Detailed Action
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . See 35 U.S.C. § 100 (note).
Art Rejections
Anticipation
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1–4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication 2015/0190284 (published 09 July 2015) (“Censo”).
Claim 1 is drawn to “a headset device.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed device and the Censo reference.
Claim 1
The Censo Reference
“1. A headset device that can be placed in the external ear canal providing selective sound transmission to the ear by introducing the warnings that are necessary and may pose a danger if not heard and the sounds of the people whose auditory warning are allowed, to the device while providing active prevention of unwanted and disturbing sounds in the environment where the person rests, sleeps or works, the headset device comprising:
The Censo reference similarly describes an earplug corresponding to the claimed headset device. Censo at Abs., ¶¶ 8, 21, 38, FIGs.1A, 2A. Censo’s earplug is inserted into and seals a user’s ear canal. Id. at ¶ 21. The earplug provides selective sound transmission so a user may hear a baby crying, alarms, speech, snoring and other sounds at a desired level. Id. at ¶¶ 40–42, FIG.3.
The environment and the activity of the person using the earplug are examples of intended use and do not materially limit the structure of the claimed headset device. Notwithstanding, Censo describes using the earplugs to block distractions, including during sleep. Id. at ¶¶ 5–7.
“a user interface that allows determining which sounds will be attenuated or not in the headset device and
Censo’s earplug 110 includes inputs 125-1 and 125-2 to activate pass-through, enhancement, noise cancellation, learning and alarm functions. Id. at ¶ 30, FIG.1. Alternatively, or in addition, Censo’s earplug further includes a user interface 230 provided on an external computing device 220. Id. at ¶ 40, FIG.2B. A user interacts with interface 230 to choose which sounds will be passed (or enhanced) or attenuated (including completely blocked), and by how much. Id.
“stores the sounds recorded and/or selected by the user in a database,
Censo’s earplug includes a database to store a permitted sounds database. Id. at ¶ 27.
a microphone that collects external sounds,
Earplug 100 includes a microphone 110 to record external sound. Id. at ¶ 22, FIG.1A.
“a processor that provides for the following:
Earplug 100 further includes processing unit 120. Id. at ¶ 25, FIG.2A.
“determining and analyzing the frequency and amplitude of the sound wave received over the microphone…
“comparing the sounds recorded in the database and the sounds coming from the microphone…
Processing unit 120 performs a frequency and loudness analysis of recorded ambient audio to compare the audio to a database of sounds. Id. at ¶ 25.
“communicating with the user interface via a communication unit and
Processing unit 120 communicates with user interface 230 via a Bluetooth wireless module 210. Id. at ¶ 38, FIGs.2A, 2B.
“attenuating the sound by producing an anti-sound in the opposite frequency of said sound and giving it to the ear through the speaker if the analyzed sound is the sound desired to be attenuated, and
If a recorded sound corresponds to a sound set to be attenuated (e.g., low level), the sound is cancelled using ANC. Id. at ¶¶ 42, 43, 47–49, FIG.2B, 4, 5. Censo describes ANC as including cancelling sound by generating an anti-sound having an inverted phase relative to an undesired sound. Id. at ¶ 28.
“giving said sound directly to the ear if the analyzed sound is the sound desired not to be attenuated.”
Otherwise, if the recorded sound corresponds to a sound to be passed (e.g., normal level) or enhanced (e.g., high level). Id.
Table 1
For the foregoing reasons, the Censo reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 2 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
“wherein said communication unit includes bluetooth technology.”
Processing unit 120 communicates with user interface 230 via a Bluetooth wireless module 210. Censo at ¶ 38, FIGs.2A, 2B. For the foregoing reasons, the Censo reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 3 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
comprising a battery that supplies the headset with the necessary energy.
Censo’s earplug 100 similarly includes a battery 130. Censo at ¶¶ 21, 29, FIGs.1, 2A. For the foregoing reasons, the Censo reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Claim 4 depends on claim 1, and further requires the following:
wherein said user interface includes user input, audio recording and analysis button and recorded audio database screen.
Censo’s user interface includes buttons or a touchscreen to activate a learning function and an analysis mode to provide selective enhancement/cancellation. Censo at ¶¶ 30. Recorded and known audio types are also displayed on screen. Id. at ¶ 40, FIG.3. For the foregoing reasons, the Censo reference anticipates all limitations of the claim.
Obviousness
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 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Censo and US Patent Application Publication 2010/0142715 (published 10 June 2010) (“Goldstein”).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Censo, Georgiou and US Patent Application Publication 2012/0213393 (published 23 August 2012) (“Foo”).
Claim 5 is drawn to “a method.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed method and the Censo reference.
Claim 5
The Censo Reference
“5. A method of attenuating unwanted sounds by a headset device that can be placed in the external ear canal providing selective sound transmission to the ear by introducing the warnings that are necessary and may pose a danger if not heard and the sounds of the people whose auditory warning are allowed, to the device while providing active prevention of unwanted and disturbing sounds in the environment where the person rests, sleeps or works, the method comprising:
The Censo reference similarly describes an earplug corresponding to the claimed headset device. Censo at Abs., ¶¶ 8, 21, 38, FIGs.1A, 2A. Censo’s earplug is inserted into and seals a user’s ear canal. Id. at ¶ 21. The earplug provides selective sound transmission so a user may hear a baby crying, alarms, speech, snoring and other sounds at a desired level. Id. at ¶¶ 40–42, FIG.3.
