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 1-25 are rejected
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) 1-4, 11 and 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neumeyer et al (US PUB 20120082329, hereinafter Neumeyer) in view of Dittli et al (US PUB 20230098589, hereinafter Dittli).
Regarding Claim 1, Neumeyer discloses a receiver-in-canal (RIC) hearing device (e.g. a hearing aid device 100), (see at least the abstract, and figures 1-2), comprising: a housing configured for deployment behind an ear of a user of the hearing device; a power source, audio components, a communication device, and a controller respectively disposed in the housing (e.g. a casing 102 houses the electronic components including a controller 104 of the hearing aid device 100), (see figures 1-2);
a cable assembly comprising a cable (e.g. ear tube 204), a receiver (e.g. ear bud 202) disposed at a distal end of the cable (e.g. the cable 204 is attached to the casing 102 at its distal end); (see figure 2), and an optical sensor (e.g. a light sensor 122) configured to generate a proximity signal based on proximity of the optical sensor to skin at or near the user's ear (e.g. a sensor 122 is disposed on the casing 102 to detect proximity of the hearing aid to the ear of the user), (see figure 2); wherein the controller is configured to operate the hearing device in a nominal power mode in response to the proximity signal exceeding a threshold and to operate the hearing device in a low power mode in response to the proximity signal falling below the threshold (e.g. the controller 104 operates the hearing device in a normal or full power mode when the proximity indicated that the hearing device is worn or proximate to the user’s ear, and further operates the device in low power mode when the proximity sensor indicated that the hearing device is no longer proximate to the user’s ear; the controller 104 monitors the signals to detect a change that exceeds a threshold; in a particular example, the controller 104 compares a difference between a ratio of the signals and a previous ratio (stored in a volatile memory (not shown) of controller 104) to a threshold to determine when a change is significant enough to warrant a state/mode adjustment), (see Neumeyer, [0010]-[0012], [0013]-[0015], [0018], [0026]-[0027], and [0030]-[0034], also figures 1 -2).
Neumeyer does not explicitly disclose a connector disposed at a proximal end of the cable and configured to attach to the housing.
However, Dittli in the same field of endeavor teaches a hearing aid device (see at least the abstract), comprising a housing (e.g. a housing 12) configured for deployment behind an ear of a user of the hearing device; a cable assembly comprising a cable (e.g. a cable 19), a receiver (e.g. a receiver 21) disposed at a distal end of the cable; and a connector (e.g. a connector 30) disposed at a proximal end of the cable and configured to attach to the housing (see Dittli, [0059]-[0064], also figures 1a, 1b). Therefore, it would have been obvious to any person having an ordinary skill in the art to incorporate a connector at the proximal end of the cable to be attached to the housing as taught by Dittli in the teachings of Neumeyer in order to achieve the ability to remove and/or replace the cable as may be required, such as for necessary repair or replacement, and thereby facilitating easy maintenance of the hearing device.
In addition, the combination of Newmeyer and Dittli further fails to explicitly disclose that the proximity sensor 122 is disposed on the connector. However, it would have been obvious to any person having an ordinary skill in the art to position the proximate sensor on the connector if so desired, since it has been held that ‘the particular placement of an element of a device is an obvious matter of design choice’ (In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950); (see MPEP 2144.04 VI B).
Regarding Claim 2, Neumeyer as modified by Dittli discloses the hearing device according to claim 1, wherein the controller operates the hearing device in the low power mode in response to the proximity signal falling below the threshold for a specified duration of time (e.g. controller 104 waits a predetermined period before sending the control signal to change the operation mode of the hearing device), (see Neumeyer, [0018], [0021] and [0031]-[0032]).
Regarding Claim 3, Neumeyer as modified by Dittli discloses the hearing device according to claim 1, comprising a motion sensor disposed in the housing, wherein the controller is configured to operate the hearing device in the low power mode in response to the proximity signal falling below the threshold and the motion sensor indicating an absence of housing motion for a specified duration of time (see Neumeyer, [0026], [0032] and [0042]).
Regarding Claim 4, Neumeyer as modified by Dittli discloses the hearing device according to claim 1, wherein the audio components communicate a first audio output to the receiver in response to the proximity signal exceeding the threshold and communicates a second audio output or no audio output to the receiver in response to the proximity signal falling below the threshold (e.g. the controller 104 activates speaker 106 for audio output to the user, and deactivate speaker 106 (no audio) when the threshold is below normal), (see Neumeyer, [0018] and [0022]).
