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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 18/650063 (reference application). The claim mapping is as follows:
Current Application
Copending Application No. 18/650063
Claim 1
Claims 1, 3, 5, and 8
Claim 2
Claims 6 and 8
Claim 3
Claims 7 and 9
Claim 4
Claim 9
Claim 5
Claim 1
Claim 6
Claim 2
Claim 7
Claim 4
Claim 8
Claim 10
Claim 9
Claim 11
Claim 10
Claim 12
Claim 11
Claim 13
Claim 12
Claim 14
Claim 13
Claim 15
Claim 14
Claim 16
Claim 15
Claims 17 and 20
Claim 16
Claim 18
Claim 17
Claim 19
Claim 18
Claim 17
Claim 19
Claim 19
Claim 20
Claim 19
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1 and 15 of the present application are directed to a transducer and earphone as similarly recited in claims 1 and 17 of the copending application, including most of the features of the claims in the copending application. Claims 1 and 15 however further recite the magnet assembly including a magnet and an adapter, the magnet being of a hard magnetic material and the adapter not being made of the hard magnetic material. The additional features are similarly recited in claim 8 of the copending application. In addition, the limitations in dependent claims 2-14 and 16-20 parallel those of the claims of the copending application as mapped out above.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 1-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 18/648980 (reference application). The claim mapping is as follows:
Current Application
Copending Application No. 18/648980
Claim 1
Claim 1
Claim 2
Claim 2
Claim 3
Claims 3-4
Claim 4
Claims 5-6
Claim 5
Claim 1
Claim 6
Claim 1
Claim 7
Claim 7
Claim 8
Claim 8
Claim 9
Claim 9
Claim 10
Claim 10
Claim 11
Claim 11
Claim 12
Claim 12
Claim 13
Claim 13
Claim 14
Claim 14
Claim 15
Claim 15
Claim 16
Claim 16
Claim 17
Claims 17 and 20
Claim 18
Claim 18
Claim 19
Claims 17 and 20
Claim 20
Claim 19
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1 and 15 of the present application are directed to a transducer and earphone as similarly recited in claims 1 and 17 of the copending application, including most of the features of the claims in the copending application, and the copending application further limiting the coil as being fixed to the inner side of the magnet assembly and being spaced apart from the first magnet conductor, as similarly recited in claims 5-6 of the present application. Claims 1 and 15 further recite the magnet assembly including a magnet and an adapter, the magnet being of a hard magnetic material and the adapter not being made of the hard magnetic material. In addition, the limitations in dependent claims 2-14 and 16-20 parallel those of the claims of the copending application as mapped out above.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 10 recites the limitations “the first vibration transmission plate” and “the second vibration transmission plate” in lines 2-3 and 4 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. For the purposes of examination, the claim has been interpreted as being dependent on claim 7 in order to provide sufficient antecedent basis. Appropriate correction or clarification is required.
Claims 11-12 are dependent on claim 10 and are therefore also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for the same reason as claim 10.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Pub No 2003/0034705 A1 to Hakansson.
As to claim 1, Hakansson discloses a transducer device including a first magnet conductor (pole 11 or central bobbin body made of conductive material 5, 6, 20 and 51, see figures 2-6; pg. 3, ¶ 0029; pg. 4, claim 1), a coil (coil 7, see figures 2-6; pg. 3, ¶ 0029), and a magnet assembly (magnets 8, 24a-d and 40a-d and yokes 9, 23a-b, 28a-d and 52, see figures 2-6; pg. 3, ¶ 0029, ¶ 0038; pg. 4, ¶ 0042, claim 1), wherein an orthographic projection of the coil on a reference plane perpendicular to a first reference direction surrounds a periphery of an orthographic projection of at least a portion of the first magnet conductor on the reference plane (coil surrounds central pole or bobbin body portion, see figures 2-6), an orthographic projection of the magnet assembly on the reference plane surrounds a periphery of the orthographic projection of the coil on the reference plane (magnetic assembly surrounds coil, see figures 2 and 4-6), one of the first magnet conductor and the magnet assembly is connected to the coil (see figures 2-6), the magnet assembly includes a magnet and an adapter stacked along the first reference direction, the magnet is made of a hard magnetic material, and the adapter is not made of the hard magnetic material (permanent magnets 8, 24a-d and 40a-d and soft iron yokes 9, 23a-b, 28a-d and 52, see figures 2 and 4-6; pg. 2, ¶ 0017; pg. 4, ¶ 0042, claim 10), and a magnetic field generated by the coil after an excitation signal is input interacts with a magnetic field generated by the magnet assembly to cause the first magnet conductor to move relative to the magnet assembly (axial force, see figures 2 and 4-6; pg. 1, ¶ 0001, ¶ 0008; pg. 3, ¶ 0029; pg. 4, claim 1).
As to claim 2, Hakansson further discloses wherein an orthographic projection of the coil on an inner circumferential surface of the magnet assembly along a second reference direction overlaps with a junction between the magnet and the adapter, and the second reference direction is perpendicular to the first reference direction (junction point of magnet and adapter/yoke overlaps with coil in a perpendicular direction, see figures 4-5).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hakansson in view of US Patent Pub No 2021/0168483 A1 to Zhang et al. (“Zhang”).
As to claim 15, Hakansson discloses an earphone (hearing aid, see pg. 1, ¶ 0001) including a transducer device, the transducer device including a first magnet conductor (pole 11 or central bobbin body made of conductive material 5, 6, 20 and 51, see figures 2-6; pg. 3, ¶ 0029; pg. 4, claim 1), a coil (coil 7, see figures 2-6; pg. 3, ¶ 0029), and a magnet assembly (magnets 8, 24a-d and 40a-d and yokes 9, 23a-b, 28a-d and 52, see figures 2-6; pg. 3, ¶ 0029, ¶ 0038; pg. 4, ¶ 0042, claim 1), wherein an orthographic projection of the coil on a reference plane perpendicular to a first reference direction surrounds a periphery of an orthographic projection of at least a portion of the first magnet conductor on the reference plane (coil surrounds central pole or bobbin body portion, see figures 2-6), an orthographic projection of the magnet assembly on the reference plane surrounds a periphery of the orthographic projection of the coil on the reference plane (magnetic assembly surrounds coil, see figures 2 and 4-6), one of the first magnet conductor and the magnet assembly is connected to the coil (see figures 2-6), the magnet assembly includes a magnet and an adapter stacked along the first reference direction, the magnet is made of a hard magnetic material, and the adapter is not made of the hard magnetic material (permanent magnets 8, 24a-d and 40a-d and soft iron yokes 9, 23a-b, 28a-d and 52, see figures 2 and 4-6; pg. 2, ¶ 0017; pg. 4, ¶ 0042, claim 10), and a magnetic field generated by the coil after an excitation signal is input interacts with a magnetic field generated by the magnet assembly to cause the first magnet conductor to move relative to the magnet assembly (axial force, see figures 2 and 4-6; pg. 1, ¶ 0001, ¶ 0008; pg. 3, ¶ 0029; pg. 4, claim 1).
Hakansson does not disclose the earphone including a support assembly and a core module connected to the support assembly, the support assembly being configured to support the core module and place the core module at a wearing position, the core module including a core housing and the core housing being connected to the support assembly, and the transducer device being disposed in an accommodation cavity of the core housing.
However such a configuration is known in the art of hearing devices, as taught by Zhang, which discloses a similar hearing device (see pg. 3, ¶ 0060), and further discloses the device having a support assembly for the speaker to enable a wearing state of the device (supporting connector 10 with hooks 30 and 50, see figure 1; pg. 4, ¶ 0061), the device further including a core module or speaker assembly including a housing and a speaker or transducer (speaker assembly 40, see figure 1; pg. 4, ¶ 0061, ¶ 0063), and the speaker being disposed in an accommodation cavity of the core housing (see figures 15-16; pg. 6, ¶ 0090; pg. 12, ¶ 0138). The proposed modification is therefore considered obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as such a configuration is known in the art, the motivation being as a matter of design and depending on the type of hearing device, and further to provide a structure that enables close contact with a user for bone conduction while the device is in a wearing state (see figure 1; pg. 1, ¶ 0004; pg. 2, ¶ 0018; pg. 4, ¶ 0061).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-9, 13-14 and 16-20 would be allowable if rewritten to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, and further pending the filing of a terminal disclaimer to overcome the nonstatutory double patenting rejections set forth in this Office action.
Claims 10-12 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, and further pending the filing of a terminal disclaimer to overcome the nonstatutory double patenting rejections set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 3 further limits the magnet assembly of claim 2 as having a second magnet conductor, with at least a portion of the second magnet conductor being disposed on an inner side of the magnet and the adapter facing the first magnet conductor, and an orthographic projection of the coil along the second reference direction forms a first overlap region with an orthographic projection of the magnet along the second reference direction, the orthographic projection of the coil along the second reference direction forms a second overlap region with an orthographic projection of the second magnet conductor along the second reference direction, and a height of the second overlap region in the first reference direction is greater than a height of the first overlap region in the first reference direction.
Claim 7 further limits the transducer device of claim 1 as further including a first vibration transmission plate and a second vibration transmission plate disposed on two sides of the coil in the first reference direction, respectively, the first vibration transmission plate is connected to one end of the first magnet conductor and the magnet, and the second vibration transmission plate is connected to the other end of the first magnet conductor and the adapter.
Claim 16 further limits the earphone of claim 15 as having the core module include at least one vibration damping sheet and a vibration panel, the transducer device being suspended in the accommodation cavity through the at least one vibration damping sheet, the vibration panel being connected to the first magnetic conductor and configured to transmit a mechanical vibration generated by the transducer device to a user.
The closest prior art, either alone or in combination, fails to anticipate or render obvious the claimed invention as recited in claims 3, 7 and 16. The claims are therefore considered to include allowable subject matter, and remaining dependent claims are further considered to include allowable subject matter at least for their dependency on claims 3, 7 and 16.
Conclusion
18. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SABRINA DIAZ whose telephone number is (571)272-1621. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-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, Ahmad Matar can be reached at 5712727488. 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.
/SABRINA DIAZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2693
/AHMAD F. MATAR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2693
Prosecution Insights