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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because figure 13 has an element number “80k” that does not appear in the specification. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 5-10 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.
Regarding claim 5:
in lines 11, 13, 15, and 16, it is unclear if “the accommodation recess” is referring to one or both accommodation recesses;
in lines 15 and 16, it is unclear if “the microphone” is referring to one or both microphones.
Claims 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for depending on the clarity of claim 5.
Regarding claim 6:
in lines 4, 5, and 6, it is unclear if “the accommodation recess” is referring to one or both accommodation recesses;
in lines 6 and 7, it is unclear if “the microphone” is referring to one or both microphones.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for depending on the clarity of claim 6.
Regarding claim 7:
in lines 2 and 3, it is unclear if “the microphone” is referring to one or both microphones;
in lines 2 and 4, it is unclear if “the accommodation recess” is referring to one or both accommodation recesses.
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.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Soltner (US-20210166675-A1) alone.
Soltner discloses a noise-canceling headrest for a vehicle seat that includes audio components such as loudspeakers and microphones.
Claim 1 – Soltner teaches a conveyance seat (figure 1), comprising:
a headrest (element 3 in figure 1);
right and left speakers provided inside the headrest (elements 11a and 11b in figures 1 and 5); and
right and left microphones provided inside the headrest (elements 17a and 17b in figure 5),
wherein the microphones are disposed to protrude further toward a front side than the speakers (figure 5).
Soltner is silent on the exact placement of the microphones and at what direction the sound collecting portion of the microphones face. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to place the microphones below the speakers as a user’s mouth is below the height of the user’s ears, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to face the sound collecting portion of the microphones toward the speakers as it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art.
Claim 2 – Soltner teaches a front cover (element 6 in figure 1) disposed to cover the right and left speakers and the right and left microphones from a front is provided (figure 1), and
the right and left microphones are disposed at positions closer to an outside in a seat width direction than the right and left speakers (figure 5).
Claim 3 – Soltner teaches a front cover (element 6 in figure 1) disposed to cover the right and left speakers and the right and left microphones from a front is provided (figure 1),
PNG
media_image1.png
510
437
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Image 1
the front cover (element 6 in figure 1) includes a cover central portion provided at a central portion of the front cover in a seat width direction (element 6A in Image 1 above), and right and left cover side portions disposed outside the cover central portion in the seat width direction (elements 6B and 6C in Image 1 above), and protruding further forward than the cover central portion (figure 1 and Image 1 above), and
a partition wall portion (element 12 in figure 2, described in paragraph [0073] of the specification as “a partition”) between the cover central portion and each of the cover side portions is disposed at a position overlapping the microphone in an up to down direction and a front to rear direction (figure 2).
Claims 4-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Soltner (US-20210166675-A1) in view of Fujikake (US-20190118688-A1).
Fujikake discloses a headrest with speakers and a microphone within.
Claim 4 – Soltner teaches a pillar that supports a main body of the headrest (element 4 in figure 2), and teaches the microphones are disposed at a position closer to an outside in a seat width direction than the speakers (figure 5), but does not teach a speaker assembly inside the headrest.
Fujikake teaches a speaker assembly (element 8 in figure 3) provided inside the headrest (figure 2),
the speaker assembly includes accommodation recesses for accommodating the microphones (element 52 is the microphone and has a recess within the assembly in figure 3), and the accommodation recesses protrude further forward than the pillar (figure 3).
It would have been obvious that Soltner’s disclosure would provide an assembly within the headrest for the speakers and microphones rather than having the audio equipment arbitrarily in the headrest. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a speaker assembly, as taught by Fujikake, in the disclosure of Soltner.
Claim 5 – Soltner teaches a front cover (element 6 in figure 1) disposed to cover the right and left speakers and the right and left microphones from a front are provided (figure 1).
