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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/06/2025 was filed after the mailing date of the application on 12/10/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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) 1-5, 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pedersen et al (US 2017/0013371 A1) in view of Derleth et al (US 2010/0135500 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Pedersen et al disclose a hearing device system (Pedersen et al; Fig 6) comprising: a first hearing device configured to be disposed on or in a first ear of a wearer and comprising a microphone that is configured to sense acoustic waves from an environment of the wearer and convert the sensed acoustic waves to a first audio signal (Pedersen et al; Fig 6; Para [0006]; hearing aid 2 with microphone 625 which senses ambient sounds and convert into first audio); a second hearing device configured to be disposed on or in a second ear of the wearer and comprising a microphone that is configured to sense acoustic waves from the environment of the wearer and convert the sensed acoustic waves to a second audio signal (Pedersen et al; Para [0006]; Fig 6; hearing aid 2 with microphone 625’ which senses ambient sounds and convert into second audio); a receiver operatively coupled to one or both of the first hearing device and the second hearing device (Pedersen et al; Fig 6; speaker 630 and speaker 630’ interpreted as receivers) and configured to: be in fluid communication with the first ear or the second ear; and output acoustic energy based on a receiver signal (Pedersen et al; Fig 6; speaker 630 and speaker 630’ are in fluid communication to first and second ear and output acoustic energy based on receiver signal from processor 620 and 620’); and a controller configured to (Pedersen et al; Fig 6; Para [0078]; processor 620 and 620’ interpreted as controller): provide the receiver signal to the receiver based on at least one of the first audio signal or second audio signal (Pedersen et al; Fig 6; Para [0078]; speaker 630 and speaker 630’ receive signal from processor 620 and 620’); determine a first signal to noise ratio of the first audio signal (Pedersen et al; Para [0013]); determine a second signal to noise ratio of the second audio signal (Pedersen et al; Para [0013]); compare the first signal to noise ratio and the second signal to noise ratio (Pedersen et al; Para [0006][0046]); but do not expressly disclose and modify the receiver signal based on a difference between the first signal to noise ratio and the second signal to noise ratio. However, in the same field of endeavor, Derleth et al disclose a system comprising and modify the receiver signal based on a difference between the first signal to noise ratio and the second signal to noise ratio (Derleth et al; Para [0015]-[0018][0034]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the receiver signal taught by Derleth as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to improve the perception of target audio signals in background noise (Derleth et al; Para [0012]).
Regarding 2, Pedersen et al in view Derleth et al disclose the system of claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein to modify the receiver signal the controller is further configured to modify the receiver signal if the difference between the first signal to noise ratio and the second signal to noise ratio is greater than a signal to noise ratio difference threshold. However, in the same field of endeavor, Derleth et al disclose a system wherein to modify the receiver signal the controller is further configured to modify the receiver signal if the difference between the first signal to noise ratio and the second signal to noise ratio is greater than a signal to noise ratio difference threshold (Derleth et al; Para [0040]-[0041]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the receiver signal taught by Derleth as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to improve the perception of target audio signals in background noise (Derleth et al; Para [0012]).
Regarding 3, Pedersen et al in view Derleth et al disclose the system of claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein to modify the receiver signal the controller is further configured to increase a gain in the receiver signal of either the first audio signal or second audio signal having the greatest signal to noise ratio. However, in the same field of endeavor, Derleth et al disclose a system wherein to modify the receiver signal the controller is further configured to increase a gain in the receiver signal of either the first audio signal or second audio signal having the greatest signal to noise ratio (Derleth et al; Para [0040]-[0041]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the receiver signal taught by Derleth as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to improve the perception of target audio signals in background noise (Derleth et al; Para [0012]).
Regarding 4, Pedersen et al in view Derleth et al disclose the system of claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein to modify the receiver signal the controller is further configured to increase clarity in the receiver signal of either the first audio signal or second audio signal having the greatest signal to noise ratio. However, in the same field of endeavor, Derleth et al disclose a system wherein to modify the receiver signal the controller is further configured to increase clarity in the receiver signal of either the first audio signal or second audio signal having the greatest signal to noise ratio (Derleth et al; Para [0040]-[0041][0045]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the receiver signal taught by Derleth as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to improve the perception of target audio signals in background noise (Derleth et al; Para [0012]).
