This disclosure relates generally to headphones for listening to sounds, such as music. More particularly, this disclosure generally relates to headphones configured to automatically limit possible hearing damage by controlling characteristics of the sound output.
Exposure to audio signals at greater and greater amplitudes through the use of headphones and media devices, such as cell phones and MP3 players, has been increasing at an alarming rate. Exposure to audio signals at high decibel levels has been determined to be one of the primary causes of age-related permanent hearing impairment. However, hearing impairment is not only increasing in the general population, but is increasing at a significantly faster rate among young people, especially in among those who utilize media devices and wear headphones (or wireless earpieces) for significant amounts of time.
The extent of hearing damage sustained through exposure to sounds has been determined to be a function of both the amplitude and the duration of the audio signals, and particularly exposure to audio signals at amplitudes that exceed a safe acoustic threshold. Permanent hearing damage is a cumulative effect of exceeding the minimum thresholds or safe pressure levels for extended periods. Safe listening durations at various amplitudes can be calculated by averaging audio output levels over time to yield a time-weighted average. Various administrative bodies (such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)) and health awareness agencies (such as the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)) have adopted guidelines for safe acoustic levels that are based on an eight hour work day. However, such guidelines were not necessarily designed to address the most common source of acoustic damage, namely headphones.
Unfortunately, most common media devices and their associated headphones encourage listening to music at volume levels well above the safe acoustic threshold set, for example, by OSHA. Such volume levels may have no immediate effect on hearing, but long-term exposure can nevertheless cause permanent hearing impairment.
To help prevent hearing damage, some devices have been developed to periodically measure sound levels of ambient audio signals. Such measurements can be used to estimate a cumulative effect of the ambient audio signals over time. However, such devices often simply notify the user when they have exceeded the OSHA or NIOSH guidelines for acoustic exposure. Unfortunately, these devices typically provide no preventative measures for the device user. Further, such devices are often worn in place of headphones, making the two devices incompatible. Some headphones utilize a predetermined maximum output level in an attempt to limit the output amplitude to prevent ear damage. This approach, however, is ineffective as it does not take into account listening duration and the calculation of risk for auditory injury over time.
Other devices have been developed to be placed as an accessory between the media player and the earphones increasing earphone impedance as the decibel level increases. This approach, however, is limited, in part, because such devices cannot be calibrated for the speakers in the headphones. As a result, these devices may either limit the audio output too much or not enough.
In the following description, the use of the same reference numerals in different drawings indicates similar or identical items.
Sound (or noise) dosimeters are devices used to measure sound levels or sound pressure levels over time to estimate the noise exposure of a person. Studies indicate that sustained exposure to noise levels in excess of 85 dB and/or short and loud noises above a peak threshold can permanently damage hearing. To protect workers from acoustic exposure-based hearing impairment, the European Community, for example, adopted a rule that no worker, while on the job, should be exposed to an acoustic pressure of more than about 200 Pa, which equates to approximately 140 dB.
Dosimeters have been developed that can be worn on the user's belt and/or worn as a badge or pin on the user's clothing. Such devices can be configured to measure sound parameters and to warn the person when the decibel level exceeds a safe threshold level. Most sound pressure level dosimeters are meant to be worn all day and to monitor all audio signals to which the dosimeter is exposed. However, this is often impractical because such devices are not discrete and are not necessarily designed to measure the types of sounds that tend to cause the most damage. For many people, especially young people, the most damaging audio signals are delivered by media players configured to reproduce sounds at high decibel levels for short periods of time, often through headphones that deliver sound signals directly into the user's ear canal, which sound signals cannot be measured by such noise dosimeters.
Embodiments of a headphone system are disclosed below that are configured to monitor audio levels over time and to adjust the audio levels appropriately to prevent the headphone system from permanently damaging the hearing of the user. In a particular embodiment, the system includes a dosimeter to monitor acoustic exposure and logic to selectively adjust audio output levels over time based on the acoustic exposure. By providing a sound pressure level dosimeter in the headphones and by allowing automatic adjustment of the audio output levels, a large percentage of hearing damage caused by headphone usage can be prevented, even if the dosimeter is not designed to monitor ambient noise and other non-headphone produced noise to which the user may be exposed.
