DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to communications filed 6/23/2026:
Claims 1, 3-5, 7-17, and 19-20 are pending
Claims 2, 6, and 18 are cancelled
35 USC 112b rejections are withdrawn
35 USC 101 rejection is withdrawn
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
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3-5, 7-17, and 19-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Response to Amendment
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 7-11, 13, 16-17, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fischer (DE102009010603, EPO translation) in view of Yeh et al (US20240259720).
Regarding claim 1, Fischer teaches a hearing device (¶1, hearing device) comprising:
a main body unit (Fig. 2, body 8); and
wherein the main body unit or the earpiece includes a ventilation adjustment mechanism including a soft actuator and capable of adjusting a ventilation amount between the external ear canal and outside air (Fig. 2, polymer 13 configured to change its shape based on a control signal to allow a change in airflow between the user’s ear canal and the outside environment), and
the main body unit includes
a microphone that collects external sound and generates an external sound signal (Fig. 2, microphone 9);
amplify the external sound signal and generate an amplified signal (Fig. 2, DSP 10),
change a shape of the soft actuator to reduce the ventilation amount (¶32, DSP sends a control signal to change the shape of the polymer in given situations), and
change the shape of the soft actuator to increase the ventilation amount when receiving the external sound signal generated by the microphone (¶18-20 shape of the vent channel can be changed such as increasing the vent amount/opening the vent when detecting a quiet environment (i.e. the microphone is receiving external sound signals and determining that the external sound signals indicate a quiet environment)).
Fischer fails to explicitly teach an earpiece insertable into an external ear canal of a user,
a receiver; and
circuitry configured to receive a digital audio signal transmitted from external equipment that functions as an audio source,
amplify the digital audio signal, and generate an amplified signal,
cause the receiver to output sound corresponding to the amplified signal,
change a shape of the soft actuator to reduce the ventilation amount when receiving the digital audio signal transmitted from the external equipment.
Yeh teaches an earpiece insertable into an external ear canal of a user (Fig. 9, earphone),
a receiver (¶57, earphone configured to receive wireless signals from another device); and
circuitry configured to receive a digital audio signal transmitted from external equipment that functions as an audio source (¶57, earphone comprising of electronic circuitry configured to receive wireless digital signals from another device),
amplify the digital audio signal, and generate an amplified signal (¶3, an earphone has a built-in amplifier for generating an amplified signal (i.e. when user increases or decreases volume)),
cause the receiver to output sound corresponding to the amplified signal (¶3, earphone outputs a corresponding sound signal),
change a shape of the soft actuator to reduce the ventilation amount when receiving the digital audio signal transmitted from the external equipment (¶66-81, adjustable vent channel is provided to ensure sound quality and noise reduction while also alleviating occlusion effect during use).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the hearing aid system (as taught by Fischer) with the wireless audio capabilities (as taught by Yeh). The rationale to do so is to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of a hearing aid apparatus that can also act as a speaker device capable of reproducing audio content provided by another device (Yeh, ¶3).
Regarding claim 3, Fischer in view of Yeh teaches wherein
the ventilation adjustment mechanism further includes a ventilation passage connecting the external ear canal and the outside air,
the soft actuator is provided to be capable of adjusting a ventilation amount of the ventilation passage, and
the circuitry is further configured to change the shape of the soft actuator to adjust the ventilation amount of the ventilation passage (Fischer, Fig. 2, ¶34, the ventilation channel 12 includes a controllable/adjustable aperture 13 that can change its shape (¶8) in dependency on one or more parameters such as whether the user is actively listening to a playback signal).
Regarding claim 4, Fischer in view of Yeh teaches wherein
the soft actuator is provided to be capable of opening and closing the ventilation passage, and
the circuitry is further configured to change the shape of the soft actuator to open and close the ventilation passage (Fischer, ¶8, 17, aperture can be controlled to open and/or close).
Regarding claim 5, Fischer in view of Yeh teaches wherein
the ventilation adjustment mechanism further includes
a ventilation passage connecting the external ear canal and the outside air, and
an adjustment member provided to be capable of adjusting a ventilation amount of the ventilation passage;
the soft actuator is connected to the adjustment member; and
the circuitry is further configured to change the shape of the soft actuator to adjust the ventilation amount of the ventilation passage (Fischer, ¶35, mechanisms for adjusting the amount of air that passes through a ventilation channel can include hinged covers or sliding parts).
Regarding claim 7, Fischer in view of Yeh teaches wherein
the circuitry, when receiving input of an instruction signal for instructing a change of the shape of the soft actuator, is further configured to change the shape of the soft actuator to a shape corresponding to the instruction signal to adjust the ventilation amount (Fischer, ¶34, the opening/closing of the channel can be time-variant and adjusted in response to a user input).
