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 1-20 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-2, 6-10, 15-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ikeda (US Patent 4,520,238).
Regarding Claims 1 and 19 (Original), Ikeda teaches an apparatus and a method comprising:
a wearable frame [fig. 12 @13];
at least one contact transducer [fig. 14 @11] coupled to the wearable frame, the at least one contact transducer being configured to detect vibrations produced by vocalization [Abstract, “A pickup device for picking up sound generated by the vocal chords and transmitted through bones from the nasal bone”] of a user [col 6 lines 38-44, “One wears the pair of eyeglasses in such a way that the portion 41b in which is embedded the microphone 11 is made into contact with the side of the nose. In this case, the thin-wall portion 41A of the soft pad 41 is pressed against the nose by the nosepieces 19. The microphone 11 can pick up the audio signal transmitted through the nasal bone”]; and
a nose pad [fig 14 @41] configured to attach to the wearable frame [col 5 lines 63-68, “In an embodiment as shown in FIG. 14, the nosepieces 19 are rotatably mounted on the pair of holders 14 which in turn are mounted on an auxiliary member or bridging member 23 which in turn are mounted on the face-supporting member 13”], wherein the nose pad [figs. 14-15 @41]:
is dimensioned to cover the contact transducer [fig. 15 @11] in a manner configured to maintain contact with a nose of the user and the contact transducer [col 6 lines 38-44, “One wears the pair of eyeglasses in such a way that the portion 41b in which is embedded the microphone 11 is made into contact with the side of the nose. In this case, the thin-wall portion 41A of the soft pad 41 is pressed against the nose by the nosepieces 19. The microphone 11 can pick up the audio signal transmitted through the nasal bone”]; and
is configured to be reattachbly detachable from the wearable frame [col 6 lines 45-49, “Adhesive tapes or the like may be interposed between the nosepieces 19 and the thin wall portion 41A of the soft pad so that the nosepieces 19 may be removably attached to the thin wall portion 41A of the soft pad 41”].
Regarding Claim 2 (Original), Ikeda teaches the apparatus of Claim 1, wherein
the nose pad [fig. 14 @41] comprises at least one of: a flexible material [col 6 lines 31-35, “In the embodiment as shown in FIGS. 14 -16, a soft pad 41 has a lower thin-wall portion 41A and a portion 41B which is made into contact with the nose”, soft is equivalent to flexible]; a rigid material [alternate limitation not addressed].
Regarding Claim 6 (Original), Ikeda teaches the apparatus of Claim 1, wherein the nose pad comprises at least one of:
an oleophobic material; or a hydrophobic material the materials listed below are well known oil (oleophobic) and water resistant (hydrophobic) materials, in addition the prior art specifically addressed the need to correct problems solved by oil and sweat, col 1 lines 30-36, “There have been proposed various types of pickup devices for picking up vibration or audio signal transmitted through the nasal bone, but they are not satisfactory in practice. That is, sweats, body oil, toilet compounds and medical compounds are made into contact with the nose”, col 7 lines 19-25, “The soft pad may be made of soft polyvinyl chloride, silicon rubber, urethane rubber, chloroprene rubber, natural rubber and foamed compounds. In order to make the soft pad snugly fit over the nose of a wearer”].
Regarding Claim 7 (Original), Ikeda teaches the apparatus of Claim 1, wherein
a first portion of the nose pad [fig. 15 @41A] is fixed to the wearable frame [fig. 15 @14] at a first connection point and
a second portion of the nose pad [fig. 15 @41B] is movably coupled [construed as sound vibration movement are passed from 41B to 11] to the contact transducer [fig. 15 @11] and
configured such that the vibrations produced by the vocalization of the user cause the second portion [41B] of the nose pad to move [to allow sound waves to reach 11] while the first portion of the nose pad [41A] remains at least substantially static [41A is pressed against nose by 14 and 19 causing sound waves to be damped because movement (vibration) of 41A is limited by mechanical pressure against nose].
Regarding Claim 8 (Original), Ikeda teaches the apparatus of Claim 1, wherein
the nose pad [fig. 8 @19] is configured to stretch around a contact point of the frame [fig. 8 @14] without contacting the contact transducer [fig. 8 @11].
Regarding Claim 9 (Original), Ikeda teaches the apparatus of Claim 1, wherein
the nose pad is configured to filter sound waves [damping is a form of filtering] arriving at the nose pad [col 7 lines 15-18, “because of the soft pad, external noise (air vibration) can be damped so that the microphone will not pick up external noise and consequently the S/N ratio can be improved”].
