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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “acoustic module” in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-10 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wang et al (US 20230028541 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Wang discloses an open-ear headphone, comprising:
an acoustic module (fig.2 #214) for providing an audio output to an ear of a user (Par.[0081] core assembly #214 converts an electrical signal into corresponding mechanical vibrations for generating an output sound signal);
a battery housing (fig.2 #216; Par.[0085]); and
a flexible arm (fig.2 #211) physically and electrically coupling the acoustic module to the battery housing (Par.[0076-0077][0087-0088] first portion #211 of the support structure may comprise and elastic “flexible” property), the flexible arm including: a flexible printed circuit connecting the battery housing and the acoustic module, and a flexible material that encases at least some of the flexible printed circuit (Par.[0085] a flexible circuit board may be provided to supply power form the battery assembly #216 to the core assembly #214, therefor the flexible circuit must be provided within arm #211)(Par.[0087] the first portion #211 of the support structure may be formed by injection molding having an elastic modulus, which is a flexible material that encases the flexible circuit board),
wherein when worn, the acoustic module is located in a concha of the ear (Par.[0073] “As another example, when the user is wearing the acoustic apparatus, the whole or part of the structure of the acoustic apparatus may be located inside one or more components (e.g., the concha cavity 102, the cymba conchae 103, and the triangular fossa 104, etc.) of the ear (e.g., the area M enclosed by the dotted line in FIG. 1)”), the battery housing is located behind the ear, and the flexible arm passes over an outer side of at least one of at least one of an anti-helix, a helix, or a lobule of the ear (As shown in figures 3-4, battery module #216 is located behind the ear, and arm #211 passes over at least the helix of the ear when in a worn state).
With respect to claim 2, Wang discloses the open-ear headphone of claim 1, wherein collectively, the acoustic module, the battery housing, and the flexible arm, are generally C-shaped (See fig.2).
With respect to claim 3, Wang discloses the open-ear headphone of claim 1, wherein the flexible arm is configured to be flexed at least along a length thereof such that a space between the acoustic module and the battery housing can be adjusted to enable donning or doffing from the ear (Par.[0076] the first portion #211 may cause a flexible compressive force on the ear).
With respect to claim 4, Wang discloses the open-ear headphone of claim 1, wherein the flexible printed circuit defines one or more open curves along its length within the flexible arm (Par.[0085] flexible circuit board connects battery module #106 to core assembly #214 along the curved path of first portion #211, therefor the flexible circuit board defines an open curve along its length).
With respect to claim 5, Wang discloses the open-ear headphone of claim 4, wherein the one or more open curves are simple open curves (See rejection of claim 4).
With respect to claim 6, Wang discloses the open-ear headphone of claim 1, wherein an original resting position of the flexible arm lies along a curved axis (fig.2 #211).
With respect to claim 7, Wang discloses the open-ear headphone of claim 6, wherein the curved axis is generally C-shaped (See fig.2).
With respect to claim 8, Wang discloses the open-ear headphone of claim 6, wherein the flexible printed circuit defines at least one simple open curve along its length within the flexible arm (Par.[0085] flexible circuit board connects battery module #106 to core assembly #214 along the curved path of first portion #211, therefor the flexible circuit board defines an open curve along its length).
With respect to claim 9, Wang discloses the open-ear headphone of claim 1, wherein the flexible material comprises two mating members (fig.2 #211,213) that each define a series of simple open curves along the original resting length of the flexible arm (Par.[0087] each portion may be made of different types of material comprising different elastic properties, wherein the portions are mated together to form the support assembly).
With respect to claim 10, Wang discloses the open-ear headphone of claim 1, wherein the flexible printed circuit extends through an entire original resting length of the flexible arm and comprises a conductor that is configured to carry electrical energy between the acoustic module and the battery housing (Par.[0085] a flexible circuit board may be provided to supply power form the battery assembly #216 to the core assembly #214, therefor the flexible circuit must comprise an conductive material).
With respect to claim 13, Wang discloses the open-ear headphone of claim 1, wherein the flexible arm maintains a light clamping force on the ear when worn (Par.[0076] the first portion #211 may cause a flexible compressive force on the ear).
