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 .
Priority
Acknowledgement is made to Applicant's claim to priority to PCT/IB2022/052067 filed 3/8/2022 and U.S. Provisional App. No. 63/161,042 filed 3/15/2021.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7, 12-13, 19, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bieback et al. (US 6121881 A), hereafter Bieback, in view of Ferguson (US 20140187179 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Bieback discloses a communication module for a respiratory protection mask (protective mask communication system; abstract ln 1), the communication module configured to send and receive radio signals (communication system provides short range radio communication between mask wearers; col. 1 ln 30-40), the communication module comprising: a housing (housing 101a/b of communication device 102; Fig. 2A-3A) having at least partially enclosed therein: a first antenna (transceiver 112 enclosed within housing 101a/b; Fig. 3).
Bieback does not disclose the housing having a second antenna separated from the first antenna to achieve antenna spatial diversity.
Ferguson teaches a communication system (par. 0034) with a second antenna separated from a first antenna to achieve antenna spatial diversity (two or more antennas are located at spatially diverse locations; par. 0042) for the purpose of improving the performance of the wireless data link (par. 0046-0048).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the housing of Bieback to comprise a second antenna to achieve spatial diversity as taught by Ferguson for the purpose of improving the performance of the wireless data link (Ferguson par. 0046-0048).
Regarding claim 2, the modified Bieback discloses the communication module of claim 1 (shown above), wherein a shape of the housing that encloses the first and second antennas conforms to a shape of the respiratory protection mask (communication device 102 conforms to shape of the mask 100; Bieback Fig. 1, 3).
Regarding claim 3, the modified Bieback discloses the communication module of claim 2 (shown above), wherein the housing is removably attachable to the respiratory protection mask (communication device 102 can be easily removed from the mask by releasing lever 136; Bieback Fig. 4/4A, col. 6 ln 12-34) such that when attached, the first antenna is positioned at a first location with respect to the mask and antenna separated the second antenna is positioned at a second location separate from the first location (two or more antennas are located at spatially diverse locations; Ferguson par. 0042).
Regarding claim 4, the modified Bieback discloses the communication module of claim 3 (shown above).
The modified Bieback does not explicitly disclose wherein the first location is a front region of the mask and the second location is a side region of the mask.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Bieback such that the first location is a front region of the mask and the second location is a side region of the mask as an obvious matter of design choice when finding the optimal locations for the antenna. Further, Applicant places no criticality on the locations of the antennas.
Regarding claim 5, the modified Bieback discloses the communication module of claim 2 (shown above), wherein the first antenna is on a first printed circuit board (Ferguson Fig. 5A shows first antenna 505a on a first PCB 500a) and the second antenna is on a second printed circuit board (Ferguson Fig. 5B shows second antenna 505b on a second PCB 500b) electrically connected to the first circuit board by a transmission line (first PCB is connected to the second PCB via coaxial cable from 515a to 515b; Ferguson Fig. 5a/b, par. 0074-0075), the first and second printed circuit boards being separated within the housing to achieve the separation between the first and second antennas (the first and second PCBs of Ferguson comprise the first and second antennas, respectively, which are separated to achieve spatial diversity, Ferguson par. 0042).
Regarding claim 7, the modified Bieback discloses the communication module of claim 5 (shown above), wherein the first printed circuit board has printed thereon the first antenna (Ferguson Fig. 5A shows first antenna 505a on a first PCB 500a) and a strip line feed structure (transmission line coupled to first antenna can be strip line; Ferguson par. 0052).
Regarding claim 12, Bieback discloses a respiratory protection mask (protective mask communication system; abstract ln 1), comprising: a facepiece to cover a face of a wearer of the respiratory protection mask (mask 100; Fig. 1, 3); an audio communication module removably attachable to a side of the respiratory protection mask (communication device 102 attached to mask 100; Fig. 1), the audio communication module having a housing (housing 101a/b of communication device 102; Fig. 2A-3A) configured to at least partially enclose an antenna (transceiver 112 enclosed within housing 101a/b; Fig. 3).
Bieback does not disclose the housing encloses two spatially separated antennas to achieve antenna spatial diversity.
Ferguson teaches a communication system (par. 0034) with a second antenna separated from a first antenna to achieve antenna spatial diversity (two or more antennas are located at spatially diverse locations; par. 0042) for the purpose of improving the performance of the wireless data link (par. 0046-0048).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the housing of Bieback to comprise a second antenna to achieve spatial diversity as taught by Ferguson for the purpose of improving the performance of the wireless data link (Ferguson par. 0046-0048).
