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 .
Status of Claims
Claim 2 is cancelled
Claims 1 and 3-9 are rejected
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 4-6, filed 11/14/2025, with respect to claim(s) 1, 8 and 9 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.
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) 1-3, 7 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sorensen (US PUB 20160249133) in view of Zhang et al (US PUB 20220279262, hereinafter Zhang).
Regarding claim 1, Sorensen discloses an earphone (e.g. an earphone device 1), (see at least the abstract) comprising an earphone body (e.g. a main body 18), an earphone tip (e.g. eargel or eartip 3) removably connected to a first end of the earphone body and configured to be received in an entrance of an ear canal (see figure 2); an earphone support member (e.g. support member 7); (see Sorensen, [0038]-[0040], and figures 2 and 11).
Sorensen further teaches detachably connecting the support member 7 to the earphone main body 18, but fails to explicitly teach: a detachable connection structure configured to detachably connect the earphone support member to a second end of the earphone body, wherein the detachable connection structure comprises a magnetic attachment.
However, Zhang in the same field of endeavor teaches an earphone (see at least the abstract and figure 1), comprising an earphone body, a support member (e.g. an ear hook 1), and a detachable connection structure (e.g. detachable attraction structure 2, 4), configured to detachably connect the earphone support member to a second end of the earphone body, wherein the detachable connection structure comprises a magnetic attachment (e.g. the detachable attraction structure 2, 4 are magnetic attachment), (see Zhang, [0036], figures 1-2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to any person having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate a detachable attachment structure comprising magnetic attachment as taught by Zhang in the teachings of Sorensen in order to facilitate the removal and attachment of the support member to the earphone body as situation demands, and thereby further improving the efficiency of the earphone device.
Regarding claim 3, Sorensen discloses the earphone of claim 1, wherein the earphone support member includes at least one of a battery; a sensor (e.g. sensor 35); a light source; a sound source; any combination of these (e.g. rate sensor 35 is positioned in the sensor protrusion 28 of the integrally formed fitting member 4 and support member 7), (see Sorensen, [0041] and figure 2).
Regarding claim 7, Sorensen discloses the earphone of claim 1, wherein the earphone body comprises a speaker (e.g. a speaker within a protrusion 26), (see Sorensen, [0039] and figure 2).
Regarding claim 9, Sorensen discloses an earphone (e.g. an earphone device 1), (see at least the abstract) comprising an earphone body (e.g. a main body 18), an earphone tip (e.g. eargel or eartip 3) removably connected to a first end of the earphone body and configured to be received in an entrance of an ear canal (see figure 2); an earphone support member (e.g. support member 7); wherein the earphone tip comprises of a flexible material (e.g. a soft flexible material such as rubber or silicone) and is attached to the earphone body using mechanical friction (e.g. frictionally fitted around the nozzle of the main body 18), (see Sorensen, [0038]-[0040], and figure 2 and 11).
Sorensen further teaches detachably connecting the support member 7 to the earphone main body 18, but fails to explicitly teach: a detachable connection structure configured to detachably connect the earphone support member to a second end of the earphone body, and wherein the detachable connection structure comprises a magnetic attachment.
However, Zhang in the same field of endeavor teaches an earphone (see at least the abstract and figure 1), comprising an earphone body, a support member (e.g. an ear hook 1), and a detachable connection structure (e.g. detachable attraction structure 2, 4), configured to detachably connect the earphone support member to a second end of the earphone body, wherein the detachable connection structure comprises a magnetic attachment (e.g. the detachable attraction structure 2, 4 are magnetic attachment), (see Zhang, [0036], figures 1-2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to any person having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate a detachable attachment structure comprising magnetic attachment as taught by Zhang in the teachings of Sorensen in order to facilitate the removal and attachment of the support member to the earphone body as situation demands, and thereby further improving the efficiency of the earphone device.
Claim(s) 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sorensen in view of Zhang as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Li et al (US PUB 20220386015, hereinafter Li015).
Regarding claim 4, Sorensen as modified by Zhang discloses the earphone of claim 1, wherein the earphone support member comprises a sensor (e.g. sensor 35), but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the sensor comprises at least one of an image sensor; an image sensor or 3D sensor for gesture recognition; a time of flight sensor; an IR sensor; an acoustic sensor; a microphone; a vibration sensor; a gyro meter; an acceleration sensor; a temperature sensor; a pressure sensor; or combinations of these sensors.
However, Li015 in the same field of endeavor teaches an earphone comprising an earphone body (e.g. a main housing 101) and a support member (e.g. a handle portion 1001), wherein the support member comprises a sensor, and wherein the sensor comprising a microphone (e.g. a microphone 90), (see Li015, [0169]-[0170] and [0191], also figures 2-4). Therefore, it would have been obvious to any person having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate a sensor comprising a microphone in the support member as taught by Li015 in the teachings of Sorensen in view of Zhang in order to effectively spread out the electrical elements outside the main housing of the earphone, and thereby further improving the operational efficiency of the earphone device.
Regarding claim 5, Sorensen as modified by Zhang and Li015 discloses the earphone of claim 1, wherein the earphone support member (handle portion 1001) has one or more electric connections (e.g. a flexible circuit 13) to the earphone body, wherein any of said connections provides at least power (e.g. via a battery 40); communication; interlock; or combination of these (see Li015, [0181] and figure 3).
Regarding claim 6, Sorensen as modified by Zhang and Li015 discloses the earphone of claim 1, wherein the earphone support member has a wireless connection (e.g. via an antenna feed 703) to the earphone body providing either communication and/or power (see Li015, [0188] and figure 3).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sorensen in view of Zhang as applied to Claim 7 above, and further in view of Shen et al (US PUB (20240121538, hereinafter Shen).
Regarding claim 8, Sorensen as modified by Zhang discloses the earphone of claim 7, but fails to explicitly disclose: wherein the speaker is an audio generating transducer in the form of a micro-electro-mechanical device (MEMS).
However, Shen in the same field of endeavor teaches an earphone (see at least the abstract) comprising a speaker (e.g. a speaker 3), wherein the speaker is an audio generating transducer in the form of a micro-electro-mechanical device (MEMS).
(see Shen, [0035] and figure 3). Therefore, it would have been obvious to any person having an ordinary skill in the art to incorporate a MEMs-type speaker as taught by Shen in the teachings of Sorensen in view of Zhang in order to benefit from the small volume that MEMs device uses, and thereby further achieving overall miniaturization of the earphone device.
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 CFR 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 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OYESOLA C OJO whose telephone number is (571)272-0848. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:00am to 4:00pm Central Time.
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, Vivian Chin can be reached at 571-272-7840. 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.
/OYESOLA C OJO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695.