Damage calculating instructions 120 are executable by processor 110 to calculate the hearing damage per second caused by the audio signal's current decibel level. Damage threshold 122 includes a numerical representation of the amount of hearing damage a user's ear can absorb before the damage becomes permanent. Damage counter 124 includes instructions for accumulating an amount of damage attributable to the acoustic exposure of the user and a numerical value of the amount of damage the user has sustained from listening to audio signals reproduced by speaker 104 using headphone system 100.
It should be appreciated that, in some instances, the ear can repair or regenerate itself through periods of low noise (i.e., noise levels below a safe hearing threshold) or no noise. Such regeneration takes time. Regeneration calculating instructions 126 are executable by processor 110 to calculate the amount of regeneration or repair that the user's ear has achieved over time. Remediation instructions 127 are executable by processor 110 to reduce the amplitude of or to otherwise modify the audio signal as the user listens to headphones 102. As discussed below in greater detail, remediation instructions 127 may be programmed in a number of ways to provide a variety of listening options to the user. Regeneration threshold data 128 includes a numerical value representing the decibel level at which the damage caused by the audio signal is less than the regeneration rate of the user's ear. Max DR threshold data 129 is a numerical value representing a peak decibel level the ear can handle before instantaneous hearing loss occurs.
In one embodiment, the count of damage counter 124 is originally set to zero as if the user's ears are fully repaired (i.e., in a fully regenerated, no-hearing-impairment state). As, an audio signal is received from audio source 130 at audio input 108, the audio signal is converted to a digital signal for processing by processor 110. Processor 110 monitors the amplitude of the audio signal and executes damage calculating instructions 120 to determine the damage over time caused by the decibel level of the audio signal as it is reproduced for the user. Using the damage calculating instructions 120, processor 110 converts the amplitude of the audio signal to a decibel level to obtain the damage per second at that decibel level. It is important to understand that the higher the amplitude of the audio signal, the higher the sound pressure level becomes and the more damage that is caused per second to a user's ear. Processor 110 uses damage calculating instructions 120 to determine the damage per second and to calculate the damage to the user's ear based on the amount of time the decibel level is maintained, and adds the resulting data to damage counter 124 to indicate the current state of the user's hearing.
Processor 110 also executes regeneration instructions 126. Regeneration instructions 126 model the regeneration rate of the human ear, so after the user listens to audio signals, which can cause degeneration, the human ear is capable of repairing the damage at a determinable rate. Further, while the ear is exposed to sounds below the regeneration threshold 128, the ear may repair itself. Regeneration instructions 126 model the regeneration rate of the human ear by subtracting the regeneration per second from damage counter 124. It should be noted that the damage rate and the regeneration rate are both impacted by the amplitude of the audio signals, such that the rates will vary over time. Thus, as damage calculating instructions 120 add damage to damage counter 124, regeneration instructions 126 may subtract damage. The addition and subtraction of damage may occur at different rates depending on the audio level. In this way, damage counter 124 models the total hearing damage that actually occurred to the ear at any time during the period in which the user listens to audio output from speaker 104.
As previously discussed, prolonged exposure to noise levels above a safe acoustic threshold can cause permanent hearing impairment. Accordingly, as damage counter 124 approaches a permanent hearing threshold included within the damage threshold 122, processor 110 selectively executes remediation instructions 127 to reduce the amplitude of the audio signal. Such remediation instructions 127 can include various steps or options, which may be executed at different stages as the damage counter 124 approaches the permanent hearing loss threshold.
In a particular example, processor 110 executes remediation instructions 127 when damage counter 124 reaches or is about to exceed the damage threshold 122. At this point, remediation instructions 127 cause the processor 110 to adjust the decibel level of the audio signal to a safe level that is below the regeneration threshold 128 and to limit the decibel level of the audio signal to that safe level until at least a portion of the hearing damage is repaired as modeled by the regeneration instructions 126. In one example, remediation instructions 127 cause processor 110 to reduce the decibel level before damage counter 124 equals or exceeds damage threshold 122. By reducing the decibel level before damage counter 124 reaches damage threshold 122, system 100 may retain a hearing buffer to protect the user's hearing in case the user is exposed to other sound signals outside of the control of system 100.
In a second example, remediation instructions 127 cause processor 110 to gradually decrease the amplitude of the audio signal over time in proportion to the distance between the damage counter 124 and the damage threshold 122. The gradual decrease of the amplitude may be a substantially linear decrease or a non-linear adjustment that decreases the decibel level more rapidly as the damage counter 124 approaches the damage threshold 122. By gradually decreasing the decibel level as the damage counter 124 approaches the damage threshold 122, the user can listen to the audio signal longer at levels above safe hearing levels without causing permanent damage.
