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.
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgment is made of receipt of Information Disclosure Statement (PTO-1449) filed 11/25/2024. An initialed copy is attached to this Office Action.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei (USPG Pub No. 2016/0246076) in view of Muramatsu et al. (USP No. 11,953,757), hereinafter “Muramatsu”.
Regarding claim 1, Wei discloses a glasses (see Fig. 1), comprising: a glasses frame (1) including a glasses rim and two glasses temples (2), the two glasses temples (2) being rotatably connected to the glasses rim, respectively (see Fig. 1, Paragraph 25, Lines 1-2); and two speakers (12), wherein for each of the two speakers (12) (Paragraph 25, Lines 5-6), the speaker includes an earphone core (12) and a core housing (14) (see Figs. 2, 4, Paragraph 26, Lines 12-14), the speaker is connected to one of the two glasses temples (2) via a hinge component (11, 15) (Paragraphs 25, 28), the hinge component (11, 15) is configured to change a position of the speaker (12) relative to the one of the two glasses temples (2) (Paragraph 25, Lines 12-15, Paragraph 28, Lines 12-15), wherein the hinge component includes a hinge (153) and a protective sleeve (154) (see Fig. 8, Paragraph 28, Lines 15-17), the protective sleeve (154) is disposed on a periphery of the hinge (see Fig. 8, Paragraph 28, Lines 15-17). Wei discloses the claimed invention except for and bent along with the hinge, the protective sleeve includes a plurality of annular ridge portions and a plurality of annular connection portions, the annular ridge portions are spaced apart along a length direction of the protective sleeve, and each annular connection portion is disposed between and connects two adjacent annular ridge portions. In the same field of endeavor, Muramatsu discloses and bent along with the hinge (143B) (see Fig. 4, Col. 8, Lines 40-48, Col. 6, Lines 46-47), the protective sleeve (200) includes a plurality of annular ridge portions and a plurality of annular connection portions (see Figs. 5B-5E), the annular ridge portions are spaced apart along a length direction of the protective sleeve (200), and each annular connection portion is disposed between and connects two adjacent annular ridge portions (see Figs. 5B-5E, Col. 8, Lines 15-26). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the glasses of Wei with and bent along with the hinge, the protective sleeve includes a plurality of annular ridge portions and a plurality of annular connection portions, the annular ridge portions are spaced apart along a length direction of the protective sleeve, and each annular connection portion is disposed between and connects two adjacent annular ridge portions of Muramatsu for the purpose of providing protection (Col. 6, Lines 36-37) and to provide a bendable portion of the temple for a better fit (Col. 6, Lines 38-40).
Regarding claim 2, Wei and Muramatsu teach the glasses set forth above for claim 1, Muramatsu further discloses wherein a tube wall thickness of each annular ridge portion is greater than a tube wall thickness of each annular connection portion (see Figs. 5A-5E).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the glasses of Wei with the teachings of Muramatsu for at least the same reasons as those set forth above with respect to claim 1. Such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape and size of a component. A change in shape and size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966), In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 5, Wei and Muramatsu teach the glasses set forth above for claim 1, Muramatsu further discloses wherein when the protective sleeve is in a bent state, an inner surface of the protective sleeve is disposed with a plurality of grooves, each groove is at a position corresponding to an annular ridge portion (see Figs. 5A-5E). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the glasses of Wei with the teachings of Muramatsu for at least the same reasons as those set forth above with respect to claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, Wei further discloses wherein the length direction of the protection sleeve (154) is consistent with the length direction of the hinge (153) (see Fig. 8).
Claims 3, 4, 6, 7 and 9-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei (USPG Pub No. 2016/0246076) in view of Muramatsu (USP No. 11,953,757) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Liu et al. (USPG Pub No. 2020/0344542 as translation for WO 2019/134377 A1), hereinafter “Liu”.
