DETAILED ACTION
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 .
This is noticed that applicant prosecute his/her application. Applicant was advised to contact US Patent Office help facility “Pro Se Assistance Program” by calling 1-866-767-3848 to get the help in properly responding to office communication in a timely manner and get the help in prosecuting this application so that this application does not result in abandonment.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “translate audio” and it should be “translate the audio”.
Claim 19 recites “translate audio” and it should be “translate the audio”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. 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 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.
5. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
6. Claims 10-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Aase et al. (hereinafter Aase) US-PG-PUB No. 2019/0230450.
Regarding claim 10, Aase teaches
A method comprising:
making an earpiece body (Fig. 14 shows a hearing assistance device 105), the earpiece body having a cuboid shape with edges of the cuboid shape beveled so as to lack corners as shown in Fig. 14, a first end of the earpiece body (Fig. 14 shows a shell) having a first circular surface as shown in Fig. 14, a second end of the earpiece body (i.e. shell) having a second circular surface as shown in Fig. 14.
Regarding claim 11, Aase teaches
The method of claim 10, further comprising: making an end piece, the end piece coupled to the first end of the earpiece body, the end piece comprising a dome shaped surface (Fig. 14 shows a cup tip).
Regarding claim 13, Aase teaches
The method of claim 10, further comprising: coupling the earpiece body to an end piece, the end piece coupled to the first end of the earpiece body, the end piece comprising a dome shaped surface (Fig. 14 shows a cup tip).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
7. 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 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.
8. 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 of this title, 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.
9. Claims 1, 3 and 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aase et al. (hereinafter Aase) US-PG-PUB No. 2019/0230450 in view of Cameron et al (Hereinafter Cameron) US-PAT No. 11,244,683 and further in view of Lee et al (Hereinafter Lee) US-PG-PUB No. 2015/0142416.
Regarding claim 1, Aase teaches
A system (Fig. 8 shows a system) comprising:
an earpiece (Fig. 14 shows a hearing assistance device 105), a body (Fig. 14 shows a shell) of the earpiece (i.e. hearing assistance device 105) having a cuboid shape with edges of the body (i.e. shell) beveled so as to lack corners that form right angles as shown in Fig. 14, a first end of the body (i.e. shell) having a first circular surface as shown in Fig. 14, a second end of the body (i.e. shell) having a second circular surface as shown in Fig. 14;
a first end piece (Fig. 14 shows a clip tip), the first end piece (i.e. clip tip) coupled to the first end of the body (i.e. shell), the first end piece (i.e. clip tip) comprising a dome shaped surface as shown in Fig. 14.
Aase fails to teach that the system is constructed to: play audio from at least one book.
Cameron teaches that the system is constructed to: play audio from at least one book as shown in Fig. 4A(Col. 32, Lines 34-39).
Arndt and Cameron each disclose a playback system. One of ordinary skill in the art could have modify the earpiece playback system of Aase to include the playback system that play audio from at least one book as taught by Cameron. The resulting modification would yield predictable results of allowing the user to listening to the book out loud. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the earpiece of Aase with the playback system that play audio from at least one book as taught by Cameron to yield the predictable result of providing narration of the book via the earpiece.
The combination of Aase and Cameron fail to teach that translate audio from a first language to a second language.
Lee teaches that translate audio from a first language to a second language…..Para. [0009], Lines 3-10.
The combination of Aase and Cameron and Lee each disclose a wearable device. One of ordinary skill in the art could have modify the earpiece of the combination of Aase and Cameron with the electronic device for providing a translation function as taught by Lee. The resulting modification would yield predictable results of providing a translation from a first language to a second language. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the earpiece of the combination of Aase and Cameron with the electronic device for providing a translation from a first language to a second language as taught by Lee to yield the predictable result of providing a translation function.
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Aase, Cameron and Lee teach all the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above. Aase teaches that the earpiece comprises a memory device (a memory…..Para. [0033], Lines 1-8).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Aase, Cameron and Lee teach all the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above. Aase teaches that the audio from the at least one book is downloaded from a cellular telephone (an audiobook your smartphone device….Col. 3, Lines 54-59)
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Aase, Cameron and Lee teach all the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above. Cameron teaches of a user starts and stops the audiobook via a smartphone as shown in Fig. 4A (Col. 32, Lines 39-44 and Lines 56-63).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Aase, Cameron and Lee teach all the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above. Cameron teaches of a user adjusts volume of the audiobook via a smartphone (Col. 3, Lines 42-45 and Col. 32, Lines 56-63).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Aase, Cameron and Lee teach all the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above. Cameron teaches the audio from the at least one book is downloaded from an information device as shown in Fig. 4A (Col. 32, Lines 34-39).
10. Claims 2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Aase, Cameron and Lee and further in view of Hegde et al (Hereinafter Hegde) US-PAT No. 12,302,072.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Aase, Cameron and Lee teach all the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above.