In another particular embodiment, processor 110 executes remediation instructions 127 to change the amplitude of the audio signal over time to fit a curve based on the original decibel level of the audio signal and a determined time period for listening. The curve is a pre-configured output curve designed to extend the amount of time the user can utilize system 100 at higher decibel and amplitude levels by lengthening the time it takes for the damage counter 124 to reach damage threshold 122. The time period may be predetermined (such as the average listening time of a normal user), set by the user, determined from the user's normal listening behavior, or any combination thereof.
Remediation instructions 127 may be programmed or configured by a user to reduce the volume below regeneration threshold 128 before damage counter 124 reaches damage threshold 122. In one particular example, processor 110 executes remediation instructions 127 to calculate a decibel adjustment curve, which processor 110 can use to adjust the audio output signal such that the decibel level of the audio signal drops below regeneration threshold 128 when damage counter 124 reaches a specified percentage of damage threshold 122.
In yet another example, remediation instructions 127 cause processor 110 to use a stepped approach to limiting hearing damage. In this example, processor 110 executes remediation instructions 127 to determine a series of decibel levels based on the original decibel level of the audio signal, which step down incrementally from the original decibel level over time so that the audio level is reduced incrementally as damage counter 124 increases. After a first period of time, processor 110 executes remediation instructions 127 to reduce the audio signal by a first increment, and then allows the user to listen to the audio signal at that decibel level until damage counter 124 reaches a specified fraction of damage threshold 122. After the specified fraction is reached or exceeded, processor 110 executes remediation instructions 127 to decrease the decibel level of the audio output by another incremental step. In a particular example, if there were four steps, processor 110 can decrement the decibel level by a step when damage counter 124 equals one fourth of damage threshold 122, one-half of damage threshold 122, three fourths of damage threshold 122, and so on. When the damage counter 124 approaches the damage threshold 122, processor 110 executes remediation instructions 127 to decrease the decibel level to a safe decibel level that is below regeneration threshold 128.
In yet another example, remediation instructions 127 cause processor 110 to use scale the amplitude based on the rate of change of the damage counter 124. This function may be linear, stepped, or exponential as described above but the rate at which the amplitude is adjusted down is based on the value of the damage counter 124.
In all of the above examples, once the decibel level is reduced below the regeneration threshold 128, processor 110 is configured to limit the audio signal to the safe decibel level until damage counter 124 indicates that regeneration has reached a predetermined fraction of damage threshold 122. For example, system 100 may use remediation instructions 127 to increase the decibel level again once damage counter 124 falls to 50% of damage threshold 122.
It should be understood that system 100 may also be designed to decrement the damage counter 124. In this instance, damage counter 124 may be originally set at damage threshold 122, and the damage counter 124 is reduced during operation based on damage calculating instructions 120 and is increased by regeneration instructions 126. In this instance, other remediation instructions (such as incrementally adjusting or limiting the audio signal as the damage counter 124 approaches the damage threshold 122) would be changed such that the remediation instructions 127 would cause the processor 110 to limit the decibel level of the audio signal as the damage counter 124 decreases.
While
Headphones 204 includes variable gain amplifier (VGA) 210 with a first input coupled to audio source 202 for receiving audio signals, a gain control input, and an output coupled to a speaker 212. VGA 210 is configured to scale the amplitude of the audio signals and to provide the scaled audio signals to speaker 212, which generates an acoustic signal and provides it to the user. The output of VGA 210 is also optionally coupled to delay 214, which is utilized in a feedback loop including an analog comparator 224, a threshold indicator 230, a transistor 222, a pulse generator 226, an energy storage element 218 (such as an integrator or capacitor), a switch 220, and a power source 216 to provide stability for the system 200. Delay 214 slows the rate at which volume adjustments happen.
Analog comparator 224 includes a first input coupled to an output of delay 214, a second input coupled to the threshold indicator 230, and an output coupled to a terminal of transistor 222. Threshold indicator 230 is a signal that represents the regeneration threshold for use by analog comparator 224 to determine if the scaled audio signal is above or below the threshold. Analog comparator 224 is further coupled to transistor 222 to increase the resistance level of transistor 222 as the charge on energy storage element 218 increases. In this way, the rate of charge increase on energy storage element 218 is variable to correctly model the rate at which the user undergoes hearing damage at different acoustic amplitudes. When the scaled audio signal exceeds the threshold indicator 230, analog comparator 224 provides an output signal to transistor 222, which biases energy storage element 218.
