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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 3/18/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 7-9, 13 & 15 are pending and presented for examination.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copies have been filed in parent Application No. 10-2020-0045164, filed on 4/14/2020 and Application No. 10-2021-0048807, filed on 4/14/2021.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 3, 4, 7-9, 13 & 15 have been amended.
Rejection of claims 1, 3, 4, 7-9, 13 & 15 under 35 USC 103 made in the prior record Final Rejection dated 1/23/2026 have been withdrawn, but new grounds of rejections under 35 USC 103 have been made in view of Watson et al. (US 10219062)(herein after “Watson”).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/18/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 1, applicant argues that Ghosh discloses MTAP updating device lists where MTAP is a router device that updates a list of connected devices, while individual earbuds have limited capabilities and thus updating a list of connected devices cannot be considered a typical or inherent function performed by an individual earbud. Examiner respectfully disagrees noting that it is only the communications teachings of Ghosh that are relied upon, where a central device (MTAP or a case device) communicates the connection status of second device (e.g. a second 155 device or a second earbud device) to a first device (e.g. a first 155 device or a first earbud device). In the case of earbud devices, it would only be necessary to maintain a list of 1 (i.e. whether a second earbud device is connected or not) and thus the complexity of a case device maintaining such a small list can be considered typical or an inherent function, even with the limited capabilities of a case device.
Applicant’s arguments, see “Remarks”, filed 3/18/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1, 3, 4, 7-9, 13 & 15 under 35 USC 103 made in the prior record Final Rejection dated 1/23/2026 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, these rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejections are made to these claims under 35 USC 103 in view of Watson et al. (US 10219062)(herein after “Watson”).
Regarding claim 1, applicant argues that none of the cited references disclose or render the limitations "determine whether a second earbud device is electrically connected with the case", "in case that the second earbud device is coupled with the first earbud device, switch the wireless communication circuit to an inquiry scan enable mode" and "in case that the second earbud device is not coupled with the first earbud device, enter into a coupling mode to couple with the second earbud device" as presently recited in claim 1. Examiner agrees and withdraws rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC 103 made in the prior record Final Rejection dated 1/23/2026. However, after further consideration, examiner introduces a new ground of rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC 103 based on Watson. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Regarding claim 13, applicant submits that this claim traverse the rejection of this claim under 35 USC 103 made in the Final Rejection dated 1/23/2026 due to similar amendments and arguments as made for claim 1. Examiner agrees and withdraws rejection of claim 13 under 35 USC 103 made in the Final Rejection dated 1/23/2026. However, for the same reasons as discussed above, examiner introduces a new ground of rejection of claim 13 under 35 USC 103 based on Watson.
Regarding claims 3, 4, 7-9 & 15, applicant submits that these claims traverse the rejections of these claims under 35 USC 103 made in the Final Rejection dated 1/23/2026 due to amendments and arguments made for claims 1 & 13 and due to their dependency on claims 1 & 13. Examiner agrees and withdraws rejections of claims 3, 4, 7-9 & 15 under 35 USC 103 made in the Final Rejection dated 1/23/2026. However, for the same reasons as discussed above, examiner introduces new grounds of rejections of claims 3, 4, 7-9 & 15 under 35 USC 103 based on Watson.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 7-9, 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chandramohan et al. (US 9769558)(herein after “Chandramohan”) in view of Ghosh et al. (US 2015/0223157)(herein after “Ghosh”) and further in view of AD2020 et al. (Analog Devices, “Efficient Earbud Charging is All About Keeping a Cool Head”, Feb 19, 2020, https://www.analog.com/en/resources/technical-articles/efficient-earbud-charging-is-all-about-keeping-a-cool-head.html)(herein after “AD2020”) and Watson et al. (US 10219062)(herein after “Watson”) and TWS et al. (Carrie Tsai, “Full Instructions: How to Use TWS Bluetooth Earbuds, News| HOW TO, March 10, 2020, https://www.neway.mobi/news/how-to-use-tws-bluetooth-earbuds.html)(herein after “TWS”) and Lui et al. (US 6727830)(herein after “Lui”).