Regarding Claim 10 (Original), Ikeda teaches the apparatus of Claim 1, wherein:
the frame comprises a fixed nose pad portion [fig. 19 @42] to which the contact transducer [figs. 18 and 19 @11] is attached; and
the fixed nose pad portion [fig. 19 @42] comprises a flexible surround dimensioned [fig. 19 @42C] to couple the nose pad to the frame [col 6 lines 49-59, “a soft pad 42 has a lower thin wall portion 44A and a portion 42B which is made into contact with the nose. The soft pad 42 is formed with apertures 42C through which are inserted the nosepieces 19 and pockets 42D into which are inserted or fitted the nosepieces 19. The pockets 42D are slightly larger in size than the nosepieces 19 in such a way that when the nosepieces 19 are inserted or fitted into the pockets 42D, they can move and consequently the pair of eyeglasses or the soft pad 42 may be located at an optimum position”].
Regarding Claim 15 (Original), Ikeda teaches the apparatus of Claim 1, wherein
the contact transducer [fig. 11 @11] is coupled to the wearable frame [fig. 11 @13] via a suspension mechanism [fig. 11 @23, col 5 lines 63-68, “In an embodiment as shown in FIG. 14, the nosepieces 19 are rotatably mounted on the pair of holders 14 which in turn are mounted on an auxiliary member or bridging member 23 which in turn are mounted on the face-supporting member 13 through the vibration damping members 20”].
Regarding Claim 16 (Original), Ikeda teaches the apparatus of Claim 15, wherein
the suspension mechanism [fig. 11 @23] is configured to bias [23 pushes 11 towards 41 when the apparatus is worn] the contact transducer [fig. 11 @11] into the nose pad [figs. 11 and 15 @41].
Regarding Claim 17 (Original), Ikeda teaches an apparatus comprising:
a nose pad [fig 14 @41] configured to attach to the wearable frame [col 5 lines 63-68, “In an embodiment as shown in FIG. 14, the nosepieces 19 are rotatably mounted on the pair of holders 14 which in turn are mounted on an auxiliary member or bridging member 23 which in turn are mounted on the face-supporting member 13”],
wherein: the nose pad is dimensioned to cover and movably couple [col x lines x-y, “In an embodiment as shown in FIG. 14, the nosepieces 19 are rotatably mounted on the pair of holders 14”, fig. 15 illustrates sensor 11 coupled to 19] a contact transducer [figs. 14-15 @11] to a nose of a user [col 6 lines 31-35, “In the embodiment as shown in FIGS. 14 -16, a soft pad 41 has a lower thin-wall portion 41A and a portion 41B which is made into contact with the nose. The microphone 11 is embedded in a thick-wall portion; that is, the portion except the thin-wall portion 41A”];
the contact transducer [fig. 15 @11 coupled to 19, coupled to 14, coupled to 13] is coupled to the wearable frame [fig. 12 @13]; and
the nose pad [fig. 14 @41] is dimensioned to reattachably detach from the wearable frame [col 6 lines 45-49, “Adhesive tapes or the like may be interposed between the nosepieces 19 and the thin wall portion 41A of the soft pad so that the nosepieces 19 may be removably attached to the thin wall portion 41A of the soft pad 41”].
Regarding Claim 20 (Original), Ikeda teaches method of Claim 19, further comprising
reattachably detaching the nose pad from the wearable frame [col 6 lines 45-49, “Adhesive tapes or the like may be interposed between the nosepieces 19 and the thin wall portion 41A of the soft pad so that the nosepieces 19 may be removably attached to the thin wall portion 41A of the soft pad 41”].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikeda.
Regarding Claim 5 (Original), Ikeda teaches the apparatus of Claim 2
Ikeda does not teach an additional nose pad configured to be swappable with the nose pad
One of ordinary skill in the art would understand that providing a spare nose pad which is in addition to the nose pad installed in the claimed apparatus, has no effect on operation of the apparatus, produces no new or unexpected result and therefore has no patentable significance [In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) … Although the reference did not disclose a plurality of ribs, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.)].
Claims 3-4, 11, 13-14, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikeda in view of Dalke (US 11,714,453). All reference is to Ikeda unless otherwise indicated.
Regarding Claim 3 (Original), Ikeda teaches the apparatus of Claim 2
Ikeda does not teach the nose pad is coupled to the wearable frame via a magnetic coupling
Dalke teaches a nose pad [fig. 10 @500] is coupled to a wearable frame [fig. 10 @200] via a magnetic coupling [col 11 lines 37-44, “One or more of various mechanisms can be provided to secure the nosepiece 500 to the HMD module and/or the light seal module 200. For example, mechanisms such as locks, latches, snaps, screws, clasps, threads, magnets, pins, an interference (e.g., friction) fit, knurl presses, bayoneting, and/or combinations thereof can be included to couple and/or secure the nosepiece 500 to the HMD module”]
Before the application was filed it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the concept of detachably attaching a nose pad using magnetic force, as taught by Dalke, into the apparatus taught by Ikeda in order to securely attach removable nose pads without causing mechanical fatigue necessitated when unscrewing or bending components to perform a cycle of attachment, detachment and reattachment.