Regarding Claim 11, Neumeyer as modified by Dittli discloses the hearing device according to claim 1, wherein the optical sensor operates at a first update rate when in the low power mode and a second update rate when in the nominal power mode, wherein the second update rate is faster than the first update rate (see Neumeyer, [0018], [0026] and [0031]).
Regarding Claim 14, Neumeyer as modified by Dittli discloses the hearing device according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to interpret changes of the proximity signal relative to the threshold due to user movement of the ear or the housing as a user input for controlling the hearing device (see Neumeyer, [0026] and [0042]).
Regarding Claim 15, Neumeyer as modified by Dittli discloses the hearing device according to claim 14, wherein the controller is configured to interpret different durations of proximity signal changes as different user inputs (see Neumeyer, [0021], [0032] and [0040]).
Regarding Claim 16, Neumeyer as modified by Dittli discloses the hearing device according to claim 15, wherein the different durations of proximity signal changes comprise a short duration change and a long duration change (e.g. based on timing delay signal input from a delay circuit 106), (see Neumeyer, [0019], [0032] and [0040]).
Regarding Claim 17, Neumeyer as modified by Dittli discloses the hearing device according to claim 15, wherein the different durations of proximity signal changes comprise a short duration change, a medium duration change, and a long duration change (see Neumeyer, [0019], [0032] and [0040]).
Regarding Claim 18, Neumeyer as modified by Dittli discloses the hearing device according to claim 1, comprising an additional optical sensor (e.g. additional sensors 124, and 126) disposed in the receiver and configured to generate an additional proximity signal based on proximity of the additional optical sensor to skin of the user's ear canal (e.g. the multiple sensors generate their respective proximity signals); wherein the controller is configured to operate the hearing device in the nominal power mode in response to the proximity signal and the additional proximity signal exceeding the threshold and to operate the hearing device in a low power mode in response to the proximity signal and the additional proximity signal falling below the threshold (see Neumeyer, [0018] and [0040], also figure 3).
Regarding Claim 19, Neumeyer as modified by Dittli discloses the hearing device according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to: operate the hearing device in the nominal power mode in response to the proximity signal exceeding an On-threshold (e.g. a threshold above a prerecorded on-state threshold); and operate the hearing device in the low power mode in response to the proximity signal falling below an Off-threshold lower than the On-threshold (e.g. a threshold below the on-state prerecorded threshold), (see Neumeyer, [0018] and [0021]).
Regarding Claim 20, Neumeyer as modified by Dittli discloses the hearing device according to claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to: operate the hearing device in the nominal power mode in response to the proximity signal exceeding an On-threshold (e.g. a threshold above a prerecorded on-state threshold); operate the hearing device in the low power mode in response to the proximity signal falling below an Off-threshold lower than the On-threshold (e.g. a threshold below the prerecorded on-state threshold); and interpret changes of the proximity signal below a User Control threshold due to user movement of the ear or the housing as a user input for controlling the hearing device, wherein the User Control threshold is between the On-threshold and the Off-threshold and is active after the proximity signal exceeds the On-threshold (see Neumeyer, [0018], [0021], [0026] and [0042]).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neumeyer in view of Dittli as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wang et al (US PUB 20190297409, hereinafter Wang).
Regarding Claim 5, Neumeyer as modified by Dittli discloses the hearing device according to claim 1, wherein the connector comprises: an interface configured to communicatively couple the optical sensor and the controller; but fails to explicitly disclose power and ground contacts arranged to couple with power and ground contacts of the housing.
However, Wang in the same field of endeavor teaches that it is well known in the art to provide power and ground contacts configured to couple with power and ground contacts of a hearing device housing (e.g. a USB plug of a headphone wire includes a power-supply pin and a ground pin), (see Wang, [0039], also figures 1 and 6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to any person having an ordinary skill in the art to incorporate a power and a ground contact as taught by Wang in the teachings of Neumeyer in view of Dittli in order to facilitate effective and safe operation of the hearing aid device.
Claim(s) 6-7 and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neumeyer in view of Dittli as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Boesen et al (US PUB 20180124495, hereinafter Boesen).