Regarding 5, Pedersen et al in view Derleth et al disclose the system of claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein to modify the receiver signal the controller is further configured to provide in the receiver signal either the first audio signal or second audio signal having the greatest signal to noise ratio to each of the first ear and second ear. However, in the same field of endeavor, Derleth et al disclose a system wherein to modify the receiver signal the controller is further configured to provide in the receiver signal either the first audio signal or second audio signal having the greatest signal to noise ratio to each of the first ear and second ear (Derleth et al; Para [0040]-[0041][0045]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the receiver signal taught by Derleth as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to improve the perception of target audio signals in background noise (Derleth et al; Para [0012]).
Regarding 16, Pedersen et al disclose a method comprising: providing a receiver signal to a receiver of a hearing device system based on at least one of a first audio signal or second audio signal (Pedersen et al; Fig 6; speaker 630 and speaker 630’ interpreted as receivers), wherein the first audio signal is converted by a microphone of a first hearing device from acoustic waves from an environment of a wearer sensed by the microphone (Pedersen et al; Fig 6; hearing aid 2 with microphone 625 which senses ambient sounds and convert into first audio), wherein the second audio signal is converted by a microphone of a second hearing device from acoustic waves from the environment of the wearer sensed by the microphone (Pedersen et al; Fig 6; hearing aid 3 with microphone 625’ which senses ambient sounds and convert into second audio), and wherein the first hearing device is configured to be disposed on or in a first car of the wearer and the second hearing device is configured to be disposed on or in a second ear of the wearer (Pedersen et al; Para [0005]); determining a first signal to noise ratio of the first audio signal (Pedersen et al; Para [0013]); determining a second signal to noise ratio of the second audio signal (Pedersen et al; Para [0013]); comparing the first signal to noise ratio and the second signal to noise ratio (Pedersen et al; Para [0006][0046]); but do not expressly disclose and modifying the receiver signal based on a difference between the first signal to noise ratio and the second signal to noise ratio. However, in the same field of endeavor, Derleth et al disclose a system comprising and modify the receiver signal based on a difference between the first signal to noise ratio and the second signal to noise ratio (Derleth et al; Para [0015]-[0018][0034]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the receiver signal taught by Derleth as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to improve the perception of target audio signals in background noise (Derleth et al; Para [0012]).
Regarding 17, Pedersen et al in view Derleth et al disclose the method of claim 16, but do not expressly disclose wherein modifying the receiver signal comprises modifying the receiver signal if the difference between the first signal to noise ratio and the second signal to noise ratio is greater than a signal to noise ratio difference threshold. However, in the same field of endeavor, Derleth et al disclose a method wherein modifying the receiver signal comprises modifying the receiver signal if the difference between the first signal to noise ratio and the second signal to noise ratio is greater than a signal to noise ratio difference threshold (Derleth et al; Para [0040]-[0041]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the receiver signal taught by Derleth as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to improve the perception of target audio signals in background noise (Derleth et al; Para [0012]).
Regarding 18, Pedersen et al in view Derleth et al disclose the method of claim 16, but do not expressly disclose wherein modifying the receiver signal comprises increasing a gain in the receiver signal of either the first audio signal or second audio signal having the greatest signal to noise ratio. However, in the same field of endeavor, Derleth et al disclose a method wherein modifying the receiver signal comprises increasing a gain in the receiver signal of either the first audio signal or second audio signal having the greatest signal to noise ratio (Derleth et al; Para [0040]-[0041]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the receiver signal taught by Derleth as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to improve the perception of target audio signals in background noise (Derleth et al; Para [0012]).
Regarding 19, Pedersen et al in view Derleth et al disclose the method of claim 16, but do not expressly disclose wherein modifying the receiver signal comprises providing in the receiver signal either the first audio signal or second audio signal having the greatest signal to noise ratio to each of the first ear and second ear. However, in the same field of endeavor, Derleth et al disclose a method wherein modifying the receiver signal comprises providing in the receiver signal either the first audio signal or second audio signal having the greatest signal to noise ratio to each of the first ear and second ear (Derleth et al; Para [0040]-[0041]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the receiver signal taught by Derleth as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to improve the perception of target audio signals in background noise (Derleth et al; Para [0012]).
