, 8, 10-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Van Der Werf, US Patent Pub. 20180184219 A1. (The Van Der Werf reference is cited in IDS filed 06/03/2024)
Re Claim 1, Van Der Werf discloses apparatus for active noise and/or occlusion suppression (para 0007: hearing device comprises an active occlusion cancellation circuit with first and second filters), comprising an earpiece that can be coupled to a user's ear canal (abstract; para 0004: hearing device can be mounted within ear canal of a user); an inner microphone arranged in the earpiece and configured to detect a sound signal in the user's ear canal (abstract; para 0004: ear canal microphone); a loudspeaker arranged in the earpiece, which is configured to output a compensation signal into the user's ear canal (fig. 7: receiver/loudspeaker 44; abstract: receiver/loudspeaker for ear canal audio output), wherein noise and/or the occlusion effect can be reduced with the compensation signal (para 0007: hearing device comprises an active occlusion cancellation circuit comprising the first and second filters); a signal processor connected to the inner microphone and the loudspeaker to form a feedback loop and arranged to apply two or more feedback filters or a feedback filter resulting from two or more feedback filters to an input signal in the feedback loop (fig. 6: 62, 36, 58, 48: filters that are included in the feedback loop between the canal microphone 28 and the loudspeaker/receiver 44; para 0155: filters 58, 60 have different magnitude response to high frequencies and filter 36 is utilized to suppress occlusion effect (para 0119) while filter 48 operates to improve efficiency of signal processor (para 0129); whereby filter 62 and 48 are mixed at 50 and altogether mixed at filter 36 with the result being summerly processed at filter 58; wherein all filters process differently), wherein the individual feedback filters have different effects on the attenuation characteristics of the feedback loop and are each designed to suppress different sound components of the noise and/or the occlusion effect (fig. 6: 62, 36, 58, 48: filters that are included in the feedback loop between the canal microphone 28 and the loudspeaker/receiver 44; para 0155: filters 58, 60 have different magnitude response to high frequencies and filter 36 is utilized to suppress occlusion effect (para 0119) while filter 48 operates to improve efficiency of signal processor (para 0129); whereby filter 62 and 48 are mixed at 50 and altogether mixed at filter 36 with the result being summerly processed at filter 58; wherein all filters process differently), wherein the two or more feedback filters are combined by a mixture (fig. 6: 62, 36, 58, 48: filters that are included in the feedback loop between the canal microphone 28 and the loudspeaker/receiver 44; para 0155: filters 58, 60 have different magnitude response to high frequencies and filter 36 is utilized to suppress occlusion effect (para 0119) while filter 48 operates to improve efficiency of signal processor (para 0129); whereby filter 62 and 48 are mixed at 50 and altogether mixed at filter 36 with the result being summerly processed at filter 58; wherein all filters process differently); to supply an intermediate signal generated by applying the two or more feedback filters or the feedback filter resulting from two or more feedback filters to the loudspeaker (fig. 6: 62, 36, 58, 48: filters that are included in the feedback loop between the canal microphone 28 and the loudspeaker/receiver 44; para 0155: filters 58, 60 have different magnitude response to high frequencies and filter 36 is utilized to suppress occlusion effect (para 0119) while filter 48 operates to improve efficiency of signal processor (para 0129); whereby filter 62 and 48 are mixed at 50 and altogether mixed at filter 36 with the result being summerly processed at filter 58; wherein all filters process differently); and to calculate the input signal supplied to the two or more feedback filters or the feedback filter resulting from two or more feedback filters from the signal of the inner microphone corrected by the intermediate signal filtered by a secondary path estimate (fig. 6: 62, 36, 58, 48: filters that are included in the feedback loop between the canal microphone 28 and the loudspeaker/receiver 44; para 0155: filters 58, 60 have different magnitude response to high frequencies and filter 36 is utilized to suppress occlusion effect (para 0119) while filter 48 operates to improve efficiency of signal processor (para 0129); whereby filter 62 and 48 are mixed at 50 and altogether mixed at filter 36 with the result being summerly processed at filter 58; wherein all filters process differently).
Re Claim 2, Van Der Werf discloses apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the mixing of the two or more feedback filters is carried out by the signal processor of the apparatus (paras 0063-0067: feedback filters can be executed in one of the numerous dedicated signal processors).
Re Claim 3, Van Der Werf discloses apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the mixing of the two or more feedback filters is carried out by a digital processing device implemented in an external device (para 0029: external device).
