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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This is in response to Applicants Request for Continued Examination filed 4/7/26 which has been entered. Claims 1-2 and 4-5 have been amended. No Claims have been cancelled. Claims 14-15 have been added. Claims 1-5 and 14-15 are still pending in this application, with Claim 1 being independent and claims 6-13 being withdrawn.
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, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ho US Publication No. 20150023541 in view of Yang US Publication No. 20140286521, and Matsumura US Publication No. 20210377644.
Referring to claim 1, Ho teaches an acoustic device to be worn on an ear for use (Figs. 8-10: in ear headphone 1’), the acoustic device comprising: a nozzle (Fig. 9: main body 10’) having a transducer installed therein, the transducer serving as a sound source (Fig. 10: speaker 30 installed in main body 10’).
However, Ho does not teach details of the transducer, but Yang teaches the transducer includes a diaphragm (Fig. 1: diaphragm of speaker 120) and a recessed portion (Fig. 1: hole 122 is recessed in speaker 120); a supporting board (Fig. 1: yoke bottom of speaker 120; Fig. 3: boards of second housing 150), wherein the transducer is supported by the supporting board (Fig. 1: speaker 120 supported by yoke bottom; Fig. 3: speaker 120 supported by second housing 150 ), and the supporting board has an air escape hole formed under the diaphragm and the recessed portion of the transducer (Fig. 1: hole 122 in yoke of speaker 120 and formed under diaphragm and upper hole 122; Fig. 3: tuning hole 152 in board of housing 150 that is under diaphragm and hole 122 of speaker 120). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a diaphragm, as taught in Yang, in the device of Ho et al. because it allows for sound to be produced. Further, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a hole placement(s) of the speaker, as taught in Yang, in the device of Ho because, it “can adjust the sound field characteristic of the earphone as required, thus the performance of the earphone is improved.”
However, Ho and Yang do not teach a housing at the base, but Matsumura teaches a housing attached to a base portion of the nozzle (Fig. 5: first housing 12c attached to external part of conduits 15, 13c) and having an electronic circuit and a battery housed therein (Fig. 5: control circuit 16 and battery 17 inside first housing 12c), the electronic circuit being configured to drive the transducer (para 0077: “a control circuit 16 for controlling driving of the speaker unit 11”), wherein the housing has a first passage extending downward from a partition disposed in the nozzle (Fig. 5: passages around circuit 16 and battery 17 that extend downward from conduit 13c, which serves as a partition in the nozzle; para 0084: “the air conduit 13c may be formed in a bent shape or in a curved shape in the first housing 12c”), with a first air escape hole formed at a lower end of the housing (para 0084: “the third opening 123c may be disposed on…a lower surface 126c of the first housing 12c), and a second air escape hole communicating with the first air escape hole (para 0084: “the air conduit 13c may be formed in a bent shape or in a curved shape in the first housing 12c such that the air conduit 13c passes through the second opening 122c and the third opening 123c”). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a housing at the base, as taught in Matsumura, in the device of Ho and Yang because it allows for a placement of larger elements, such as the battery and control circuit, that allow for a wireless earpiece to be used and for proper usage of the speaker.
Referring to claim 5, Ho teaches the nozzle is arranged to secure a passage continuously which extends between the base portion and a distal end of the nozzle outside of the nozzle along an ear canal, and the nozzle occupies only a part of a cross-section of the ear canal to allow an external sound to be taken in through the passage when the acoustic device is worn on the ear, the passage being open at the base portion (Figs. 9-10: gap 14 continuously extends along entirety of length of main body 10’ on outside of chamber 13, chamber 13 occupies only a part of cross section of the ear canal to allow sound from gap 14 to be taken in; Fig. 9: gap 14 open at end by 12’; 0023: “One end of the gap 14 is communicable to external environment and therefore the ambient sound can be delivered therefrom.” – Examiner notes that the rear housing 12c of Matsumura and its passages will extend downward from partitions in compartment 112 that hold speaker 120 of Yang when Yang’s speaker setup and Matsumura’s rear housing are incorporated into the earbud of Ho.).