Energy storage element 218 operates as a damage counter by producing an output signal to adjust the gain of VGA 210. Energy storage element 218 may be an integrator, capacitor, or other storage element. In the following discussion, energy storage element 218 is described as a capacitor. However, it should be understood that system 200 operates in a similar manner if energy storage element 218 is an integrator, where the integrator stores energy instead of charge. Energy storage element 218 is coupled to switch 220 which is turned on and off by pulse generator 226 to couple energy storage element 218 to power source 216 according to timing of the generated pulses. Energy storage element 218 receives its charge from power source 216 when switch 220 is closed. When transistor 222 is turned on, charge stored in energy storage element 218 flows to ground 228 through transistor 222 and the rate of current flow is dependent on the signal level/voltage applied to the gate of transistor 222, which level is set by the output of analog comparator 224. If the scaled audio signal has a decibel level that is above the threshold indicator 230, analog comparator 224 turns on current flow through transistor 222 and current flows from energy storage element 218 through transistor 222 to ground. Energy storage element 218 is further coupled to VGA 210, and based on the charge held within energy storage element 218, controls the gain of VGA 210 to scale the audio signal.
In one example, an audio signal is received at the input of VGA 210. VGA 210 scales the amplitude of the audio signal to produce a scaled audio signal at its output, which is then provided to speaker 212 for reproduction for the user. The scaled audio signal is also received by analog comparator 224, which compares the adjusted signal to threshold indicator 230. If the scaled audio signal is above threshold indicator 230, analog comparator 224 generates a control signal to decrease the resistance of transistor 222, allowing more current to flow from energy storage element 218 through transistor 222 to ground. If, however, the scaled audio signal is below threshold indicator 230, analog comparator 224 controls transistor 222 to decrease or turn off current flow through transistor 222, allowing less charge to escape from energy storage element 218 to ground 228. Thus, the charge recorded by energy storage element 218 is consumed at varying rates dependent on the decibel level at which the scaled audio signal is received by analog comparator 224 and dependent on the level at which the threshold indicator 230 is set.
Energy storage element 218 models the human ear in a manner similar to the way damage counter 124 in
Thus, system 200 utilizes energy storage element 218 as an analog imitation of the regeneration and damage rate of the human ear, and system 200 can be configured to control the scaled analog signal based on damage sustained by the user's hearing over the period of time the user uses headphones 204 to prevent permanent hearing damage. Thus, the system 200 actively scales the amplitude or volume level of the audio signal as the user consumes the allowable dosage for the day as represented by the charge on energy storage element 218.
As the user listens to the audio signal at a level above the regeneration threshold, the amount of charge being drained from energy storage element 218 is increased above the level at which the charge is replenished, causing the overall charge on energy storage element 218 to decrease. As the charge decreases, energy storage element 218 will control VGA 210 to decrease the amplitude of the audio signal, such that the scaled audio signal will have a lower volume and thus a lower sound pressure level than the original audio signal, and the scaled audio signal will be delivered to the user through speaker 212. The gain of VGA 210 is directly related to the amount of charge remaining in energy storage element 218. By altering the relationship between charge on energy storage element 218 and the gain of VGA 210, different correction curves can be generated by system 200.
VGA 210 may eventually lower the audio signal's amplitude to a decibel level below that of threshold indicator 230. This can happen if either the charge on energy storage element 218 reaches zero or the charge reaches a predetermined amount. For example, system 200 may reserve part of the repairable hearing damage that the user's ear can sustain for consumption by the user while not using system 200. Therefore the charge level at which VGA 210 reduces the audio signal's amplitude to a decibel level below that of threshold indicator 230 could be at a charge level representing an acoustic dosage of approximately 90% of the allowable daily allotment, leaving 10% of the repairable hearing damage.