Regarding claim 13, the modified Bieback discloses the respiratory protection mask of claim 12 (shown above), wherein the two spatially separated antennas are on two spatially separated printed circuit boards electrically connected by a transmission line (the first and second PCBs of Ferguson comprise the first and second antennas, respectively, which are separated to achieve spatial diversity, Ferguson par. 0042; first PCB is connected to the second PCB via coaxial cable from 515a to 515b; Ferguson Fig. 5a/b, par. 0074-0075), the two spatially separated printed circuit boards being at least partially enclosed within the housing (circuit board 113 of Bieback is in the housing 101a/b of the communication device 102, Fig. 3; the communication device being a detachable standalone module, it follows that the second PCB with the second antenna would also be within the housing), the housing shaped to have a non-planar curvature that conforms to a non-planar curvature of the respiratory protection mask (housing 101a/b conforms to a non-planar curvature of the mask 100 as seen in Bieback Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 19, the modified Bieback discloses the respiratory protection mask of claim 12 (shown above).
The modified Bieback does not disclose wherein the two spatially separated antennas are on a single printed circuit board.
However, Bieback discloses a single circuit board within the communication device (PCB 113; Fig. 3). When modifying Bieback in view of Ferguson to add a second antenna, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include the second antenna on the single circuit board of Bieback for the purpose of decreasing the number of components in the module. Additionally, Applicant places no criticality on this feature. Therefore, absent any showing of unexpected benefit, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Bieback to include the two spatially separated antennas on a single printed circuit board as a matter of design choice.
Regarding claim 21, the modified Bieback discloses the respiratory protection mask of any of claim 12 (shown above), wherein at least one of the two spatially separated antennas includes a strip line feed structure (transmission line coupled to first antenna can be a strip line; Ferguson par. 0052).
Claim(s) 6 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bieback in view of Ferguson as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Li (CN 103928757 B, machine translation accessed June 20, 2026 relied upon herein).
Regarding claim 6, the modified Bieback does not disclose the communication module of claim 5 (shown above).
The modified Bieback does not disclose wherein the second antenna includes a plated edge portion of the second printed circuit board.
Li teaches a PCB antenna (par. 0002) wherein the antenna includes a plated edge portion of the printed circuit board (PCB antenna is installed on the edge of the PCB board; par. 0008) for the purpose of reducing space requirements while enhancing signal directivity and anti-interference ability (par. 0010).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Bieback wherein the second antenna includes a plated edge portion of the second printed circuit board as taught by Li for the purpose of reducing space requirements while enhancing signal directivity and anti-interference ability (Li par. 0010).
Regarding claim 14, the modified Bieback discloses the respiratory protection mask of claim 13 (shown above).
The modified Bieback does not disclose wherein one of the two spatially separated antennas includes a metal-plated edge portion of a printed circuit board.
Li teaches a PCB antenna (par. 0002) wherein the antenna includes a metal plated edge portion of the printed circuit board (PCB antenna is installed on the edge of the PCB board; par. 0008) for the purpose of reducing space requirements while enhancing signal directivity and anti-interference ability (par. 0010).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Bieback wherein the second antenna includes a plated edge portion of the second printed circuit board as taught by Li for the purpose of reducing space requirements while enhancing signal directivity and anti-interference ability (Li par. 0010).
Claim(s) 8 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bieback in view of Ferguson, and further in view of Schantz et al. (US 20120007787 A1), hereafter Schantz.
Regarding claim 8, the modified Bieback discloses the communication module of claim 5 (shown above), further comprising a connector interface connected to the second printed circuit board (radio transceiver 411 is connected to the antenna on second circuit board via splitter/combiner 409 and a transmission line, such as coaxial cable, Ferguson Fig. 4A, par. 0052; examiner notes: it can be understood that a coaxial cable connecting two components would connect via a connector interface).
The modified Bieback does not disclose a flexible ribbon cable connecting the second printed circuit board to the connector interface.
Schantz teaches a flexible ribbon cable works well for connecting an antenna on a PCB to a RF module because a ribbon cable enables additional connections for power, signal, or other purposes to be co-located (par. 0074).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Bieback to use a ribbon cable as taught by Schantz for the purpose of enabling additional connections for power, signal, or other purposes to be co-located (Schantz par. 0074).