Regarding Claim 6, Neumeyer as modified by Dittli discloses the hearing device according to claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the optical sensor is configured to sense a heart rate of the user.
However, Boesen in the same field of endeavor teaches that it is well known in the art to provide an optical sensor (e.g. optical sensor 106) configured to sense a heart rate of the user (see Boesen, [0047] and [0049], also figure 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to any person having an ordinary skill in the art to incorporate an optical sensor capable of sensing heart rate of the user as taught by Boesen in the teachings of Neumeyer in view Dittli so as to adapt the hearing device for measuring user’s vital sign to thereby prevent potential health risks.
Regarding Claim 7, Neumeyer as modified by Dittli and Boesen discloses the hearing device according to claim 1, wherein the optical sensor (106) is configured to sense blood oxygen saturation of the user (see Boesen, [0032]-[0033], also figure 1).
Regarding Claim 9, Neumeyer as modified by Dittli and Boesen discloses the hearing device according to claim 1, wherein: the optical sensor comprises: an infrared (IR) emitter; one or more visible light emitters; photodetectors sensitive to IR light and one or more visible light wavelengths; and the connector comprises material substantially transparent to IR light and the one or more visible light wavelengths (see Boesen, [0020]; see also Stillwell, figure 4).
Regarding Claim 10, Neumeyer as modified by Dittli and Boesen discloses the hearing device according to claim 9, wherein the controller is configured to control the one or more visible light emitters as visible indicators to the user (see Boesen, [0020]).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neumeyer in view of Dittli as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Stillwell et al (US PAT 6361357, hereinafter Stillwell).
Regarding Claim 8, Neumeyer as modified by Dittli and Boesen discloses the hearing device according to claim 1, wherein: the optical sensor comprises an infrared (IR) emitter and a photodetector sensitive to IR light (see Boesen, [0020]), but further fails to explicitly disclose: the connector comprises material substantially transparent to IR light.
However, Stillwell in the same field of endeavor teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a cable connector having a material substantially transparent to light generated by an optical sensor (e.g. a transparent connector plug 430), (see Stillwell, column 11 lines 8-23, and figure 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to any person having an ordinary skill in the art to incorporate a cable connector plug comprising a material that is substantially transparent to light generated by the optical sensor as taught by Stillwell in the teachings of Newmeyer in views of Dittli and Boesen in order to improve the collection and distribution of the optical signal, and also to enhance the aesthetic appearance of the connector plug and the associated device.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neumeyer in view of Dittli as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Naravampanawe et al (WO 2023033737, hereinafter Narampa)
Regarding Claim 12, Neumeyer as modified by Dittli discloses the hearing device according to claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the power source comprises a lithium-ion battery coupled to a charge pump, a buck converter, a boost converter, or a buck/boost converter.
However, Narampa in the same field of endeavor teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a hearing device with a power source (e.g. power source module 16) comprising a lithium-ion battery coupled to a charge pump, a buck converter, a boost converter, or a buck/boost converter as set forth in page 12, lines 13-23, also figure 4. Therefore, it would have been obvious to any person having an ordinary skill in the art to incorporate a power source comprising a lithium ion battery coupled to a buck/boost converter as taught by Narampa in the teachings of Neumeyer in view of Dilli in order to effectively manage and regulate the power source, and thereby further extending the battery life.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neumeyer in view of Dittli as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Larsen et al (US PUB 20190068053, hereinafter Larsen).
Regarding Claim 13, Neumeyer as modified by Dittli discloses the hearing device according to claims 1, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein: the power source comprises a zinc-air battery coupled to a charge pump or a boost converter; and the optical sensor is coupled to the charge pump or the boost converter.
However, Larsen in the same field of endeavor teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a hearing device with a power source comprising a zinc-air battery coupled to a charge pump or a boost converter; and the optical sensor is coupled to the charge pump or the boost converter as set forth in [0153] and figure 15. Therefore, it would have been obvious to any person having an ordinary skill in the art to incorporate a power source comprising a zinc-air battery coupled to a charge pump as taught by Larsen in the teachings of Neumeyer in view of Dilli in order to effectively manage and regulate the power source output, and thereby further extending the battery life.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neumeyer in view of Wang et al (US PUB 20190297409, hereinafter Wang) and Stillwell et al (US PAT 6361357, hereinafter Stillwell).