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Regarding claim 3, Wei and Muramatsu disclose the claimed invention but do not specify wherein when the protective sleeve is in a bent state, a width, along the length direction of the protective sleeve, of an annular ridge portion on the outer side of a bent shape formed by the protective sleeve is greater than a width, along the length of the protective sleeve, of an annular ridge portion on the inner side of the bent shape formed by the protective sleeve. In the same field of endeavor, Liu discloses wherein when the protective sleeve (70) is in a bent state (see Figs. 28, 29), a width, along the length direction of the protective sleeve (70), of an annular ridge portion (71) on the outer side of a bent shape formed by the protective sleeve is greater than a width, along the length of the protective sleeve, of an annular ridge portion on the inner side of the bent shape formed by the protective sleeve (Paragraph 168). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the glasses of Wei and Muramatsu with wherein when the protective sleeve is in a bent state, a width, along the length direction of the protective sleeve, of an annular ridge portion on the outer side of a bent shape formed by the protective sleeve is greater than a width, along the length of the protective sleeve, of an annular ridge portion on the inner side of the bent shape formed by the protective sleeve of Liu for the purpose of encasing the hinge to provide further protection (Paragraph 159, Lines 3-4). Such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape and size of a component. A change in shape and size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966), In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 4, Wei, Muramatsu and Liu teach the glasses set forth above for claim 3, Liu further discloses wherein the width of the annular ridge portion gradually decreases from the outer side of the bent shape to the inner side of the bent shape (Paragraph 170). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the glasses of Wei and Muramatsu with the teachings of Liu for at least the same reasons as those set forth above with respect to claim 3.
Regarding claim 6, Wei and Muramatsu disclose the claimed invention but do not specify wherein the width of each groove along the length of the protective sleeve gradually decreases from an outer side of the bent shape to an inner side of the bent shape. In the same field of endeavor, Liu discloses wherein the width of each groove along the length of the protective sleeve gradually decreases from an outer side of the bent shape to an inner side of the bent shape (Paragraphs 174, 175). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the glasses of Wei and Muramatsu with wherein the width of each groove along the length of the protective sleeve gradually decreases from an outer side of the bent shape to an inner side of the bent shape of Liu for the purpose of encasing the hinge to provide further protection (Paragraph 159, Lines 3-4). Such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape and size of a component. A change in shape and size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966), In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 7, Wei and Muramatsu disclose the claimed invention but do not specify wherein a width, along the length direction of the protective sleeve, of a groove on an outer side of a bent shape is greater than a width, along the length direction of the protective sleeve, of a groove on the inner side of the bent shape formed by the protective sleeve. In the same field of endeavor, Liu discloses wherein a width, along the length direction of the protective sleeve, of a groove on an outer side of a bent shape is greater than a width, along the length direction of the protective sleeve, of a groove on the inner side of the bent shape formed by the protective sleeve (Paragraphs 174, 175). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the glasses of Wei and Muramatsu with wherein a width, along the length direction of the protective sleeve, of a groove on an outer side of a bent shape is greater than a width, along the length direction of the protective sleeve, of a groove on the inner side of the bent shape formed by the protective sleeve of Liu for the purpose of encasing the hinge to provide further protection (Paragraph 159, Lines 3-4). Such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape and size of a component. A change in shape and size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966), In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 9, Wei and Muramatsu disclose the claimed invention but do not specify the hinge includes: a hinge mount; a hinge arm rotatably connected to the hinge mount via a rotating shaft, and being rotatable relative to the hinge mount when an external force is applied to the hinge arm to change the position of the speaker relative to the glasses temple; a support member flexibly disposed on the hinge mount; and an elastic member configured to elastically offset the support member toward the hinge arm so that the support member elastically abuts the hinge arm. In the same field of endeavor, Liu discloses the hinge (40) includes: a hinge mount (42) (Paragraph 140); a hinge arm (43) rotatably connected to the hinge mount (42) via a rotating shaft (41) (Paragraph 140), and being rotatable relative to the hinge mount (42) when an external force is applied to the hinge arm (43) to change the position of the speaker (20) relative to the glasses temple (32) (Paragraphs 82, 145); a support member (44) flexibly disposed on the hinge mount (42) (see Fig. 34, Paragraph 177); and an elastic member (45) configured to elastically offset the support member (44) toward the hinge arm (43) so that the support member elastically abuts on the hinge arm (see Fig. 34, Paragraphs 177, 178). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the glasses of Wei and Muramatsu with the hinge includes: a hinge mount; a hinge arm rotatably connected to the hinge mount via a rotating shaft, and being rotatable relative to the hinge mount when an external force is applied to the hinge arm to change the position of the speaker relative to the glasses temple; a support member flexibly disposed on the hinge mount; and an elastic member configured to elastically offset the support member toward the hinge arm so that the support member elastically abuts the hinge arm of Liu for the purpose of providing a mechanism to facilitate adjustment for multiple fixed positions of the speakers (Paragraph 7).
