Detailed Action
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . See 35 U.S.C. § 100 (note).
Art Rejections
Obviousness
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.
Claims 1–10 and 24–27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of US Patent Application Publication 2012/0177206 (published 12 July 2012) (“Yamagishi”) and US Patent 6,449,374 (patented 10 September 2002) (“Skulley”).
Claims 28–31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Yamagishi; Skulley and US Patent Application Publication 2011/0170703 (published 14 July 2011) (“Palma”).
Claim 1 is drawn to “an audio device.” The following table illustrates the correspondence between the claimed audio device and the Yamagishi reference.
Claim 1
The Yamagishi Reference
“1. An audio device, comprising:
The Yamagishi reference similarly describes an ear speaker device corresponding to the claimed audio device.
“an acoustic module configured to deliver sound close to an ear canal opening but does not block or obstruct the ear canal;
Yamagishi’s audio device includes left and right electroacoustic transducers 2L, 2R, both of which correspond individually to the claimed acoustic module. For simplicity of explanation, this rejection refers to the left electroacoustic transducer 2L as an element corresponding to the claimed acoustic module. Yamagishi’s transducer 2L is hung on the ear of a user by an earl clip 21L near the user’s ear canal to deliver sound without blocking the user’s ear canal. Id. at ¶¶ 132, 133 149–151, FIGs.5, 12, 25.
“a terminal member constructed and arranged to rest posterior of [[the]] an otobasion inferius; and
Yamagishi describes an ear clip 21L to hang transducer 2L on the user’s ear. Id. Yamagishi depicts a terminal portion of ear clip 21L that rests posterior to the user’s otobasion inferius. See id. at FIGs.12, 25.
“a body that extends between the acoustic module and the terminal member,
Ear clip 21L similarly includes a body that extends between a housing 4L of transducer 2L and the terminal portion of clip 21L. See id. Specifically, ear clip 21L includes a portion that extends from housing 4L and over the top of the user’s ear. See id.
“wherein the body has compliance such that the audio device lightly clamps on [[the]] an outer ear when it is worn, [[and]]
Yamagishi does not describe any portion of ear clip 21L being formed of compliant material in order to clamp onto the user’s ear.
“wherein the acoustic module comprises a housing that houses an audio driver, the housing including a sound-emitting nozzle that is arranged to deliver sound from a front side of the audio driver and one or more ports exposed to a rear side of the audio driver,
In a second embodiment, Yamagishi’s left electroacoustic transducer 2L likewise includes a housing 4L that houses a speaker unit 207L corresponding to the claimed audio driver, a tubular duct 208L corresponding to the claimed sound-emitting nozzle and rear ports 305–308. Id. at ¶¶ 249–251, FIGs.25, 33.
“wherein the terminal member comprises a cylindrical central member and an outer member, and
“wherein the outer member is made from a compliant material and is configured to contact the outer ear and/or an ear root region near an ear root dimple.”
Yamagishi’s terminal portion, or member, of ear clip 21L is not formed as a cylindrical central member with an outer member made from a compliant material in contact with the outer ear.
Table 1
PNG
media_image1.png
320
630
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1: Marked-up copy of Yamagishi at FIG.12 (marked-up to remove reference symbols and to highlight correspondence with claimed features).
The table above shows that the Yamagishi reference describes an ear speaker device that corresponds closely to the claimed audio device. The Yamagishi reference does not anticipate the claimed invention, however, since Yamagishi does not describe that the body portion of clip 21L has compliance in order to lightly clamp the user’s ear when worn. Further, Yamagishi does not describe that the terminal member of ear clip 21L includes a cylindrical center member and an outer member made of compliant material that contacts the outer ear and/or an ear root region near an ear root dimple.
The differences between the claimed invention and the Yamagishi reference are such that the invention as a whole would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the Application was effectively filed. The Yamagishi reference describes an ear speaker device hung on a user’s ear by an ear hook that extends between a housing in front of the user’s ear, over the auricle and extends downward along the user’s ear to rest posterior to the user’s otobasion inferius. Yamagishi, however, does not describe the ear hook in greater detail, leaving its implementation to one of ordinary skill in the art.