Regarding claims 1 & 13, Chandramohan discloses a first earbud, and method of operating an electronic device, (Col 3, lines 55-57 disclose a portable listening device that can be stored in a case. Col 1, lines 63-65 disclose that a portable listening device may be an earbud. Col 7, lines 53-67 & col 8, lines 1-4 disclose a method for an electronic device) comprising:
a wireless communication circuit configured to perform Bluetooth communication (col 18, lines 38-53 disclose each earbud may have circuitry including a processor and other components. Col 49 & lines 51-58 disclose that other circuitry components in each earbud may include a Bluetooth transceiver (i.e. to perform Bluetooth communication).);
a touch pad (Col 45, lines 45-52 disclose that a housing of the earbud has at least one touch sensitive region.);
a connection terminal, when the first earbud device is accommodated in a case device, configured to connect with the case device (Col 37, lines 1-6 disclose a wired connection, when the earbud is stored within a housing of a case, configured to connect with the case so that the case can charge the earbud. Col 19, lines 16-30 disclose that the wired connection between the earbud and the case can be made through a case transfer interface (i.e. a connection terminal) in the earbud.);
a processor operatively connected to the touch pad and the wireless communication circuit (Fig 43 and col 45, lines 65-67 & col 46, lines 1-9 disclose the earbud includes a processor communicatively connected to the touch region of the earbud. Fig 48 and col 49, lines 59-67 & col 50, lines 1-29 disclose that the processor 4850 in the earbud is communicatively to a wireless transceiver 4865 used to support Bluetooth communication.); and
a memory operatively connected to the processor, wherein the memory stores instructions that, when executed, cause the processor to (Fig 48 & col 50, lines 30-49 disclose the earbud includes memory 4860 communicatively connected to the processor 4850 that can store firmware (i.e. instructions). Col 6, lines 46-66 disclose that the processor in the earbud can be operatively coupled with the memory storing instructions in the earbud that the instructions stored in memory can be executed by the processor.):
receive, through the connection terminal, information indicating that a cover of the case device is being opened is based on wired communication (Fig 2 & col 21, lines 13-29 disclose that the earbud 202a may receive communication from processor 210 of the case to turn ON its wireless radio when a lid of the case is in the open position. Fig 2 & col 21, lines 32-35 disclose that the communication may be through the wired connection through case interface 270 (i.e. the connection terminal).),
transition, based on receiving the information, to a wake up mode from a sleep mode, (Fig 2 & col 21, lines 13-29 disclose that the earbud 202a may transition to turning ON its wireless radio (i.e. wake up mode) from a state of turning OFF its wireless radio (i.e. sleep mode) upon receiving the communication from the case to turn ON its wireless radio when the lid of the case is open.),
after being transitioned to the wake up mode, communicating with the case device based on the wired communication (Fig 2 & col 19, lines 22-25 disclose that earbud interface 245 can enable case 204 to communicate & transfer data with earbuds 202a & 202b through case transfer interface 270. Col 22 & lines 40-43 disclose that processor 210 in case 204 can send a signal to earbuds 202a and 202b via interface 245 to place the earbuds in pairing mode (i.e. communication between case 204 and earbuds 202a & 202b would be after transitioning to wake up mode because pairing would not be possible if the earbuds were not in wake up mode.).).
in case that both of the first earbud device and the second earbud device are electrically connected with the case device, determine whether the second earbud device is a device coupled with the first earbud device (Col 6, lines 44-63 disclose a scenario where a pair of earbuds (i.e. both a first earbud representing the electronic device and a second earbud representing the second external electronic device) are electrically connected to a case through connectors coupling the case to each of the earbuds, and the case sends, upon opening of a lid on the case, one or more signals to the pair or earbuds to initiate pairing of the earbuds to another electronic device. In order to initiate pairing of the earbuds with another electronic device, the first earbud would need to determine whether the second earbud is coupled to the first earbud (e.g. to coordinate stereo audio communication with the other electronic device paired with the earbuds).).
Chandramohan fails to disclose wherein the communicating is to determine whether a second earbud device is electrically connected with the case device based on the wired communication.