Regarding claim 10, Wei, Muramatsu and Liu teach the glasses set forth above for claim 9, Liu further discloses wherein the hinge mount includes a first end surface (422), the hinge arm includes a second end surface (431), and the hinge component includes a connection wire (60) (see Fig. 27), wherein the connection wire is configured to connect the speaker and the control circuit (Paragraph 156); and a ratio of a gap between the first end surface and the second end surface to a diameter of the connection wire is greater than 1.5 or less than 0.8 (Paragraph 158). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the glasses of Wei and Muramatsu with the teachings of Liu for at least the same reasons as those set forth above with respect to claim 9.
Regarding claim 11, Wei, Muramatsu and Liu teach the glasses set forth above for claim 9, Liu further discloses wherein the hinge arm (43) includes a first support surface (432) and a second support surface (433) connected to each other (see Fig. 33, Paragraph 177), the support member (44) includes a third support surface (441) (see Fig. 33, Paragraph 177), when the elastic member (45) elastically offsets the support member (44) toward the hinge arm (43) (Paragraph 177), the third support surface (441) elastically abuts on the first support surface (432) and the second support surface (433), respectively; and when the hinge arm (43) is rotated relative to the hinge mount (42) by the external force (Paragraph 178), a connection between the first support surface (432) and the second support surface (433) drives the support member (44) against the elastic offset of the elastic member (45) to move towards the elastic member (45), so that the third support surface (441) is switched from being elastically abutting on one of the first support surface (432) and the second support surface (433) to being elastically abutting on the other of the first support surface and the second support surface (see Fig. 33, Paragraph 177). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the glasses of Wei and Muramatsu with the teachings of Liu for at least the same reasons as those set forth above with respect to claim 9.
Regarding claim 12, Wei, Muramatsu and Liu teach the glasses set forth above for claim 11, Liu further discloses wherein a ratio between a maximum distance from the rotating shaft to the connection and a shortest distance from the rotating shaft to the first support surface is between 1.1 and 1.5 in a section perpendicular to a central axis of the rotating shaft (Paragraph 190). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the glasses of Wei and Muramatsu with the teachings of Liu for at least the same reasons as those set forth above with respect to claim 9.
Regarding claim 13, Wei and Muramatsu disclose the claimed invention except for wherein the core housing includes a contact surface, the contact surface includes a gradient structure, the gradient structure includes at least one convex portion or at least one concave portion. In the same field of endeavor, Liu discloses wherein the core housing includes a contact surface, the contact surface includes a gradient structure, the gradient structure includes at least one convex portion or at least one concave portion (see Figs. 10-12, Paragraphs 67-69). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the glasses of Wei and Muramatsu with wherein the core housing includes a contact surface, the contact surface includes a gradient structure, the gradient structure includes at least one convex portion or at least one concave portion of Liu for the purpose of adhering to and fitting a predefined region of a back of an auricle of an ear (Paragraph 8).
Regarding claim 14, Wei, Muramatsu and Liu teach the glasses set forth above for claim 13, Liu further discloses wherein the gradient structure is located at a center or an edge of the contact surface (see Figs. 10-12, Paragraphs 67-69). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the glasses of Wei and Muramatsu with the teachings of Liu for at least the same reasons as those set forth above with respect to claim 13.
Regarding claim 15, Wei, Muramatsu and Liu teach the glasses set forth above for claim 13, Liu further discloses wherein the contact surface is in direct or indirect contact with the user (see Figs. 10-12, Paragraphs 67-69), and the contact surface includes a first contact surface region and a second contact surface region (see Figs. 10-12, Paragraphs 67-69), a protrusion degree of the second contact surface region being greater than a protrusion degree of the first contact surface region (see Figs. 10-12, Paragraphs 67-69). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the glasses of Wei and Muramatsu with the teachings of Liu for at least the same reasons as those set forth above with respect to claim 13.