The Skulley reference, like Yamagishi, describes an ear hook 10 to hang an audio device 22 on a user’s ear. Skulley at Abs., col. 1 ll. 7–9, col. 2 ll. 1–12, FIG.1A. Skulley detaches and suggests forming the prehensile portion 12/24, or body portion, of ear hook 10 with resilience to create a bias that clamps the ear of the user. Id. at col. 8 ll. 12–29, FIG.4A. Skulley further teaches forming portion 12/24 with a compressible material (e.g., compressible member 44) to comfortably comply with and securely grip the user’s ear. See id. at col. 1 ll. 23–42, col. 2 ll. 27–51.
Skulley further teaches terminating prehensile portion 12/24 with a digit receiving member 18/46 that is depicted as being formed by material located at the center of the portion’s terminal portion and having the shape of a cylinder in order to define a centrally-located, cylindrical hole designed to receive a user’s finger and aid placement and removal. Skulley at col. 4 ll. 45–56, col. 6 ll. 17–27, FIGs.1A, 1E, 2A. Skulley teaches that the outside, or an outer member, of center cylindrical member 18/46 is coated with an elastomer (like compressible member 44) that will securely contact the user’s outer ear. Id. at col. 4 ll. 20–29, col. 6 ll. 47–59, FIG.2C.
Read in light of Yamagishi, the Skulley reference would have reasonably suggested embodying Yamagishi’s ear hook 21L with a resilience and with a compressible material to together provide a degree of compliance in order to clamp on the user’s ear. One of ordinary skill would have reasonably sought to configure Yamagishi’s ear hook 21L with a light clamping pressure in order to reduce the discomfort generated by clamping Yamagishi’s device on the user’s ear. See id. at col. 1 ll. 23–42, col. 2 ll. 27–51. And one of ordinary skill would have reasonably sought to form Yamagishi’s terminal portion with a center cylindrical portion for receiving a user’s finger and with an elastomer outer member to conform securely to the user’s outer ear. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Yamagishi and the Skulley references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 2 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the audio device is configured to be worn on or abutting [[an]] the outer ear, such that the body contacts the outer ear.”
Similarly, Yamagishi describes hanging the housing 4L of an ear speaker device on a user’s auricle with an ear hook 21L. Yamagishi at ¶¶ 150–151, FIG.12. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Yamagishi and the Skulley references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 3 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the body comprises a compliant spring member that is configured to contact the ear root region or the outer ear proximate the otobasion inferius.”
The obviousness rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of embodying Yamagishi’s ear hook 21L with a resilient prehensile tail, or compliant spring member, to contact the ear root region of a user’s ear. See Skulley at col. 8 ll. 12–29, FIG.4A. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Yamagishi and the Skulley references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 4 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the body extends along an arc for at least 180 degrees.”
The obviousness rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of embodying Yamagishi’s ear hook 21L with a resilient prehensile tail, or compliant spring member, to contact the ear root region of a user’s ear. See Skulley at col. 8 ll. 12–29, FIG.4A. Skulley suggests forming the prehensile tail with an arc that extends over at least 180 degrees. See Skulley at FIG.4A. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Yamagishi and the Skulley references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 5 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the body includes a generally “C”-shaped portion that extends from a first end where it is coupled to the acoustic module, to a second end where it is coupled to the terminal member.”
The obviousness rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of embodying Yamagishi’s ear hook 21L with a resilient prehensile tail, or compliant spring member, to contact the ear root region of a user’s ear. See Skulley at col. 8 ll. 12–29, FIG.4A. Skulley suggests forming the prehensile tail in a C shape between a housing-connecting portion 20 and a terminal portion 18. See Skulley at FIG.4A. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Yamagishi and the Skulley references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 6 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the terminal member is constructed and arranged to fit into or near a dimple or depression behind an earlobe and just posterior of the otobasion inferius.”
The obviousness rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of embodying Yamagishi’s ear hook 21L with a resilient prehensile tail, or compliant spring member, to contact the ear root region of a user’s ear. See Skulley at col. 8 ll. 12–29, FIG.4A. Skulley suggests forming the prehensile tail with a terminal portion that fits into or near a dimple or depression behind an earlobe, posterior to the otobasion inferius. See Skulley at FIG.4A. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Yamagishi and the Skulley references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 7 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the terminal member is generally round and has an arc-shaped surface.”