The environment and the activity of the person using the earplug are examples of intended use and do not materially limit the operations of the claimed method. Notwithstanding, Censo describes using the earplugs to block distractions, including during sleep. Id. at ¶¶ 5–7.
“recording unwanted sounds through a user interface or selecting sounds desired to be heard or unwanted sounds from the recorded sounds (1001),
“analyzing and classifying the recorded sounds in the user interface (1002),
“recording sounds in a classified form in an audio database (1003),
Censo describes a learning function that records ambient sounds through a microphone 110 and analyzes them to extract a set of acoustic parameters. Id. at ¶¶ 51–54, claims 3–6, FIG.6. Sounds are recorded in classified form as either blocking sounds or permitted sounds. Id.
“deleting unwanted voice definitions from the audio database by the user (1004),
Censo does not describe user-initiated deletion of unwanted voice definitions from an audio database.
“communicating by the user interface with a processor in the headset device through a communication unit and accessing by a processor the audio database (1005),
Censo’s earplug 110 includes inputs 125-1 and 125-2 to activate pass-through, enhancement, noise cancellation, learning and alarm functions. Id. at ¶ 30, FIG.1. Alternatively, or in addition, Censo’s earplug further includes a user interface 230 provided on an external computing device 220. Id. at ¶ 40, FIG.2B. A user interacts with interface 230 to choose which sounds will be passed (or enhanced) or attenuated (including completely blocked), and by how much. Id.
Processing unit 120 communicates with user interface 230 via a Bluetooth wireless module 210. Id. at ¶ 38, FIGs.2A, 2B.
“detecting external sounds with a microphone in the headset device and recording of sounds through the processor (1006),
Earplug 100 includes a microphone 110 to record external sound. Id. at ¶ 22, FIG.1A.
“analyzing the sounds received from the microphone by the processor and comparing it with the sounds in the audio database (1007),
Processing unit 120 performs a frequency and loudness analysis of recorded ambient audio to compare the audio to a database of sounds. Id. at ¶ 25.
“attenuating the unwanted sound by producing an anti-sound in the opposite frequency of said sound by the processor and giving the produced anti-sound to the ear through a speaker if the processed sound is the sound desired to be attenuated in the user interface (1008), and
If a recorded sound corresponds to a sound set to be attenuated (e.g., low level), the sound is cancelled using ANC. Id. at ¶¶ 42, 43, 47–49, FIG.2B, 4, 5. Censo describes ANC as including cancelling sound by generating an anti-sound having an inverted phase relative to an undesired sound. Id. at ¶ 28.
“ensuring that the user can hear the sound without an intervention by the processor if the processed sound is not the sound desired to be attenuated in the user interface (1009).”
Otherwise, if the recorded sound corresponds to a sound to be passed (e.g., normal level) or enhanced (e.g., high level). Id.
Table 2
The Goldstein reference teaches and suggests techniques for managing a database of sounds. Goldstein at Abs., ¶¶ 3–6. Goldstein teaches including a feature to remove, or unlearn, a particular sound signature. Id. at ¶ 59. This would have reasonably suggested modifying Censo’s system and method so that a user may delete acoustic parameters corresponding to a sound analyzed through a learning function. For example, a user may choose to delete a signature. See Censo at ¶ 25; Goldstein at ¶ 59. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Censo and the Goldstein references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 6 depends on claim 5, and further requires the following:
“comprising a step in which the patients can hear the alarm sounds and other sounds that they need to hear by giving sounds in the frequency zones determined by the user in the user interface and less affected by the hearing loss if the user has a hearing loss.”
The Foo reference further teaches and suggests a system and method for remapping detected alarm sounds to render them more audible to a user with hearing loss. Foo at ¶¶ 5, 28, 41. For example, if the sound of an alarm is detected, the alarm is shifted or emphasized in frequency to accommodate a hearing aid wearer’s residual hearing. Id. This would have reasonably suggested modifying Censo’s earplug to similarly shift a detected alarm sound so that the alarm will be more audible to a hearing aid user by shifting the alarm to correspond to a frequency range in which the user has residual hearing. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Censo, the Goldstein and the Foo references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Summary
Claims 1–6 are rejected under at least one of 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103 as being unpatentable over the cited prior art. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Issues Under 35 U.S.C. § 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.
Claims 1–6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) 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.
Claim 1 recites “anti-sound in the opposite frequency of said sound.” Claim 5 recites a similar limitation. In the context of noise cancellation, this term is unclear because one of ordinary skill would have recognized an “anti-sound” to normally refer to a signal having an inverted phase relative to a target sound that is to be cancelled. See Censo at ¶ 28. There is no art accepted meaning to the recited limitation of “opposite frequency.” The Specification does not provide a definition. Accordingly, claims 1 and 5 and their dependent claims 2–4 and 6 are rejected.
For purposes of examination, the term “anti-sound in the opposite frequency of said sound” is interpreted as “anti-sound having the opposite phase of said sound.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WALTER F BRINEY III whose telephone number is (571)272-7513. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-4:30 pm.
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 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.
/Walter F Briney III/
Walter F Briney IIIPrimary ExaminerArt Unit 2692
12/17/2025