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 .
Claims filed 11-27-2024
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11-27-2024 was filed on the mailing date of the application filed on 11-27-2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
The acronyms “TWS” and “TES” “D/A” converter, a variable “DC/DC” converter should be defined the first time they appear in the claims and Claim 3 line 13 user “LS” should be defined the first time it appear in the claims.
The trademark “Bluetooth” should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears, or where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as TM, SM, or ©, ® following the term.
Claims 1-6. Remove the parenthesis and numbers and letters inside the parenthesis.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-6 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.
Claim 1 line 2-5 recited “an electrode (M) for electrical connection with a skin of an ear of a user on an outer surface of an ear unit (I) of each of a pair of electrically separated left and right earphones (RE, LE)”. As written, the claim requires a single electrode that is for electrical connection with a skin of an ear of a user on an outer surface of an ear unit (I) of both the left and right earphones, and thus it is unclear if this is the intention or if instead each of the left and right earphones is to includes its own electrode.
Claim 1 line 14-17 recited “a variable DC/DC converter (100), which is provided in a first circuit (C1), which is a separated circuit of one of the pair of separated left and right earphones (RE, LE) and connected to the control part (90)” It is unclear.
For examination purposes, examiner interprets “a variable DC/DC converter (100), which is provided in a first circuit (C1), and the first circuit (C1) is located in the left earphone (LE).
Claim 1 line 21-24 recited “the variable amplifier are provided in a second circuit (C2), which is another one of separated circuits of the pair of separated right and left earphones (RE, LE)”. It is unclear.
For examination purposes, examiner interprets “the variable amplifier (120) is provided in a second circuit (C2), and the second circuit (C2) is located in the right earphone (RE).
Claim 3 line 3-4 recited “--- the cable accommodation space (cc)”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because there is not “a cable accommodation space” is recited in this claim, nor the parent claim 1.
Claim 4 line 3-4 recited “--- the body housings (B) of the pair of left and right earphones (RE, LE)”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because there is not a single body housing for both the left and right earphones, rather each of the left and right earphones has its own housing.
Examiner notes that no art has been applied to claims 1-6; however, the claims as currently presented are not deemed allowable and Applicant is required to clarify in compliance with 35 USC 112 as so to facilitate a clear understanding of the claimed invention and the protection sought.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIE X DANG whose telephone number is (571)272-0040. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5.
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, Carolyn R Edwards can be reached at 571-270-7136. 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.
/JULIE X DANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2692
/CAROLYN R EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2692
Prosecution Insights