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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 8/28/2026, with respect to Claims 1-4 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of 4/29/2026 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Black et al. (US 2021/0361943 A1) in view of King (US 2020/0100938).
Black discloses an in ear stimulation system including a cooling assembly (e.g. generally seen in Fig. 2 and 6B), an earpiece magnetically attachable to the cooling assembly (e.g. earpiece 550), the cooling assembly comprises a cooling module (e.g. thermoelectric device 530; paragraph 110), a heat sink (e.g. heat sink 540), the cooling module comprises a thermoelectric cooler (paragraph 110), the earpiece comprises a body (e.g. Fig. 6B generally shows the body of the earpiece), the earpiece comprising a thermally conductive insert (e.g.Fig. 6B shows the earpiece 550 which is comprised of a conductive material in order for thermal transfer to occur between the thermoelectric device 530 and the earpiece portion 550). Black discloses the electrode may be all, part of, or a coating of the earpiece 550. Fig. 6B appears to show the electrode as a part of or a coating on the inner earpiece structure denotated by the diagonal shading in the direction toward to bottom right. In other words that portion is what Examiner considers to be the claimed thermally conductive insert which contacts the thermoelectric device.
Black fails to teach a fan adapted to reject heat from the cooling module and a cooler magnet and the ear piece being magnetically attachable to the cooler magnet.
King teaches in a similar field use of a magnet to couple various parts of an ear heat transfer device as set forth in paragraph 155 for providing the predictable result of providing a known means to
provide attachment in a medical device in a similar field. It would have been obvious to one having
ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system of black with using a
cooler magnet and the ear piece being magnetically attachable to the cooler magnet since such a
modification would be a known alternative connection means in place of Black forming the ear piece
integrally with the ear cups and heat transfer elements since such a modification would provide a known
alternative means for coupling the ear piece to the thermoelectric device.
King additionally teaches that it is known to use a fan assembly to provide cooling of the ear stimulation device as set forth in paragraph 73 for providing a known method for cooling through convection means. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the system as taught by Black with incorporating a fan to provide additional cooling and thermal regulation of the device through the known convection means taught by King.
With regard to claim 3, Black discloses a headphone system comprising two cooling assemblies according to claim 2 (as discussed above), configured to be placed over the ears of the user and a headband connecting the two hearing protection devices (e.g. 5B shows a headphone system with earcups configured to cover each of a user’s ears and a headband portion that joins each ear cup portion).
With regard to claim 4, claim 4 generally recites the same limitation previously set forth in claim 1. Examiner considers these claim limitations to be sufficiently addressed above with respect to claim 1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH A STOKLOSA whose telephone number is (571)272-1213. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 930AM-530PM.
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, Jonathan Teixeira-Moffat can be reached at 571-272-4390. 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.
/JOSEPH A STOKLOSA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3794