It should be understood that the above-described system is only one possible analog embodiment, and that it is contemplated that other systems could be devised using additional analog comparators and/or resistors. For example by adding a second comparator between transistor 222 and analog comparator 224, system 200 could accommodate an acceptable safe level indicator and threshold indicator 230, where the acceptable safe level indicator is a sound pressure level where the user could listen to audio signals for a 24 hour period and only consume 1% of the allowable dosage (where the allowable dosage is the amount of exposure to acoustic signals that a user can experience before permanent hearing impairment occurs). Thus setting the minimum volume level to a higher decibel value than that of threshold indicator 230. In another example, multiple resistors or transistors could be utilized to provide a stepped function as described in the description of
If, however, at 306 the sound pressure level exceeds the threshold, method 300 advances to 310 and, if the hearing damage is less than usable hearing dosage, the method advances to 312 and the amplitude level of the output signal is adjusted based on remediation instructions. The usable hearing dosage is the amount of hearing damage that the user has sustained by using the headphone system. Thus the usable hearing dosage is a percentage of the damage threshold 122 of
At 310, if the hearing damage is greater than the usable hearing dosage, method 300 proceeds to 314 and the amplitude of the audio signal is adjusted to a level that is below the threshold. If, however, the hearing damage is less than the usable hearing dosage, the method 300 advances to 312 and adjusts the amplitude level based on the remediation instructions. The amplitude could be adjusted by the remediation instructions in a variety of ways and, in particular, in the manners described above with respect to
Once method 300 adjusts the amplitude either according to the remediation instructions or below the threshold, method 300 advances to 308 and records the change in the hearing damage. If the sound pressure level was above the threshold then the hearing damage sustained is decreased, but if the sound pressure level was above the threshold, the hearing damage is increased. After the change in hearing damage is recorded, method 300 returns to 302 and the cycle begins again with another audio signal.
It should be appreciated that, while the above-discussion has focused on amplitude of the audio signals, the techniques and systems described above may also be used to adjust other audio parameters, such as tone, pitch, bass, and other parameters. To the extent that certain parameters are determined to increase the rate of damage to the hearing, it may be useful to selectively adjust one or more acoustic parameters, including amplitude, pitch, tone, frequency, and other parameters, without substantially altering the content of the audio signal, thereby reducing the effects of prolonged exposure and (preferably) preventing permanent damage to the hearing of the user.
Adjustment curve 402 is generated when processor 110 executes remediation instructions 127. Adjustment curve 402 is determined by a number of pre-programmed or user adjustable variables including, but not limited to, listening time, starting amplitude, and the current state of damage counter 124. In this example, processor 110 executes remediation instructions 127 upon activation of headphones 102 and calculates a continuous curve that would allow the user to listen to headphones 102 for 20 hours continuously without damaging the user's hearing. In this embodiment, processor 110, in conjunction with remediation instructions 127, takes an active role in determining the amplitude of the sound generated by headphones 102 over time, and adjustment curve 402 depicts a continuous and gradual reduction of the amplitude of the acoustic signals over time. While the adjustment curve 402 represents one possible adjustment, by altering the variables, many different continues curves can be provided.
While
However, unlike in
Adjustment curve 602 depicts a step function, which allows the user to listen to sound at any level they desire until damage counter 124 is approximately equal to damage threshold 122. When the damage threshold 122 is reached, the adjustment curve 602, in conjunction with remediation instructions 127 executed by processor 110, causes the processor 110 to decrease amplitude of the audio signal abruptly to a decibel level that is below threshold 604.
It should be appreciated that other adjustment curves may also be used. For example, an adjustment curve could be a sloped line that decreases linearly over time. In another example, the adjustment curve may be an exponential decay curve. In still another example, the adjustment curve may include components of each of the above types of curves, forming a composite curve that takes different types of remediation actions at different times during the period over which the user is listening to the audio signal. Such different actions may be based on the amount of time, the current audio level, the amount of damage, or any combination thereof.
In conjunction with the systems and methods described above with respect to
Although the present invention has been described with reference to preferred embodiments, workers skilled in the art will recognize that changes may be made in form and detail without departing from the scope of the invention.
