DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-9 and 12-13 are rejected
Claims 10-11 and 14-15 are objected to
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 12 and 13 are objected to because of the following informalities: Each of claims 1, 12 and 13 recites the following limitations: generating audio signals based on the captured audio, providing the audio signals to an ambient sound detector, determining… wherein the classification includes determining a coherence measure between at least two of the audio signals, the ANC system generating, based on the audio signals, a feed-forward compensating signals; mixing the audio signals with the generated feed-forward compensating signal at a ratio of the generated feed-forward compensating signal in dependence of the determined classification of the sound environment. However, these highlighted limitations appear to be inconsistent with the applicant’s original disclosure. According to [0044]-[0048] and figure 2 of the specification, it is observed that only two audio signals are generated, one by each of the two microphones (M1, M2), and a corresponding feed-forward compensating signal is generated by the ANC for each of these two audio signals. In addition, it appears that each of these audio signals is separately mixed with their respective generated feed-forward compensating signals first (at blocks 10, 20) before the two resulting mixtures are further mixed together. Furthermore, the mixing ratio only apply to the individual audio signal of each of the two microphones.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jensen et al (US PUB 20140086425, hereinafter Jensen).
Regarding Claim 1, Jensen discloses a method of operating a hearing device (e.g. using the hearing device of figure 1) comprising an active noise control (ANC) system (e.g. an ANC processor 1), the hearing device being configured to be placed at an car of a wearer (see figure 1), the hearing device comprising a microphone system comprising two microphones arranged in relation to the hearing device and being configured at a location of the hearing device outside the ear canal of the wearer when the hearing device is worn (e.g. a pair of ambient microphones 2a, 2b), (see figures 1 and 2), wherein the method comprises: capturing audio with the microphone system, generating audio signals based on the captured audio, providing the audio signals to an ambient sound detector (e.g. microphones 2a, 2b generates audio signals X1, X2, and provided same to an adaptive control block 39), (see [0025]-[0026], also figures 1-2), determining, using the ambient sound detector, a classification of ambient sound environment based on the audio signals from the two external microphones, wherein the classification includes determining a coherence measure between at least two of the audio signals (e.g. a controller 38 performs classification of the ambient sound received via the two external microphones by determining a coherence measure between their respective audio input signals), (figures 3-4), providing the audio signals to the ANC system, the ANC system generating, based on the audio signals, a feed-forward compensating signal (e.g. ANC processor 1 implements a feedforward, filtered-X adaptive control noise cancelation algorithm, such as using a pair of adaptive filter 4a, 4b); mixing (e.g. via a combiner 7) the audio signals with the generated feed-forward compensating signal at a ratio of the generated feed-forward compensating signal in dependence of the determined classification of the sound environment (e.g. the combiner 7 mixes the generated feed-forward compensating signals using the gains G1, G2 generated in dependence on the output the coherence based gain controller 38), (see Jensen, [0025]-[0035], also figures 1-4).
Regarding Claim 2, Jensen discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the microphone system being configured so that a first microphone (e.g. microphone 2) is positioned at a position external to an ear canal of the ear of the wearer and a second microphone (e.g. microphone 3) is positioned at a position internal to the ear canal of the ear of the wearer (see Jensen, figure 1).
Regarding Claim 12, Jensen discloses a method of operating a hearing device (e.g. using the hearing device of figure 1) comprising an active noise control
(ANC) system (e.g. an ANC processor 1), the hearing device being configured to be placed at an car of a wearer (see figure 1), the hearing device comprising an input system comprising two input transducers arranged external to the ear canal of the wearer when the hearing device is worn at or in the ear (e.g. a pair of ambient microphones 2a, 2b), (see figures 1 and 2), wherein the method comprises: capturing audio with the input system, generating audio signals based on the captured audio, providing the audio signals to an ambient sound detector (e.g. microphones 2a, 2b generates audio signals X1, X2, and provided same to an adaptive control block 39), (see [0025]-[0026], also figures 1-2), determining, using the ambient sound detector, a classification of ambient sound environment based on the audio signals from the two external input transducers, wherein the classification includes determining a coherence measure between the audio signals from the two external input transducers (e.g. a controller 38 performs classification of the ambient sound received via the two input transducers by determining a coherence measure between their respective audio input signals), (figures 3-4), providing the audio signals to the ANC system, the ANC system generating, based on the audio signals, a feed-forward compensating signal (e.g. ANC processor 1 implements a feedforward, filtered-X adaptive control noise cancelation algorithm, such as using a pair of adaptive filter 4a, 4b); mixing (e.g. via a combiner 7) the audio signals with the generated feed-forward compensating signal at a ratio of the generated feed-forward compensating signal in dependence of the determined classification of the sound environment (e.g. the combiner 7 mixes the generated feed-forward compensating signals using the gains G1, G2 generated in dependence on the output the coherence based gain controller 38), (see Jensen, [0025]-[0035], also figures 1-4).
Regarding Claim 13, Jensen discloses a hearing device comprising a housing configured to be placed at an ear of a wearer (see at least he abstract and figure 1), wherein the hearing device comprises: a microphone system comprising two microphones arranged outside the ear canal of the wearer when the hearing device is being worn (e.g. a pair of ambient microphones 2a, 2b), (see figures 1 and 2),
wherein the microphone system is configured to capturing audio and to generating audio signals based on the captured audio (e.g. microphones 2a, 2b generates audio signals X1, X2, and provided same to an adaptive control block 39), (see [0025]-[0026], also figures 1-2), an ambient sound detector configured to receive the audio signals and the ambient sound detector further configured to determining a classification of ambient sound environment based on the audio signals, wherein the classification include determining a coherence measure between at least two of the audio signals (e.g. a controller 38 performs classification of the ambient sound received via the two external microphones by determining a coherence measure between their respective audio input signals), (figures 3-4), an active noise control (ANC) system (e.g. an ANC processor 1), which is configured for receiving the audio signals, the ANC system being configured for generating, based on the audio signals, a feed-forward compensating signal (e.g. ANC processor 1 implements a feedforward, filtered-X adaptive control noise cancelation algorithm, such as using a pair of adaptive filter 4a, 4b); the hearing device being configured for mixing (e.g. via a combiner 7) the audio signals with the generated feed-forward compensating signal at a ratio of the generated feed-forward compensating signal in dependence of the determined classification of the sound environment (e.g. the combiner 7 mixes the generated feed-forward compensating signals using the gains G1, G2 generated in dependence on the output the coherence based gain controller 38), (see Jensen, [0025]-[0035], also figures 1-4).
Regarding Claim 14, Jensen discloses the hearing device according to claim 13, wherein the microphone system being configured so that a first microphone (e.g. microphone 2) is positioned at a position external to an ear canal of the ear of the wearer and a second microphone (e.g. microphone 3) is positioned at a position internal to the ear canal of the ear of the wearer (see Jensen, figure 1).
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, 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 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.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jensen as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ferraris et al ().
Regarding Claim 3, Jensen discloses the method according to claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the classification includes or is a measure of ambientness.
However, Ferraris teaches that it is well known in the art to classify audio signal based on a measure of ambientness as set forth in [0020] and figure 1. Therefore it would have been obvious to any person having an ordinary skill in the art to incorporate measure of ambientness in classifying the audio signals at taught by Ferraris in the teachings of Jensen in order to further simplify the classification process.
Regarding Claim 4, Jensen as modified by Ferraris discloses the method according to claim 3, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein ambientness is represented as a
normalized value in the interval [0:1]. However, it would have been obvious to set the ambientness as a normalized value in the interval [0:1 if such would yield an optimum result, since it has been held that "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955); see MPEP 2144.05 II A.
Regarding Claim 5, Jensen as modified by Ferraris discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the classification of ambient sound environment is performed for frequencies below 3 kHz.
Regarding Claim 6, Jensen as modified by Ferraris discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the classification of ambient sound environment is based on or includes the coherence measure determined for each of, or a subset of, a number of frequency bands (see Jensen, [0036], and figures 5a-5b).
Regarding Claim 7, Jensen as modified by Ferraris discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the classification of ambient sound environment is further based on one or more of: level, detection of presence of own voice, coherence measure between at least one frequency band of each of the audio signals (see Jensen, [0036], and figures 5a-5b).
Regarding Claim 8, Jensen as modified by Ferraris discloses the method according to 6, wherein coherence measure is determined for at least two neighboring frequency channels, or at least two non-neighboring frequency channels (see Jensen, [0036], and figures 5a-5b).
Regarding Claim 9, Jensen as modified by Ferraris discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the classification of ambient sound environment is performed using a linear and/or a non-linear combination of more than one input from the ambient sound detector (see Jensen, [0036], and figures 5a-5b).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-11 and 14-15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record provided on PTO 892 and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OYESOLA C OJO whose telephone number is (571)272-0848. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:00am to 4:00pm Central Time.
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, Vivian Chin can be reached at 571-272-7840. 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.
/OYESOLA C OJO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695
Prosecution Insights