The combination of Aase, Cameron and Lee fail to teach that a second end piece, the second end piece coupled to the second end of the body, the second end piece comprising gripper, wherein a user removes the earpiece from an ear of a human via the gripper.
Hegde teaches that a second end piece, the second end piece coupled to the second end of the body, the second end piece comprising gripper, wherein a user removes the earpiece from an ear of a human via the gripper as shown in Figs. 1 and 2B below.
PNG
media_image1.png
403
393
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
511
476
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The combination of Aase, Cameron and Lee and Hegde each disclose a wearable device. One of ordinary skill in the art could have modify the earpiece of the combination of Aase, Cameron and Lee with the gripper of Hegde. The resulting modification would yield predictable results of allowing the earpiece to be remove via the gripper. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the earpiece of the combination of Aase, Cameron and Lee with the gripper of Hegde to yield the predictable result of allowing the earpiece to be remove via the gripper.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Aase, Cameron and Lee teach all the features with respect to claim 1 as outlined above.
The combination of Aase, Cameron and Lee fail to teach that a second end piece, the second end piece coupled to the second end of the body, the second end piece comprising gripper, wherein a user removes the earpiece from an ear of a human via the gripper, and wherein the gripper is constructed to be touched by human fingers to remove the earpiece from the ear of the human.
Hegde teaches that a second end piece, the second end piece coupled to the second end of the body, the second end piece comprising gripper, wherein a user removes the earpiece from an ear of a human via the gripper, and wherein the gripper is constructed to be touched by human fingers to remove the earpiece from the ear of the human as shown in Figs. 1 and 2B below.
PNG
media_image1.png
403
393
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
511
476
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The combination of Aase, Cameron and Lee and Hegde each disclose a wearable device. One of ordinary skill in the art could have modify the earpiece of the combination of Aase, Cameron and Lee with the gripper of Hegde. The resulting modification would yield predictable results of allowing the earpiece to be remove via the gripper. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the earpiece of the combination of Aase, Cameron and Lee with the gripper of Hegde to yield the predictable result of allowing the earpiece to be remove via the gripper.
11. Claims 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aase in view of Hegde et al (Hereinafter Hegde) US-PAT No. 12,302,072.
Regarding claim 12, Aase teaches all the features with respect to claim 10 as outlined above.
Aase fails to teach that making an end piece, the end piece coupled to the second end of the earpiece body, the end piece comprising gripper, wherein a user removes an earpiece comprising the earpiece body from an ear of a human via the gripper.
Hegde teaches that making an end piece, the end piece coupled to the second end of the earpiece body, the end piece comprising gripper, wherein a user removes an earpiece comprising the earpiece body from an ear of a human via the gripper as shown in Figs. 1 and 2B below.
PNG
media_image1.png
403
393
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
511
476
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Aase and Hegde each disclose a wearable device. One of ordinary skill in the art could have modify the earpiece of Aase with the gripper of Hegde. The resulting modification would yield predictable results of allowing the earpiece to be remove via the gripper. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the earpiece of Aase with the gripper of Hegde to yield the predictable result of allowing the earpiece to be remove via the gripper.
Regarding claim 14, Aase teaches all the features with respect to claim 10 as outlined above.
Aase fails to teach that coupling the earpiece body to an end piece, the end piece coupled to the second end of the earpiece body, the end piece comprising gripper, wherein a user removes an earpiece comprising the earpiece body from an ear of a human via the gripper.
Hegde teaches that coupling the earpiece body to an end piece, the end piece coupled to the second end of the earpiece body, the end piece comprising gripper, wherein a user removes an earpiece comprising the earpiece body from an ear of a human via the gripper as shown in Figs. 1 and 2B below.
PNG
media_image1.png
403
393
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
511
476
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Aase and Hegde each disclose a wearable device. One of ordinary skill in the art could have modify the earpiece of Aase with the gripper of Hegde. The resulting modification would yield predictable results of allowing the earpiece to be remove via the gripper. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the earpiece of Aase with the gripper of Hegde to yield the predictable result of allowing the earpiece to be remove via the gripper.
12. Claims 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aase in view of Cameron et al (Hereinafter Cameron) US-PAT No. 11,244,683.
Regarding claim 15, Aase teaches all the features with respect to claim 10 as outlined above. Aase teaches that an earpiece comprising the earpiece body as shown in Fig. 14.
Aase fails to teach that downloading audio from at least one book to an earpiece from a cellular telephone.
Cameron teaches downloading audio from at least one book to an earpiece from a cellular telephone as shown in Fig. 4A (Col. 24, Lines 27-31 and Col. 32, Lines 34-39).
Aase and Cameron each disclose a playback method. One of ordinary skill in the art could have modify the playback method of Aase to include the playback method that downloading audio from at least one book to an earpiece from a cellular telephone as taught by Cameron. The resulting modification would yield predictable results of allowing the user to listening to the book out loud. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the playback method of Aase with the playback method that downloading audio from at least one book to an earpiece from a cellular telephone as taught by Cameron to yield the predictable result of providing narration of the book via the earpiece.
