DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to Applicant’s Request for Continued Examination (RCE), received on 04/29/2026. Claims 1, 3, and 5 have been amended as per the claim set entered on 04/08/2026. Claims 2, 11-14 have been cancelled. Claims 1, 3, 5-10 are pending and have been considered.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) submitted on 04/29/2026 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04/29/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pg. 6, filed 04/08/2026, with respect to the objections of claim 5 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objection of claim 5 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pg. 6, filed 04/08/2026, with respect to “Claim Rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)” have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of claim 11-14 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 04/08/2026, pgs. 7-10, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s representative asserts, “Without conceding to the propriety of the Examiner's rejection, but merely to timely advance the prosecution of the application, as the Examiner will note, independent claim 1 has been amended to more clearly clarify the present invention.
In particular, independent claim 1 now recites a combination of elements including ‘a first radio device, disposed near a speech output source to receive first sound signals, wherein the first sound signals comprise speech signals and noise signals, and a position of the first radio device changes within a certain range; a second radio device, disposed at a fixed distance from the speech output source to receive the noise signals; a sensor module, configured to determine a sensing signal to determine position information of the first radio device; a processor, configured to reduce noise from the first sound signals according to the position information of the first radio device and the noise signals to generate second sound signals, wherein the second sound signals are noise-reduced speech signals; and a sensing end, comprising an optical sensor and connected to the first radio device; wherein the sensor module comprises at least one light source emitter, the optical sensor is configured to generate a corresponding sensing signal according to a time difference of receiving an optical signal emitted by the light source emitter, and the sensor module is configured to determine the position information of the first radio device according to the corresponding sensing signal; wherein the apparatus further comprises a pull rod, the first radio device is connected to the sensing end through the pull rod, and a position of the pull rod changes within a certain range to change positions of the sensing end and the first radio device;
wherein the pull rod slides within an arc-shaped slide, the light source emitter and the optical sensor are located in the slide, and a reflecting device is also provided in the slide’ (emphasis added).
Applicant respectfully submits that the combination of elements set forth in claim 1 is not disclosed or suggested by the references relied on by the Examiner.
Specifically, Howell teaches a head-worn personal audio apparatus supporting enhanced audio output. Specifically, Howell discloses the placement of speakers and microphones on the temple arms of glasses to achieve headphone functionality. It also discloses noise reduction using two microphones and the movement of microphones through an extension. However, Howell does not involve determining the position information of a movable microphone through the use of an optical sensor in conjunction with a light source emitter, nor does it involve targeted noise reduction based on position information.
It is important to emphasize that although Howell discloses a position sensor, the described position sensor is actually a GPS receiver (according to [Col. 37, Lines 56-64]), which can only obtain the geographical location information of the glasses or the user, rather than acquiring the relative position of the microphone through optical distance measurement.
It should also be emphasized that, although Howell discloses a light source (LED) 1442, the light source 1442 therein is used for providing ornamental lighting to the frame or serving as an indicator light (according to [Col. 33, Lines 61-63]), not for position detection. Moreover, position detection refers to detection of a change in the relative position of the first radio device, not detection of a geographic location.
Therefore, Howell fails to teach at least the following feature:
a sensor module, configured to determine a sensing signal to determine position information of the first radio device;
a processor, configured to reduce noise from the first sound signals according to the position information of the first radio device and the noise signals to generate second sound signals, wherein the second sound signals are noise-reduced speech signals; and
a sensing end, comprising an optical sensor and connected to the first radio device;
wherein the sensor module comprises at least one light source emitter, the optical sensor is configured to generate a corresponding sensing signal according to a time difference of receiving an optical signal emitted by the light source emitter, and the sensor module is configured to determine the position information of the first radio device according to the corresponding sensing signal;
wherein the apparatus further comprises a pull rod, the first radio device is connected to the sensing end through the pull rod, and a position of the pull rod changes within a certain range to change positions of the sensing end and the first radio device;
wherein the pull rod slides within an arc-shaped slide, the light source emitter and the optical sensor are located in the slide, and a reflecting device is also provided in the slide.
Applicant respectfully submits that claim 1 differs from Howell at least by the features listed above. This difference gives rise to the technical effect that noise is reduced from a received speech, and clarity and comfort of the speech heard by a user are improved.
With regard to the Examiner's reliance on the secondary references, the references also fail to disclose the above features as set forth in amended independent claim 1.
Bevirt teaches a wireless headset with extendable microphone. According to paragraph [0063], "the electronics within the headset may alter the gain of the microphone depending upon whether the microphone is stowed or deployed...The microswitch may be used to indicate to the headset electronics whether the microphone is stowed or deployed...the boom deployment sensor system may utilize an optical sensor". That is to say, Bevirt merely briefly mentions in paragraph [0063] that the boom deployment sensor system may use an optical sensor, and paragraph [0063] is limited to determining whether the microphone is in the stowed or deployed state, rather than measuring the specific distance moved by the microphone. Although both use optical sensors, the purpose and manner of light processing of the optical sensor in Bevirt differ from those of the optical sensor in claim 1, and these differences are also reflected in the arrangement of the optical sensor in the specific device. Therefore, Bevirt does not disclose the above-mentioned distinguishing feature.
