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 .
Response to Arguments
Claims 10, 11, and 14 have been amended.
Claims 1-9 and 15-17 have been canceled.
Claims 10-14 and 18-20 are presently pending.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 10 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
It is noted that the Examiner took Official Notice with respect to the subject matter of previous Claim 15 (see the Non-Final Rejection mailed out on 28 July 2025, pg. 12). Applicant has failed to traverse that finding of the Official Notice. As such, the assertion of Official Notice is taken to be admitted prior art. See MPEP 2144.03(C).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 10-11, 14, and 18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishio et al. (US 2012/0013721 A1) (of record, hereinafter Nishio), further in view of Logvinov et al. (US 2006/0242314 A1) (of record, hereinafter Logvinov), and further in view of Torgerson (US 2023/0131674 A1) (hereinafter Torgerson)
Regarding Claim 10, Nishio discloses television (TV) streamer [Figs. 1-2] comprising:
communication circuitry; [Figs. 1-2; 0019, 0036: communication and signal transfer between hearing aids and audio/visual processing device may be performed by any wired and/or wireless connection through some communication module]
control circuitry; [Figs. 1-2; signal processing circuit 21]
delay circuitry; [Figs. 1-2; 0019, 0029: Delay Time Setter 103] and
one or more speakers; [Fig. 2; 0031: where signal processing circuit 21 may be separate or integrated with audio reproduction circuit 23 and video reproduction circuit 22] wherein:
the control circuitry is configured to:
control the communication circuitry to receive audio associated with a TV program; [Figs. 1-2; 0018-19: signal supplier 104 of audio-processing device 20 (e.g., a television) receives incoming audio/video data and decodes and generates audio signal S100 and video signal S200]
control the communication circuitry to transmit the audio, or a first processed version of the audio, to hearing aids over a wireless connection; [Figs. 1-2; 0019, 0029-31: signal processing circuit 21 may transmit audio signal S100 to one or more hearing aid 10; 0024, 0036: communication and signal transfer between hearing aids and audio/visual processing device may be performed by any wired and/or wireless connection]
use the delay circuitry to determine when a delay time has elapsed; [Figs. 1-2; 0019-24, 0030: delay time T103 may be set such that output of content is delayed until lapse of delay time for synchronous reproduction of content] and
control circuitry to generate video data based on received video signal after the delay time has elapsed. [Figs. 1-2; 0019-24, 0030: delay time T103 may be set such that output of video signal S200 content to video reproduction circuit is delayed until lapse of delay time for synchronous reproduction of content; 0018: where signal processing circuit 21 may be separate or integrated with video reproduction circuit 22] and
control the one or more speakers to generate sound based on the audio, or a second processed version of the audio. [Figs. 1-2; 0029-31: where audio may be transmitted and output simultaneously by a plurality of hearing aids as well as some audio reproduction circuit 23; 0031: where signal processing circuit 21 may be separate or integrated with audio reproduction circuit 23 and video reproduction circuit 22]
Nishio further discloses disclose wherein the TV streamer comprises soundbar functionality; and [Nishio – Figs. 1-2; 0029-31: where audio may be transmitted and output simultaneously by a plurality of hearing aids as well as some audio reproduction circuit 23; 0031: where signal processing circuit 21 may be separate or integrated with audio reproduction circuit 23 and video reproduction circuit 22;]
wherein the TV streamer is coupled to a TV or to an audiovisual (AV) source. [Nishio – Figs. 1-2; 0036-38: communication of data may be wired or wireless, and where input signal may be a broadcast signal, or reproduced from some recorded medium]
Nishio fails to explicitly disclose to control the one or more speakers to generate sound based on the audio, or a second processed version of the audio, after the delay time has elapsed. (Emphasis on the particular elements of the limitations not explicitly disclose by Nishio – namely transmission of audio to another device after elapse of the delay time).
Logvinov, in analogous art, teaches to control the one or more speakers to generate sound based on the audio, or a second processed version of the audio, after the delay time has elapsed. [Figs. 1-4; 0012-17: where in AV systems where AV content is transmitted to a plurality of output devices (such as the audio reproduction circuit and hearing aids of Nishio above) transmission of data may be delayed accordingly to determined delays such that synchronization discrepancy between the plurality of audio outputs is less than some amount T1 which may be as low as 1ms]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Nishio with the teachings of Logvinov to specify transmitting audio to another device after the delayed time has elapsed as it is understood that it is desirable to achieve audio-audio synchronization when a streamed content is being transported and routed to different physical endpoints so as to avoid undesirable audio manifestations. [Logvinov – 0003, 0008-11]
Nishio and Logvinov fail to explicitly disclose wherein the TV streamer comprises soundbar functionality in a single device; and wherein the TV streamer is coupled to a TV or to an audiovisual (AV) source by a single cable. (Emphasis on the particular elements of the limitations not explicitly disclose by Nishio and Logvinov – namely wherein the TV Streamer comprises soundbar functionality in a single device and is connected to a TV or an AV source via a single cable).
