DETAILED ACTION
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 1-26 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-30 Patent No. 10,937,410.
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims in the continuations are broader than the ones in patent, broad claims in the continuation application are rejected previously patented narrow claims. For example, claim 1 of the present invention is the same as claim 1 of Patent No. 10,937,410 except that “adjusting a response of the digital filter at frequencies that span at least frequencies between about 200 Hz to about 5 kHz." Therefore, claim 28 of the present invention is broader than the patented claim 1.
Claims 1-26 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-27 Patent No. 11,600,256 B2
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims in the continuations are broader than the ones in patent, broad claims in the continuation application are rejected previously patented narrow claims. For example, claim 1 of the present invention is the same as claim 1 of Patent No. 11,600,256 B2 except that “accessing a nominal set of two or more parameters for the digital filter, determining, based on the frequency domain representation of the first input signal indicative of the response of the ear of the user to the audio signal, a set of two or more correction parameters." Therefore, claim 1 of the present invention is broader than the patented claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by U.S Patent No. 9,792,893 B1 to Gauger, Jr. et al. (hereinafter “Gauger”).
Regarding claim 1, Gauger teaches a method comprising:
receiving a first input signal captured by one or more sensors associated with an active
noise reduction (ANR) headphone, wherein the first input signal is captured
responsive to delivering an audio signal through an electroacoustic transducer of
the ANR headphone (column 1, lines 45-60; an active noise reduction (ANR) earphone system includes a feedback microphone for detecting noise, feedback circuitry, responsive to the feedback microphone, for applying a digital filter K.sub.fb to an output of the feedback microphone to produce an antinoise signal, an electroacoustic driver for transducing the antinoise signal into acoustic energy);
computing, by one or more processing devices, a frequency domain representation of the first input signal for a set of discrete frequencies, wherein the frequency domain representation of the first input signal is indicative of a response of an ear to the audio signal (column 3, lines 45-64; The amount of variation varies over the frequency of sound being reproduced, and tends to be greatest near ear canal resonances. A system that has little impedance between the plant (in particular, the feedback microphone 26) and the eardrum can provide greater acoustic potential noise cancellation than one with a larger impedance);
generating, by the one or more processing devices based on the frequency domain representation of the input signal, a set of parameters for a digital filter disposed
in an ANR signal flow path of the ANR headphone, the set of parameters being
such that a loop gain of the ANR signal flow path substantially matches a target
loop gain (column 2, lines 29-40 and column 6, lines 34-67; server has a target loop-gain K.sub.loop pre-set as best for the acoustics of the earbud and which provides appropriate margin allowing for fit-to-fit variation within a given ear), wherein generating the set of parameters comprises:
determining at least one resonance frequency corresponding to a resonance
associated with an ear canal of the ear (column 6, lines 20-33; the location of one or more resonances or other frequency response features of the determined G.sub.ds or K.sub.fb can serve as a unique digital signature of the ear. The entropy present in the location of such resonances can be augmented by having the user speak during identification, and using the location of formants in the voice as further identification markers); and
adjusting a response of one or more second order sections of the digital filter
based at least in part on the determined resonance frequency (Abstract, column 1, lines 45-60 and column 2, lines 16-40; the digital filter K.sub.fb may be specific to an individualized system response G.sub.ds between the driver and the microphone when coupled to the first ear, the first ear being an individually-identified human ear. The digital filter K.sub.fb may be selected from a plurality of stored digital filters based on an identification of the first ear as corresponding to one of the digital filters. The feedback circuitry may measure the response G.sub.ds at a limited number of frequencies, based on the measured G.sub.ds, determine an equalizer filter K.sub.norm, combine the equalizer filter K.sub.norm with a fixed filter K.sub.nom-fb to generate the digital filter K.sub.fb. The feedback circuitry may measure G.sub.ds and generate K.sub.fb each time the earphone system may be coupled to an ear) ; and
processing a second input signal in the ANR signal flow path using the generated set of parameters to generate an output signal for driving the electroacoustic transducer
of the ANR headphone (Abstract, column 2, lines 53-65; an active noise reduction (ANR) earphone system includes a feedback microphone for detecting noise, digital feedback circuitry, responsive to the feedback microphone, for applying a filter to an output of the feedback microphone to produce an antinoise signal, an electroacoustic driver for transducing the antinoise signal into acoustic energy, a housing supporting the feedback microphone and the driver and maintaining the feedback microphone in a fixed position relative to the driver, a positioning and retaining structure for physically coupling the housing to the outer ear of the user, and an ear tip for acoustically coupling the feedback microphone and the driver to an ear canal of the user).