Kim teaches an electronic device and system including the same. Specifically, Kim discloses moving a microphone, detecting the distance between two microphones, adjusting a gain value based on the distance, and applying the gain value to the audio collected by the two microphones for optimization of noise cancelling. However, the position sensors described in Kim are contact-triggered sensors rather than optical sensors (according to paragraphs [0140- 0141], and Figs. 13-14).
Sheaffer teaches a self-calibrating microphone and loudspeaker arrays for wearable audio devices. Specifically, Sheaffer determines position information by collecting image data (according to paragraph [0070]), rather than through optical ranging.
Lee teaches systems, methods, apparatus, and computer-readable media for automatic control of active noise cancellation. Lee does not involve optical sensors.
Lau teaches a dual-mode headset. Specifically, the optical sensors in Lau are used to detect the arm's position (according to [Col. 3, Lines 9-13]), rather than detecting position information to change the parameters applied to eliminate noise.
Therefore, the references do not disclose the application of optical ranging to noise reduction headphone, and targeted noise reduction through the detected microphone position information.
Accordingly, none of the utilized references individually or in combination teach or suggest the limitations of amended independent claim 1 or its dependent claims. Therefore,
Applicant respectfully submits that amended independent claim 1 and its dependent claims clearly define over the teachings of the utilized references.
Accordingly, reconsideration and withdrawal of the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are respectfully requested.
In response, the examiner would like to refer to the combination of references in conjunction as applied to the claims as currently amended. Specifically, the examiner agrees with Applicant’s assertion that “Howell does not involve determining the position information of a movable microphone through the use of an optical sensor in conjunction with a light source emitter…” (pg. 8 of remarks) but respectfully asserts that Howell is not cited for these portions of the rejection. The claim element at hand appears to be the “wherein the sensor module comprises…the optical sensor is configured to generate a corresponding sensing signal…and the sensor module is configured to determine the position information of the first radio device according to the corresponding sensing signal”. Referring to pg. 7 of the Final Rejection mailed on 02/09/2026, Howell is relied upon to disclose the italicized portion of the above claim element, while Bevirt is relied upon for the underlined portions as applied to the optical components contained within the structure of Howell (as Bevirt has explicit disclosure for using optical components to perform the method, [0063]). Howell need not disclose “determining the position information of a movable microphone through the use of an optical sensor…” by itself as the combination of Howell in view of Bevirt is used to reject the claim.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Further, with regard to Applicant’s assertion that Howell fails to disclose “targeted noise reduction based on position information”, the examiner respectfully asserts that this is merely an allegation of patentability without pointing to the novelty over the cited portion of Howell. Howell discloses a signal subtraction between two microphone signals, wherein the two microphones are placed on each hinge ([Fig. 42], [Col. 73, Lines 55-67, Col. 74, Lines 1-2]). This indicates the position information to be the distance between the hinges, wherein the subtraction operation being performed is targeted noise reduction and is based on the position information of the microphones.
Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
Applicant's arguments do not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(c) because they do not clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Further, they do not show how the amendments avoid such references or objections.
With regard to Applicant’s arguments that Howell does not “aquir[e] the relative position of the microphone through optical distance measurement”, the examiner respectfully asserts that “determining a sensing signal to determine position information of the first radio device” (as currently claimed) does not claim optical distance to be the form of measure. Further, when the sensing signal is defined to be an optical signal (the “wherein the sensor module…” claim element), the combination of Howell in view of Bevirt is used to reject this element.
With regard to Applicant’s arguments against the LED of Howell, the examiner respectfully asserts that the claim language “wherein the sensor module comprises at least one light source emitter” (the only portion of this claim element which Howell is exclusively used for) has nothing to say about position detection. Bevirt is relied upon for the position detection using optical sensors, in view of the LED of Howell. Further, the claim language “…configured to determine a sensing signal to determine position information of the first radio device” is silent with regard to how the position information is obtained and/or determined. The term “relative position of the first radio device” (remarks, pg. 8) is not with respect to another component. The examiner asserts that a GPS location still reads on this interpretation.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., originally defining the sensor module to be comprised of a sensing signal and position information which are based on an optical signal) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Therefore, Applicant’s arguments against Howell (remarks pg. 8) are unpersuasive. See updated rejections below.
With regard to Applicant’s arguments against Bevirt (remarks, pgs. 9-10), the examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s assertion that “the purpose and manner of light processing of the optical sensor in Bevirt differ from those of the optical sensor in claim 1, and these differences are also reflected in the arrangement of the optical sensor in the specific device”.
With regard to the purpose and manner of light processing, the examiner asserts that this is merely an allegation of patentability.
Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
Applicant's arguments do not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(c) because they do not clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Further, they do not show how the amendments avoid such references or objections.