Referring to claim 14, Ho teaches when the acoustic device is worn on the ear with a distal end of the nozzle inserted into an earhole (para 0021: “The contour of the ear pad 20 conformingly contacts the listener's ear canal.” – Examiner notes that when the contour of earpad 20 contacts the ear canal, the adjacent end of main body 10’ will be inserted into the ear canal as well) and the base portion of the nozzle positioned outside of the earhole (para 0030: “The chamber 13 and the space between the speaker 30 and the ear canal”; - Examiner notes that if the space (of chamber 13) is between an element and the ear canal, then at least some of that space would be outside of the ear canal and therefore, the end of main body 10’ opposite to earpad 20 (the ear canal end) would be positioned outside of the ear canal), a passage that continuously extends between the base portion and the distal end of the nozzle is secured (Figs. 8-10: chamber 13/ gap 14 continuously extends between ends of main body 10’) to allow an external sound to be taken in through the passage (para 0023: “One end of the gap 14 is communicable to external environment and therefore the ambient sound can be delivered therefrom.”).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ho, Yang, and Matsumura, as shown in claim 1 above, and further in view of Azmi et al. US Publication No. 20140205131.
Referring to claim 15, Ho, Yang, and Matsumura do not necessarily teach a longitudinal direction of the transducer coincides with a longitudinal direction of a passage, but Azmi et al. teaches when the acoustic device is worn on the ear with a distal end of the nozzle inserted into an earhole and the base portion of the nozzle positioned outside of the earhole (para 0001: “earphones that fit within the use's ear canal” – Examiner notes that in Fig. 2A, when the earbud is within an ear canal, a distal end by 14 will be within the ear canal and the opposite end will be outside of the earhole), a longitudinal direction of the transducer coincides with a longitudinal direction of a passage (Fig. 2A: longitudinal directions of transducers 16, 18 coincide with longitudinal direction of passage of housing 1/cap 12). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to orient the longitudinal directions of the transducer and passage in the same way, as taught in Azmi et al., in the device of Ho, Yang, and Matsumura because it utilizes space in the ear device housing more efficiently.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 2-4, Ho, Yang, and Matsumura teach most of the limitations of claim 2, however, they do not, alone or in combination with other prior art of record, teach that the transducer is in the same passage as the passage that extends downward from the partition in the nozzle in combination with other recited elements in the claim. The downward passage in Matsumura is either the air conduit 13c, which is distinctly separate from the passage containing the transducer, or is a passage around the battery and circuit, which is not a reasonable location for the transducer to be.
Claims 3-4, which depend on claim 2, are narrower in scope than claim 2, and therefore, Ho, Yang, and Matsumura alone or in combination with other prior art of record, do not teach or make obvious to combine the further limitations.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/7/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant states on para 1 of page 9 of the remarks:
“FIG. 5 of Matsumara Matsumara describes the earbud 10 c including the first housing 12 c. Matsumara further describes that the first housing 12 c is the part elongated in the vertical direction, and the first opening 121 c, the second opening 122 c, and the third opening 123 c are formed in the first housing 12 c. Matsumara further describes that the third opening 123 c is disposed on the lower surface 126 c of the first housing 12 c. However, Matsumura does not describe that the first housing 12 c has a first passage extending downward from a partition disposed in a nozzle, with a first air escape hole formed at the lower surface 126 c of the first housing 12 c, and a second air escape hole communicating with the first air escape hole.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant has not pointed out how Matsumura does not have a first passage extending downward from a partition in a nozzle or a second air escape hole communicating with the first escape hole. As seen in the rejection above, Fig. 5 of Matsumura shows passages around the circuit and battery extending downward. Para 0084 also states “the air conduit 13c may be formed in a bent shape or in a curved shape in the first housing 12c such that the air conduit 13c passes through the second opening 122c and the third opening 123c”. This means that the air conduit 13c forms a passage that extends downward from the horizontal part of 13c and the third opening 123c reads on “the first air escape hole” and the second opening reads on the “second air escape hole” and because the conduit 13c extends between the two openings and passes air between the openings, the two opening will be in communication with one another. Therefore, Matsumura teaches the noted limitations in claim 1.
Conclusion
Examiner respectfully requests, in response to this Office Action, support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line number(s) in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist Examiner in prosecuting the application.
When responding to this Office Action, Applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present, in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. He or she must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections. See 37 CFR 1.111(c).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATHERINE A FALEY whose telephone number is (571)272-3453. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Wednesday, 9am-5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ahmad Matar can be reached on (571)272-7488. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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:
(571) 273-8300, for formal communications intended for entry and for
informal or draft communications, please label “PROPOSED” or “DRAFT”.
Hand-delivered responses should be brought to:
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Arlington, VA 22314
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KATHERINE A FALEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
Prosecution Insights