Regarding Claim 4 (Original), Ikeda teaches the apparatus of Claim 2
Ikeda does not teach the nose pad is dimensioned to be coupled to the wearable frame by snapping to the wearable frame
Dalke teaches a nose pad [fig. 10 @500] is dimensioned to be coupled to a wearable frame [fig. 10 @200] by snapping to the wearable frame [col 11 lines 37-44, “One or more of various mechanisms can be provided to secure the nosepiece 500 to the HMD module and/or the light seal module 200. For example, mechanisms such as locks, latches, snaps, screws, clasps, threads, magnets, pins, an interference (e.g., friction) fit, knurl presses, bayoneting, and/or combinations thereof can be included to couple and/or secure the nosepiece 500 to the HMD module”]
Before the application was filed it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the concept of detachably attaching a nose pad using snaps, as taught by Dalke, into the apparatus taught by Ikeda in order to mechanically securely removable nose pads while minimizing the mechanical fatigue caused by unscrewing or bending components to perform a cycle of attachment, detachment and reattachment.
Regarding Claim 11 (Original), Ikeda teaches the apparatus of Claim 1
Ikeda does not teach the frame is configured to support at least two display devices in front of eyes of the user
Dalke teaches a frame [fig. 2 @200] is configured to support at least two display devices in front of eyes of the user [col 3 lines 51-55, “The head-mountable device 10 can include display elements 140 that provide visual output for viewing by a user wearing the head-mountable device 10”]
Before the application was filed it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the concept of placing display panels in front of the users eyes, as taught by Dalke, into the apparatus taught by Ikeda in order to provide virtual reality and augmented reality images to the user wearing the apparatus.
Regarding Claims 13 and 18 (Original), Ikeda teaches the apparatus of Claims 1 and 17
Ikeda does not teach the nose pad comprises an inner rigid surface and a flexible outer surface
Dalke teaches a nose pad [fig. 8 @400] comprises an inner rigid surface [fig. 8 @412] and a flexible outer surface [fig. 8 @410, col 10 lines 38-45, “the end portions 412 can be thicker, more rigid, and/or less stretchable, while the bridge element 410 can be thinner, more flexible, and/or more stretchable”]
Before the application was filed it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the concept of fashioning the nose pad from both flexible and rigid materials, as taught by Dalke, into the apparatus taught by Ikeda in order to allows forces along the side to be transmitted to the sides of the nose, while the bridge element 410 more readily conforms to the top of the nose. The bridge element 410 can yield to the shape of the nose while the end portions 412 can provide relatively greater resilient against the nose (Dalke: col 10 lines 40-45).
Regarding Claim 14 (Original), Ikeda in view of Dalke teaches the apparatus of Claim 13, wherein
the inner rigid surface comprises a rigid material [Dalke: fig. 8 @412] and
the outer flexible surface comprises a flexible material [Dalke: fig. 8 @410, col 10 lines 38-45, “the end portions 412 can be thicker, more rigid, and/or less stretchable, while the bridge element 410 can be thinner, more flexible, and/or more stretchable”, col 7 lines 19-25, “The soft pad may be made of soft polyvinyl chloride, silicon rubber, urethane rubber, chloroprene rubber, natural rubber and foamed compounds. In order to make the soft pad snugly fit over the nose of a wearer”]
Ikeda in view of Dalke does not teach the nose pad rigid surface material comprises a plastic material and the nose pad flexible surface comprises a silicon material
Before the invention was filed it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure a rigid surface using one of the plastic materials taught by Ikeda and configure a flexible surface using a silicon material taught by Ikeda with a reasonable expectation of success.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ikeda in view of Lopez (US 2017/0078788). All reference is to Ikeda unless otherwise indicated.
Regarding Claim 12 (Original), Ikeda teaches the apparatus of Claim 1
Ikeda does not teach a least one processing device is embedded within the frame, the at least one processing device being electrically coupled to the contact transducer
Lopez teaches a least one processing device [figs. 1 and 2 @106] is embedded within the frame [fig. 1 @102],
the at least one processing device being electrically coupled [fig. 2 @208] to the contact transducer [fig. 2 @202]
Before the application was filed it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the concept of incorporating a processor into the head mounted device frame, as taught by Dalke, into the apparatus taught by Ikeda in order to process the signals detected by the nose sensor as close to the sensor as possible, thereby making the head mounted apparatus more portable and reducing the corruption of unprocessed sensor signals.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Douglas Wilson whose telephone number is (571)272-5640. The examiner can normally be reached 1000-1700 EST. 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, Patrick Edouard can be reached at 571-272-7603. 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.
/Douglas Wilson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2622