With regard to the arrangement of the optical sensor in the specific device, the optical sensor is claimed to be “located in the slide”. Considering the microswitch of Bevirt is located along the sliding mechanism (Fig. 22C), if the microswitch is an optical sensor (as disclosed by Bevirt) this indicates an optical sensor within the slide as the slide is connected to the optical sensor via the switch (which can also be an optical sensing component). The examiner is interpreting the slide to be the enclosing body of the earpiece within which the boom slides in/out.
Therefore, Applicant’s arguments against Bevirt are unpersuasive. See updated rejections below.
Applicant’s arguments, see pgs. 6-10, filed 04/08/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 (Howell in view of Bevirt) have been fully considered and are persuasive (with respect to the newly added “the light source emitter and the optical sensor are located in the slide…”). Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Larsen et al. (US-20180352317-A1), hereinafter Larsen. Larsen discloses “A headset for voice communication is provided comprising an earphone unit having a speaker, a microphone boom comprising one or more microphones wherein the microphone boom is rotatably interconnected with the earphone unit to allow for 360 degrees rotation. The microphone signals are transmitted from the microphone boom to the earphone unit via an optical transceiving unit having a transmitter and a receiver, wherein the microphone boom comprises the transmitter and the earphone unit comprises the receiver” (abstract). See updated rejections below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The claimed sensing end of claims 1/3 is illustrated by element(s) 212, 312, 512, and/or 612 in Figs. 2-6, with paragraphs [0011] and [0012] of the instant application disclosing “In some embodiments, the sensing end is a touch element” and “In some embodiments, the sensing end is an optical sensor”, respectively. The specification does not provide details as to how the combination of an optical sensor and a touch sensor within the same component are to be used in conjunction in one embodiment. Each figure (and associated disclosure) depicts either one or the other. In fact, the disclosure instead gives one skilled in the art the indication that these are techniques/components that are to be substituted for one another. Their placement in the figures is nearly identical, and they perform the same underlying function. The specification does not make clear how they would be used together nor is there any apparent reason to one skilled in the art to do so.
As a result, claim 3 fails to meet the written description requirement of 35 U.S.C. 112(a). The lack of disclosure of the claimed sensing end (as detailed above) in a manner understandable to a person of ordinary skill in the art results in a failure to reasonably convey that the inventor(s) at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
All claims dependent upon rejected base claims are also rejected for failing to meet the written description requirements.
Claim 3 is also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
The claimed sensing end of claims 1/3 is illustrated by element(s) 212, 312, 512, and/or 612 in Figs. 2-6, with paragraphs [0011] and [0012] of the instant application disclosing “In some embodiments, the sensing end is a touch element” and “In some embodiments, the sensing end is an optical sensor”, respectively. The specification does not provide details as to how the combination of an optical sensor and a touch sensor within the same component are to be used in conjunction in one embodiment (MPEP 2164.01(a), Wands factor (F)). Each figure (and associated disclosure) depicts either one or the other. In fact, the disclosure instead gives one skilled in the art the indication that these are techniques/components that are to be substituted for one another. Their placement in the figures is nearly identical, and they perform the same underlying function. The specification does not make clear how they would be used together nor is there any apparent reason to one skilled in the art to do so (MPEP 2164.01(a), Wands factor (D)). If the purpose of the invention is to “provide a speech noise reduction apparatus and method to reduce noise in speech received by a user and to improve clarity and comfort of the speech heard by the user” (instant app, [0004]), (MPEP 2164.01(a), Wands factor (B)), wherein the noise reduction is performed using an optical sensor (claim 1) and/or a touch sensor (claim 3) (MPEP 2164.01(a), Wands factor (A)), it is unclear to the examiner how the combination of these sensors can be used to reduce noise when prior art traditionally relies upon one sensor for determining how to reduce noise (see the switch lever of Bevirt, MPEP 2164.01(a), Wands factor (C)).
As a result, the specification does not provide the requisite level of detail, teach, or provide background on how both the optical sensor and the touch sensor can be used in conjunction without undue experimentation.
All claims dependent upon rejected base claims are also rejected for failing to meet the enablement requirements.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Howell et al. (US-12140819-B1), hereinafter Howell in view of Bevirt et al. (US-20080044002-A1), hereinafter Bevirt, further in view of Larsen et al. (US-20180352317-A1), hereinafter Larsen.