Claim(s) 6-7, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pedersen et al (US 2017/0013371 A1) in view of Derleth et al (US 2010/0135500 A1) and further in view of Kamkar-Parsi et al (US 2016/0381469 A1).
Regarding 6, Pedersen et al in view Derleth et al disclose the system of claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein the controller is further configured to determine a preferred ear of the wearer. However, in the same field of endeavor, Kamkar-Parsi et al disclose a method further comprising determining a preferred ear of the wearer (Kamkar-Parsi et al; Para [0041]; local hearing aid selection interpreted as preferred ear detection based on deviation angle). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the preferred hearing aid detection taught by Kamkar-Parsi et al as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to reduce the undesirable sound signals (Kamkar-Parsi et al; Para [0016]).
Regarding 7, Pedersen et al in view Derleth et al and further in view of Kamkar-Parsi et al disclose the system of claim 6, but do not expressly disclose wherein to determine the preferred ear of the wearer the controller is further configured to identify which of the first audio signal or second audio signal has the greatest signal to noise ratio. However, in the same field of endeavor, Derleth et al disclose a system wherein to determine the preferred ear of the wearer the controller is further configured to identify which of the first audio signal or second audio signal has the greatest signal to noise ratio (Derleth et al; Para [0016]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the receiver signal taught by Derleth as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to improve the perception of target audio signals in background noise (Derleth et al; Para [0012]).
Regarding 20, Pedersen et al in view Derleth et al disclose the method of claim 16, but do not expressly disclose further comprising determining a preferred ear of the wearer. However, in the same field of endeavor, Kamkar-Parsi et al disclose a method further comprising determining a preferred ear of the wearer (Kamkar-Parsi et al; Para [0041]; local hearing aid selection interpreted as preferred ear detection based on deviation angle). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the preferred hearing aid detection taught by Kamkar-Parsi et al as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to reduce the undesirable sound signals (Kamkar-Parsi et al; Para [0016]).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pedersen et al (US 2017/0013371 A1) in view of Derleth et al (US 2010/0135500 A1) and further in view of Udesen et al (US 2022/0141604 A1) and further in view of Kamkar-Parsi et al (US 2016/0381469 A1).
Regarding 8, Pedersen et al in view Derleth et al disclose the system of claim 6, but do not expressly disclose wherein at least one of the first hearing device or second hearing device further comprises an inertial measurement unit (IMU) operatively connected to the controller and configured to detect motion of a head of the wearer and provide a movement signal to the controller, wherein to determine the preferred ear of the wearer the controller is further configured to determine an angle between a median plane of the wearer and an axis that extends between the head of the wearer and an acoustic source relative to either a first ear side of the head or a second ear side of the head. However, in the same field of endeavor, Udesen et al disclose a system wherein at least one of the first hearing device or second hearing device further comprises an inertial measurement unit (IMU) operatively connected to the controller and configured to detect motion of a head of the wearer (Udesen et al; Para [0021]) and provide a movement signal to the controller (Udesen et al; Para [0024]), the controller is further configured to determine an angle between a median plane of the wearer and an axis that extends between the head of the wearer and an acoustic source relative to either a first ear side of the head or a second ear side of the head (Udesen et al; Fig 4; Para [0024][0042]-[0045][0094]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the receiver signal taught by Udesen as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to offer improved preservation of spatial auditory cues (Udesen et al; Para [0006]). Moreover, in the same field of endeavor, Kamkar-Parsi et al disclose a system wherein to determine the preferred ear of the wearer (Kamkar-Parsi et al; Para [0041]; local hearing aid selection interpreted as preferred ear detection based on deviation angle). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the preferred hearing aid detection taught by Kamkar-Parsi et al as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to reduce the undesirable sound signals (Kamkar-Parsi et al; Para [0016]).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pedersen et al (US 2017/0013371 A1) in view of Derleth et al (US 2010/0135500 A1) and further in view of Boley et al (US 2020/0329316 A1).
