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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Applicant is advised that the new art unit number is 2692. Please use the new art unit number for all future communications.
This Office action is in response to the Election filed on 12/30/2025.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/28/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, lines 6-7: the two instances of “cuff middle end” should be --cuff middle portion--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species III (Figure 3D) in the reply filed on 12/30/2025 is acknowledged. No claims are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR § 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 20 (hereinafter instant claim 20) is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-17 (hereinafter patent claims 1-17) of U.S. Patent No. 12,425,785. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Regarding instant claim 20: Patent claims 1-17 include all of the limitations of instant claim 20. Hence, instant claim 20 are generic to the species of invention covered by patent claims 1-17. Therefore, instant claim 20 are anticipated by patent claims 1-17 and are therefore not patentably distinct therefrom. (See Eli Lilly and Co. v. Barr Laboratories Inc., 58 USPQ2D 1869, "a later genus claim limitation is anticipated by, and therefore not patentably distinct from, an earlier species claim", In re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010, "Thus, the generic invention is 'anticipated' by the species of the patented invention" and the instant "application claims are generic to species of invention covered by the patent claim, and since without terminal disclaimer, extant species claims preclude issuance of generic application claims").
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 8-12, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clow (US 2014/0098983) in view of Jentz et al. (US 2016/0134957) in view of West et al. (US 2020/0389742) in view of Gerber et al. (US 2017/0318372) in view of Daley et al. (US 2023/0164501).
Regarding claim 1, Clow discloses a Personal Communication Device (PCD) comprising:
a microphone (Fig. 1B: 173, aka Fig. 2: 258),
a speaker (Fig. 1B: 181, aka ¶ 0062: speaker inside of 218 of Fig. 2), and
a PCD body, wherein the PCD body is configured as an ear clip and includes a clip first end (218), a clip second end (205) and a clip middle portion (210) (Figs. 2-3),
wherein the clip first end (218) is associated with the clip second end via the clip middle portion (see Fig. 2), and is oriented to be perpendicular to the clip middle portion (Fig. 2-3: axis of 218 extends perpendicularly to 210)
wherein the clip second end (205) includes a body structure (see Fig. 2) which defines a component cavity (inherent that 205 contains cavity in order for the electronic elements to be held within 205) for containing a power source (Fig. 1B: 132),
wherein the clip middle portion (210) is at least one of a
wherein the speaker and the microphone are communicated with the power source (¶ 0058) and the sound processing electronics (¶ 0059), such that when a sound is received by the microphone, the sound processing electronics processes the sound to generate processed sound data and communicate the processed sound data to the speaker (¶ 0059, 0055), and
wherein the PCD is configured for wireless connectivity (Fig. 1B: 150 and ¶ 0058) and is configured to be securely associated with the ear of the user (¶ 0068) such that when the PCD is associated with the ear of the user, the speaker is located proximate an ear canal of the user (¶ 0070) and the body structure is located proximate a rear portion of one or more of the ear helix and an ear antihelix (Fig. 15: see location of 205).
While Clow discloses that the PCD body is configured as an ear clip, and that other types of securing arrangements may be employed (¶ 0041), Clow does not explicitly disclose that the PCD body is configured as an ear cuff; and thus further does not disclose that the clip first end, clip second end, and clip middle portion are a cuff first end, cuff second end, and cuff middle portion, respectively.
Additionally, Clow is not relied upon to disclose wherein the cuff middle portion is configured to be curved in shape to flexibly and securely associate with a helix of an ear of a user.