Regarding claim 1, Howell discloses: a speech noise reduction apparatus ([Col. 7, Lines 17-20] noise cancellation functionalities, such as through two directional microphones, one pointing at the user's mouth, and the other pointing away, [Noise cancellation in the context of a user’s mouth indicates the noise is in speech]), the apparatus comprising:
a first radio device ([Fig. 14C, microphone 1428]), disposed near a speech output source to receive first sound signals ([Fig. 14C, Speaker 1426], [Also, as the context is wearable glasses, the microphone will be near a mouth, i.e. speech output source, when worn correctly]),
wherein the first sound signals comprise speech signals and noise signals ([Col. 51, Lines 55-60] One microphone is for capturing the voice of the user. But the microphone captures ambient noise also. It can be embedded in a protrusion extending from the end of the temple), and a position of the first radio device changes within a certain range ([Col. 34, Lines 5-10] The extension 1446 (e.g., a boom arm) can move the microphone 1428 to an end 1448 of the extension 1446, thereby closer to the mouth of the user [Wherein the microphone 2110 of Fig. 21 (used as the reference mic in Col. 51 mapping) is in the same position as that of 1428, i.e. extending below the glasses arm, indicating them to be the same microphone]);
a second radio device ([Col. 51, Lines 60-65] Another microphone can be located at the top of one of the lens holders pointing away from the mouth of the user), disposed at a fixed distance from the speech output source to receive the noise signals ([Col. 51, Lines 60-65] This microphone is for capturing ambient noise [Wherein there is no disclosure as to differing lens holder configurations, indicating this microphone to be fixed compared to the speaker/mouth of the glasses/user]);
a sensor module ([Col. 37, Lines 55-57] the sensor can be a position sensor that provides position information), configured to determine a sensing signal to determine position information of the first radio device ([Col. 37, Lines 57-65] The position sensor can, for example, be a GPS receiver that is able to fully or partially determine the position of the eyeglasses… the position sensor can be provided within the frame (e.g., arm) of the eyeglasses, [Wherein the eyeglasses contain the first radio device, indicating tracking position of the first radio device, i.e. that also located on the arm of the eyeglasses. Further, GPS information is representative of a signal]);
a processor ([Fig. 29, Processor 2506]), configured to reduce noise from the first sound signals according to the position information of the first radio device and the noise signals to generate second sound signals, wherein the second sound signals are noise-reduced speech signals ([Col. 73, Lines 60-67], [Col. 74, Lines 1-2] There can also be a tube from the first microphone to or towards the mouth of the user, to guide the sound from the mouth to the microphone. The second microphone can be in the vicinity of the other hinge, whose directionality favors sound arriving in front of or outside of the user. Signals received from the second microphone are subtracted from signals received from the first microphone before the audio signals are further processed for transmission [Subtracting signals received by a second microphone, i.e. noise signals, from signals received by a first microphone, i.e. first sound + noise signals, tracks to a generation of second sound signals which are noise-reduced speech signals. Further, wherein the first microphone will inherently have a locational dependency on noise, i.e. if the first microphone is closer to the mouth then there will be less noise to subtract, e.g. less ambient noise received, therefore, tracking to a noise reduction dependent upon the first radio device position and noise signals]); and,
a sensing end, comprising an optical sensor and connected to the first radio device ([Fig. 14C, LED 1442], [Col. 72, Lines 34-36] There can be one LED coupling to more than one optical fiber, with each optical fiber guiding the light from the LED to different areas of the frame, [Wherein the LED 1442 being coupled with optical fiber indicates a required optical sensor for receiving the information sent through the optical fiber by the LED (see photodetectors/photodiodes of Howell, [Col. 90, Lines 1-15]). Further, the LED and microphone 1428 being on the same side frame indicates a sensing end comprising an optical sensor, i.e. photodetector, connected to the first radio device, i.e. microphone, through the bridge or other adjoining element of the physical structure of the glasses]),
wherein the sensor module comprises at least one light source emitter ([Col. 90, Lines 4-5] Normally, the photodiode receives light from the LED, [A LED tracks to a light source emitter]).
Howell does not disclose:
the optical sensor is configured to generate a corresponding sensing signal according to a time difference of receiving an optical signal emitted by the light source emitter, and the sensor module is configured to determine the position information of the first radio device according to the corresponding sensing signal;
wherein the apparatus further comprises a pull rod, the first radio device is connected to the sensing end through the pull rod, and a position of the pull rod changes within a certain range to change positions of the sensing end and the first radio device; and
wherein the pull rod slides within an arc-shaped slide.