Regarding claim 2, Gauger teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the first input signal comprises characteristics that vary from user to user, and the second input signal comprises characteristics having reduced variation from user to user as compared to the first input signal (column 1, lines 7-26; acoustic mass of such a nozzle acts as an acoustic impedance that reduces the variation in the total response of such a headset from an ANR perspective when compared between different users, with different ear anatomy. Achieving uniformity of response through acoustic measures comes at the cost of performance, that is, the amount of sound cancellation that can be provided, is compromised in order to provide a similar response on different users).
Regarding claim 3, Gauger teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the one or more sensors comprise a feedback microphone of the ANR headphone, and the ANR signal flow path comprises a feedback path disposed between the feedback microphone and the electroacoustic transducer (Abstract, column 1, lines 45-57; an active noise reduction (ANR) earphone system includes a feedback microphone for detecting noise, feedback circuitry, responsive to the feedback microphone, for applying a digital filter K.sub.fb to an output of the feedback microphone to produce an antinoise signal, an electroacoustic driver for transducing the antinoise signal into acoustic energy, a housing supporting the feedback microphone and the driver near the entrance to the ear canal, and an ear tip for coupling the housing to the external anatomical structures of a first ear of a user and positioning the housing to provide a consistent acoustic coupling of the feedback microphone and the driver to the ear canal of the first ear).
Regarding claim 4, Gauger teaches the method of claim 3, wherein for a majority of a frequency range where the feedback path has positive loop gain, a variation in a feedback insertion gain, as measured over multiple users, is less than a variation in a response of the physical acoustics of the ANR headphone, as measured by the response between the electroacoustic transducer and the feedback microphone
for the multiple users (Abstract, column 3, lines 45-64; the feedback loop to be operable up to as much as 4 kHz, but the ear-to-ear variation in a system with little impedance between the plant and the eardrum may exceed 10 dB at 2 kHz and 20 dB at 4 kHz, requiring that the feedback loop be limited to operating over frequencies up to 1.5 kHz to provide stable performance for all users).
Regarding claim 5, Gauger teaches the method of claim 4, wherein the variation in the feedback insertion gain is at least 10% less than the variation in the response of the physical acoustics of the ANR headphone for a majority of the frequency range where the feedback path has positive loop gain (column 4, lines 8-50; if the acoustics are ideal such that the sound pressure detected by the feedback microphone corresponds perfectly to that at the ear when excited by either the driver or noise, then the ratio Δ.sub.d/Δ.sub.n=1 and the active contribution to the insertion gain is 1/(1−G.sub.dsK.sub.fb). To minimize insertion gain (maximize noise reduction), one wishes to maximize the feedback loop gain bandwidth G.sub.dsK.sub.fb.).
Regarding claim 6, Gauger teaches the method of claim 3, wherein an average feedback insertion gain, as measured over multiple users, has a high-frequency crossover that is greater than or equal to about 1.5kHz (Abstract and column 4, lines 8-50; if the acoustics are ideal such that the sound pressure detected by the feedback microphone corresponds perfectly to that at the ear when excited by either the driver or noise, then the ratio Δ.sub.d/Δ.sub.n=1 and the active contribution to the insertion gain is 1/(1−G.sub.dsK.sub.fb). To minimize insertion gain (maximize noise reduction), one wishes to maximize the feedback loop gain bandwidth G.sub.dsK.sub.fb.).