This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/176,738, filed Jul. 5, 2011 , now U.S. Pat. No. 9,167,339, which is a non-provisional of and claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent App. No. 61/362,211, filed Jul. 7, 2010, both of which are incorporated herein by reference in their entireties.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3350643 | Webb | Oct 1967 | A |
4845755 | Busch et al. | Jul 1989 | A |
4947432 | Topholm | Aug 1990 | A |
4972487 | Mangold et al. | Nov 1990 | A |
5107473 | Fuji et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
5130665 | Walden | Jul 1992 | A |
5148153 | Haymond | Sep 1992 | A |
5303306 | Brillhart et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5450494 | Okubo et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5524056 | Killion et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5524150 | Sauer | Jun 1996 | A |
5563951 | Wang et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5608803 | Magotra et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5651073 | Isu et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5661812 | Scofield et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5666426 | Helms | Sep 1997 | A |
5692058 | Eggers et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5721783 | Anderson | Feb 1998 | A |
5727070 | Coninx | Mar 1998 | A |
5734731 | Marx | Mar 1998 | A |
5734964 | Fishman et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5734976 | Bartschi et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5764775 | Kim | Jun 1998 | A |
5768397 | Fazio | Jun 1998 | A |
5802183 | Scheller et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5812598 | Sharma et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5824022 | Zilberman et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5867581 | Obara | Feb 1999 | A |
5873126 | Singh et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
6078675 | Bowen-Nielsen et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6151400 | Seligman | Nov 2000 | A |
6330339 | Ishige et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6532294 | Rudell et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6694034 | Julstrom et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6741712 | Bisgaard | May 2004 | B2 |
6794852 | Tran | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6920229 | Boesen et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
7010133 | Chalupper et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7050907 | Janky et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
7167571 | Bantz et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7301305 | Tran | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7324650 | Fischer et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7336227 | Durst et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7397217 | Van Brocklin et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7446505 | Paul et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7451256 | Hagen et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7499686 | Sinclair et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7519194 | Niederdrank et al. | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7529545 | Rader et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
7561708 | Röhrlein et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7593822 | Stewart | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7610035 | Van Bosch et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7640101 | Pair et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7676335 | Ahmed et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7715576 | Ribic et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7778432 | Larsen et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7787647 | Hagen et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7826631 | Fischer et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7853028 | Fischer et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7929722 | Shridhar et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
7933419 | Roeck et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
8170884 | Vaudrey et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
8265315 | Sørensen et al. | Sep 2012 | B2 |
8379871 | Michael et al. | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8457335 | Imamura et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8515110 | Neumeyer et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8526649 | Foo et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
8611570 | Neumeyer et al. | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8649538 | Apfel et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8654999 | Mindlin, II et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8761421 | Apfel et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8787603 | Fichtl et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8810392 | Teller et al. | Aug 2014 | B1 |
9071917 | Apfel | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9167339 | Knox et al. | Oct 2015 | B2 |
9191756 | Neumeyer et al. | Nov 2015 | B2 |
9462397 | Neumeyer et al. | Oct 2016 | B2 |
20030008659 | Waters et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030055537 | Odinak et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030059076 | Martin | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030069704 | Bean et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030215105 | Sacha | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040059446 | Goldberg et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040199146 | Rogers et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20050036637 | Janssen | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050277994 | McNamee et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050281424 | Rass et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060182294 | Grasbon et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060198530 | Fischer et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20070014423 | Darbut et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070098195 | Holmes | May 2007 | A1 |
