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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/4/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments revolve around the limitation of the back opening being positioned so as to directly face said second hole. In the rejection (see below), Figures 1-5, 8-9 were relied upon to show a front opening (502), a back opening (504), a first hole (112), and a second hole (112). Figs. 8-9 are opposing views of the speaker (142). In Figure 8, a back opening (adjacent 504) is clearly directly facing a second hole (112). Additionally, on the opposite side of speaker (142), a front opening (here numbered 602) is additionally facing a first hole (112). Thus the claimed limitations are met.
PNG
media_image1.png
807
985
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
703
1001
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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) 1, 4-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhong et al. (US 10904667 B1).
Regarding Claim 1, Zhong teaches: A head-mountable device (Figs. 1-5) comprising at least a temple (106; Col. 4, ln 42-62), said temple having a cavity open to the outside through a first hole (ports 112) and a second hole (112) positioned opposite from each other along a transversal direction (Y) (Y, see Figs. 1B; Col. 7, ln 53-66: the top and bottom holes 112 are also visible in Figs. 8-9), the eyewear comprising a speaker assembly (120) mounted inside said cavity, said speaker assembly comprising a speaker (transducer 142) operable to reproduce a sound (Fig. 2; Col. 6, ln 5-8 and Col 6., ln 36-41), a speaker enclosure (118, 136, 156) that houses said speaker (142) and a processing unit configured to control the operation of said speaker (146; Col. 7, ln 9-19), said speaker comprising a diaphragm (membrane in transducer 142) designed to move in order to produce said sound (Col. 6, ln 42-44), said diaphragm dividing an internal volume of said speaker enclosure into a front cavity and a back cavity that are open to the outside of said speaker enclosure respectively through a front opening (second duct 502) and a back opening (first duct 504; Col. 9, ln 1-24; Fig. 4, Col. 8, ln 48-67 disclosing the routing of the audio signals 402 and 404 from first and second side of the transducers 142 to the upper and lower ports 112), the speaker assembly being mounted inside said cavity so as to create an air communication between said front opening (504) and said first hole (112; Col. 9, ln 6-18) and between said back opening (502) and said second hole (112; Col. 9, ln 6-18), wherein said back opening is positioned so as to directly face said second hole (Fig. 5; Col. 9, ln 8-9).
Regarding Claim 4, Zhong teaches: wherein said speaker enclosure has a top wall that faces said second hole, said back opening being realized in said top wall (Fig. 2: top wall of 136 with openings 118).
Regarding Claim 5, Zhong teaches: wherein said diaphragm is substantially perpendicular to said top wall (as shown).
Regarding Claim 6, Zhong teaches: wherein said speaker enclosure has a back wall that delimits said back cavity and is opposite to said diaphragm (as shown), said processing unit being connected to said speaker through said back wall (FPC 146 located within 118, 136, 156).
Regarding Claim 7, Zhong teaches: wherein said processing unit is mounted on a printed circuit board that is fixed to said back wall (FPC 146).
Regarding Claim 8, Zhong teaches: wherein said printed circuit board is flexible (Flexible Printed Circuit 146).
Regarding Claim 9, Zhong teaches: wherein said speaker enclosure has a gluing surface configured to be glued to a corresponding internal surface of said cavity (any external portion of at least 136 can be said to have a gluing surface configured to be glued to an internal surface of, for example, 118).
Regarding Claim 10, Zhong teaches: wherein said gluing surface entirely surrounds said front opening (as shown).
Regarding Claim 11, Zhong teaches: wherein said gluing surface lies at least partially on a plane that is oblique with respect to said diaphragm (i.e. corners of 136).
Regarding Claim 12, Zhong teaches: wherein said speaker enclosure has an auxiliary back opening that directly faces said second hole (top openings of 136).
Regarding Claim 13, Zhong teaches: wherein the device is an eyewear (Figs. 1-5).
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.
Claim(s) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong et al. (US 10904667 B1), in view of Sprague et al. (US 20160316304 A1).
Regarding Claim 2, Zhong teaches: further comprises at least a microphone configured to generate a microphone signal (Col. 5, ln 8-10; Col. 25-35). Zhong does not specifically teach: said processing unit being configured to receive said microphone signal, to elaborate said microphone signal generating a speaker signal and to transmit said speaker signal to said speaker. In a related field, Sprague teaches the use of microphones on a worn frame to receive input signals which are then processed and output via transducers of the frame ([0006]-[0010]: “In some embodiments, a hearing assistance device may include a frame configured to be worn on the head of a user. The frame may include a bridge configured to be supported on the nose of the user. A first transducer may be coupled to the frame. The first transducer may include at least two microphones configured to receive an audio signal including speech. The at least two microphones are positioned such that: a first lag microphone is situated at or near a rear portion of a first side of the frame; and a second microphone is situated at or near a front portion of the frame; a converter configured to convert and to amplify the audio signal to an amplified representation of the audio signal; and a second transducer for emitting the amplified representation of the audio signal to a first earphone coupled to a first ear of the user, where at least a portion of the first earphone is removably coupled to at least a portion of the frame, such that when the first earphone is in contact with the portion of the frame, the first earphone is configured to emit the amplified representation of the audio signal”). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Zhong, in view of Sprague, to process the microphone signal which may include speech input, for output to the speaker of Zhong. Motivation for doing so would be to allow the frame of Zhong to perform the function of hearing assistance to the user.
Regarding Claim 3, Zhong, as modified by Sprague, further teaches: wherein said microphone is connected to said processing unit through an auxiliary printed circuit board (FPC 146 of Zhong would interface with processor of Sprague), said processing unit being mounted on a printed circuit board (as modified), said printed circuit board and auxiliary printed circuit board being positioned adjacent to each other between a back wall of said speaker enclosure and a temple cover of said temple (Fig. 2; Col. 7, ln 5-43). Zhong, in view of Sprague, does not specifically teach separate printed circuit board and auxiliary printed circuit board (Zhong teaches a flexible printed circuit board 146). However, providing separate printed circuit boards instead of a singular circuit board for processing of speaker/microphone signals separately would have been further obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Motivation for doing so would lie in allowing individual components to be manufactured for a particular purpose (i.e. speaker output vs microphone input) prior to assembly of the frame.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW A EASON whose telephone number is (571)270-7230. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30AM-4PM.
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, Matthew Eason can be reached at (571) 270-7230. 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.
/MATTHEW A EASON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2624
Prosecution Insights