Bevirt discloses:
the optical sensor is configured to generate a corresponding sensing signal according to a time difference of receiving an optical signal emitted by the light source emitter, and the sensor module is configured to determine the position information of the first radio device according to the corresponding sensing signal ([0063] The microphone 954 is attached to the microphone boom 953, which in turn is attached to a slider 950. A microswitch 951 is mounted within the headset. The microswitch 951 has a switch lever 952. As the microphone boom begins to deploy, the slider 950 moves away from the fully stowed position and allows the switch lever 952 to swing out, toggling the microswitch 951. FIG. 22C illustrates the slider 950 in the fully stowed position, wherein the switch lever 952 is pressed and provides an electrical signal via the microswitch 951 that the microphone is stowed. The microswitch may be used to indicate to the headset electronics whether the microphone is stowed or deployed. In some embodiments, the electronics are adapted to utilize a binary signal from the microswitch to vary between two preset gain levels. The gain levels may be embedded within the electronics or may be programmable into the electronics. In some embodiments, the boom deployment sensor system may utilize an optical sensor, [Consider the microswitch to be utilizing an optical sensor as disclosed in Bevirt for tracking microphone location (in view of Howell’s previously disclosed optical fibers within glasses). Based on this, the switch will be switched on/off corresponding to a time difference as is necessarily how optical sensors function (based on length of optical fiber transmitting light with respect to the receiver), wherein the associated microphone positions have associated electrical signals and/or gain levels, indicating generating sensing signals based on location of microphone which will necessarily be dependent on a time difference for an optical sensor. Further, determining the microphone position based upon the electrical signal via microswitch indicates determining position information based on a sensing signal, i.e. the provided electrical signal]);
wherein the apparatus further comprises a pull rod ([Fig. 4C, Sliding Block 206 used to deploy microphone 203]), the first radio device is connected to the sensing end through the pull rod ([0041] A sliding block 206 is used to help guide the deployment and may form the junction between the microphone wire portion 207 and the microphone boom 204. The end of the wire portion 207 is anchored with a wire anchor block 202. In some embodiments, the microphone wire portion 207 will continue on through the boom 204 out to the microphone 203), and a position of the pull rod changes within a certain range to change positions of the sensing end and the first radio device ([0044] the microphone boom 204 may be substantially straight when stowed, and the deployed microphone boom 205 may be curved, [Wherein the sensing end, i.e. wire anchor 202, and first radio device, i.e. microphone 203, will change positions with respect to the bending and/or deployment length microphone boom 204. The “certain range” of microphone boom 204 is defined using the sliding block 206, seen at both end positions in Figs. 4A and 4C, respectively]); and
wherein the pull rod slides within an arc-shaped slide ([Fig. 1B, First Boom Section 32, Second Boom Section 33], [Fig. 4A, retracted boom 207], [Fig. 4C, Extended boom 205], [The examiner asserts that a first boom section (curved) which can retract into another boom section which is also curved (as seen in the fully extended/deployed position of Fig. 4c) indicates the outer boom casing, i.e. first boom section, to be a slide for the second boom section, i.e. pull rod, wherein the curvature of Fig. 1A and of Figs, 4a-c tracks to an arc-shape]).
Howell and Bevirt are considered analogous art within noise cancellation on head-mounted wearables. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Howell to incorporate the teachings of Bevirt, because of the novel way to place the microphone of a small headset near the user’s mouth to reduce introduced noise into the communication system in an adjustable way, improving flexible noise cancellation approaches on head-mounted wearables (Bevirt, [0005]-[0008]).
Howell in view of Bevirt does not disclose:
the light source emitter and the optical sensor are located in the slide, and
a reflecting device is also provided in the slide.
Larsen discloses:
the light source emitter and the optical sensor are located in the slide ([0064] The microphone signals are transmitted from the microphone boom 8 to the electronic circuit 12 in the earphone unit 4 via an optical transceiving unit 16. The optical transceiving unit 16 comprises a transmitter 18 and a receiver 20. The microphone boom 8 comprises the transmitter 18 and the earphone unit 4 comprises the receiver 20, [The examiner asserts that an optical transmitter tracks to a light source emitter, and a receiver tracks to an optical sensor, in view of the sliding/deployable microphone of Bevirt. Considering the slide is attached to the earphone unit (via transceiving unit 16), see Fig. 3, this indicates that components of the earphone are also components of the slide, i.e. the transmitter is part of the slide via connection to the receiver by the transceiving unit 16. Fig. 3 clearly shows this connection between the transmitter and receiver which would be substituted for the transmitter/receiver of Bevirt, as Bevirt discloses its previously cited functionality (see “the optical sensor is configured to…”) can be performed using optical sensors]), and
a reflecting device is also provided in the slide ([0070] The electro-optical receiver 36 receives the first communication signal 28 as transmitted from the electro-optical transmitter, the optical signal 37, i.e. the first communication signal in optical form, may be transmitted directly to the electro-optical receiver, or the optical signal 37 may be transmitted to the electro-optical receiver via an optical fibre, such as e.g. via a plastic optical fibre, [The examiner asserts that an optical fiber is a reflecting device as light which travels through the fiber reflects amongst the core(s)]).
Howell, Bevirt, and Larsen are considered analogous art within noise cancellation on head-mounted wearables. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Howell in view of Bevirt to incorporate the teachings of Larsen, because of the novel way to reduce the size of an interconnection between a microphone and earphone by using an optical transceiver which also improves isolation of transfer of microphone data, making said microphone data less susceptible to interference, i.e. noise (Larsen, [0014]).
Regarding claim 8, Howell in view of Bevirt further in view of Larsen discloses: the apparatus according to claim 1.