Regarding 9, Pedersen et al in view Derleth et al disclose the system of claim 6, but do not expressly disclose further comprising an eye sensor operatively connected to the controller, wherein the eye sensor is configured to detect eye movement of at least one eye of the wearer and provide an eye movement signal to the controller, wherein to determine the preferred ear of the wearer the controller is further configured to determine motion of at least one eye of the wearer in relation to motion of a head of the wearer. However, in the same field of endeavor, Boley et al disclose a system further comprising an eye sensor operatively connected to the controller, wherein the eye sensor is configured to detect eye movement of at least one eye of the wearer and provide an eye movement signal to the controller (Boley et al; Para [0006]), wherein to determine the preferred ear of the wearer the controller is further configured to determine motion of at least one eye of the wearer in relation to motion of a head of the wearer (Boley et al; Para [0100]-[0102]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the preferred ear detection taught by Boley as receiver signal modification in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to improve eye motion estimate (Boley et al; Fig 8; Para [0076]).
Claim(s) 10, 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pedersen et al (US 2017/0013371 A1) in view of Skoglund (US 2019/0132685 A1) and further in view of Andersen et al (US 2020/0260198 A1).
Regarding 10, Pedersen et al disclose a hearing device system comprising: a first hearing device configured to be disposed on or in a first ear of a wearer (Pedersen et al; Para [0005]) and comprising a microphone that is configured to sense acoustic waves from an environment of the wearer and convert the sensed acoustic waves to a first audio signal (Pedersen et al; Fig 6; hearing aid 2 with microphone 625 which senses ambient sounds and convert into first audio); a second hearing device configured to be disposed on or in a second ear of the wearer and comprising a microphone that is configured to sense acoustic waves from the environment and convert the sensed acoustic waves to a second audio signal (Pedersen et al; Fig 6; hearing aid 3 with microphone 625’ which senses ambient sounds and convert into second audio); a receiver operatively coupled to one or both of the first hearing device and the second hearing device (Pedersen et al; Fig 6; speaker 630 and speaker 630’ interpreted as receivers) and configured to: be in fluid communication with the first ear or the second ear; and output acoustic energy based on a receiver signal (Pedersen et al; Fig 6; speaker 630 and speaker 630’ are in fluid communication to first and second ear and output acoustic energy based on receiver signal from processor 620 and 620’); and determine a first signal to noise ratio of the first audio signal (Pedersen et al; Para [0013]); determine a second signal to noise ratio of the second audio signal (Pedersen et al; Para [0013]); compare the first signal to noise ratio and the second signal to noise ratio (Pedersen et al; Para [0006][0046]); but do not expressly disclose a movement sensor configured to sense movement of a head of the wearer and provide a movement signal based on the sensed movement ; and a controller configured to: receive the movement signal; provide the receiver signal to the receiver based on the movement signal and at least one of the first audio signal or second audio signal; and modify the receiver signal based on the movement signal and a difference between the first signal to noise ratio and the second signal to noise ratio. However, in the same field of endeavor, Skoglund et al disclose a system comprising a movement sensor configured to sense movement of a head of the wearer and provide a movement signal based on the sensed movement (Skoglund et al; Para [0018][0021]); and a controller configured to: receive the movement signal (Skoglund et al; Para [0183]); provide the receiver signal to the receiver based on the movement signal and at least one of the first audio signal or second audio signal (Skoglund et al; Para [0183]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the receiver signal taught by Skoglung as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to provide an improved hearing system (Skoglund et al; Para 0015]). Moreover, in the same field of endeavor, Andersen et al disclose a system comprising and modify the receiver signal based on the movement signal and a difference between the first signal to noise ratio and the second signal to noise ratio (Andersen et al; Para [0150]-[0157]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the receiver signal taught by Andersen as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to allow processing in limited power capacity device (Andersen et al; Para [0023]).
Regarding 12, Pedersen et al in view of Skoglung et al and further in view of Andersen et al disclose the system of claim 10, but do not expressly disclose wherein the movement sensor comprises an inertial measurement unit (IMU). However, in the same field of endeavor, Skoglund et al disclose a system wherein the movement sensor comprises an inertial measurement unit (IMU) (Skoglund et al; Para [0040]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the receiver signal taught by Skoglung as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to provide an improved hearing system (Skoglund et al; Para 0015]).