20070214893 | Killion et al. | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20070254728 | Moallemi et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070255435 | Cohen et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20070274531 | Camp et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080037797 | Goldstein et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080136654 | Toriello et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080137873 | Goldstein et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080167531 | McDermott et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080240477 | Howard et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20090074216 | Bradford et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090208024 | Farver et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090262964 | Havenith et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090290721 | Goldstein et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20100027822 | Dietz | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100054511 | Wu et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100202637 | Cornelisse et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
20100255782 | Klemmensen | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100273452 | Rajann et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100296668 | Lee et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110176697 | Apfel et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110200215 | Apfel et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110243345 | Carreras et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20110249836 | Solum et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20120082329 | Neumeyer et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120130660 | Neumeyer et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
20130301860 | Neumeyer et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20140003641 | Neumeyer et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20150256946 | Neumeyer et al. | Sep 2015 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
19542961 | May 1997 | DE |
2473664 | Jan 2012 | GB |
1998043192 | Jan 1998 | WO |
2006117365 | Nov 2006 | WO |
2008071236 | Jun 2008 | WO |
2009001559 | Dec 2008 | WO |
2010073749 | Jul 2010 | WO |
2011159349 | Dec 2011 | WO |
Entry |
---|
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 13/290,269, mailed Sep. 19, 2016, 35 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 14/719,544, mailed Jul. 13, 2016, 6 pages. |
Berger, Elliott, “Dangerous Decibles: How Loud is Too Loud?” <www.dangerousdecibels.org/education/information-center/decibel-exposure-time-guidelines/>, accessed Dec. 23, 2013, 3 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 13/007,568, mailed May 30, 2013, 19 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 13/176,738, mailed May 22, 2014, 11 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 13/290,269, mailed May 1, 2015, 23 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 13/708,009, mailed Jul. 30, 2014, 9 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 13/935,744, mailed Jun. 10, 2015, 9 pages. |
International Searching Authority/Unites States, International Search Report and Written Opinion, PCT Patent Application PCT/US2011/001077, mailed Nov. 15, 2011, 9 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 13/007,568, mailed Dec. 12, 2012, 19 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 13/176,738, mailed Feb. 18, 2015, 5 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 13/176,738, mailed Jan. 16, 2014, 13 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 13/176,738, mailed Jul. 18, 2013, 16 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 13/290,269, mailed Nov. 18, 2014, 20 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 13/708,009, mailed Jan. 21, 2014, 7 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 13/935,744, mailed Aug. 7, 2015, 10 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 13/935,744, mailed Dec. 26, 2014, 6 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 13/935,744, mailed Feb. 20, 2015, 10 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 13/007,568, mailed Feb. 14, 2014, 5 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 13/176,738, mailed Jun. 17, 2015, 9 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 13/244,260, mailed May 1, 2013, 12 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 13/708,009, mailed Feb. 27, 2015, 5 pages. |
GN ReSound Group, USA. ReSound Alera: End User Brochure. Instructional brochure M101100-GB-10.02 Rev.A, 2010, 7 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Restriction Requirement, U.S. Appl. No. 13/935,744, mailed Oct. 10, 2014, 6 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Restriction Requirement, U.S. Appl. No. 14/719,544, mailed Aug. 27, 2015, 5 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 13/290,269, mailed Feb. 1, 2016, 28 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Non-Final Office Action, U.S. Appl. No. 14/719,544, mailed Mar. 28, 2016, 5 pages. |
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Notice of Allowance, U.S. Appl. No. 13/935,744, mailed Jun. 2, 2016, 9 pages. |
File History of U.S. Appl. No. 9,191,756, filed on Dec. 7, 2012, issued on Nov. 17, 2015. |
American Heritage Dictionary, published in 2011, p. 1652. |
Barron's Dictionary of Computer and Internet Terms, published in 2013, p. 457. |
Ira Sager, “Before IPhone and Android Came Simon, the First Smartphone”, Jun. 29, 2012; Retrieved from www.bloomberg.com on Jan. 23, 2017. —. |