However, Ghosh further teaches wherein the communicating is to determine whether a second earbud device is electrically connected with the case device based on the wired communication. (Fig 1 & [0018] disclose a multi-transport access point (MTAP) 100 that communicates with various electronic devices 105, 115, 125, 135, 145, and 155. [0030] discloses that MTAP 100 may be connected to various electronic devices through wired transports (e.g. multiple electronic devices 155 connected through Ethernet to MTAP 100). [0035] discloses that MTAP 100 maintains an updated device list of all the devices connected to MTAP 100 and sends the updated list to all the devices connected to it, allowing every device connected to MTAP 100 to discover the presence of all the other devices connected to MTAP 100. The communication teachings of Ghosh may be applied to Chandramohan wherein a first earbud device, that is placed into and established wired communication with a case device and is not in sleep mode (i.e. has been transitioned to wake up mode), receives an updated list from a case device of other earbud devices (e.g. a second earbud device) that are electrically connected to the case device based on wired communication, and the first earbud device would use the updated list to determine whether the second earbud device is electrically connected to the case device based on wired communication.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a first earbud device comprising a connection terminal, wherein when the first earbud device is accommodated in a case device, configured to connect with the case device, the first earbud device receives, through the connection terminal, information indicating that a cover of the case device is being opened that is based on wired communication, and transition, based on receiving the information, to a wake up mode from a sleep mode, as disclosed by Chandramohan, and after being transitioned to the wake up mode, determine whether a second earbud device is electrically connected with the first earbud device based on the wired communication. The motivation to do so would have been to have a first earbud device capable of connecting to a case device through wired communication so that the first earbud device can receive, through the wired communication, a list of other earbud devices connected to the case through wired communication, so that the first earbud device can know if a second earbud device is connected to the case through wired communication so that the first earbud device may determine if the first earbud device is coupled with the second earbud device.
Chandramohan fails to disclose wherein the wired communication is based on power line communication.
However, AD2020 further teaches wherein the wired communication is based on power line communication (Section “Combining Data and Power Transfer” discloses wired communication using powerline communication for space-constrained portable consumer devices (e.g. earbuds in an earbud case).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a first earbud device comprising a connection terminal, wherein when the first earbud device is accommodated in a case device, configured to connect with the case device through the connection terminal, the first earbud device receives information indicating that a cover of the case device is being opened that is based on wired communication, and determine whether a second earbud device is electrically connected with the case device based on the wired communication, as disclosed by Chandramohan in view of Ghosh, wherein the wired communication is based on power line communication, as further taught by AD2020. The motivation to do so would have been to have a first earbud device connect to and communicate with a case device through wired communication using powerline communication, in order to reduce the number of channels and connectors required between the first earbud device and the case device that are space-constrained.
Chandramohan fails to disclose wherein in case that the second earbud device is coupled with the first earbud device, switch the wireless communication circuit to an inquiry scan enable mode in response to receiving input, and in case that the second earbud device is not coupled with the first earbud device, enter into a coupling mode to couple with the second earbud device in response to receiving input.
However, Watson further teaches in case that the second earbud device is coupled with the first earbud device, switch the wireless communication circuit to an inquiry scan enable mode in response to receiving input (Fig 4 & col 9, lines 31-47 disclose that when wireless earbuds are already communicatively coupled to each other, the wireless earbuds become discoverable (i.e. enter inquiry scan mode) in response to a user input.), and
in case that the second earbud device is not coupled with the first earbud device, enter into a coupling mode to couple with the second earbud device in response to receiving input, (Fig 4 and col 9, lines 48-67 & col 10, lines 1-18 disclose that when the wireless earbuds are not communicatively coupled to each other, in response to a user input a wireless earbud case causes at least one wireless earbud to become discoverable, and upon receiving a pairing request the wireless earbud case causes the wireless earbuds to become communicatively coupled.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a first earbud device comprising a connection terminal, wherein when the first earbud device is accommodated in a case device, configured to connect with the case device through the connection terminal, the first earbud device receives information indicating that a cover of the case device is being opened that is based on wired communication, and determine whether a second earbud device is electrically connected with the case device based on the power line communication, as disclosed by Chandramohan in view of Ghosh and AD2020, wherein in case that the second earbud device is coupled with the first earbud device, switch the wireless communication circuit to an inquiry scan enable mode in response to receiving input, and in case that the second earbud device is not coupled with the first earbud device, enter into a coupling mode to couple with the second earbud device in response to receiving input, as further taught by Watson. The motivation to do so would have been to have a first earbud device connect to a case device, receive an indication that a lid of the case device is open and determine if a second earbud device is connected to the case device, and in case that the second earbud device is coupled with the first earbud device, switch to an inquiry scan enable mode in response to receiving a user input input, in order to be able to pair other devices, and in case that the second earbud device is not coupled with the first earbud device, enter into a coupling mode to couple with the second earbud device in response to receiving a user input input, in order to couple the first earbud device with the second earbud device so the earbud devices can provide stereo audio when paired to another device.