Regarding claim 7, Gauger teaches the method of claim 1, wherein generating the set of parameters comprises:
accessing a nominal set of parameters for the digital filter (column 7, lines 11-21; the resulting G.sub.ds*K.sub.norm will have sufficiently less variation such that a pre-designed nominal fixed K.sub.nom-fb can be used, such that K.sub.fb in effect becomes K.sub.norm*K.sub.nom-fb),
determining, based on the frequency domain representation of the first input signal, a set of correction parameters, and generating the set of parameters as a combination of the nominal set of parameters and corresponding parameters in the set of correction parameters (column 7, lines 11-21; the resulting G.sub.ds*K.sub.norm will have sufficiently less variation such that a pre-designed nominal fixed K.sub.nom-fb can be used, such that K.sub.fb in effect becomes K.sub.norm*K.sub.nom-fb. If the variation K.sub.norm equalizes is simple, such as the center frequency of a strong ear canal resonance, signal processing methods such as band-passing the feedback microphone signal to include only signals over the relevant frequency range and counting zero crossings of that signal may be used).
Regarding claim 8, Gauger teaches the method of claim 7, wherein the nominal set of parameters are computed based on training data comprising a plurality of ear responses (Abstract , column 6, lines 3-33; the location of one or more resonances or other frequency response features of the determined G.sub.ds or K.sub.fb can serve as a unique digital signature of the ear. The entropy present in the location of such resonances can be augmented by having the user speak during identification, and using the location of formants in the voice as further identification markers).
Regarding claim 9, Gauger teaches the method of claim 8, wherein the nominal set of parameters are generated by executing an optimization process configured to generate the parameters for a corresponding ear response (column 2, lines 29-40 and column 6, lines 34-67; server has a target loop-gain K.sub.loop pre-set as best for the acoustics of the earbud and which provides appropriate margin allowing for fit-to-fit variation within a given ear).
Regarding claim 10, Gauger teaches the method of claim 9, wherein determining the set of correction parameters comprises: computing a loop gain for the nominal set of parameters of the digital filter; generating an error vector comprising deviations of the loop gain at different frequencies from a corresponding target loop gain; and generating the set of correction parameters as the output of the optimization process based on statistics of the training data (column 2, lines 29-40 and column 6, lines 34-67; server has a target loop-gain K.sub.loop pre-set as best for the acoustics of the earbud and which provides appropriate margin allowing for fit-to-fit variation within a given ear).
Regarding claim 11, Gauger teaches the method of claim 1, wherein a total insertion gain of the ANR headphone when ANR is active is less than -30dB in a frequency range of about 1-2kHz (column 3, line 62 through column 4, line 6; it would be desirable for the feedback loop to be operable up to as much as 4 kHz, but the ear-to-ear variation in a system with little impedance between the plant and the eardrum may exceed 10 dB at 2 kHz and 20 dB at 4 kHz, requiring that the feedback loop be limited to operating over frequencies up to 1.5 kHz to provide stable performance for all users).
Regarding claim 12, Gauger teaches the method of claim 1, wherein an average active insertion gain, as measured over multiple users, has a high-frequency crossover that is greater than or equal to about 2.2kHz (column 3, line 62 through column 4, line 6; it would be desirable for the feedback loop to be operable up to as much as 4 kHz, but the ear-to-ear variation in a system with little impedance between the plant and the eardrum may exceed 10 dB at 2 kHz and 20 dB at 4 kHz, requiring that the feedback loop be limited to operating over frequencies up to 1.5 kHz to provide stable performance for all users).
Regarding claim 13, Gauger teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the set of parameters is generated within 1 second of receiving the first input signal (column 5, lines 21-35; filters that may be used in the headphone, such as K.sub.ff for a feed-forward microphone and K.sub.eq for equaling input audio signals, will be changed to adjust for the customization of K.sub.f).
Regarding claim 14, Gauger teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising storing the generated set of parameters for identifying or authenticating a user (column 2, lines 41-52; the processor may also determine that the earphone is located in an ear having the measured response G.sub.ds, and provide an authentication signal to an authentication program. The first processor and the signal processor may be implemented in a single processing device).
