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 .
Response to Amendment
This is in response to applicant's amendment which was filed on 6/30/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-23 have been amended. No claims have been cancelled. No claim has been added. Claims 1-23 are still pending in this application, with claims 1, 21-22 being independent.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye (CN 211670968) in view of Bloom (US 2022/0086548).
Regarding claim 22, Ye teaches A method, comprising: providing headphones with left and right ear cups (Ye figure 8, ¶0030, “earcups 100”); and providing, in each ear cup, a low frequency resonator (Ye ¶0044 “improved low-frequency characteristics”) and pressure relief structure for headphones (Ye ¶0044, “setting a first sound guide tube 60 on the substrate 10 and connecting the first sound guide tube 60 to the front and rear cavities of the earphone…the sound guide tube can increase leakage damping and prevent the air pressure in the front cavity from depressurizing too quickly”) configured with at least one arcuate channel formed in a first flat surface of the low frequency resonator and pressure relief structure (Ye figure 5, the tube 60 is arced), the at least one arcuate channel having a length configured to resonate sound at a first frequency "f” (Ye ¶0019 “Helmholtz resonance principle”),however, does not explicitly teach pressure relief structure for headphones configured with at least one arcuate channel formed in and extending below a first flat surface of the low frequency resonator and pressure relief structure.
Bloom teaches a pressure relief structure for headphones (Bloom figure 17H, aperture 1703) configured with at least one arcuate channel (Bloom figure 17H, acoustic channel 1760 is arced) formed in and extending below a first flat surface (Bloom figure 17H, a flat surface on the upper portions of housing 1704 can be considered a first flat surface of the low frequency resonator) of the low frequency resonator (Bloom figure 17H, ¶0169 “A back volume 1719 can increase the efficiency of the system at certain frequencies (e.g., low frequencies) and/or allows for tuning of the acoustic driver”) and pressure relief structure (Bloom figure 17H, the acoustic channel extends below aperture 1703 and the flat surface of the housing).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the known technique of Bloom to improve the known method of Ye to achieve the predictable result of reduced internal pressure in the headphone which may damage the transducer components (Bloom ¶0181).
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ye (CN 211670968) in view of Bloom (US 2022/0086548) in further view of Ji (US 2018/0352323).
Regarding claim 23, Ye in view of Bloom does not explicitly teach wherein the at least one channel is configured to resonate sound at the first frequency “f” according to: f=(kc/2π)*(A/VL)^1/2 where: c—speed of sound, 343 m/s at sea level and room temperature A—total cross section are of the at least one channel (m2) V—volume of air trapped between earpad of ear cup and head of wearer of the headphones (m3) L—Length of the at least one channel (m) (Qi ¶0197, “The one or more resonance cavities may be, for example, Helmholtz cavity.” Although not clearly recited in Qi, it is known in the art that the equation f=(c/2π)*(A/VL)^1/2 is the formula to find the resonance frequency of a Helmholtz resonance cavity) k—shaping coefficient experimentally determined for the specific headphone for which the device is to be used (Qi ¶0197, “In some embodiments, a high-pass sound filtering, a low-pass sound filtering, and/or a band-pass filtering effect of the acoustic route may be achieved by …a type of acoustic resistance material in each of at least one of the one or more resonance cavities.” See also ¶0195. With BRI, these additional resistance material and structures that alter the frequency can be considered the shaping coefficient since it can be predetermined as how they will affect the resonance frequency. In addition, It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made that if there it is a known and expected component of the headphone that would modify the resonance frequency, to apply a coefficient that would encompass the effects of said component since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)).
Ji further cites the formula for a Helmholtz Resonator (Ji ¶0039, “The frequency generated by Helmholtz resonance may be represented as follows, using the volume V of the resonance space 242 and 244, the length l of the channel 252 and 254, the sectional area S of the channel 252 and 254 and the speed c of the sound wave” f0=c/2π (S/lV)1/2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the known technique of Ji to improve the known method of Ye in view of Bloom to achieve the predictable result of achieving the desired resonance frequency.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 22-23 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new ground of rejection in the current rejection.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NORMAN YU whose telephone number is (571)270-7436. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Fri 11am-7pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ahmad Matar can be reached on 571-272-7488. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Va. 22313-1450
Or faxed to:
(571) 273-8300, for formal communications intended for entry and for
informal or draft communications, please label “PROPOSED” or “DRAFT”.
Hand-delivered responses should be brought to:
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Arlington, VA 22314
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NORMAN YU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
Prosecution Insights