Regarding claim 15, the modified Bieback discloses the respiratory protection mask of claim 14 (shown above). The modified Bieback discloses that an audio communication module is connected to the second circuit board (radio transceiver 411 which connected to the antenna on second circuit board via splitter/combiner 409 and a transmission line, such as coaxial cable, microstrip, or stripline; Ferguson Fig. 4A, par. 0052).
The modified Bieback does not disclose a flexible ribbon cable configured to connect one of the two spatially separated printed circuit boards to an audio communication module input/output port.
Schantz teaches a flexible ribbon cable works well for connecting an antenna on a PCB to a RF module because a ribbon cable enables additional connections for power, signal, or other purposes to be co-located (par. 0074).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Bieback to use a ribbon cable as taught by Schantz for the purpose of enabling additional connections for power, signal, or other purposes to be co-located (Schantz par. 0074).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bieback, in view of Ferguson, in view of Schantz, and further in view of Caratelli et al. (US 20200303807 A1), hereafter Caratelli and Prendergast et al. (US 9496932 B1), hereafter Prendergast.
Regarding claim 17, the modified Bieback discloses the respiratory protection mask of claim 15 (shown above).
The modified Bieback does not explicitly disclose wherein the flexible ribbon cable is spaced apart from the other of the two spatially separated printed circuit boards.
Caratelli teaches that cables can cause undesired radiation which interferes with antenna system performance (par. 0005). Prendergast teaches antennas typically require a separation distance from noise sources to achieve antenna isolation (col. 1 ln 55-61).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Bieback wherein the flexible ribbon cable is spaced apart from the circuit board in view of Caratelli and Prendergast for the purpose of preventing interference to the antenna on the PCB from the flexible ribbon cable since they teach that cables can cause radiation which can interfere with signals from antennas and the interference can be mitigated by a separation from the noise source to achieve antenna isolation. (Caratelli par. 0005 and Prendergast col. 1 ln 55-61).
Claim(s) 9 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bieback, in view of Ferguson, in view of Schantz, in view of Caratelli, in view of Prendergast, and further in view of Toda (US 6065977 A).
Regarding claim 9, the modified Bieback discloses the communication module of claim 8 (shown above).
The modified Bieback does not disclose wherein the flexible ribbon cable is spaced apart from the first printed circuit board by a spacer.
Caratelli teaches that cables can cause undesired radiation which interferes with antenna system performance (par. 0005). Prendergast teaches antennas typically require a separation distance from noise sources to achieve antenna isolation (col. 1 ln 55-61).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Bieback wherein the flexible ribbon cable is spaced apart from the circuit board in view of Caratelli and Prendergast for the purpose of preventing interference to the antenna on the PCB from the flexible ribbon cable since they teach that cables can cause radiation which can interfere with signals from antennas and the interference can be mitigated by a separation from the noise source to achieve antenna isolation. (Caratelli par. 0005 and Prendergast col. 1 ln 55-61).
The modified Bieback does not disclose the flexible ribbon cable is spaced apart from the circuit board by a spacer.
Toda teaches a spacer extending from a housing to keep components electrical components spaced apart (spacer 12 extends from housing 11; col. 3 ln 28-33, claim 13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Bieback to space apart the flexible ribbon cable and PCB by a spacer extending from a housing as taught by Toda since Toda teaches that this is a known configuration for spacing apart electronic components.
Regarding claim 18, the modified Bieback discloses the respiratory protection mask of claim 15 (shown above).
The modified Bieback does not disclose wherein the flexible ribbon cable is spaced apart from the other of the two spatially separated printed circuit boards by a spacer that extends from a housing of the audio communication module.
Caratelli teaches that cables can cause undesired radiation which interferes with antenna system performance (par. 0005). Prendergast teaches antennas typically require a separation distance from noise sources to achieve antenna isolation (col. 1 ln 55-61).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Bieback wherein the flexible ribbon cable is spaced apart from the circuit board in view of Caratelli and Prendergast for the purpose of preventing interference to the antenna on the PCB from the flexible ribbon cable since they teach that cables can cause radiation which can interfere with signals from antennas and the interference can be mitigated by a separation from the noise source to achieve antenna isolation. (Caratelli par. 0005 and Prendergast col. 1 ln 55-61).
The modified Bieback does not disclose the flexible ribbon cable is spaced apart from the circuit board by a spacer that extends from a housing of the audio communication module.