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) 14-15 and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al (US 20230028541 A1) in view of Hatfield et al (US 20200314518 A1).
With respect to claim 14, Wang discloses an open-ear headphone, comprising:
an acoustic module (fig.2 #214) configured to be located at least in part in a cavum conchae of an outer ear of a user and comprising an acoustic transducer (Par.[0081] core assembly #214 converts an electrical signal into corresponding mechanical vibrations for generating an output sound signal, therefor the core assembly is an acoustic transducer), and a portion (fig.3 #212) that is outwardly convex and is configured to sit in a lower concavity of the cavum conchae that is adjacent to an antitragus of the user's ear (Par.[0073][0079] “As another example, when the user is wearing the acoustic apparatus, the whole or part of the structure of the acoustic apparatus may contact the upper part of the external auditory canal 101 (e.g., the tragus 109, the cymba conchae 103, the triangular fossa 104, the antihelix 105, the scapha 106, the helix 107, etc. where one or more components are located”);
a battery housing (fig.2 #216; Par.[0085]); and
a flexible arm (fig.2 #211) physically and electrically coupling the acoustic module to the battery housing (Par.[0076-0077][0087-0088] first portion #211 of the support structure may comprise and elastic “flexible” property), the flexible arm including: a flexible printed circuit connecting the battery housing and the acoustic module, and a flexible material that encases at least some of the flexible printed circuit (Par.[0085] a flexible circuit board may be provided to supply power form the battery assembly #216 to the core assembly #214, therefor the flexible circuit must be provided within arm #211)(Par.[0087] the first portion #211 of the support structure may be formed by injection molding having an elastic modulus, which is a flexible material that encases the flexible circuit board).
Wang discloses wherein the acoustic apparatus may be an air conduction acoustic apparatus (Par.[0184]); however does not disclose expressly a first sound-emitting opening that is configured to emit sound produced by the acoustic transducer.
Hatfield disclose a headphone comprising an acoustic module (fig.3 #114, Par.[0028] “driver housing”) for providing an audio output to an ear of a user, and a first sound-emitting opening (fig.3 #302) that is configured to emit sound produced by an acoustic transducer (Par.[0028]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the present invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use the sound-emitting opening of Hatfield in the air conduction acoustic apparatus of Wang. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an outlet for acoustic sound to exit the transducer and enter a user’s ear canal.
With respect to claim 15, Wang discloses the open-ear headphone of claim 14, wherein the flexible printed circuit extends through an entire original resting length of the flexible arm and comprises a conductor that is configured to carry electrical energy between the acoustic module and the battery housing (Par.[0085] a flexible circuit board may be provided to supply power form the battery assembly #216 to the core assembly #214, therefor the flexible circuit must comprise an conductive material).
With respect to claim 17, Wang discloses the open-ear headphone of claim 14, wherein when worn, the battery module is located behind the user's ear (As shown in figures 3-4, battery module #216 is located behind the ear).
With respect to claim 18, Wang discloses the open-ear headphone of claim 14, wherein the flexible arm is configured to be flexed at least along a length thereof such that a space between the acoustic module and the battery housing can be adjusted to enable donning or doffing from the ear (Par.[0076] the first portion #211 may cause a flexible compressive force on the ear).
With respect to claim 19, Wang discloses the open-ear headphone of claim 14, wherein when worn, an outer side of at least one of at least one of an anti-helix, a helix, or a lobule of the ear is located between the battery housing and the acoustic module (As shown in figures 3-4, arm #211 passes over at least the helix of the ear when in a worn state).
With respect to claim 20, Wang discloses the open-ear headphone of claim 14, wherein an original resting position of the flexible arm lies along a curved axis (fig.2 #211).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-12 and 16 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Graff et al (US 10924838 B1) discloses an open-ear audio device with flexible arms to be worn over the ear.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON R KURR whose telephone number is (571)270-5981. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 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, Vivian Chin can be reached at (571-272-7848. 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.
JASON R. KURR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2695
/JASON R KURR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695
Prosecution Insights