Regarding claim 15, Gauger teaches the method of claim 1, wherein:
the audio signal comprises a wideband signal that includes energy at a plurality of the
frequencies in the set of discrete frequencies (column 3, lines 45-64; The amount of variation varies over the frequency of sound being reproduced, and tends to be greatest near ear canal resonances. A system that has little impedance between the plant (in particular, the feedback microphone 26) and the eardrum can provide greater acoustic potential noise cancellation than one with a larger impedance).
Regarding claim 16, Gauger teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the audio signal has a spectrum that comprises 10 or more tones centered at predetermined frequencies between about 45 Hz - 16 kHz (column 3, line 62 through column 4, line 6; it would be desirable for the feedback loop to be operable up to as much as 4 kHz, but the ear-to-ear variation in a system with little impedance between the plant and the eardrum may exceed 10 dB at 2 kHz and 20 dB at 4 kHz, requiring that the feedback loop be limited to operating over frequencies up to 1.5 kHz to provide stable performance for all users).
Regarding claim 17, Gauger teaches the method of claim 16, wherein the predetermined frequencies comprise a plurality of frequencies above 1 kHz that have spacing less than or equal to 1/4-octave (column 3, line 62 through column 4, line 6; it would be desirable for the feedback loop to be operable up to as much as 4 kHz, but the ear-to-ear variation in a system with little impedance between the plant and the eardrum may exceed 10 dB at 2 kHz and 20 dB at 4 kHz, requiring that the feedback loop be limited to operating over frequencies up to 1.5 kHz to provide stable performance for all users).
Regarding claim 18, Gauger teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the audio signal is delivered automatically in response to detecting that the ANR headphone has been positioned in, on, or around a user's ear (column 5, lines 21-35; a circumaural or supra-aural headset design, with little plant-to-ear impedance, G.sub.ds changes every time the headphone is donned or the user adjusts the positions of the ear cup for comfort, so the feedback loop filter K.sub.fb needed to achieve a wide-bandwidth feedback loop would need to continuously adapt).
Regarding claim 19, Gauger teaches the method of claim 15, wherein the audio signal is delivered automatically in response to detecting an oscillation in the ANR signal flow path (Abstract, column 4, lines 38-50; if the acoustics are ideal such that the sound pressure detected by the feedback microphone corresponds perfectly to that at the ear when excited by either the driver or noise, then the ratio Δ.sub.d/Δ.sub.n=1 and the active contribution to the insertion gain is 1/(1−G.sub.dsK.sub.fb).).
Regarding claim 20, Gauger teaches the method of claim 1, wherein:
the one or more sensors comprise a feedforward microphone of the ANR headphone and a feedback microphone of the ANR headphone (Abstract and column 1, lines 45-65; an active noise reduction (ANR) earphone system includes a feedback microphone for detecting noise, feedback circuitry, responsive to the feedback microphone, for applying a digital filter K.sub.fb to an output of the feedback microphone to produce an antinoise signal),
the first input signal comprises a ratio of a feedback microphone signal and a feedforward microphone signal, and the ANR signal flow path comprises a feedforward path disposed between the feedforward microphone and the electroacoustic transducer (column 1, lines 45-60; an active noise reduction (ANR) earphone system includes a feedback microphone for detecting noise, feedback circuitry, responsive to the feedback microphone, for applying a digital filter K.sub.fb to an output of the feedback microphone to produce an antinoise signal, an electroacoustic driver for transducing the antinoise signal into acoustic energy).
Regarding claim 21, Gauger teaches the method of claim 20, wherein the feedforward microphone signal is captured responsive to determining that the ambient noise in the vicinity of the ANR headphone is above the threshold (Abstract, column 3, lines 6-25; n active noise reduction (ANR) earphone system includes a feedback microphone for detecting noise, digital feedback circuitry, responsive to the feedback microphone, for applying a filter to an output of the feedback microphone to produce an antinoise signal, an electroacoustic driver for transducing the antinoise signal into acoustic energy, a housing supporting the feedback microphone and the driver and maintaining the feedback microphone in a fixed position relative to the driver, a positioning and retaining structure for physically coupling the housing to the outer ear of the user, and an ear tip for acoustically coupling the feedback microphone and the driver to an ear canal of the user).