Chandramohan fails to disclose wherein in case that the second earbud device is coupled with the first earbud device, the input is a hold input lasting longer than a first time interval, through the touch pad, and in case that the second earbud device is not coupled with the first earbud device, the input is a hold input lasting longer than a second time interval, through the touch pad.
However, TWS further teaches wherein in case that the second earbud device is coupled with the first earbud device, the input is a hold input lasting longer than a first time interval, through the touch pad (5th page, section “To Pair with Both Sides of Your TWS Buds” discloses a case where both earbuds blink in different colors alternately, indicating that a second earbud (i.e. the second external electronic device) is coupled with a first earbud (i.e. the electronic device), and then switching to matching or pairing mode (i.e. inquiry scan mode) in response to receiving a press and hold input on the first earbud button (i.e. a hold input on the touch pad lasting longer that a first time interval).), and
in case that the second earbud device is not coupled with the first earbud device, the input is a hold input lasting longer than a second time interval, through the touch pad (5th page, section “To Pair with Both Sides of Your TWS Buds” discloses a case where both earbuds are not coupled (i.e. the second external electronic device is not coupled with the electronic device) and in response to a long press input on both earbuds (i.e. a hold input on the touch pad lasting longer than a second time interval) LED lights on both earbuds blink in different colors alternately indicating the two earbuds have entered a coupling mode (i.e. the electronic device and the second external device enter into a coupling mode).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a first earbud device comprising a connection terminal, wherein when the first earbud device is accommodated in a case device, configured to connect with the case device through the connection terminal, the first earbud device receives information indicating that a cover of the case device is being opened that is based on wired communication, and determine whether a second earbud device is electrically connected with the case device based on the power line communication, wherein in case that the second earbud device is coupled with the first earbud device, switch the wireless communication circuit to an inquiry scan enable mode in response to receiving input, and in case that the second earbud device is not coupled with the first earbud device, enter into a coupling mode to couple with the second earbud device in response to receiving input, as disclosed by Chandramohan in view of Ghosh and AD2020 and Watson, wherein in case that the second earbud device is coupled with the first earbud device, the input is a hold input lasting longer than a first time interval, through the touch pad, and in case that the second earbud device is not coupled with the first earbud device, the input is a hold input lasting longer than a second time interval, through the touch pad, as further taught by TWS. The motivation to do so would have been to have a first earbud device connect to a case device, receive an indication that a lid of the case device is open and determine if a second earbud device is connected to the case device, and in case that the second earbud device is coupled with the first earbud device, switch to an inquiry scan enable mode in response to receiving a hold input, lasting longer than a first time interval, through a button on the first earbud device in order to be able to pair with the second earbud device, and in case that the second earbud device is not coupled with the first earbud device, enter into a coupling mode to couple with the second earbud device in response to receiving a hold input, lasting longer than a second time interval, through the button in the first earbud device in order to couple the first earbud device with the second earbud device so the earbud devices can provide stereo audio when paired with each other.
Chandramohan fails to disclose wherein a length of the second time interval is longer than a length of the first time interval.
However, Lui further teaches wherein a length of the second time interval is longer than a length of the first time interval (Col 1, lines 60-67 & col 2, lines 1-14 disclose an application button comprising determining a length of time that the application button has been pressed and if the application button has been pressed for a short period of time (e.g. less than one second) a first application function is launched, and if the application button has been pressed for a long period of time (e.g. more than one second) a second application function is launched.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a first earbud device comprising a touch pad, where in case that the second earbud device is coupled with the first earbud device, switch the wireless communication circuit to an inquiry scan enable mode in response to receiving a hold input, lasting longer than a first time interval, through the touch pad, and in case that the second earbud device is not coupled with the first earbud device, enter into a coupling mode to couple with the second earbud device in response to receiving a hold input, lasting longer than a second time interval, through the touch pad, as disclosed by Chandramohan in view of Watson and TWS, wherein a length of the second time interval is longer than a length of the first time interval, as further taught by Lui. The motivation to do so would have been to have a first earbud device, with a single button, connect to a case device, receive an indication that a lid of the case device is open and determine if a second earbud device is connected to the case device, and in case that the second earbud device is coupled with the first earbud device, switch to an inquiry scan enable mode in response to receiving a hold input, lasting longer than a first time interval, through the single button on the first earbud device, and in case that the second earbud device is not coupled with the first earbud device, enter into a coupling mode to couple with the second earbud device in response to receiving a hold input, lasting longer than a second time interval, through the single button in the first earbud device, wherein a length of the second time interval is longer than a length of the first time interval, in order to eliminate the need for a second button on the first earbud device (saving cost and space) to perform the two different functions of entering inquiry scan mode and entering coupling mode.