Toda teaches a spacer extending from a housing to keep components electrical components spaced apart (spacer 12 extends from housing 11; col. 3 ln 28-33, claim 13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Bieback to space apart the flexible ribbon cable and PCB by a spacer extending from a housing as taught by Toda since Toda teaches that this is a known configuration for spacing apart electronic components.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bieback, in view of Ferguson, in view of Schantz, in view of Caratelli, in view of Prendergast, in view of Toda, and further in view of Philippine et al. (US 10182750 B1), hereafter Philippine.
Regarding claim 10, the modified Bieback discloses the communication module of claim 9 (shown above).
The modified Bieback does not disclose wherein the connector interface includes a potting cap and a rib to space the potting cap apart from the first printed circuit board.
Philippine teaches that potting can protect electrical connections of a transceiver from moisture causing shorting (col. 3 ln 64-col. 4 ln 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Bieback to include a potting cap as taught by Philippine for the purpose of protecting electrical connections from moisture causing shorting (Philippine col. 3 ln 64-col. 4 ln 4).
The modified Bieback does not disclose a rib to space the potting cap apart from the first printed circuit board.
Caratelli teaches that cables can cause undesired radiation which interferes with antenna system performance (par. 0005). Prendergast teaches antennas typically require a separation distance from noise sources to achieve antenna isolation (col. 1 ln 55-61).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Bieback with a rib to space the potting cap apart from the first PCB in view of Caratelli and Prendergast for the purpose of preventing interference to the antenna on the PCB from any cables connected to the potting cap of the connector interface since they teach that cables can cause radiation which can interfere with signals from antennas and the interference can be mitigated by a separation from the noise source to achieve antenna isolation. (Caratelli par. 0005 and Prendergast col. 1 ln 55-61).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bieback, in view of Ferguson, in view of Schantz, in view of Caratelli, in view of Prendergast, in view of Toda, in view of Philippine, and further in view of Yang et al. (US 20220342223 A1), hereafter Yang, and Lee (US 9425008 B1).
Regarding claim 11, the modified Bieback discloses the communication module of claim 10 (shown above).
The modified Bieback does not disclose further comprising a magnetic shield strip and at least one hall sensor, the magnetic shield strip positioned to shield the hall sensors from remote speaker microphone (RSM) interference.
Yang teaches a wearable device comprising a hall sensor for the purpose of determining whether the device is in contact with an external component (hall sensor determines whether the electronic device is in contact with a case; par. 0097, 0106).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Bieback to comprise a hall sensor as taught by Yang for the purpose of determining whether the device is in contact with an external component (hall sensor determines whether the electronic device is in contact with a case; par. 0097, 0106). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that this would provide the benefit of monitoring the use state of the device by determining whether the device is in contact with an external component, such as the respiratory protection mask.
The modified Bieback does not disclose a magnetic shield strip positioned to shield the hall sensors from remote speaker microphone (RSM) interference.
Lee teaches a magnetic shield strip positioned to shield the hall sensors (C-shaped vane interrupter 88 provides a magnetic shielding structure for the Hall effect sensor; col. 8 ln 65-col. 9 ln 3) for the purpose of deflecting external magnetic fields around the hall sensor (col. 8 ln 65-col. 9 ln 10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Bieback to comprise a magnetic shield strip as taught by Lee for the purpose of deflecting external magnetic fields around the hall sensor (Lee col. 8 ln 65-col. 9 ln 10). One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that hall sensors could experience interference from electromagnetic signals of the remote speaker microphone.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bieback, in view of Ferguson, in view of Schantz, and further in view of Jung et al. (US 20190024910 A1), hereafter Jung.
Regarding claim 16, the modified Bieback discloses the respiratory protection mask of claim 15 (shown above), wherein the audio communication module is further configured with a connector (communication device 102 has flange 138 to connect to mask 100; Fig. 2A, col. 6 ln 27-34).
The modified Bieback does not disclose a rib configured to contact and offset one of the two spatially separated printed circuit boards.
Jung teaches a rib configured to contact and offset a PCB (ribs 227a/b contact a PCB 231 and offset it from the housing; Fig. 11-13, par. 0148-0152) for the purpose of keeping the PCB in a fixed location in the presence of shaking or movement (par. 0152).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Bieback to comprise a rib configured to contact and offset one of the two spatially separated printed circuit boards as taught by Jung for the purpose of keeping the PCB in a fixed location in the presence of shaking or movement (Jung par. 0152).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KELSEY RHEE whose telephone number is (703)756-5954. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM 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, BRANDY LEE can be reached at (571) 270-7410. 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.
/K.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/BRANDY S LEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights