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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed 7/22/24, 9/30/24, 1/3/25, 1/27/26 have been considered.
Drawings
The drawings filed 5/17/24 are acceptable to the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 34 objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 34, line 6 misspells the word metal as “mental”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 34, 36, 37, 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Essabar et al. (US 2011/0135134 A1), cited by applicant.
Re claim 34: Essabar teaches an acoustic output device (figure 1), comprising: a speaker assembly (3), configured to convert audio signals into vibration signals (operation of a speaker); a functional assembly, ((5), including a microphone and microphone boom) electrically connected to the speaker assembly; and a supporting structure(4, 29), configured to be connected to the speaker assembly and the functional assembly, wherein the supporting structure includes a metal body (14) and a metal connector (15, 25) sleeved in potion (60, figures 3 and 4) and fixed on one end of the metal body (figure 4), and the end of the metal body is connected to the functional assembly via the metal connector.
Re claim 36: see paragraph [0024], spot welding
Re claim 37: see figure 4 in which the metal body and its connection is placed on the outer face of the metal connector (25) with welding points being located as depicted in figure 3.
Re claim 39: Note that in the connection made between (15, 25) forms a thicker combination then the metal body (14) itself and therefor would have a different deformation with this deformation that can be related to a threshold deformation since the claim does not define this threshold deformation.
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.
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 CFR 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.
Claim(s) 34-37, 39, 43-51 and 53 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN109788386 (A)) in view of Essabar et al. (See attached translation of Li et al.)
Re claim 34: Li et al. teaches an acoustic output device (figure 1), comprising: a speaker assembly (20, 50), configured to convert audio signals into vibration signals; a functional assembly (60,70) electrically connected to the speaker assembly; and a supporting structure (10 or 40), configured to be connected to the speaker assembly and the functional assembly, wherein the supporting structure includes a metal body (such as elastic metal wire 11) and a connector, such as (14 and 15) sleeved and fixed on one end of the metal body, and the end of the metal body is connected to the functional assembly via the connector. In Li the connector used is made of plastic and not metal as set forth. Essabar et al. teaches in a similar environment that similar connections can be made by using metal connectors (15, 25) to ensure the metal elements do not readily separate, paragraph [0024]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing of the invention to incorporate metal connectors as taught by Essabar et al. in place of the plastic connectors used in Li to predictably provide a connection that will not readily separate. Therefor the claimed subject matter would have been obvious before the filing of the invention
Re claim 35: see Li et al. the use of holes for the elastic wire, paragraph [0046]
Re claim 36: note in Esssabar the metal connections are made by welding which would be incorporate as discussed with respect to claim 34 to ensure the metal elements do not readily separate
Re claim 37: see figure 4 of Essabar et al. in which the metal body and its connection is placed on the outer face of the metal connector (25) with welding points being located as depicted in figure 3 with this welding predictably provide a connection that will not readily separate.
Re claim 39: Note in Essabar et al. the connection made between (15, 25) forms a thicker combination then the metal body (14) itself and therefor would have a different deformation with this deformation that can be related to a threshold deformation since the claim does not define this threshold deformation.
Re claim 43: note Li et al. additionally teaches the use of a rear hook assembly (figure 1, element (40)) having similar features as support structure (10), see paragraphs [0202-0205] including a metal body (41), connectors (42) and wire (such as 12) allowing for connections to a circuit in a similar manner as in (10) to enable the device to be suspended behind a user’s head when the user wears it.
Re claim 44: note Li et al. teaches in figures 2-7 that the connector includes a mounting surface (142) that is parallel to the axis direction of the connector with a wire (12) mounted through this portion of the connector
Re claim 45: Li et al. teaches in figures 3 and 5 (along with paragraphs [0075-0083] that the connector includes anti-rotation surface(s) (143) which when press into lock onto a rear surface of stop block (23) preventing rotation and also a stop flange (1421) that is connected to the anti-rotation surface(s) (143)
Re claim 46: Li et al. teaches that the other end of the connector includes a stop slot (1423)
Re claim 47: Li et al. teaches that wire (12) has a greater length than the metal body thereby allowing for electric connections to be made (see figure 2)
Re claim 48: Li et al. teaches those elastic coverings, similar to protective sleeve (16) can be used to improve waterproof effect
Re claim 49: note that protecting sleeves such as (16) integral with sheath(s) (17) in Li et al. are placed on the exterior surfaces of the device components thereby providing a channel in which other components including the metal bay and wire pass through
Re claim 50: note in Li et al. (figure 1) elastic covering (16) integral with protective sheaths (17) have accommodating cavities therein for housing a battery (70) and control circuit (60)
Re claim 51: see shape of the covering (16, 17) in figure 1 of Li et al. including a part close to the connector and a part that is departing from the connector that are bonded together integrally and fixed to the accommodating cavity
Re claim 53: note in Li et al. the covering (16, 17) is formed by injection molding, paragraphs [0052-0055] and [0064]
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 38, 40-42 and 52 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The claimed acoustic output device including in combination those features of claim 34, wherein the metal body is connected to the metal connector by die casting as set forth in claim 38 is neither taught by nor an obvious variation of the art of record. The claimed acoustic output device including in combination those features of claim 39/34, wherein the deformation is determined based on a first cross-sectional dimension Ф1 and a second cross-sectional dimension Ф2, wherein the first cross-sectional dimension ф1 is a dimension of a cross- section of the first part along a direction that passes a geometric center of the cross- section of the first part, and the second cross-sectional dimension φ2 is a dimension of a cross-section of the second part along the same direction that passes a geometric center of the cross-section of the second part as set forth in claim 40 is neither taught by nor an obvious variation of the art of record. The limitations of claims 41 and 42 depend upon those features of claim 40. The claimed acoustic output device including in combination those features of claim 51/50/48/43/34, wherein a bonding strength between the second covering part and the accommodating cavity is greater than a bonding strength between the first covering part and the accommodating cavity as set forth in claim 52 is neither taught by nor an obvious variation of the art of record.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW SNIEZEK whose telephone number is (571)272-7563. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00 AM-3:30 PM EST.
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 571-272-7488. 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.
/ANDREW SNIEZEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
/A.S./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693 1/29/26