The obviousness rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of embodying Yamagishi’s ear hook 21L with a resilient prehensile tail, or compliant spring member, to contact the ear root region of a user’s ear. See Skulley at col. 8 ll. 12–29, FIG.4A. Skulley suggests forming the prehensile tail with a terminal portion that is generally round and arc-shaped. See Skulley at FIG.4A. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Yamagishi and the Skulley references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 8 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the
The obviousness rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of embodying Yamagishi’s ear hook 21L with a compressible, or compliant, material to grip the user’s ear. See Skulley at col. 1 ll. 23–42, col. 2 ll. 27–51. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Yamagishi and the Skulley references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 9 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the body comprises an elastomer or a metal spring to provide the compliance.”
The obviousness rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of embodying Yamagishi’s ear hook 21L with a resilient prehensile tail, or compliant spring member, to contact the ear root region of a user’s ear. See Skulley at col. 8 ll. 12–29, FIG.4A. Skulley further suggests forming the prehensile tail an elastomer. See Skulley at col. 6 ll. 47–59. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Yamagishi and the Skulley references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 10 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the body comprises one or more compliant joints to achieve compliance.”
The obviousness rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of embodying Yamagishi’s ear hook 21L with a resilient prehensile tail, or compliant spring member, to contact the ear root region of a user’s ear. See Skulley at col. 8 ll. 12–29, FIG.4A. The Skulley reference teaches and suggests an alternative embodiment where the prehensile member includes a joint to provide compliance. Skulley at col. 5 l. 29 to col. 6 l. 46, FIG.2A. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Yamagishi and the Skulley references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 24 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the compliance in the body is provided by an inverted "V"-shaped member made of the compliant material.”
Claim 25 depends on claim 24 and further requires the following:
“wherein the inverted "V"-shaped member includes an elongated cavity or opening.”
Claims 24 and 25 are analyzed together. The obviousness rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of modifying Yamagishi’s ear hook 21L to incorporate multiple features of Skulley’s earhook, including the compliant nature of the earhook, the use of an elastomeric outer cushion to comfortably contact and securely grip the user’s outer ear and the provision of a center cylindrical member to receive a user’s finger.
According to Skulley, in order to provide compliance in Yamagishi’s ear hook 21L, one of ordinary skill should from the ear hook as depicted in Skulley’s figures. In one example, Skulley depicts an ear hook with an inverted V-shaped member having an elongated cavity as highlighted in the reproduction below.
PNG
media_image2.png
522
638
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 2: Marked-up version of Skulley at FIG.1A (marked-up to remove reference symbols and to highlight correspondence with claimed features).
For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Yamagishi and the Skulley references makes obvious all limitations of the claims.
Claim 26 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the compliant material is an elastomer or a foam.”
Similarly, the Skulley reference suggests covering an ear hook with an elastomer, like element 44. Skulley at col. 6 l. 47–59. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Yamagishi and the Skulley references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 27 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the central member is configured to sit on or near the ear root dimple.”
The obviousness rejection of claim 1, incorporated herein, shows the obviousness of embodying Yamagishi’s ear hook 21L with a resilient prehensile tail, or compliant spring member, to contact the ear root region of a user’s ear. See Skulley at col. 8 ll. 12–29, FIG.4A. Skulley suggests forming the prehensile tail with a center cylindrical terminal portion 18/46 that fits into or near a dimple or depression behind an earlobe, posterior to the otobasion inferius. See Skulley at FIGs.1A, 4C. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Yamagishi and the Skulley references makes obvious all limitations of the claim.
Claim 28 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the body includes a housing that carries electronics and power that are used to receive wireless audio signals and create and send signals that are used to drive a driver located in acoustic module [sic .]”
Claim 29 depends on claim 28 and further requires the following:
“wherein the housing is rigid.”
Claim 30 depends on claim 28 and further requires the following:
“wherein the housing is disposed between a compliant portion of the body and the terminal member.”
Claim 31 depends on claim 1 and further requires the following:
“wherein the body includes a housing that carries electronics and/or power, and wherein the body is configured to sit behind the outer ear.”
Claims 28–31 are analyzed together. These claims add a rigid housing to the claimed body. The body carries electronics, power and are used to receive wireless audio signals and create and send signals used to drive a driver located in the acoustic module. The housing is disposed between a compliant portion of the body and its terminal member. The housing sits behind the outer ear. Neither Yamagishi nor Skulley fairly describe, teach or suggest the claimed housing. Yamagishi locates electronics in housing 4L that sits in front of the ear and is configured as a wired device. Yamagishi at ¶ 108, FIG.12. Skulley similarly located electronics in a housing that sits in front of the ear. Skulley at FIG.3A.