Howell further discloses: wherein the apparatus further comprises a filter for filtering high-frequency signals from the second sound signals to obtain fourth sound signals ([Col. 50, Lines 45-60] audio analog signals from a microphone 2614 can be fed to an A-to-D converter 2616 to generate digital low frequency signals for the processor 2608 and then to the RF transceiver circuits 2604… high frequency filters are used at the front end of the RF transceiver circuits 2604, [In view of the previously disclosed second microphone of Howell responsible for receiving noise-exclusive signals, indicating this could be the microphone used for high-pass filtering without leaving the disclosure of Howell]).
Claim(s) 3, 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Howell in view of Bevirt further in view of Larsen, further in view of Kim et al. (US-20160072936-A1), hereinafter Kim.
Regarding claim 3, Howell in view of Bevirt further in view of Larsen discloses: the apparatus according to claim 1.
Howell in view of Bevirt further in view of Larsen does not disclose:
wherein the sensing end is a touch element, the sensor module comprises at least one touch sensor; and,
the sensor module is configured to determine the position information of the first radio device according to the sensing signal generated by a contact point between the touch element and the touch sensor.
Kim discloses:
wherein the sensing end is a touch element ([0058] The proximity sensor 141 may sense the proximity touch and a proximity touch pattern), the sensor module comprises at least one touch sensor ([0141] The elastic spring 44 positioned at a valley of the pattern 54 can touch the position sensor SE corresponding to the valley. The controller can recognize that the elastic spring 44 is located at the position corresponding to the touched position sensor SE [Indicating the position sensor to also be containing a touch element]); and,
the sensor module is configured to determine the position information of the first radio device according to the sensing signal generated by a contact point between the touch element and the touch sensor ([Fig. 14], [0141] the controller can sense that the second support 24 is located at the corresponding position and thus can detect the distance between the first and second microphones M1 and M2, [Wherein the moving, second support (containing a microphone, see Fig. 13) tracks to the first radio device]).
Howell, Bevirt, Larsen, and Kim are considered analogous art within speech noise reduction. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Howell in view of Bevirt further in view of Larsen to incorporate the teachings of Kim, because of the novel way to perform predetermined operations on a wearable user device without direct manipulation by the user, improving user convenience in using wearables (Kim, [0174]).
Regarding claim 6, Howell in view of Bevirt, further in view of Larsen discloses: the apparatus according to claim 1.
Howell in view of Bevirt, further in view of Larsen does not disclose:
wherein the processor is further configured to determine the corresponding noise reduction parameter according to a pre-determined matching relationship and the position information of the first radio device; and,
wherein the matching relationship is used for representing a corresponding relationship between the position information and the noise reduction parameter.
Kim discloses:
wherein the processor is further configured to determine the corresponding noise reduction parameter according to a pre-determined matching relationship and the position information of the first radio device ([0143] When the position of the second microphone is changed, a sound determined as noise can be changed. For example, the second sound, which is regarded as noise in the first state (S1 of FIG. 13), can be changed to a third sound S03 in the third state (S3 of FIG. 13), [Determining whether or not signals are noise based on the position of a microphone, i.e. first radio device, indicates a pre-determined, i.e. in view of the pre-determined reference length (see below), matching relationship between noise reduction parameter and position information, i.e. reference length]); and,
wherein the matching relationship is used for representing a corresponding relationship between the position information and the noise reduction parameter ([0145] the gain value applied to the noise cancellation circuit may be changed on the basis of a reference length SL. For example, the gain value can be reduced when the distance between the first and second microphones M1 and M2 is shorter than the reference length SL, whereas the gain value can be increased when the gain value can be reduced when the distance between the first and second microphones M1 and M2 is greater than the reference length SL [The reference length is used to determine matching relationships between noise reduction, i.e. gain, and position, i.e. distance]).
Howell, Bevirt, Larsen, and Kim are considered analogous art within speech noise reduction. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Howell in view of Bevirt, further in view of Larsen to incorporate the teachings of Kim, because of the novel way to perform predetermined operations on a wearable user device without direct manipulation by the user, improving user convenience in using wearables (Kim, [0174]).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Howell in view of Bevirt, further in view of Larsen, further in view of Sheaffer et al. (US-20220053281-A1), hereinafter Sheaffer.
Regarding claim 5, Howell in view of Bevirt, further in view of Larsen discloses: the apparatus according to claim 1.
Howell in view of Bevirt, further in view of Larsen does not disclose:
wherein the processor is configured to obtain the position information of the first radio device, determine a corresponding noise reduction parameter according to the position information of the first radio device and reduce noise from the first sound signals according to the noise signals and the corresponding noise reduction parameter.