Taylor Martin, “The Evolution of the Smartphone”, Jul. 29, 2014; Retrieved from www.pocketnow.com on Jan. 23, 2017. |
Sangeeta Mukherjee, “Smartphone Evolution From IBM Simon to Samsung-Galaxy S3”, May 8, 2012; Retrieved from www.ibtimes.com on Jan. 23, 2017. |
B. Kasoff, “A Closer Look The Evolution of The Smart Phone”, Sep. 19, 2014; Retrieved from www.blog.wipp.org on Jan. 23, 2017. |
File History of U.S. Appl. No. 8,654,999, filed on Apr. 12, 2011, issued on Feb. 18, 2014. |
Michael Valente, “Guideline for Audiologic Management of the Adult Patient”, Oct. 30, 2006; Retrieved from http://www.audiologyonline.com/ on Dec. 14, 2016. |
ISA Good Practice Guidance, “Good Practice Guidance for Adult Hearing Aid Fittings and Services—Background to the Document and Consultation”, Nov. 2004. |
Gitte Keidser et al, “Variation in preferred gain with experience for hearing-aid user”, 2008, International Journal Audiology 47:10, 621-635, retrieved from University of Washington Libraries on Jan. 4, 2017. |
Harvey Dillon et al, “The trainable hearing aid: What will it do for clients and clinicians?”, The Hearing Journal 59:4, 30-36, Apr. 2006. |
Non-Final Office Action dated Dec. 12, 2012 from U.S. Appl. No. 8,761,421 Patent Prosecution History. |
Response to Dec. 12, 2012 Non-Final Office Action filed Mar. 1, 2013 from U.S. Appl. No. 8,761,421 Patent Prosecution History. |
Final Office Action dated May 30, 2013 from U.S. Appl. No. 8,761,421 Patent Prosecution History. |
Response to May 30, 2013 Final Office Action filed Jul. 10, 2013 from U.S. Appl. No. 8,761,421 Patent Prosecution History. |
File History of U.S. Appl. No. 7,640,101, filed on Jun. 24, 2004, issued on Dec. 29, 2009. |
Richard B. Langley, “NMEA 0183: A GPS Receiver Interface Standard”, (1995) GPS World, 54-57. |
Ken Lassesen, “Creating 16-Bit and 32-Bit Screen Savers with Visual Basic” Jun. 29, 1995, Microsoft Developer Network Technology Group, Retrieved from http://msdn.microsoft.com on Oct. 20, 2007. |
Prosecution History of U.S. Appl. No. 8,649,538, filed on Feb. 8, 2011, issued on Feb. 11, 2014. |
Consumer Reports,—“Hear Well in a Noisy World”—Features at a glance, Jul. 2009, Consumer Reports Magazine, Retrieved from www.consumerreports.org on Nov. 18, 2016. |
Bernard Widrow et al, “Microphone Arrays for Hearing Aids: An Overview”, Jan. 2003, Journal of Speech Communication, 39, 139-146. |
Gary P. Rodriguez et al, “Preferred Hearing Aid Response Characteristics Under Acoustic and Telecoil Coupling Conditions” Nov. 1993, American Journal of Audiology, 55-59 , Retrieved from http://aja.pubs.asha.org on Apr. 13, 2016. |
Non-Final Office Action dated Jun. 4, 2013 from U.S. Appl. No. 8,611,570 Patent Prosecution History. |
Response to Jun. 4, 2013 Final Office Action filed Aug. 16, 2013 from U.S. Appl. No. 8,611,570 Patent Prosecution History. |
Certified English Translation of WO/2009/001559, Oct. 20, 2016. |
Prosecution History of U.S. Appl. No. 6,694,034, filed on Dec. 28, 2000, issued on Feb. 12, 2004. |
Tooley, Michael, “Data Communications Pocket Book” 2nd Edition 1989, 1992, Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd, Linacre House, Jordan Hill Oxford OX2 8DP. |
Patent File History of U.S. Appl. No. 7,929,722, filed on Nov. 18, 2008, issued on Apr. 19, 2011. |
Patent File History of U.S. Appl. No. 8,170,884, filed on Jan. 8, 2008, issued on May 1, 2012. |
Parker, Sybil P., “McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific and Technical Terms”, Fifth Edition, 1974, 1994, McGraw-Hill, USA. |
Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Appl. No. 9,191,756, filed Jan. 27, 2017. |
Declaration of Robert K. Morrow Ph.D. filed in Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Appl. No. 9,191,756, filed Jan. 27, 2017. |
Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Appl. No. 8,654,999 filed Jan. 27, 2017. |
Declaration of Les Atlas Ph.D. filed in Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Appl. No. 8,654,999, filed Jan. 27, 2017. |
Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Appl. No. 8,761,421 filed Dec. 21, 2016. |
Declaration of Robert E. Morley, Jr. D.Sc. filed in Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Appl. No. 8,761,421, filed Dec. 21, 2016. |
Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Appl. No. 7,640,101 filed Dec. 12, 2016. |
Declaration of Sayfe Kiaei Ph.D. filed in Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Appl. No. 7,640,101, filed Dec. 12, 2016. |
Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Appl. No. 8,649,538 filed Dec. 6, 2016. |
Declaration of Les Atlas Ph.D. filed in Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Appl. No. 8,649,538, filed Dec. 6, 2016. |
Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Appl. No. 8,611,570 filed Dec. 6, 2016. |
Declaration of Sayfe Kiaei Ph.D. filed in Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Appl. No. 8,611,570, filed Dec. 5, 2016. |
Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Appl. No. 6,694,034 filed Jan. 3, 2017. |
Declaration of Robert E. Morley, Jr. D.Sc. filed in Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Appl. No. 6,694,034 filed Jan. 3, 2017. |
Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Appl. No. 7,929,722 filed Feb. 17, 2017. |
Declaration of Les Atlas Ph.D. filed in Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Appl. No. 7,929,722 filed Feb. 17, 2017. |
Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Appl. No. 8,170,884 filed Feb. 21, 2017. |
Declaration of Sayfe Kiaei Ph.D. filed in Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Appl. No. 8,170,884 filed Feb. 21, 2017. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20160007109 A1 | Jan 2016 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61362211 | Jul 2010 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 13176738 | Jul 2011 | US |
Child | 14853904 | US |