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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
1. 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.
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.
2. Claims 1-7, 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over submitted prior art Kornagel et al. (EP 2244491 A1) in view of Tiefenau (2010/0067721).
As to claim 1, Kornagel teaches a method for operating a hearing device which includes a signal processing unit and a microphone (Fig. 1, 100 input signal/microphone signal [0022, 0030]) and a receiver (Fig. 1, 1 and Fig. 5, 5 & 7) connected to the signal processing unit, the method comprising:
providing an input signal (Fig. 1, input signal 100);
selecting from the input signal a signal component having a specific frequency ([0004] – input signal 100 is divided by a frequency crossover 1 into low frequency signal 101);
providing a further signal at a further specific frequency (Fig. 1 and [0004], the high frequency signal component 102 frequency distortion unit 2);
creating an output signal on a basis of the signal component and the further signal (output signal 105 generated, adder 3); and
outputting the output signal by way of the receiver (Fig. 1, 1) to generate a sound (output signal 105, hearing aid).
Kornagel does not explicitly teach the further signal is configured to form first time intervals and second time intervals, wherein hair cells of a region of a basilar membrane of a user of the hearing device that is associated with the specific frequency are excited on account of an interference during the first time intervals, while no excitation of the hair cells is effected during the second time intervals.
Tiefenau teaches transforming the frequency ranges concerned such that they are transposed down to a lower frequency (specific frequency) range in which hair cells are still available for sound transduction. In known solutions this problem is solved by means of signal processing. Hearing devices of this type have a signal processing system that uses a computer to transpose sound waves recorded by a microphone into a different frequency range and then outputs those signals to a receiver again as a lower signal. Thus the high-frequency components of the input signal are displaced to a low frequency range by means of signal processing in order to trigger a response in those areas of the basilar membrane and/or hair cells that are still active ([0007]), that is during the period that high frequency components of the input signal not high enough to trigger a response and no excitation of the hair cells is effected and displaced to a low frequency range in a period that will trigger a response.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Tiefenau into the teachings of Kornagel for the purpose of having a signal processing system that uses a computer to transpose sound waves recorded by a microphone into a different frequency range and then outputs those signals to a receiver again as a lower signal.
As to claim 2, Kornagel teaches the method according to claim 1, which comprises selecting the signal component depending on a loss of hearing of the user ([0003-0006]).
As to claim 3, Kornagel teaches the method according to claim 1, which comprises selecting a plurality of signal components (Fig. 1, input signal 100 divided by GF 1 into a low frequency signal 101 and high frequency signal 102 and signal components below the cutoff frequency GF are selected; claims 8-9).
As to claim 4, Kornagel teaches the method according to claim 1, which comprises generating the further signal synthetically ([0003-0004] - The high-frequency signal component 102 is then distorted in a frequency distorter 2. The distorted output signal 103 is supplied to an input of an adder 3).
As to claim 5, Kornagel teaches the method according to claim 1, which comprises providing a plurality of further signals (Fig. 1, input signal 100 divided by GF 1 and all signals components above the cutoff frequency GF are provided).
As to claim 6, Kornagel teaches the method according to claim 1, which comprises adapting an amplitude of the signal component depending on a loss of hearing of the user ([0003] - in hearing aids, frequency-distorting algorithms are used for different purposes and at different points of signal processing. For example, DE 699 22 940 T2 discloses a hearing device with a combination of audio compression and feedback suppression. Common to all frequency-distorting algorithms is that they are usually intended to only act from a so-called cut-off frequency, because distortions of low frequencies disturb the auditory impression very much, while distortions of high frequencies are less critical. The cut-off frequency is preferably set to a frequency at which the input signal has a particularly low signal amplitude A or is particularly low tonal).
As to claim 7, Kornagel teaches the method according to claim 1, which comprises adapting a deviation between the specific frequency (low frequency) and the further specific frequency (high frequency) on the basis of a parameter ([0003-0004] – frequency distorter; frequency-distorting algorithms are used for different purposes and at different points of signal processing. For example, DE 699 22 940 T2 discloses a hearing device with a combination of audio compression and feedback suppression. Common to all frequency-distorting algorithms is that they are usually intended to only act from a so-called cut-off frequency, because distortions of low frequencies disturb the auditory impression very much, while distortions of high frequencies are less critical. An input signal 100 is divided by a frequency splitter 1 ("split-band filter") with a pre-definable limit frequency GF ("split frequency") into a low-frequency and a high-frequency signal component 101, 102. The high-frequency signal component 102 is then distorted in a frequency distorter 2. The distorted output signal 103 is supplied to an input of an adder 3).
Claim 9 is rejected for the same reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1. Furthermore, Kornagel teaches a hearing device (throughout the EP2244491, for example, [0002-0007, 0010, 0015-0016]).
3. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kornagel and Tiefenau in view of Shachar et al. (2014/0081114)
As to claim 8, Kornagel and Tiefenau do not explicitly discuss the method according to claim 1, which comprises not providing the further signal when the signal component is classified as belonging to a background noise.
Background noise typically consists of a mix of thermal noise, atmospheric noise and noise generated by the receiver’s circuits and these noise sources can interfere with the signal, making it difficult to distinguish between the desired signal and the background noise. And Shachar teaches the systems frequently cannot differentiate low amplitude, high frequency signals from background noise ([0143]) and it would have been obvious and known from general technical knowledge not providing the further signal or high frequency signals classified as belonging to a background noise.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Shachar into the teachings of Kornagel and Tiefenau for the purpose of avoiding frequently missed or lost in the background noise when amplifier gain is made sufficiently high to attempt to record such signals.
Conclusion
4. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QUYNH H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-7489. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30AM-5:30PM.
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, Ahmad Matar can be reached on 571-272-7488. 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.
/QUYNH H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693