Regarding claim 22, Gauger teaches the method of claim 21, wherein the feedback microphone signal is captured responsive to delivering an audio signal through an electroacoustic transducer of the ANR headphone, the audio signal comprising a wideband signal that includes energy at a plurality of the frequencies in the set of discrete frequencies (column 3, lines 45-64; The amount of variation varies over the frequency of sound being reproduced, and tends to be greatest near ear canal resonances. A system that has little impedance between the plant (in particular, the feedback microphone 26) and the eardrum can provide greater acoustic potential noise cancellation than one with a larger impedance).
Regarding claim 23, Gauger teaches the method of claim 20, wherein the feedforward microphone signal is captured responsive to determining that the ambient noise in the vicinity of the ANR headphone is above the threshold, and detecting: (i) a lack of an audio signal being played through the electroacoustic transducer; and (ii) a lack of a user speaking (Abstract, column 1, lines 45-60 and column 2, lines 16-40; the digital filter K.sub.fb may be specific to an individualized system response G.sub.ds between the driver and the microphone when coupled to the first ear, the first ear being an individually-identified human ear. The digital filter K.sub.fb may be selected from a plurality of stored digital filters based on an identification of the first ear as corresponding to one of the digital filters. The feedback circuitry may measure the response G.sub.ds at a limited number of frequencies, based on the measured G.sub.ds, determine an equalizer filter K.sub.norm, combine the equalizer filter K.sub.norm with a fixed filter K.sub.nom-fb to generate the digital filter K.sub.fb. The feedback circuitry may measure G.sub.ds and generate K.sub.fb each time the earphone system may be coupled to an ear).
Regarding claim 24, Gauger teaches the method of claim 20, wherein one or both of the feedforward microphone signal and the feedback microphone signal are captured repeatedly at each of a plurality of time intervals (Abstract, column 1, lines 45-60 and column 2, lines 16-40; the digital filter K.sub.fb may be specific to an individualized system response G.sub.ds between the driver and the microphone when coupled to the first ear, the first ear being an individually-identified human ear. The digital filter K.sub.fb may be selected from a plurality of stored digital filters based on an identification of the first ear as corresponding to one of the digital filters. The feedback circuitry may measure the response G.sub.ds at a limited number of frequencies, based on the measured G.sub.ds, determine an equalizer filter K.sub.norm, combine the equalizer filter K.sub.norm with a fixed filter K.sub.nom-fb to generate the digital filter K.sub.fb. The feedback circuitry may measure G.sub.ds and generate K.sub.fb each time the earphone system may be coupled to an ear).
Regarding claim 25, Gauger teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising:
measuring a quality of seal of the ANR headphone to a wearer's ear, and reducing the
target loop gain when the quality of seal is less than a predetermined threshold (column 1, lines 45-60; an active noise reduction (ANR) earphone system includes a feedback microphone for detecting noise, feedback circuitry, responsive to the feedback microphone, for applying a digital filter K.sub.fb to an output of the feedback microphone to produce an antinoise signal, an electroacoustic driver for transducing the antinoise signal into acoustic energy).
Regarding claim 26, Gauger teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the resonance associated with the ear canal of the ear is based at least in part on at least one of: a shape of the ear canal, or a size of the ear canal (Abstract and column 3, lines 45-62; in FIG. 1, places acoustic impedance, in the form of an acoustic mass (i.e., a tube of air), between the driver 12 and the feedback, or system, microphone 26 on one side, and the ear drum 28, via the ear canal 30, on the other (note that an actual human ear canal is longer than that shown in FIG. 1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AKELAW A TESHALE whose telephone number is (571)270-5302. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am -6pm.
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 at (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.
AKELAW TESHALE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2694
/AKELAW TESHALE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2694
Prosecution Insights