Regarding claim 8, Fischer in view of Yeh teaches wherein
the circuitry, when receiving the digital audio signal transmitted from the external equipment, is further configured to adjust a change amount of the shape of the soft actuator according to magnitude of the sound signal (Fischer, ¶15, 20, ambient environment can include heavy distribution of energy/high magnitude of noise and the invention allows for an opening/closing of the ventilation channel in accordance with the detect noise).
Regarding claim 9, Fischer in view of Yeh teaches wherein
the circuitry is further configured to change the shape of the soft actuator according to the external sound signal generated by the microphone (Fischer, ¶34, aperture is changed when detecting user’s voice and during high/low noisy environments).
Regarding claim 10, Fischer in view of Yeh teaches wherein
the circuitry is further configured to adjust a change amount of the shape of the soft actuator according to magnitude of the external sound signal generated by the microphone (Fischer, ¶15, 20, ambient environment can include heavy distribution of energy/high magnitude of noise and the invention allows for an opening/closing of the ventilation channel in accordance with the detect noise).
Regarding claim 11, Fischer in view of Yeh teaches wherein
the circuitry is further configured to determine whether the user has uttered, and
when determining that the user has uttered, change the shape of the soft actuator to increase the ventilation amount (Fischer, ¶34, aperture is changed when detecting user’s voice).
Regarding claim 13, Fischer in view of Yeh teaches wherein the ventilation adjustment mechanism is a vent (Fischer, Fig. 2, vent channel 12).
Regarding claim 16, Fischer in view of Yeh teaches wherein the soft actuator is a conductive polymer actuator (Fischer, ¶8, electroactive polymer).
Regarding claim 17, Fischer in view of Yeh teaches wherein the hearing device is a hearing aid or an earphone (Fischer, ¶2, hearing aid device).
Regarding claim 19, it is rejected similarly as claim 1. The medium can be found in Fischer (¶18, signal processing requires a form of computational assistance provided by a digital processor which further requires a form of computational instruction set to be stored on a storage medium).
Regarding claim 20, it is rejected similarly as claim 1. The method can be found in Fischer (¶16, method).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fischer (DE102009010603, EPO translation) Yeh et al (US20240259720) in further view of Pedersen et al (US20190394577, hereinafter “Pedersen”).
Regarding claim 12, Fischer in view of Yeh fail to explicitly teach wherein
the circuitry is further configured to acquire at least one of a vibration signal obtained by detecting vibration of the main body unit and a movement signal obtained by detecting a movement of a jaw of the user, and
determine, based on at least one of the vibration signal and the movement signal, whether the user has uttered.
Pedersen teaches wherein
the circuitry is further configured to acquire at least one of a vibration signal obtained by detecting vibration of the main body unit and a movement signal obtained by detecting a movement of a jaw of the user, and
determine, based on at least one of the vibration signal and the movement signal, whether the user has uttered (¶42, sensor capable of detecting vibrations can be used to detect whether a user has spoken).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the voice activity detection technique (as taught by Pedersen) to the hearing device (as taught by Fischer in view of Yeh). The rationale to do so is to apply a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield the predictable result of detecting whether the user has uttered/spoken.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fischer (DE102009010603, EPO translation) Yeh et al (US20240259720) in further view of Boley (US20180359578).
Regarding claim 14, Fischer in view of Yeh teaches wherein the earpiece
further includes an earpiece main body unit formed in a cylindrical shape (Yeh, Fig. 1, earpiece has a body shaped like a cylinder),
Fischer in view of Yeh fails to explicitly teach the soft actuator is provided in the earpiece main body unit and formed in an annular shape, and
the circuitry is further configured to expand and contract the soft actuator.
Boley teaches the soft actuator is provided in the earpiece main body unit and formed in an annular shape, and
the circuitry is further configured to expand and contract the soft actuator (abstract, Fig. 2, element 18 surrounds the earpiece and is contractable/expandable via electrical signal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the earpiece (as taught by Fischer in view of Yeh) with the electroactive material (as taught by Boley). The rationale to do so is to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of controlling an amount of leakage in the ear canal to improve a signal-to-noise ratio (Boley, ¶14).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fischer (DE102009010603, EPO translation) Yeh et al (US20240259720) in further view of Gerbert et al (US20080285783, hereinafter “Gerbert”).
Regarding claim 15, Fischer in view of Yeh fail to explicitly teach wherein the earpiece is detachably attachable to the main body unit.
Gerbert teaches wherein the earpiece is detachably attachable to the main body unit (Gebert, abstract, Fig. 2, earpiece is detachable).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the hearing aid body (as taught by Fischer in view of Yeh) with the earpiece (as taught by Gerbert). The rationale to do so is to combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of a hearing aid apparatus with a detachable earpiece (Gebert, abstract).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to PTO-892, Notice of References Cited for a listing of analogous art.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QIN ZHU whose telephone number is (571)270-1304. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 6AM-4PM EST.
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, Duc Nguyen can be reached on 571-272-7503. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/QIN ZHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2691
Prosecution Insights