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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: the words “any one of” (line 1) appear to be an error and should likely be deleted. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bruwer et al. (US 2022/0407515).
Regarding claim 1, Bruwer et al. disclose a squeeze detection system, comprising: an elongated body 8.1 extending along a longitudinal direction (par. 0080, body 8.1 forms stem of an earphone), the elongated body having a handle (8.4 and circumferential section next to it); and a sensor assembly (coil 8.8 and surface portion 8.5 across from it) positioned within the elongated body proximate the handle (see Fig. 8), the sensor assembly comprising a conductive target (portion of 8.5 across from coil 8.8) mounted to the elongated body, and an inductive sensor 8.8 mounted to the elongated body, wherein a gap is defined between a coil of the inductive sensor and a target surface of the conductive target (Id.) and the conductive target and the inductive sensor are mounted to the elongated body such that a size of the gap is changeable in order to detect a squeeze in either of a first direction and a second direction within a plane that is perpendicular to the longitudinal direction at the handle of the elongated body, the first and second directions being perpendicular (see Fig. 8, squeezing radially in either the vertical direction or the horizontal direction on body 8.1 will necessarily cause the circular cross-section of the body to warp and change the distance between coil 8.8 and target on 8.5).
Regarding claim 2, Bruwer et al. disclose that the elongated body comprises a cylindrical wall (8.2,8.3) and a support leg 8.5, the handle positioned at an outer surface of the cylindrical wall, an inner surface 8.3 of the cylindrical wall facing an interior of the elongated body, the support leg 8.5 extending from the inner surface of the cylindrical wall into the interior of the elongated body (see Fig. 8, leg 8.5 extends from wall near element 8.4 and into interior), one of the conductive target and the inductive sensor positioned on a mounting plate 8.6 of the support leg (see Fig. 8, coil. 8.8 positioned on plate 8.6).
Regarding claim 3, Bruwer et al. disclose that the support leg 8.5 is cantilevered from the inner surface of the cylindrical wall such that the support leg is mounted to the cylindrical wall at a proximal end portion of the support leg (near element 8.4) and the mounting plate 8.6 is positioned at a distal end portion of the support leg (see Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 8, Bruwer et al. disclose that the coil 8.8 of the inductive sensor is positioned about parallel to the target surface (surface portion of 8.5 across from 8.8) of the conductive target (see Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 9, Bruwer et al. disclose that a tangent line from the target surface of the conductive target is oriented about perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (line tangent from surface part of 8.5 across from coil 8.8 is perpendicular to longitudinal direction, see Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 11, Bruwer et al. disclose that the sensor assembly is configured to detect the squeeze in any direction within the plane that is perpendicular to the longitudinal direction at the handle of the elongated body (see Fig. 8, a squeeze in any radial direction will necessarily result in deflection and detection).
Regarding claim 12, Bruwer et al. disclose that the conductive target comprises a metallic foil or a metallic plate (portion of 8.5 across from coil 8.8 is a metallic plate, see par. 0080).
Regarding claim 15, Bruwer et al. disclose a squeeze detection system, comprising: an elongated body 8.1 extending along a longitudinal direction (par. 0080, body 8.1 forms stem of an earphone), the elongated body having a handle (8.4 and circumferential section next to it); and a sensor assembly (coil 8.8 and surface portion 8.5 across from it) positioned within the elongated body proximate the handle (see Fig. 8), the sensor assembly comprising a conductive target (portion of 8.5 across from coil 8.8) mounted to the elongated body, and an inductive sensor 8.8 mounted to the elongated body, wherein a gap is defined between a coil of the inductive sensor and a target surface of the conductive target (Id.) and the conductive target and the inductive sensor are mounted to the elongated body such that a size of the gap is changeable in order to detect a squeeze in any direction within a plane that is perpendicular to the longitudinal direction at the handle of the elongated body (see Fig. 8, a squeeze in any radial direction will necessarily result in deflection of circular cross-section of body and detection), a target surface of the conductive target (surface portion of 8.5 across from coil 8.8) faces the coil 8.8 of the inductive sensor, and a tangent line from the target surface of the conductive target is oriented about perpendicular to the longitudinal direction (see Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 16, Bruwer et al. disclose a wand, comprising: an elongated body 6.1 extending along a longitudinal direction between a first end portion and a second end portion, the elongated body having a handle (6.4 and surrounding housing porition) positioned proximate the first end portion of the elongated body; a transmitter 6.8 positioned within the elongated body proximate the second end portion of the elongated body (see Fig. 6A and par. 0075, member 6.8 is an antenna); and a sensor assembly (6.13, 6.11) positioned within the elongated body proximate the first end portion of the elongated body, the sensor assembly comprising a conductive target 6.13 mounted to the elongated body, and an inductive sensor 6.11 mounted to the elongated body, wherein a gap is defined between a coil of the inductive sensor and a target surface of the conductive target, and the conductive target and the inductive sensor are mounted to the elongated body such that a size of the gap is changeable in order to detect a squeeze in either of a first direction and a second direction within a plane that is perpendicular to the longitudinal direction at the handle of the elongated body, the first and second directions being perpendicular (see Figs. 6A and 6B, a squeeze on top and bottom of body or on sides of body will result in a warping/distortion of body and change in gap between target 6.13 and coil 6.11).
