CTNF 18/856,894 CTNF 91403 DETAILED ACTION This action is in response to communications filed 10/15/2024: Claims 1-20 are pending Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 07-34-01 Claims 2-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, 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. Regarding claim 2 , it recites “a communication unit capable of receiving an external signal from an outside….” It is unclear what the “outside” recitation could refer to. Because of its broad scope, the Examiner has interpreted it in light of what’s shown in the prior art. Claims 3-12 are rejected as being dependent upon an indefinite parent claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claim is directed to “a program” which is not one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-11, 13, and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fischer (DE102009010603, EPO translation) in view of Gebert et al (US20080285783, hereinafter “Gebert”) . 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 at least in a part thereof 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); a signal processing unit that amplifies the external sound signal (Fig. 2, DSP 10); a receiver that outputs sound corresponding to the external sound signal amplified by the signal processing unit (Fig. 2, receiver 11); and a control unit that changes a shape of the soft actuator (¶32, DSP sends a control signal to change the shape of the polymer). Fischer fails to explicitly teach an earpiece insertable into an external ear canal of a user. Gebert teaches an earpiece insertable into an external ear canal of a user (abstract, Fig. 2, an earpiece for insertion into a user’s ear). 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) with the earpiece (as taught by Gebert). 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). Regarding claim 2 , Fischer in view of Gebert teaches further comprising a communication unit capable of receiving an external signal from an outside (Fischer, ¶34, control signal being sent in dependency of certain parameters), wherein the control unit changes the shape of the soft actuator based on a reception state of the communication unit (Fischer, ¶34, parameters for control of the vent channel can include a use/reception of a playback signal such as a music signal). Regarding claim 3 , Fischer in view of Gebert 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 control unit changes, based on the reception state of the communication unit, 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 Gebert teaches wherein the soft actuator is provided to be capable of opening and closing the ventilation passage, and the control unit changes 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 Gebert 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 control unit changes the shape of the soft actuator based on the reception state of the communication unit 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 6 , Fischer in view of Gebert teaches wherein the control unit, when the communication unit receives a sound signal transmitted from external equipment, changes the shape of the soft actuator to reduce the ventilation amount, and on the other hand, when the communication unit receives input of the external sound signal from the microphone, changes the shape of the soft actuator to increase the ventilation amount (Fischer, ¶34, opening the ventilation channel when detecting of user’s voice and closing the channel when detecting playback signals). Regarding claim 7 , Fischer in view of Gebert teaches wherein the control unit, when receiving input of an instruction signal for instructing a change of the shape of the soft actuator, changes 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 Gebert teaches wherein the control unit, when the communication unit receives a sound signal transmitted from external equipment, changes 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 Gebert teaches wherein the control unit changes the shape of the soft actuator according to the external sound signal input from 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 Gebert teaches wherein the control unit changes a change amount of the shape of the soft actuator according to magnitude of the external sound signal input from 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 Gebert teaches wherein the control unit determines whether the user has uttered, and when determining that the user has uttered, changes 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 Gebert teaches wherein the ventilation adjustment mechanism is a vent (Fischer, Fig. 2, vent channel 12). Regarding claim 15 , Fischer in view of Gebert teaches wherein the earpiece is detachably attachable to the main body unit (Gebert, abstract, Fig. 2, earpiece is detachable). Regarding claim 16 , Fischer in view of Gebert teaches wherein the soft actuator is a conductive polymer actuator (Fischer, ¶8, electroactive polymer). Regarding claim 17 , Fischer in view of Gebert teaches wherein the hearing device is a hearing aid or an earphone (Fischer, ¶2, hearing aid device). Regarding claim 18 , it is rejected similarly as a combination of claims 1 and 15. Regarding claim 19 , it is rejected similarly as claim 1. The program 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). Regarding claim 20 , it is rejected similarly as claim 1. The method can be found in Fischer (¶16, method) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fischer (DE102009010603, EPO translation) in view of Gebert et al (US20080285783, hereinafter “Gebert”) in further view of Pedersen et al (US20190394577, hereinafter “Pedersen”) . Regarding claim 12 , Fischer in view of Gebert fail to explicitly teach wherein the control unit acquires 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 determines, based on at least one of the vibration signal and the movement signal, whether the user has uttered. Pedersen teaches wherein the control unit acquires 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 determines, 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 Gebert). 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 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fischer (DE102009010603, EPO translation) in view of Gebert et al (US20080285783, hereinafter “Gebert”) in further view of Boley (US20180359578) . Regarding claim 14 , Fischer in view of Gebert teaches wherein the earpiece further includes an earpiece main body unit formed in a cylindrical shape (Gebert, Fig. 2, earpiece has a main body (10) shaped like a cylinder), Fischer in view of Gebert fails to explicitly teach the soft actuator is provided in the earpiece main body unit and formed in an annular shape, and the control unit expands and contracts the soft actuator. Boley teaches the soft actuator is provided in the earpiece main body unit and formed in an annular shape, and the control unit expands and contracts 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 Gebert) 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) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA 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 . 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 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 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. /QIN ZHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2691 Application/Control Number: 18/856,894 Page 2 Art Unit: 2691 Application/Control Number: 18/856,894 Page 3 Art Unit: 2691 Application/Control Number: 18/856,894 Page 4 Art Unit: 2691 Application/Control Number: 18/856,894 Page 5 Art Unit: 2691 Application/Control Number: 18/856,894 Page 6 Art Unit: 2691 Application/Control Number: 18/856,894 Page 7 Art Unit: 2691 Application/Control Number: 18/856,894 Page 8 Art Unit: 2691 Application/Control Number: 18/856,894 Page 9 Art Unit: 2691 Application/Control Number: 18/856,894 Page 10 Art Unit: 2691 Application/Control Number: 18/856,894 Page 11 Art Unit: 2691
Prosecution Insights