Regarding Claim 21, Neumeyer discloses a cable assembly configured to attach to a housing of a receiver-in-canal (RIC) hearing device (see at least the abstract, and figures 1-2), the cable assembly comprising: a cable (e.g. a cable 204); a receiver (e.g. ear bud 202) disposed at a distal end of the cable (see figure 2); and a connector disposed at a proximal end of the cable and configured to attach to the housing of the hearing device (e.g. the cable 204 is connected to the casing 102 by some means at the distal end); (see figure 2), the connector comprising: an optical sensor (e.g. a sensor 122) configured to generate a proximity signal based on proximity of the optical sensor to skin at or near an ear of a user of the hearing device; (e.g. sensor 122 detects proximity of the hearing aid to the ear of the user, and the sensor 122 could be a light/optical sensor); an interface configured to communicatively couple the optical sensor with a controller of the hearing device (e.g. optical sensor 122 is inherently in communication with a controller 104), (see Neumeyer, [0010]-[0012], [0013]-[0015], [0018], [0026]-[0027], and [0030]-[0034], also figures 1-2).
Neumeyer does not explicitly disclose power and ground contacts configured to couple with power and ground contacts of the hearing device housing.
However, Wang in the same field of endeavor teaches that it is well known in the art to provide power and ground contacts configured to couple with power and ground contacts of a hearing device housing (e.g. a USB plug of a headphone wire includes a power-supply pin and a ground pin), (see Wang, [0039], also figures 1 and 6). Therefore, it would have been obvious to any person having an ordinary skill in the art to incorporate a power and a ground contact as taught by Wang in the teachings of Neumeyer in order to facilitate effective and safe operation of the hearing aid device.
In addition, the combination of Neumeyer and Wang further fails to explicitly disclose wherein the connector comprises material substantially transparent to light generated by the optical sensor.
However, Stillwell in the same field of endeavor teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a cable connector having a material substantially transparent to light generated by an optical sensor (e.g. a transparent connector plug 430), (see Stillwell, column 11 lines 8-23, and figure 4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to any person having an ordinary skill in the art to incorporate a cable connector plug comprising a material that is substantially transparent to light generated by the optical sensor as taught by Stillwell in the teachings of Newmeyer in view of Wang, in order to improve the collection and distribution of the optical signal, and also to enhance the aesthetic appearance of the connector plug and the associated device.
Claim(s) 22-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Neumeyer in views of Wang and Stillwell as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Boesen et al (US PUB 20180124495, hereinafter Boesen).
Regarding Claim 22, Neumeyer as modified by Wang and Stillwell discloses the cable assembly according to claim 21, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the optical sensor is configured to sense a heart rate of the user.
However, Boesen in the same field of endeavor teaches that it is well known in the art to provide an optical sensor (e.g. optical sensor 106) configured to sense a heart rate of a user (see Boesen, [0047] and [0049], also figure 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to any person having an ordinary skill in the art to incorporate an optical sensor capable of sensing heart rate of the user as taught by Boesen in the teachings of Neumeyer in views of Wang and Stillwell so as to adapt the hearing device for measuring user’s vital sign to thereby prevent potential health risks.
Regarding Claim 23, Neumeyer as modified by Wang, Stillwell and Boesen discloses the cable assembly according to claim 21, wherein the optical sensor (106) is configured to sense blood oxygen saturation of the user (see Boesen, [0032]-[0033], also figure 1).
Regarding Claim 24, Neumeyer as modified by Wang, Stillwell and Boesen discloses the cable assembly according to claim 21, wherein: the optical sensor comprises an infrared (IR) emitter and a photodetector sensitive to IR light; and the connector comprises material substantially transparent to IR light (see Boesen, [0020], [0041]; see also Stillwell, figure 4).
Regarding Claim 25, Neumeyer as modified by Wang, Stillwell and Boesen discloses the cable assembly according to claim 21, wherein: the optical sensor comprises: an infrared (IR) emitter; one or more visible light emitters; photodetectors sensitive to IR light and one or more visible light wavelengths; the connector comprises material substantially transparent to IR light and the one or more visible light wavelengths (see Boesen, [0020], [0041]; see also Stillwell, figure 4).
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