Re Claim 4, Van Der Werf discloses apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the resulting attenuation characteristics are adjusted by weighting the individual feedback filters (fig. 6: 62, 36, 58, 48: filters that are included in the feedback loop between the canal microphone 28 and the loudspeaker/receiver 44; para 0155: filters 58, 60 have different magnitude response to high frequencies and filter 36 is utilized to suppress occlusion effect (para 0119) while filter 48 operates to improve efficiency of signal processor (para 0129); whereby filter 62 and 48 are mixed at 50 and altogether mixed at filter 36 with the result being summerly processed at filter 58; wherein all filters process differently).
Re Claim 6, Van Der Werf discloses apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the apparatus comprises one or more forward filters to which the signals from one or more outer microphones are fed and wherein the output signals of the forward filter are taken into account when generating the intermediate signal and/or the compensation signal (figs. 3; 6: filter 48 is a feedforward filter where its output is mixed with the intermediate signal of the feedback loop).
Re Claim 8, Van Der Werf discloses apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the weighting of the individual feedback filters are automatically adjusted by a calculation unit (para 0041: adaptive filter is able to automatically adjust accordingly).
Re Claim 10, Van Der Werf discloses apparatus according to claim 8, wherein the weighting factors for the individual feedback filters are calculated such that they add up to a predefined value (para 0045: magnitude of first filter being below a threshold, loop gain turned down to zero ant adaptation of second filter is stopped; whereby the threshold is predefined value).
Re Claim 11, Van Der Werf discloses apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the calculated weighting factors are multiplied by a further factor and wherein this factor originates from a further calculation unit (para 0122: processed audio signal has to be multiplied with [1+BR] to compensate for the active occlusion cancellation circuit).
Re Claim 12, Van Der Werf discloses apparatus according to claim 8, wherein it recognizes different wearing situations, in particular different ventilation, and the calculation unit adapts the weighting factors accordingly (paras 0053-0055: signal processors are adapted for intended use of hearing device, whereby the different types of hearing devices imply different intended uses).
Re Claim 13, Van Der Werf discloses apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the filtering of at least one of the feedback filters is carried out at a first sampling rate and the filtering of at least one further feedback filter is carried out at a second sampling rate different from the first sampling rate, and wherein the input and output signals of these filters undergo a sampling rate conversion (paras 0018-0022, 0139: multi rate filters).
Re Claim 14, Van Der Werf discloses apparatus according to claim 1, wherein it is part of a headset, hearing aid or hearing protection (para 0117: hearing device; paras 0054-0055: hearing device could be a headset or hearing aid; wherein hearing aid and headsets are selected from the Markush claim language).
Claims 15-16 have been analyzed and rejected according to claim 1.
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 the 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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Der Werf, US Patent Pub. 20180184219 A1 as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Gauger, JR. et al, US Patent Pub. 20140126734 A1. (The Gauger, JR. et al reference is cited in IDS filed 06/03/2024)
Re Claim 5, Van Der Werf discloses apparatus according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the apparatus comprises an equalizer for a reproduction of external audio signals by the loudspeaker, by which the external audio signals are processed and wherein the intermediate signal is generated from the output signal of the feedback filters combined by the mixing and the audio signal filtered by the equalizer. However, Gauger, JR. et al discloses an equalizing audio filter combined with the feedback and feedforward paths (Gauger, JR. et al, para 0085 equalizing audio filter). It would have been obvious to modify the Van Der Werf system to include an equalizing audio filter as taught in Gauger, JR. et al for the purpose of equalizing the levels across a broad frequency.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Der Werf, US Patent Pub. 20180184219 A1 as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Stein et al, US Patent Pub. 20180103319 A1.
Re Claim 7, Van Der Werf discloses apparatus according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the weighting of the individual feedback filters are set manually. However, Stein et al discloses the concept of manually tuning/weighting filters (Stein et al, para 0056). It would have been obvious to modify the Van Der Werf system such that its filters can be manually tuned/weighted as taught in Stein et al for the purpose of being able to manually control the filters.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Der Werf, US Patent Pub. 20180184219 A1 as applied to claim 8 above, in view of Kechichian et al, US Patent Pub. 20150381821 A1.
Re Claim 9, Van Der Werf discloses apparatus according to claim 8, but fails to disclose wherein the calculation unit provides for each individual feedback filter a weighting function followed by a power estimate, which is then normalized and smoothed to calculate a weighting factor. However, Kechichian et al discloses a system where NLMS algorithm is employed to model the direct path of the acoustic impulse response of an adaptive filter where update term is normalized by a smoothed power estimate (Kechichian et al, para 0138). It would have been obvious to modify the Van Der Werf system such that its filters weights are normalized by a smoothed power estimate as taught in Kechichian et al for the purpose of making complex filter designs manageable.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEORGE C MONIKANG whose telephone number is (571)270-1190. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri., 9AM-5PM, ALT. Fridays off.
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 R 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.
/GEORGE C MONIKANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2692 12/12/2025