Sheaffer discloses:
wherein the processor is configured to obtain the position information of the first radio device ([0070] The microphone array calibrator 430 is configured to determine how to adjust far-field transfer functions and/or position-dependent audio settings based on a determination of a physical arrangement of a microphone array 419 using the optical and/or mechanical sensing method, [Wherein any of the microphones within the array can represent a first radio device.]),
determine a corresponding noise reduction parameter according to the position information of the first radio device (([0065] The calibrator 430 is further configured to supply the newly computed beamforming weight vectors to the microphone beamformer 420 in order for the beamformer 420 to adjust the directional beam patterns according to the change in the physical arrangement of the microphone array 419, [Beamforming weight vectors track to “noise reduction parameters”. Further, in the context of a microphone array for the purposes of reducing noise (as disclosed in Sheaffer), this indicates the beam is aimed to reduce noise signals, i.e. removing ambient noise from sound signals ([0043]), in view of the noise reduction of Howell wherein one signal is determined to be pure noise. A signal received by any microphone on the array of Sheaffer could be a “noise signal”, i.e. that without beamforming performed. Using the weight vectors to adjust the beam shape, wherein the weight vectors are dependent upon the microphone array positioning (receiving noise signals) indicating that the vector representing the noise reduction parameter is generated according to the position information of the devices (including at least a first radio device)])) and
reduce noise from the first sound signals according to the noise signals and the corresponding noise reduction parameter ([0066] The audio rendering processor 405 may apply each of the input audio signals with a corresponding new weight in order to produce an expected beam pattern [An expected beam pattern tracks to that without unexpected noise]).
Howell are considered analogous art within speech noise cancellation. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Howell in view of Bevirt, further in view of Larsen to incorporate the teachings of Sheaffer, because of the novel way to disclose wearable devices with microphone arrays which perform beamforming operations to spatially select sound sources within an environment in which the wearable device is located, improving the quality of audio signals from particular sources while reducing noise and interference (Sheaffer, [0032]).
Claim(s) 7, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Howell in view of Bevirt, further in view of Larsen, further in view of Lee et al. (US-9202456-B2), hereinafter Lee.
Regarding claim 7, Howell in view of Bevirt, further in view of Larsen discloses: the apparatus according to claim 1.
Howell further discloses:
wherein the processor is further configured to configure the corresponding noise reduction parameter for the noise signals to determine third sound signals ([Col. 17, Lines 50-60] if the average power level of the environment or the ambient noise level is higher than a preset threshold value, signal amplification is reduced… if the average power level of the environment is more than 75 dB, hearing enhancement amplification is reduced, such as to 0 dB, [In view of the previously disclosed microphone of Howell responsible for ambient noise-exclusive signals indicating that the determined amplification adjustment could be a corresponding noise reduction parameter for noise signals. Further, “configuring” a noise reduction parameter for determining sound signals does not require the applying of that parameter in view of the current construction of the claim. Therefore, the third sound signals can be equivalent to the noise signals])
Howell in view of Bevirt, further in view of Larsen does not disclose: wherein the processor is further configured reverse phases of the third sound signals and then add the third sound signals to the first sound signals to determine the noise-reduced second sound signals.
Lee discloses:
wherein the processor is further configured to reverse phases of the third sound signals and then add the third sound signals to the first sound signals to determine the noise-reduced second sound signals ([Col. 15, Lines 5-20] An ANC filter in a feedback ANC system is typically configured to reverse the phase of the error feedback signal and may also be configured to integrate the error feedback signal, equalize the frequency response, and/or to match or minimize the delay… it may be desirable for the error feedback microphone to be disposed within the acoustic field generated by the loudspeaker, [Wherein the error feedback tracks to noise remaining after an original reduction, indicating the error feedback signal to be representative of a noise, i.e. third, signal. Further, disposing the third signal within the loudspeaker, wherein the loudspeaker receives audio signal output comprising a multichannel signal, noise signal, and reproduced audio (see Fig. 1B), indicates an addition of these signals (at least a noise and mixed signal) into one output]).
Howell are considered analogous art within speech noise reduction. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Howell in view of Bevirt, further in view of Larsen to incorporate the teachings of Lee, because of the novel way to apply an automatic noise cancellation (ANC) filter to received audio signals, attenuating environmental sound to equalize or enhance one or more components of a sensed ambient sound signal (Lee, [Col. 19, Lines 5-20]).
Regarding claim 10, Howell in view of Bevirt, further in view of Larsen discloses: the apparatus according to claim 1.
Howell further discloses:
wherein the apparatus further comprises a D/A converter ([Fig. 31B, “D to A” 2610]); and,
the D/A converted is connected to an output end of the processor to convert the second sound signals from a digital quantity to an analog quantity ([Fig. 31B, “D to A” 2610 to Speaker 2612], [Col. 50, Lines 44-45] Outputs from the processor 2608 are fed to a D-to-A converter 2610 to generate audio signals for a speaker 2612, [Sending the converted audio to a speaker indicates that the d/a is connected to the output end of the processor, i.e. to be presented auditorily to the user through the speaker]).
Howell in view of Bevirt, further in view of Larsen does not disclose:
wherein the apparatus comprises a plurality of A/D converters; and,
the A/D converters are disposed between the first radio device and the processor and between the second radio device and the processor to convert the received first sound signals and noise signals from an analog quantity to a digital quantity respectively.