Regarding claim 7, Chandramohan in view of Ghosh and AD2020 and Watson and TWS and Lui disclose the first earbud device of claim 1.
Chandramohan discloses wherein the instructions further cause the processor to establish a first communication link with a second earbud device through the wireless communication circuit in case that the second earbud device is coupled with the first earbud device (Col 48, lines 52-59 disclose a first wireless earbud that shares audio data (i.e. establishes a first communication link through a wireless communication circuit) with a second wireless earbud, in the case that the first wireless earbud and the second wireless earbud are communicatively coupled.).
Regarding claim 8, Chandramohan in view of Ghosh and AD2020 and Watson and TWS and Lui disclose the first earbud device of claim 1.
Chandramohan discloses wherein the instructions further cause the processor to charge a battery of the first earbud device with power received from the case device through the connection terminal if the first earbud device is electrically connected to the case device through the connection terminal (Col 37, lines 1-6 disclose a wired connection, when an earbud (i.e. the electronic device) is stored within a housing of a case (i.e. the first external device), configured to connect with the case so that the case can charge the earbud. Col 19, lines 16-30 disclose that the wired connection between the earbud and the case can be made through a case transfer interface (i.e. a connection terminal) in the earbud.).
Regarding claim 9, Chandramohan in view of Ghosh and AD2020 and Watson and TWS and Lui disclose the first earbud device of claim 1.
Chandramohan discloses wherein the instructions further cause the processor to respond to an inquiry received from a user equipment, and establish a third communication link with the user equipment if a connection request is received from the user equipment (Fig 47, col 48, lines 29-51 & 60-67 and Fig 49, col 53, lines 65-67 & col 54 lines 1-4 disclose an earbud receiving a pairing signal (i.e. inquiry signal) from a host device such as a smartphone (i.e. a user equipment) after switching to pairing mode based on a lid of a case being opened, and upon receiving the pairing signal, the earbud initiates a pairing sequence to the host device (i.e. responds to the inquiry signal) that, upon the host device receiving the pairing sequence signal, initiates bidirectional data transfer between the earbud and the host device (i.e. establishes a third communication link with the user equipment.).).
Claims 3 & 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chandramohan et al. (US 9769558)(herein after “Chandramohan”) in view of Ghosh et al. (US 2015/0223157)(herein after “Ghosh”) and AD2020 et al. (Analog Devices, “Efficient Earbud Charging is All About Keeping a Cool Head”, Feb 19, 2020, https://www.analog.com/en/resources/technical-articles/efficient-earbud-charging-is-all-about-keeping-a-cool-head.html)(herein after “AD2020”) and Watson et al. (US 10219062)(herein after “Watson”) and TWS et al. (Carrie Tsai, “Full Instructions: How to Use TWS Bluetooth Earbuds, News| HOW TO, March 10, 2020, https://www.neway.mobi/news/how-to-use-tws-bluetooth-earbuds.html)(herein after “TWS”) and Lui et al. (US 6727830)(herein after “Lui”), as applied to claims 1 & 13 respectively, and further in view of Michael et al. (US 2006/0128308)(herein after “Michael”).
Regarding claims 3 & 15, Chandramohan in view of Ghosh and AD2020 and Watson and TWS and Lui disclose the first earbud device of claim 1 and the method of claim 13.