Soltner does not teach a speaker assembly. Fujikake teaches a speaker assembly (element 8 in figure 3) provided inside the headrest (figure 2) and configured to assemble the right and left speakers and the right and left microphones (figure 3), and
the speaker assembly includes right and left speaker holding portions that hold the right and left speakers and the right and left microphones, respectively, and a connecting portion that connects the right and left speaker holding portions (it would have been obvious, when modifying the disclosure of Soltner with a speaker assembly as taught by Fujikake, to have the assembly shaped to follow the interior of the headrest of Soltner, which would provide a right and left holding portion, connected together),
each of the speaker holding portions includes an accommodation recess for accommodating the microphone (the microphone of Fujikake, element 52, has a recess, and it would have been obvious to provide each of the two microphones of Soltner with similar recesses to hold the speakers and the microphone),
the microphone is accommodated in the accommodation recess in a state where the microphone is inclined in the same direction as the front surface of the accommodation recess (it would have been obvious to attach the microphone flush to the surface of the recess, which would cause the microphone to incline in the same direction as the recess).
Providing Soltner’s disclosure with a speaker assembly would create an overlap of the accommodation recesses by the front cover, inclining inward with the right and left cover side portions.
Claim 6 – Soltner, when modified by Fujikake, teaches the overlapping portion of the front cover is disposed to incline inward in the seat width direction,
the front surface of the accommodation recess is disposed to incline in the same direction as the overlapping portion of the front cover, and
the microphone is accommodated in the accommodation recess in a state where the microphone is inclined in the same direction as the front surface of the accommodation recess.
It would have been obvious that Soltner’s disclosure would provide an assembly within the headrest for the speakers and microphones rather than having the audio equipment arbitrarily in the headrest. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide a speaker assembly, as taught by Fujikake, in the disclosure of Soltner. Providing Soltner’s disclosure with a speaker assembly would create an overlap of the accommodation recesses by the front cover, inclining inward with the right and left cover side portions. It also would have been obvious to attach the microphone flush to the surface of the recess, which would cause the microphone to incline in the same direction as the recess.
Claim 7 – Soltner, when modified by Fujikake, teaches the microphone in the recess but does not explicitly teach the microphone inclined inward further than the surface of the recess.
It has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art, therefore it would have been obvious to make the microphone accommodated in the accommodation recess in a state where the microphone is inclined further inward in the seat width direction than the front surface of the accommodation recess as the side portions of Soltner are not perfectly perpendicular to the user, and inclining the microphones further inward would allow the microphone to be angled more towards the user.
Claim 8 – Soltner does not teach a recessed portion recessed rearward is formed on the front surface of the accommodation recess, and
a rear portion of the microphone is accommodated in the recessed portion.
Fujikake teaches a recessed portion recessed rearward being formed on the front surface of the accommodation recess is necessary for audio equipment.
In figure 5 of Fujikake’s disclosure, it can be seen that element 27 has recessed ledges it attaches to within the headrest assembly, and then a further recessed area is required for the body of element 27. Therefore, when providing Soltner’s disclosure with a speaker assembly, it would have been obvious to provide Soltner’s disclosure with a recessed portion on the front surface of the accommodation recess to provide the rear portion of the microphones a space to occupy.
Claim 9 – Soltner teaches the front cover includes a cover central portion provided at a central portion of the front cover in the seat width direction (element 6A in Image 1 above), and right and left cover side portions disposed outside the cover central portion in the seat width direction (elements 6B and 6C in Image 1 above), and protruding further forward than the cover central portion (figure 1 and Image 1 above).
It would have been obvious that Soltner, when modified to have a speaker assembly as taught by Fujikake, would teach the cover side portions cover at least parts of the speaker holding portions from the front and both sides in the seat width direction.
PNG
media_image2.png
379
258
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Image 2
Claim 10 – Soltner doesn’t teach the speaker assembly, however Soltner, when modified with a speaker assembly as taught by Fujikake, teaches each of the speaker holding portions includes a central wall portion forming the front surface of the accommodation recess (element A in Image 2 above), and a side wall portion protruding forward from an end portion of the central wall portion in the seat width direction (element B in image 2 above).
It would have been obvious that the cover side portions cover at least the side wall portions of the speaker holding portions from the front and both the sides in the seat width direction when modifying Soltner with a speaker assembly as taught by Fujikake.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TROY A LIBBY whose telephone number is (571)272-6676. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri; 7:30 AM - 2:30 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, DAVID DUNN can be reached at (571) 272-6670. 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.
/T.A.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3636
/DAVID R DUNN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3636
Prosecution Insights