Lee discloses:
wherein the apparatus comprises a plurality of A/D converters ([Fig. 3B, “ADC” C10a, C10b]); and,
the A/D converters are disposed between the first radio device and the processor and between the second radio device and the processor to convert the received first sound signals and noise signals from an analog quantity to a digital quantity respectively ([Fig. 3B, “Audio Preprocessing Stage AP20”], [In view of the audio preprocessing stage defined in Fig. 3B, it is clear that the A/D converters are disposed between the first and second radio devices, i.e. microphones MC10/MC20, and a processor, i.e. digital preprocessing stage P20a/P20b, in view of the previously disclosed radio devices and processor of Howell which could be substituted into Lee without a change in functionality to Lee as Howell also discloses ADC conversion before processing, see [Col. 66, Lines 25-35]]).
Howell are considered analogous art within speech noise reduction. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Howell in view of Bevirt, further in view of Larsen, to incorporate the teachings of Lee, because of the novel way to apply an automatic noise cancellation (ANC) filter to received audio signals, attenuating environmental sound to equalize or enhance one or more components of a sensed ambient sound signal (Lee, [Col. 19, Lines 5-20]).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Howell in view of Bevirt, further in view of Larsen, further in view of Lau et al. (US-8942384-B2), hereinafter Lau.
Regarding claim 9, Howell in view of Bevirt, further in view of Larsen discloses: the apparatus according to claim 8.
Howell in view of Bevirt, further in view of Larsen does not disclose: wherein the apparatus further comprises an electro-acoustic transducer connected to an output end of the filter to output the fourth sound signals in a form of sound.
Lau discloses:
wherein the apparatus further comprises an electro-acoustic transducer connected to an output end of the filter to output the fourth sound signals in a form of sound ([Fig. 4, Input 141 to Processor 170, sent through noise gate 171, resulting in output 131/151], [Col. 3, Lines 25-40] The speaker 150 comprises a transducer for converting an audio signal to audible output… The processor 170 comprises traditional electrical circuitry known in the art such as ADCs, DACs, amplifiers, filters and other signal processing circuits for transmitting and receiving audio signals, [Converting audio signals into audible output indicates the transducer to be electro-acoustic. Further, sending audio into a processor containing filters (noise gate 171), in view of the low-pass filter of Howell (reasonably understood to be contained within a noise gate), to then be passed into speakers containing transducers indicates the transducer is connected to the output end of the filter. Further still, sending audio through a noise gate indicates that the audio has noise before being processed through the gate, indicating the signals output from the gate to be representative of fourth sound signals, i.e. those with filtered/reduced noise]).
Howell, Bevirt, Larsen, and Lau are considered analogous art within speech noise reduction. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Howell in view of Bevirt, further in view of Larsen to incorporate the teachings of Lau, because of the novel way to automatically switch between different operating conditions based on the position of a headset arm, improving user convenience when switching from a headset to other device for speaking (Lau, [Col. 1, Lines 5-15]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ito et al. (US-7120267-B2) discloses “A headset of the present invention includes: a housing 10 worn on one auricle of a wearer; an arm 41 having a predetermined length, one end side of which is accommodated in the housing and the other end side of which is pulled out of a hole 13a of the housing to the outside, accommodated in the housing by adjusting the length pulled out of the hole 13a of the housing to the outside”. See component arm 41 of the design. See entire document.
Comerford et al. (US-20050071166-A1) discloses “An apparatus for imaging the mouth of a user while detecting the speech of the user. The apparatus includes a headset. A video camera mounted to the headset is positioned so as to capture a frontal view of the mouth of a user. A microphone mounted to the headset is positioned so as to detect the speech of the user. An illumination source illuminates the mouth of the user. A communication device transmits the output of the video camera and the output of the microphone to a computer” (abstract). Specifically, Comerford discloses using light guides including optical fiber cables which are mounted in and extend through a boom 20. See Fig. 5.
Moova et al. (US-10455328-B2) discloses “Example embodiments relating to the adjustment of a microphone attached to a headset are provided. The adjustable headset detects a microphone attached to the headset at a first position and receives one or more speech signal inputs from a user. The headset calculates a feedback parameter which includes a confidence parameter, a vocabulary assistance parameter, and a node exit attempt parameter. The headset determines a pass state in an instance in which the feedback parameter satisfies a feedback threshold, to maintain the microphone at the first position. The headset determines a fail state in an instance in which the feedback parameter fails to satisfy a feedback threshold, to cause a stepper motor to move the microphone from the first position to a second position relative the user.” (abstract). See entire document.
Bodley (US-7089042-B2) discloses “The present invention relates to a headset having an adjustable microphone boom wherein gain applied to the microphone signal is varied based on the position of the boom.” (abstract). See entire document.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THEODORE JOHN WITHEY whose telephone number is (703)756-1754. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8am-5pm.
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, Andrew Flanders can be reached at (571) 272-7516. 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.
/THEODORE WITHEY/Examiner, Art Unit 2655
/ANDREW C FLANDERS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2655
Prosecution Insights