Regarding claim 16, Aase teaches all the features with respect to claim 10 as outlined above. Aase teaches that an earpiece comprising the earpiece body as shown in Fig. 14.
Aase fails to teach that starting audio play in an earpiece via a cellular telephone.
Cameron teaches starting audio play in an earpiece via a cellular telephone (Col. 24, Lines 27-31 and Col. 32, Lines 39-44 and Lines 56-63).
Aase and Cameron each disclose a playback method. One of ordinary skill in the art could have modify the playback method of Aase to include the playback method that starting audio play in the earpiece via the cellular telephone as taught by Cameron. The resulting modification would yield predictable results of allowing the user playback control. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the playback method of Aase with the playback method that starting audio play in the earpiece via the cellular telephone as taught by Cameron to yield the predictable result of providing an user interface that control the start and/or stop of the output.
Regarding claim 17, Aase teaches all the features with respect to claim 10 as outlined above. Aase teaches that an earpiece comprising the earpiece body as shown in Fig. 14.
Aase fails to teach that stopping audio from playing in an earpiece via a cellular telephone.
Cameron teaches stopping audio from playing in an earpiece via a cellular telephone (Col. 24, Lines 27-31 and Col. 32, Lines 39-44 and Lines 56-63).
Aase and Cameron each disclose a playback method. One of ordinary skill in the art could have modify the playback method of Aase to include the playback method that stopping audio from playing in an earpiece via a cellular telephone as taught by Cameron. The resulting modification would yield predictable results of allowing the user playback control. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the playback method of Aase with the playback method that stopping audio from playing in an earpiece via a cellular telephone as taught by Cameron to yield the predictable result of providing an user interface that control the start and/or stop of the output.
Regarding claim 18, Aase teaches all the features with respect to claim 10 as outlined above. Aase teaches that an earpiece comprising the earpiece body as shown in Fig. 14.
Aase fails to teach that adjusting volume of audio play in an earpiece via a cellular telephone.
Cameron teaches adjusting volume of audio play in an earpiece via a cellular telephone (Col. 3, Lines 42-45 , Col. 24, Lines 27-31 and Col. 32, Lines 56-63).
Aase and Cameron each disclose a playback method. One of ordinary skill in the art could have modify the playback method of Aase to include the playback method that adjusting volume of audio play in an earpiece via a cellular telephone as taught by Cameron. The resulting modification would yield predictable results of allowing the user to adjust the loudness of the output. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the playback method of Aase with the playback method that adjusting volume of audio play in an earpiece via a cellular telephone as taught by Cameron to yield the predictable result of providing an user interface that control the volume.
13. Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. (hereinafter Cheng) US-PG-PUB No. 2017/0041701 in view of Cameron et al (Hereinafter Cameron) US-PAT No. 11,244,683 and further in view of Lee et al (Hereinafter Lee) US-PG-PUB No. 2015/0142416.
Regarding claim 19, Cheng teaches
A system (Fig. 4 shows a system) comprising:
an earpiece (Fig. 1A shows an in-ear headphone 10), a body (Fig. 1A shows an earbud tip 106) of the earpiece (i.e. in-ear headphone 10) having a cone frustum shape with edges of the body beveled so as to lack corners that form right angles as show in Fig. 1A, a first end of the body (i.e. earbud tip 106) having a first circular surface as show in Fig. 1A, a second end of the body (i.e. earbud tip 106) having a second circular surface as show in Fig. 1A;
Cheng fails to teach that the system is constructed to: play audio from at least one book.
Cameron that the system is constructed to: play audio from at least one book as shown in Fig. 4A(Col. 32, Lines 34-39).
Cheng and Cameron each disclose a playback system. One of ordinary skill in the art could have modify the playback system of Cheng to include playback system that play audio from at least one book as taught by Cameron. The resulting modification would yield predictable results of allowing the user to listening to the book out loud. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the earpiece of Cheng with the playback system that play audio from at least one book as taught by Cameron to yield the predictable result of providing narration of the book via the earpiece.
The combination of Cheng and Cameron fail to teach that translate audio from a first language to a second language.
Lee teaches that translate audio from a first language to a second language…..Para. [0009], Lines 3-10.
The combination of Cheng and Cameron and Lee each disclose a wearable device. One of ordinary skill in the art could have modify the earpiece of the combination of Cheng and Cameron with the electronic device for providing a translation function as taught by Lee. The resulting modification would yield predictable results of providing a translation from a first language to a second language. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the earpiece of the combination of Cheng and Cameron with the electronic device for providing a translation from a first language to a second language as taught by Lee to yield the predictable result of providing a translation function.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELICA M MCKINNEY whose telephone number is (571)270-3321. The examiner can normally be reached 7AM-3PM EST M-F. 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, Fan Tsang can be reached at (571)272-7574. 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.
/ANGELICA M MCKINNEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2694