The Palma reference describes a headset, that like the devices described in Yamagishi and Skulley, includes an ear hook. Palma at Abs., ¶¶ 2, 184–186, FIGs.15–17. Palma further teaches improving the functionality of the ear hook by adding a wireby forming a portion of its body as a housing 210 that contains a PCB 215, battery 225, Bluetooth and associated circuitry to receive, create and send audio to drive a speaker of the headset. Id. at ¶¶ 40, 184–185. Palma teaches forming housing 210 from rigid materials, like metal and plastic. Id. at ¶ 189. Palma locates housing 210 behind the user’s ear in a position between the top of an ear hook body 172 and a terminal member 105. Id. at ¶ 184, FIG.15.
Read in light of Yamagishi and Skulley, the Palma reference fairly teaches and suggests modifying Yamagishi’s ear hook to include a rigid housing between a top body portion and a terminal portion. The housing would be used to hold a PCB, battery and wireless circuitry in order to receive, create and send audio signals to Yamagishi’s speakers. One of ordinary skill would have reasonably expected that modifying Yamagishi as outlined would improve Yamagishi’s headset by adding a wireless audio functionality. For the foregoing reasons, the combination of the Yamagishi, the Skulley and the Palma references makes obvious all limitations of the claims.
Summary
Claims 1–10 and 24–31 are rejected under at least one of 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103 as being unpatentable over the cited prior art. 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.
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 C.F.R. § 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.
Double Patenting
Applicant filed a terminal disclaimer that disclaims any terminal portion of this Application that would extend beyond the expiration date of US Patents 10,674,244; 11,303,984; 11,849,271; and 12,041,404. That terminal disclaimer has been approved. Accordingly, the non-statutory double patenting rejections presented in the Non-Final Rejection at 10–15 (25 September 2025) are withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claim 28 is objected to because it does end with a period. See MPEP § 608.01(m). Appropriate correction is required. No new matter may be added.
Response to Applicant’s Arguments
Applicant’s Reply (30 January 2026) has substantively amended all the claims. This Office action includes updated rejections.
Applicant’s Reply at further includes comments pertaining to the rejections included in this Office action. Regarding claim 1, Applicant comments that Skulley’s digit receiving member 18 does not correspond to the claimed cylindrical central member. The Examiner has considered this argument, but finds it unpersuasive. The claimed terminal member of claim 1 now requires a cylindrical central member and an outer member. The Examiner has not found, and Applicant has not posited, a special meaning for the term “cylindrical central member,” and it is presumed to carry its plain meaning in light of the Specification. Here, the term indicates a member that is centrally-located and exhibits a cylindrical shape. A “member” is generally understood as simply a part of something larger. The term “central” generally designates the middle of a circle, or, more broadly, locating something at the middle of something else, like how text may be center on a page. And the term “cylindrical” generally refers to something exhibiting the shape of a cylinder, meaning it has a circular or oval cross-section and straight sides. Skulley’s digit receiving member 18 meets this definition. For instance, Skulley’s digit receiving member 18 is inarguably a member of an ear hook 10. Skulley at col. 4 ll. 45–56. Digit receiving member 18 is formed as a cylinder as seen by its generally oval cross-section seen in the elevation view provided by Skulley at FIG.1A and by its inclusion of straight inner/outer surfaces as best seen in the perspective view provided by Skulley at FIG.1E. Digit receiving member 18 has a cylindrical shape that forms the terminal portion of prehensile portion 12 and whose central portion defines a cylindrical hole corresponding to the center point of the terminal portion. Skulley at col. 4 ll. 45–56, FIG.1A. Thus, digit receiving member includes a member located centrally in a terminal portion and formed with a cylinder of material in order to define a central cylindrical hole.
For the foregoing reasons, Applicant has not persuasively established any error in the Office action. All the rejections will be maintained.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 C.F.R. § 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WALTER F BRINEY III whose telephone number is (571)272-7513. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-4:30 pm.
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, Carolyn Edwards can be reached at 571-270-7136. 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.
/Walter F Briney III/
Walter F Briney IIIPrimary ExaminerArt Unit 2692
3/20/2026