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei (USPG Pub No. 2016/0246076) in view of Muramatsu (USP No. 11,953,757) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chen et al. (CN 106954150 A), hereinafter "Chen".
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Regarding claim 16, Wei and Muramatsu disclose the claimed invention except for wherein the earphone core includes a transducing device disposed inside an accommodation chamber with an opening formed by the core housing, and being capable of generating a vibration based on an audio signal; a vibration transmission plate connected to the transducing device and exposed from the opening to transmit the vibration; and a vibration transmission layer covering an outer surface of the vibration transmission plate in an integral injection molding manner, and further being connected to the core housing to seal the opening. In the same field of endeavor, Chen discloses wherein the earphone care includes a transducing device (1802) disposed inside an accommodation chamber with an opening formed by the core housing, and being capable of generating a vibration based on an audio signal; a vibration transmission plate (1801) connected to the transducing device and exposed from the opening to transmit the vibration; and a vibration transmission layer (1830) covering an outer surface of the vibration transmission plate in an integral injection molding manner, and further being connected to the core housing to seal the opening (see Figs. 2-C, 6, 9, 18-A, 18-B, 20, 22-A, 23, 25, 30).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the claimed invention to provide the glasses of Wei and Muramatsu with wherein the earphone core includes a transducing device disposed inside an accommodation chamber with an opening formed by the core housing, and being capable of generating a vibration based on an audio signal; a vibration transmission plate connected to the transducing device and exposed from the opening to transmit the vibration; and a vibration transmission layer covering an outer surface of the vibration transmission plate in an integral injection molding manner, and further being connected to the core housing to seal the opening of Chen for the purpose of improving the tone quality of the speakers (Abstract).
Regarding claim 17, Wei, Muramatsu and Chen teach the glasses set forth above for claim 16, Chen further discloses wherein the vibration transmission plate (1801) protrudes from the opening, and the vibration transmission layer (1830) is fitted with the outer surface of the vibration transmission plate (1801) in an integral injection molding manner (see Figs. 2-C, 6, 9, 18-A, 18-B, 20, 22-A, 23, 25, 30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the glasses of Wei and Muramatsu with the teachings of Chen for at least the same reasons as those set forth above with respect to claim 16.
Regarding claim 18, Wei, Muramatsu and Chen teach the glasses set forth above for claim 16, Chen further discloses wherein the vibration transmission plate (1801) is spaced apart from the core housing at the opening to form an annular spaced region around the vibration transmission plate, and the vibration transmission layer (1830) includes at least one through hole at a region corresponding to the annular spaced region (see Figs. 2-C, 6, 9, 18-A, 18-B, 20, 22-A, 23, 25, 30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the glasses of Wei and Muramatsu with the teachings of Chen for at least the same reasons as those set forth above with respect to claim 16.
Regarding claim 19, Wei, Muramatsu and Chen teach the glasses set forth above for claim 18, Chen further discloses wherein the at least one through hole includes a plurality of through holes, the plurality of through holes being arranged around the vibration transmission plate at intervals (see Figs. 2-C, 6, 9, 18-A, 18-B, 20, 22-A, 23, 25, 30, Pgs. 27, 56). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the glasses of Wei and Muramatsu with the teachings of Chen for at least the same reasons as those set forth above with respect to claim 16.
Regarding claim 20, Wei, Muramatsu and Chen teach the glasses set forth above for claim 16, Chen further discloses wherein the vibration transmission plate includes hard rubber, and the vibration transmission layer includes soft rubber (Pgs. 10, 19). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to provide the glasses of Wei and Muramatsu with the teachings of Chen for at least the same reasons as those set forth above with respect to claim 16.
Prior Art Citations
Gasparetto (USPG Pub No. 2013/0201438 - Figs. 3a-3c) is being cited herein to show
glasses relevant to the claimed invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHIDERE S SAHLE whose telephone number is (571)270-3329. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM.
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, Ricky Mack can be reached at 571 272-2333. 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.
/MAHIDERE S SAHLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872 9/18/2026
Prosecution Insights