Regarding 13, Pedersen et al in view of Skoglung et al and further in view of Andersen et al disclose the system of claim 10, but do not expressly disclose further comprising an eye sensor operatively connected to the controller, wherein the eye sensor is configured to detect eye movement of at least one eye of the wearer and provide an eye movement signal, wherein to modify the receiver signal the controller is further configured to modify the receiver signal based on the movement signal, the eye movement signal, and a difference between the first signal to noise ratio and the second signal to noise ratio. However, in the same field of endeavor, Skoglund et al disclose a system further comprising an eye sensor operatively connected to the controller, wherein the eye sensor is configured to detect eye movement of at least one eye of the wearer and provide an eye movement signal (Skoglund et al; Para [0018][0021]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the receiver signal taught by Skoglung as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to provide an improved hearing system (Skoglund et al; Para 0015]). Moreover, in the same field of endeavor, Andersen et al disclose a system wherein to modify the receiver signal the controller is further configured to modify the receiver signal based on the movement signal, the eye movement signal, and a difference between the first signal to noise ratio and the second signal to noise ratio (Andersen et al; Para [0150]-[0157]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the receiver signal taught by Andersen as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to allow processing in limited power capacity device (Andersen et al; Para [0023]).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pedersen et al (US 2017/0013371 A1) in view of Skoglund (US 2019/0132685 A1) and further in view of Andersen et al (US 2020/0260198 A1) and further in view of and further in view of Kamkar-Parsi et al (US 2016/0381469 A1).
Regarding 11, Pedersen et al in view of Skoglung et al and further in view of Andersen et al disclose the system of claim 10, but do not expressly disclose wherein the controller is further configured to determine a preferred ear of the wearer based on the movement signal. However, in the same field of endeavor, Kamkar-Parsi et al disclose a system wherein the controller is further configured to determine a preferred ear of the wearer based on the movement signal (Kamkar-Parsi et al; Para [0041]; local hearing aid selection interpreted as preferred ear detection based on deviation angle). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the preferred hearing aid detection taught by Kamkar-Parsi et al as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to reduce the undesirable sound signals (Kamkar-Parsi et al; Para [0016]).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pedersen et al (US 2017/0013371 A1) in view of Skoglund (US 2019/0132685 A1) and further in view of Andersen et al (US 2020/0260198 A1) and further in view of Neher et al (US 2021/0297796 A1).
Regarding 14, Pedersen et al in view of Skoglung et al and further in view of Andersen et al disclose the system of claim 10, but do not expressly disclose wherein the controller is further configured to provide binaural localization cues to the wearer. However, in the same field of endeavor, Neher et al disclose a system wherein the controller is further configured to provide binaural localization cues to the wearer (Neher et al; Para [0014]-[0015][0025]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the receiver signal taught by Neher as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to reduce user acceptance (Neher et al; Para [0004]).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pedersen et al (US 2017/0013371 A1) in view of Skoglund (US 2019/0132685 A1) and further in view of Andersen et al (US 2020/0260198 A1) and further in view of Neher et al (US 2021/0297796 A1) and further in view of and further in view of Kamkar-Parsi et al (US 2016/0381469 A1).
Regarding 15, Pedersen et al in view of Skoglung et al and further in view of Andersen et al and further in view of Neher et al disclose the system of claim 14, but do not expressly disclose wherein the controller is further configured to analyze the movement signal, the first audio signal, and the second audio signal to determine a position of an acoustic source relative to a median plane of the wearer. However, in the same field of endeavor, Kamkar-Parsi et al disclose a system wherein the controller is further configured to analyze the movement signal, the first audio signal, and the second audio signal to determine a position of an acoustic source relative to a median plane of the wearer (Kamkar-Parsi et al; Para [0041]; local hearing aid selection interpreted as preferred ear detection based on deviation angle). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the preferred hearing aid detection taught by Kamkar-Parsi et al as receiver signal in the device taught by Pedersen. The motivation to do so would have been to reduce the undesirable sound signals (Kamkar-Parsi et al; Para [0016]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KUASSI A GANMAVO whose telephone number is (571)270-5761. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 AM-5PM.
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, Carolyn Edwards can be reached at 5712707136. 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.
/KUASSI A GANMAVO/Examiner, Art Unit 2692
/CAROLYN R EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2692
Prosecution Insights