Regarding claim 17, Bruwer et al. disclose that the elongated body comprises a cylindrical wall (6.2,6.3) and a support leg 6.9, the handle 6.4 positioned at an outer surface of the cylindrical wall, an inner surface of the cylindrical wall facing an interior of the elongated body, the support leg 6.9 extending from the inner surface of the cylindrical wall into the interior of the elongated body (see Figs. 6B and 6C), one of the conductive target and the inductive sensor positioned on a mounting plate of the support leg (see Fig. 6C, PCB 6.6 and sensor coil. 6.11 positioned on plate portion of support leg 6.9).
Regarding claim 18, Bruwer et al. disclose that the support leg 6.9 is cantilevered from the inner surface of the cylindrical wall such that the support leg is mounted to the cylindrical wall at a proximal end portion of the support leg and the mounting plate is positioned at a distal end portion of the support leg (see Fig. 6C, horizontal straight portion of 6.9 is the mounting plate that cantilevers to center of interior of body from leg portion that is mounted to cylindrical wall portion 6.3).
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) 10, 13 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bruwer et al. (US 2022/0407515).
Regarding claim 10, Bruwer et al. disclose that the conductive target and the inductive sensor are mounted to the elongated body such that the size of the gap is changeable in order to detect the squeeze within a plurality of planes that are perpendicular to the longitudinal direction, the plurality of planes distributed along the detection range of the handle (see Fig. 8, a squeeze in any plane along the longitudinal length of the body/handle will result in a distortion of cross-section of body and change in gap between coil. 8.8 and target portion of 8.5).
Bruwer et al. do not explicitly state that a detection range of the handle is no less than twenty-five millimeters along the longitudinal direction. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the length of the sensor portion such that it extends and senses a squeeze along any of various longitudinal lengths in order to tailor the design to a specific application and structure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have made the sensor portion and thereby the detection range to extend at least twenty-five millimeters because it would have provided more surface area for a user to apply the squeezing force for activation.
Regarding claim 13, Bruwer et al. do not disclose the size of the gap between the target portion of 8.5 and the coil 8.8. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have made the size of the gap a small value, including no greater than five millimeters, because it would have allowed the structure to remain smaller and more compact.
Regarding claim 20, Bruwer et al. do disclose that the conductive target 6.13 and the inductive sensor 6.11 are mounted to the elongated body such that the size of the gap is changeable in order to detect the squeeze within a plurality of planes that are perpendicular to the longitudinal direction, the plurality of planes distributed along the detection range of the handle (see Figs. 6A and 6B, a squeeze in any cross-sectional plane along the longitudinal length of the body/handle will result in a distortion of cross-section of body and change in gap between coil 6.11 and target portion of 6.13).
Bruwer et al. do not explicitly state that a detection range of the handle is no less than twenty-five millimeters along the longitudinal direction. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the length of the sensor portion such that it extends and senses a squeeze along any of various longitudinal lengths in order to tailor the design to a specific application and structure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have made the sensor portion and thereby the detection range to extend at least twenty-five millimeters because it would have provided more surface area for a user to apply the squeezing force for activation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7 and 19 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:
With regard to claim 4, Bruwer et al. do disclose that the inductive sensor comprises a printed circuit board 8.6. Bruwer et al. and the other cited prior art fail to disclose or suggest each of a pair of sides of the printed circuit board being received within a respective mounting slot at the cylindrical wall, and the conductive target being positioned on the mounting plate of the support leg.
With regard to claims 5 and 19, Bruwer et al. fail to disclose or suggest the structure of the wand or system being such that a first end portion of the support leg is mounted to the cylindrical wall, a second end portion of the support leg is mounted to the cylindrical wall, and the mounting plate is positioned between the first and second end portions of the support leg.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Note that Lehmann et al. (US 2022/0100290) discloses a wand type structure with inductive squeeze detection.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL M WEST whose telephone number is (571)272-2139. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am - 5:30 pm (CT).
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, Kristina DeHerrera can be reached at 303-297-4237. 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.
/PAUL M. WEST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights