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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 06/01/2026, with respect to independent claims 1 and 7 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The previous rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to independent claim(s) 13 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 13-17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu et al (pub # 20250070220), see provisional application 65/553,093 filed on 02/13/2024 for support of priority, in view of Sugihara et al (pub # 20150042544) and further in view of Leetz (GB 2619367 A).
Consider claim 13. Xu et al teaches A securement arm for a wearable electronic device, (Fig. 10 and paragraph 0068, temple arm 1002). the securement arm comprising:
a proximal housing having a first proximal end and a first distal end opposite the first proximal end; (Fig. 10 and paragraph 0243, part of temple arm 1002 that includes the first void 1006 and battery cell 1004).
a distal housing defining a first curve configured to accommodate an ear of a user, (Fig. 10 and paragraph 0243, part of temple arm 1002 that includes second void 1010 that is curved to accommodate a user’s ear).
the distal housing having:
and a second distal end opposite the second proximal end; (Fig. 10).
a battery disposed within the distal housing, (Fig. 10 and paragraph 0243, battery cell 1008).
the battery defining a second curve that approximates the first curve; (Fig. 10 and paragraph 0243, temple arm 1002 also includes another battery cell 1008 that is curved along both x and y axes to fill a second void 1010).
Xu et al does not specifically disclose a second proximal end removably coupled to the first distal end of the proximal housing;. However Sugihara et al in at least Figs. 7A and 7B as well as paragraph 0161 discloses a battery 16 disposed within a temple tip 12 of an eyeglass-type wearable device comprising connections lines LB1 to LB4 for providing power to the wearable device. Paragraph 0161 specifically discloses that “The temple tip part 12 provided with the battery 16 is designed to be removable. The battery 16 provided in the temple tip part 12 can be charged using a charging device or the like by removing the temple tip part 12 from the temple part 10”. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the features of Sugihara et al with the invention of Xu et al so that convenience to the user can be improved (Sugihara et al paragraph 0107).
Xu et al in view of Sugihara et al does not specifically disclose and a charging port cap disposed at the second distal end. However Leetz in at least Fig. 18 and highlighted section of page 18 of the attached document discloses a wearable device 12 comprising securement arms 26 wherein one of the arms 26 includes a charging port 124 comprising a charging port cover 128 on the end of said arm 26, thus a charging port cap. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the features of Leetz with the invention of Xu et al in view of Sugihara et al so that when the headset 10 is not in user or when the user would like to use the headset 10 in an aquatic environment liquid is prevented from entering the charging port (Leetz highlighted section of page 18 of the attached document).
Consider 14. Xu et al further teaches The securement arm of claim 13, wherein the battery comprises a housing including the distal housing. (Fig. 10 and paragraph 0243, temple arm 1002 also includes another battery cell 1008 that is curved along both x and y axes to fill a second void 1010).
Consider claim 15. Leetz further teaches The securement arm of claim 13, wherein the charging portcap is removably coupled to the second distal end of the distal housing. (Fig. 18 and highlighted section of page 18 of attached document, the charging port cover 128 has an internal screw thread to screw threadingly engage the charging port 124.).
Consider claim 16. Xu et al further teaches The securement arm of claim 13, wherein: the battery is a first battery; (Fig. 10 and paragraph 0243, battery cell 1008).
and the securement arm further comprises a second battery disposed within the proximal housing. (Fig. 10 and paragraph 0243, a battery cell 1004 that is curved along both the x and y axes to fill a first void 1006 of the temple arm.).
Consider claim 17. Leetz further teaches The securement arm of claim 13, wherein the charging port cap defines a through-hole extending through a thickness of the distal housing. (Fig. 18 and highlighted section of page 18 of attached document, the charging port 124 is preferably a socket into which a cable can be plugged to provide power to the onboard power source 32.).
Consider claim 20. Xu et al further teaches The securement arm of claim 13, further comprising: a first seal disposed between the first distal end and the second proximal end and defining an external surface of the securement arm; and a second seal disposed within the proximal housing and between the proximal housing and the distal housing. (paragraph 0257 and Fig. 15 discloses battery cells like the ones disclosed in Fig. 10 being sealed on both ends with side pieces 1504A and 1504B).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18 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.
Consider claim 18. The prior art of record does not teach or render obvious The securement arm of claim 13, further comprising a blind connection mechanism including: a biasing member adjustably engaged with an inner surface at or near the first distal end; a groove defined by the second proximal end configured to engage the biasing member when the second proximal end is inserted into the first distal end; and a canted surface defined by the biasing member or the second proximal end and configured to expand the biasing member when the second proximal end is inserted into the first distal end.
Claim 19 objected to due to its dependency from claim 18.
Claims 1-12 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Consider independent claim 1. The prior art of record does not teach or render obvious, in combination with all of the other limitations of the claim. A wearable display device, comprising: a display frame; a securement arm including a proximal end removably coupled to the display frame and a distal end opposite the proximal end, the securement arm defining a singular seamless shell; a battery disposed within the shell; a speaker disposed within the shell distal to the battery; and a printed circuit board (PCB) coupled to the battery and electrically coupled to the speaker via an electric a conductor, a length of the conductor being greater than a distance between the PCB and the speaker; wherein the shell defines an opening at the proximal end of the arm sized for removal of battery and the PCB without interrupting the electrical coupling between the PCB and the speaker via the conductor.
Consider independent claim 7. The prior art of record does not teach or render obvious, in combination with all of the other limitations of the claim. A wearable electronic device, comprising: a display frame coupled to a display window; a securement arm, the securement arm comprising: a proximal arm comprising a shell pivotally coupled to the display frame at a proximal end of the shell, the shell having a first distal end opposite the proximal end; and a distal arm coupled to the first distal end, the distal end arm defining an internal volume having a first curvature; a first battery disposed within the shell and removable from the securement arm through an opening defined at the proximal end of the shell; and a second battery disposed within the distal arm, the second battery having a second curvature that approximates the first curvature to fit within the internal volume and being removable from the securement arm.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHAYCE R BIBBEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7222. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 8:00-6:00.
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.
/CHAYCE R BIBBEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2624
