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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-7, 9, 12, 13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solum, US PGPub 2014/0193007 in view of Udesen, US PGPub 2015/0189449 in view of Gudiksen, US PGPub 2014/0341390.
Regarding claim 1, Solum discloses a hearing device configured for being worn at an ear of a user (Figure 1, element 300, paragraph 29), the hearing device comprising: an input transducer (microphone 304);a processing unit (hearing assistance electronics 305);an output transducer (speaker 302);an antenna (antenna 307); and a wireless communication unit coupled to the antenna (wireless communications receiver 306); wherein the hearing device is configured to initiate a scanning for advertisements of available broadcasted audio streams (paragraphs 29, 31; the hearing aid 300 scans for streaming audio from external device 110). There are movement sensors 112 in Solum disclosed in paragraphs 20-24, however the sensors are part of the external device 110 and not in the hearing device. Accordingly, Solum does not disclose a movement sensor configured to provide movement data indicative of user movement and
wherein the hearing device is configured to initiate the scanning based on the movement data.
Udesen discloses a hearing device 2 in figure 1 comprising a movement sensor configured to provide movement data indicative of user movement (position controller 12 having motion detector 22 and position estimator 24, paragraph 87). Paragraphs 90-93 describe audio system 30 using position and motion data to process the input signal 50 to output signal 52 in accordance with the position of the hearing aid device. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the invention of Solum to include the motion detector and signal processing of Udesen for the purpose of improving the audio experience of the hearing device using its own precise position and movement data.
The combination of Solum and Udesen does not disclose wherein the hearing device is configured to initiate the scanning based on the movement data. Gudiksen discloses wherein a hearing device (not shown, but the user is shown in figure 1, see also paragraph 88) is configured to initiate the scanning based on the movement data (paragraph 88, the hearing device performs a search and identifies a different audio source transmitter 7 when the user moves). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the combination of Solum and Udesen to include the teachings of Gudisken for the purpose of optimizing the selection of an audio source while a user moves.
Regarding claim 4, the hearing device according to claim 1, wherein the hearing device is configured to initiate the scanning for the advertisements when the movement data indicates that the user has changed location (Gudisken, paragraph 88, since Gudisken is directed toward changing location and audio streams; Udesen discloses movement data updated with a change of location in paragraph 56; accordingly the combination reads on the claim).
Regarding claim 5, the hearing device according to claim 4, wherein the hearing device is configured to initiate the scanning for the advertisements when the movement data indicates that the user has moved over a threshold distance from a position of a last scanning is taught by Udesen, paragraph 56 which discloses a position change over a threshold.
Regarding claim 6, the hearing device according to claim 1, wherein the movement sensor comprises one or more of: an accelerometer, a gyroscope, a magnetometer, or a GPS module (Udesen, paragraph 55).
Regarding claim 7, the hearing device according to claim 1, wherein the hearing device is further configured for performing the scanning for advertisements (Gudisken, paragraph 88).
Regarding claim 9, it is a method claim representing the same subject matter as that of claim 1 and is therefore rejected using the same rationale.
Regarding claim 12, it is a method claim representing the same subject matter as that of claim 4 and is therefore rejected using the same rationale.
Regarding claim 13, it is a method claim representing the same subject matter as that of claim 5 and is therefore rejected using the same rationale.
Regarding claim 15, it is a method claim representing the same subject matter as that of claim 7 and is therefore rejected using the same rationale.
Claim(s) 2 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solum, Udesen, and Gudisken as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Dickmann et al, US PGPub 2020/0162883.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Solum, Udesen, and Gudisken fails to teach wherein the scanning for advertisements is for a scan duration, the scan duration being a limited period of time. Dickmann et al disclose scanning for advertisements is for a scan duration, the scan duration being a limited period of time in paragraph 61. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the combination of Solum, Udesen, and Gudisken to include the teachings of Dickmann et al for the purpose of conserving battery life of the hearing aid while attempting to scan for audio sources.
Regarding claim 10, it is a method claim representing the same subject matter as that of claim 2 and is therefore rejected using the same rationale.
Claim(s) 3, 11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solum, Udesen, and Gudisken as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Pedersen et al, US PGPub 2025/0110688.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Solum, Udesen, and Gudisken fails to teach the hearing device according to claim 1, wherein the hearing device is further configured to pause one or more active processes of the processing unit and/or one or more active processes of the wireless communication unit for a scan duration of the scanning. Pedersen et al teach the hearing device is further configured to pause one or more active processes of the processing unit and/or one or more active processes of the wireless communication unit for a scan duration of the scanning (paragraphs 26 and 49). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the combination of Solum, Udesen, and Gudisken to include the teachings of Pedersen et al for the purpose of ensuring efficient computational use.
Regarding claim 11, it is a method claim representing the same subject matter as that of claim 3 and is therefore rejected using the same rationale.
Regarding claim 14, the method according to claim 9, further comprising stopping or pausing any audio streaming the hearing device was providing when the act of scanning for the advertisements is initiated is taught by paragraph 49 of Pedersen et al.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Solum, Udesen, and Gudisken as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lee et al, US PGPub 2014/0294183.
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Solum, Udesen, and Gudisken fails to teach a hearing system comprising the hearing device of claim 1, and an assistance device, the hearing device and the assistance device being configured to wirelessly connect with each other. Lee et al disclose a hearing system comprising the hearing device of claim 1, and an assistance device, the hearing device (hearing aid 300) and the assistance device (terminal 100) being configured to wirelessly connect with each other in figure 1 and paragraph 48. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the combination of Solum, Udesen, and Gudisken to include the teachings of Lee et al for the purpose of controlling the sound sources received by the hearing aid via a user interface easily.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Mitra et al, US PGPub 2024/0397271 is directed toward an audio presentation system in an exhibition space comprising a hearing aid for hearing the audio for exhibits. Solum et al, US PGPub 2018/0124526 is directed toward an assistive listening system having multiple audio sources in different rooms and a hearing device to be configured to listened to audio in a specific room.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Brian T Pendleton whose telephone number is (571)272-7527. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30AM - 5:30 PM.
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, Colleen Fauz can be reached at (571) 272-1667. 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.
Brian T. Pendleton
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2425
/Brian T Pendleton/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2425
Prosecution Insights