DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-18 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b), or the following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "said device”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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) 1-2, 4, 7-11, 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over El Guindi (US Patent No. 11477583; US Publication No. 20210306771) view of McKinney et al (US Patent No. 12069436).
Regarding claim 1, El Guindi teaches a hearing aid (103, hearing aid) configured to be operated based on an estimation of a current listening effort of a hearing aid user, the hearing aid comprising: a classification unit (318, classifier; 320, vital monitor; 325, stress logger) comprising determining a value representing said hearing aid user’s current listening effort from data obtained from at least one physiological sensor (para. 0034-0041, wherein the classifier, 318, determines classification probabilities), a memory (memory, 305) storing reference sets of values representing the hearing aid user’s current listening effort and corresponding listening modes, a signal processor (processor, 330) configured to adjust signal processing parameters based on the listening mode corresponding to the determined measure according to the stored reference sets.
Although El Guindi teaches using a neural network (¶0042, processor, 330, neural network engine) in the hearing aid, El Guindi does not specify what tasks the internal neural engine performs. Further, El Guindi does teach a neural network (element 102), which is external to the hearing aid, configured to classify the current situation of the hearing aid user (para. 0042, wherein stress log is sent for machine learning in the wireless device, 102, to be applied to the processing scheme).
In figure 15, McKinney teaches the addition of an internal neural network (160, machine learning processor) to hearing aid (100), thus adding a environment adapting feature within the hearing aid.
It would have been obvious matter of design choice to configure the neural network to be internal or external to the hearing aid such that environmental adaptation can be realized since Applicant's has not disclosed that having either configuration solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well either configuration [In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)].
Regarding claim 2, the combination of El Guindi and McKinney teaches a hearing aid (103) according to claim 1, wherein the classification unit (318, 320, 355) is configured to classify the current situation defined by one or more of the following: the physical environment (para. 0038, classifier, 318), the current acoustic situation, the current mode or state of the hearing aid user (para. 0040, vital signs, 320) the current mode or state of the hearing aid, and/or the current mode or state of the device in communication with the hearing aid.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of El Guindi and McKinney teaches a hearing aid according to claim 1, wherein the hearing aid (103) comprises a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) estimator for determining an SNR in the environment of the hearing aid user (para. 0038, speech in noise, e.g. SNR).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of El Guindi and McKinney teaches a hearing aid according to claim 1, wherein said classification unit (318) is configured to determine a PTT of the hearing aid user (para. 0029-0031; wherein PTT is anticipated since photoplethsmogram (PPG) information is core to the measurement of PTT).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of El Guindi and McKinney teaches a hearing aid according to claim 1, wherein the hearing aid comprises said at least one physiological sensor (fig. 3, sensor; 365).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of El Guindi and McKinney teaches a hearing aid according to claim 8, wherein the hearing aid implements a clock synchronization to synchronize data from measurements of said at least one physiological sensor in said device with measurements of said at least one physiological sensor in said hearing aid.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of El Guindi and McKinney teaches a hearing aid according to claim 1, wherein the hearing aid (103) comprises at least one accelerometer (355; para. 0045-0047) configured to detect a movement of the hearing aid user.
Regarding claim 11, the combination of El Guindi and McKinney teaches a hearing aid according to claim 3, wherein said device comprises a remote control, a smartphone, or other portable or wearable electronic device (para. 0032; phone).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of El Guindi and McKinney teaches an apparatus capable of performing a method of operating a hearing aid based on an estimation of a current listening effort of a hearing aid user, the method comprising classifying (318, classifier; 320, vital monitor; 325, stress logger) the current situation of the hearing aid user, comprising determining a value representing said hearing aid user’s current listening effort from data obtained from at least one physiological sensor (fig. 3, sensor; 365), storing reference sets of values representing the hearing aid user’s current listening effort (memory, 305) and corresponding listening modes, adjusting signal processing parameters (processor, 330 in conjunction with the processing scheme) based on the listening mode corresponding to the determined measure according to the stored reference sets.
Regarding claim 18, the combination of El Guindi and McKinney teaches a data processing system comprising a processor (330) and memory (305) storing program code which, when executed by the processor, causes the method of claim 17 to be performed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 3, 5-6, 12-16 is/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.
Examiner’s Note
The referenced citations made in the rejection(s) above are intended to exemplify areas in the prior art document(s) in which the examiner believed are the most relevant to the claimed subject matter. However, it is incumbent upon the applicant to analyze the prior art document(s) in its/their entirety since other areas of the document(s) may be relied upon at a later time to substantiate examiner’s rationale of record. A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention. W.L. Gore & associates, Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984). However, “the prior art’s mere disclosure of more than one alternative does not constitute a teaching away from any of these alternatives because such disclosure does not criticize, discredit, or otherwise discourage the solution claimed….” In re Fulton, 391 F.3d 1195, 1201, 73 USPQ2d 1141, 1146 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHYLESHA DABNEY whose telephone number is (571)272-7494. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Wednesday and Friday 10:30-4:30PM.
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, Duc Nguyen can be reached at 5712727503. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
For general questions such as application status, Monday–Friday, 8:30AM -5:00PM, inquiry to:
Local: 571-272-1000
Toll-Free: 800-786-9199
TTY: 800-877-8339
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks
P O Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Or faxed to:
(703) 273-8300, for formal communications intended for entry and for informal or draft communications, please label "Proposed" or "Draft" when submitting an informal amendment.
Hand-delivered responses should be brought to:
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
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.
September 21, 2026
/PHYLESHA DABNEY/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2694