Chandramohan discloses wherein the instructions further cause the processor to receive an inquiry signal from a user equipment after switching to the inquiry scan enable mode, and respond to the inquiry signal (Fig 47, col 48, lines 29-51 & 60-67 disclose an earbud receiving a pairing signal (i.e. inquiry signal) from a host device such as a smartphone (i.e. a user equipment) after switching to pairing mode based on a lid of a case being opened, and upon receiving the pairing signal, the earbud initiates a pairing sequence to the host device (i.e. responds to the inquiry signal).).
Chandramohan fails to disclose responding if a strength of the inquiry signal is equal to or greater than a threshold value.
However, Michael further teaches responding if a strength of the inquiry signal is equal to or greater than a threshold value ([0027] discloses receiving inquiry messages at different frequencies, measuring energy at each frequency, comparing the received energy at each frequency to a threshold, and if greater than the threshold generating a detection signal (i.e. response to the inquiry message).).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the first earbud device of claim 1 or method of claim 13, wherein the instructions further cause the processor to receive an inquiry signal from a user equipment after switching to the inquiry scan enable mode, and respond to the inquiry signal, as disclosed by Chandramohan in view of Ghosh and AD2020 and Watson and TWS and Lui, and responding if a strength of the inquiry signal is equal to or greater than a threshold value, as further taught by Michael. The motivation to do so would be to have a wireless devices such as Bluetooth wireless ear buds, and a method for the wireless device, that conserves energy by only responding to pairing requests that are above a defined threshold.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chandramohan et al. (US 9769558)(herein after “Chandramohan”) in view of Ghosh et al. (US 2015/0223157)(herein after “Ghosh”) and AD2020 et al. (Analog Devices, “Efficient Earbud Charging is All About Keeping a Cool Head”, Feb 19, 2020, https://www.analog.com/en/resources/technical-articles/efficient-earbud-charging-is-all-about-keeping-a-cool-head.html)(herein after “AD2020”) and Watson et al. (US 10219062)(herein after “Watson”) and TWS et al. (Carrie Tsai, “Full Instructions: How to Use TWS Bluetooth Earbuds, News| HOW TO, March 10, 2020, https://www.neway.mobi/news/how-to-use-tws-bluetooth-earbuds.html)(herein after “TWS”) and Lui et al. (US 6727830)(herein after “Lui”), as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Liao et al. (US 2018/0013500)(herein after “Liao”).
Regarding claim 4, Chandramohan in view of Ghosh and AD2020 and Watson and TWS and Lui disclose the first earbud device of claim 1.
Chandramohan discloses wherein the instructions further cause the processor to receive an inquiry signal from a user equipment after switching to the inquiry scan enable mode, and respond to the inquiry signal (Fig 47, col 48, lines 29-51 & 60-67 disclose an earbud receiving a pairing signal (i.e. inquiry signal) from a host device such as a smartphone (i.e. a user equipment) after switching to pairing mode based on a lid of a case being opened, and upon receiving the pairing signal, the earbud initiates a pairing sequence to the host device (i.e. responds to the inquiry signal).).
Chandramohan fails to disclose responding with a signal strength that is lower than or equal to a threshold value.
However, Liao further teaches responding with a signal strength that is lower than or equal to a threshold value ([0033] discloses a UE transmitting using a first RAT at a TX power level below a first threshold in response to a network node request to the UE to transmit at a TX power level below a first threshold.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the first earbud device of claim 1, wherein the instructions further cause the processor to receive an inquiry signal from a user equipment after switching to the inquiry scan enable mode, and respond to the inquiry signal, as disclosed by Chandramohan in view of Ghosh and AD2020 and Watson and TWS and Lui, and responding with a signal strength that is lower than or equal to a threshold value, as further taught by Liao. The motivation to do so would be to limit the transmission power of an electronic device, responding to a pairing request, that is transmitting on one radio access technology to be below a threshold to prevent internal leakage in the electronic device that may also have a second radio access technology transceiver.
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Zorkendorfer et al. (US 10097913) discloses an Earbud Case with Charging System.
Cousins et al. (US 2017/0094398) discloses Earbuds with Capacitive Touch Sensors.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES P SEYMOUR whose telephone number is (571)272-7654. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 EST.
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, Nishant Divecha can be reached at 571-270-3125. 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.
/JAMES P SEYMOUR/Examiner, Art Unit 2419
/Nishant Divecha/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2419
Prosecution Insights