Torgerson, in analogous art, teaches wherein the TV streamer comprises soundbar functionality in a single device; [Figs. 1B-D, 3-4; 0044-50: playback device (such as the streamer of Nishio and Logvinov) may receive AV content and split the AV content into audio content for playback via the playback device and/or other audio playback devices and video content for playback on the coupled video display device; 0072: playback device may be embodied as a soundbar connected to a video display device by cable (see Fig. 3)] and
wherein the TV streamer is coupled to a TV or to an audiovisual (AV) source by a single cable. [Figs. 1B-D, 3-4; 0044-50: playback devices (such as the TV streamer of Nishio and Logvinov above) may be configured to connect to some local content source by one or more cables, and to a video display device by one or more cables; 0072: playback device may be embodied as a soundbar connected to a video display device by cable (see Fig. 3)]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Nishio and Logvinov with the teachings of Torgerson to specify the Streamer comprising soundbar functionality in a single device and coupled to a TV or source by a single cable as it is understood that a soundbar is a known form of playback device that may connect to content sources and display devices for simultaneous and synchronized output of audio and video content across a plurality of playback devices. [Torgerson – 0072]
Regarding Claim 11, Nishio, Logvinov, and Torgerson disclose all of the limitations of Claim 10 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Nishio and Logvinov disclose wherein the delay time is selected such that sound generated based on the audio, or the second processed version of the audio, transmitted to the other device, and sound generated by the hearing aids based on the audio, or the first processed version of the audio, reach ears of a wearer of the hearing aids within 10 milliseconds of each other. [Nishio – 0024-26, 0029-30: wherein delay time may be calculated based on delay information corresponding to processing and transmission time of each hearing aid 10; Logvinov – 0012-17: transmission of data may be delayed accordingly to determined delays such that synchronization discrepancy between the plurality of audio outputs is less than some amount T1 which may be as low as 1ms]
Regarding Claim 14, Nishio, Logvinov, and Torgerson disclose all of the limitations of Claim 10 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Nishio and Logvinov disclose wherein the control circuitry is configured to: control the communication circuitry to receive video associated with the TV program; and use the delay circuitry to delay the video prior to controlling the communication circuitry to transmit the video to the TV. [Nishio – Figs. 1-2; 0019-24, 0030: delay time T103 may be set such that output of video signal S200 content to video reproduction circuit is delayed until lapse of delay time for synchronous reproduction of content; 0018: where signal processing circuit 21 may be separate or integrated with video reproduction circuit 22; Logvinov – Figs. 1-4; 0012-17: video and audio packets will be buffered and delayed according to appropriately determined delay; Torgerson – Figs. 1B-D, 3-4; 0044-50, 0072]
Regarding Claim 18, Nishio, Logvinov, and Torgerson disclose all of the limitations of Claim 10 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Nishio and Logvinov disclose wherein the TV streamer is further configured to measure a streaming delay in streaming data to the hearing aids, and the delay time is based on the streaming delay. [Nishio – 0008, 0024-26: delay time may include transmission time for signal to reach the hearing aid after transmission by signal processing circuit 21; Logvinov – 0009: delays may result from network induced delays]
Claim(s) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishio, Logvinov, and Torgerson as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Durrieu (US 2021/0289299 A1) (of record, hereinafter Durrieu).
Regarding Claim 12, Nishio, Logvinov, and Torgerson disclose all of the limitations of Claim 10 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Nishio and Logvinov discloses the TV streamer further comprising processing circuitry for controlling signal magnitudes in the audio, and wherein the control circuitry is configured to control the communication circuitry to transmit the processed audio to the hearing aids. [Nishio – Figs. 1-2; Logvinov – Fig. 3; 0010, 0018-19, 0024: delay system may utilize level detection to control volume levels of various audio outputs and perform automatic gain control of the outputs]
Nishio, Logvinov, and Torgerson fail to explicitly disclose processing circuitry configured to reduce noise in the audio using a neural network, and wherein the control circuitry is configured to control the communication circuitry to transmit the noise-reduced audio to the hearing aids.
Durrieu, in analogous art, discloses processing circuitry configured to reduce noise in the audio using a neural network, and wherein the control circuitry is configured to control the communication circuitry to transmit the noise-reduced audio to the hearing aids. [0009, 0030, 0080-83: input audio may be classified and processed such that certain audio events may be modulated selectively, while others (i.e., noise) are suppressed; 0037, 0112: where such classification and separation may be implemented through use of a deep neural network]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Nishio, Logvinov, and Torgerson with the teachings of Durrieu to process the audio using a neural network to produce and transmit noise-reduced audio to leverage AI systems to assist in automatically classifying and selectively modulating certain types of audio events while suppressing others to improve the experience of users with hearing loss. [Durrieu – 0037, 0080-82]
Regarding Claim 13, Nishio, Logvinov, Torgerson, and Durrieu disclose all of the limitations of Claim 12 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Nishio and Logvinov discloses wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to buffer a window of the audio. [Nishio – Figs. 1-2; 0019-20: system may accumulate content prior to transmission; Logvinov – 0009, 0025: delay system may buffer media content (where it would be implicitly understood that the length of the buffered content comprises a window of the buffered audio content)]
Nishio, Logvinov, Torgerson, and Durrieu fail to explicitly disclose wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to buffer a window of the audio equal to or more than 50 milliseconds in length prior to using the neural network to reduce noise in the audio.
Although Nishio, Logvinov, Torgerson, and Durrieu do not explicitly recite buffering content prior to using the neural network, it would be inherent and/or implicitly understood that at least some amount of data would need to be stored or buffered in some manner prior to being processed by some element of the system, such as the neural network. As such, the inherent and implicit teachings of the references reasonably teach buffering of at least some of the input audio data prior to processing by the neural network.
Furthermore, although Nishio, Logvinov, Torgerson, and Durrieu do not explicitly disclose that such a buffer be at least 50ms in length, specifying that size buffer would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as it would amount to a design choice in size that one of ordinary skill in the art could optimize without undue experimentation to suit their particular needs, and which would not materially change the performance of the underlying prior art systems. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishio, Logvinov, and Torgerson as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Lakkundi et al. (US 2015/0058877 A1) (of record, hereinafter Lakkundi) .
Regarding Claim 19, Nishio, Logvinov, and Torgerson disclose all of the limitations of Claim 10 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Nishio and Logvinov disclose processing circuitry configured to adjust levels and quality of the audio. [Nishio – 0009, 0034; Logvinov – Fig. 3; 0010, 0018-19, 0024: delay system may utilize level detection to control volume levels of various audio outputs and perform automatic gain control of the outputs]
Nishio, Logvinov, and Torgerson fail to explicitly disclose processing circuitry configured to adjust a sound profile of the audio based on a type of the audio.
Lakkundi, in analogous art, teaches processing circuitry configured to adjust a sound profile of the audio based on a type of the audio. [Figs. 1-4; 0044-45: input audio may be adjusted according to a sound profile based on a determined type of content of the content]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Nishio, Logvinov, and Torgerson with the teachings of Lakkundi to specify adjusting sound profiles of the audio based on a type of the audio as it is understood that various sound profiles may be utilized to adjust audio data (such as equalization or enabling/disabling use of surround sound mode, etc.) to produce a sound most suited to the type of content. [Lakkundi – 0045]
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishio, Logvinov, and Torgerson as applied to claims 1 and 10, respectively above, and further in view of Bren et al. (US 2003/0059073 A1) (of record, hereinafter Bren).
Regarding Claim 20, Nishio, Logvinov, and Torgerson disclose all of the limitations of Claim 10 which are analyzed as previously discussed with respect to that claim.
Furthermore, Nishio and Logvinov disclose processing circuitry configured to adjust levels and quality of the audio. [Nishio – 0009, 0034; Logvinov – Fig. 3; 0010, 0018-19, 0024: delay system may utilize level detection to control volume levels of various audio outputs and perform automatic gain control of the outputs]
Nishio, Logvinov, and Torgerson fail to explicitly disclose processing circuitry configured to boost low frequencies in the audio.
Bren, in analogous art, teaches processing circuitry configured to boost low frequencies in the audio. [ABST; 0009, 0033-34: audio signals to be sent to a hearing aid output (such as the audio signals of Nishio, Logvinov, and Torgerson) may filter and boost the gain of low frequency components of the signal prior to sending to the hearing aid output]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to modify the apparatus of Nishio, Logvinov, and Torgerson with the teachings of Bren to specify circuitry to boost low frequencies in the audio as it is readily understood that systems for hearing aids may filter out specific frequency components of an audio signal, and boost such frequencies according to the specific needs of the user with hearing impairment. [Bren – ABST; 0022, 0033-34]
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lau (US 2012/0204213 A1)
Siegel (US 2012/0314139 A1)
Elliot (US 2019/0130923 A1)
Jeyaram et al. (US 2024/0005929 A1)
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM J KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-2767. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am - 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, Hadi Armouche can be reached at (571) 270-3618. 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.
/WILLIAM J KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2409