In a similar field of endeavor, Jentz discloses a PCD body (220, 230, and 240), wherein the PCD body is configured as an ear cuff (¶ 0033: grips antihelix) and includes a cuff first end (230), a cuff second end (220) and a cuff middle portion (240),
wherein the cuff middle portion (240) is at least one of a hollow rectangular structure (see Fig. 2A: 240 has rectangular cross-section) and one or more hollow tubes, and is configured to be curved in shape (see Fig. 2A) to flexibly (¶ 0031) and securely associate with a antihelix of an ear of a user (¶ 0033 and Fig. 2C), and
wherein the PCD is configured to be securely associated with the ear of the user such that when the PCD is associated with the ear of the user, the speaker (250) is located proximate an ear canal (105e) of the user and the body structure (240) is located proximate a rear portion of one or more of the ear helix and an ear antihelix (¶ 0033 and Fig. 2C).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute 210 of Clow with 240 of Jentz, which would result in: the body middle portion being 240 of Jentz, which would result in:
wherein the PCD body is configured as an ear cuff and includes a cuff first end, a cuff second end and a cuff middle portion,
wherein the cuff first end is oriented to be perpendicular to the cuff middle portion (axis of 218 of Clow extends perpendicularly to 240 of Jentz)
wherein the cuff middle portion is at least one of a antihelix of an ear of a user, and
wherein the PCD is configured to be securely associated with the ear of the user such that when the PCD is associated with the ear of the user, the speaker is located proximate an ear canal of the user (already covered by Clow) and the body structure is located proximate a rear portion of one or more of the ear helix and an ear antihelix (end of 240 of Jentz is located at rear of antihelix, and thus 205 of Clow connected thereto will also be located there),
the motivation being to employ another type of securing arrangement as suggested by ¶ 0041 of Clow.
Clow-Jentz is not relied upon to disclose wherein the cuff middle portion is configured to be curved in shape to flexibly and securely associate with a helix of an ear of a user.
In a similar field of endeavor, West discloses wherein the cuff middle portion (1500) is configured to be curved in shape to flexibly and securely associate with a helix of an ear of a user (Figs. 15A/B, and ¶ 0062).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to: wherein the cuff middle portion is configured to be curved in shape to flexibly and securely associate with a helix of an ear of a user, the motivation being to use a feature of the external ear to secure the PCD that is known to be capable of providing support (West - ¶ 0062).
Clow-Jentz-West is not relied upon to disclose that the rectangular structure is a hollow rectangular structure.
In a similar field of endeavor, Gerber discloses a middle body portion (14) connecting a body first end (12) and a body second end (16), where the body first end (12) contains a power source (23) and sound processing electronics (20), and the body second end (16) includes a speaker (17) and microphone (17 or 18a) (see Figs. 1A, 2A, and 2B), where the middle body portion has a hollow passageway so that wiring/cabling can be run within to connect the body first end (12) and body second end (16) (¶ 0051).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to: configure the cuff middle portion to be a hollow rectangular structure, the motivation being to provide a passageway so that wiring/cabling can be run within to connect the cuff first end (218 of Clow) and cuff second end (205 of Clow) (Gerber - ¶ 0051).
Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber is not relied upon to disclose: wherein the cuff first end is orientated to securely associate with the speaker via a speaker tube; and
the component cavity for containing the microphone.
In a similar field of endeavor, Daley discloses a sound tube to convey acoustic energy from a loudspeaker in a casing to an earpiece (¶ 0059) which is what Clow discloses (i.e. Clow teaches a sound tube (322) to convey acoustic energy from a loudspeaker integrated in a housing (218) to an earpiece (320) (Figs. 2-3 and ¶ 0070))
Additionally, Daley discloses an alternative configuration where a speaker tube (514) transmits an electric sound signal to a speaker (502) at the end of the tube (¶ 0027 and Fig. 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the configuration of Clow and Daley with the alternate configuration of Daley by replacing the sound tube (322 of Clow) with a speaker tube (514 of Daley) through which an electric sound signal is transmitted rather than through which sound itself is transmitted, and by relocating the speaker of Clow from inside of 218 to the location of 320 of Clow, which would result in:
wherein the cuff first end (218 of Clow) is configured to securely associate with the speaker (the relocated speaker 12 of Clow) via a speaker tube (514 of Daley),
the motivation being to perform the simple substitution of one configuration for delivering sound into an ear canal for another, to obtain predictable results of sound being delivered into an ear canal. See MPEP § 2143(B).
Additionally, Daley discloses a body structure (504) which defines a component cavity (inherent that 504 contains cavity in order for the electronic elements to be held within 504) for containing a power source (510), a microphone (506) and sound processing electronics (508) (¶ 0055 and Fig. 5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to: the component cavity for containing the microphone, the motivation being to perform the simple substitution of one microphone location for another to obtain predictable results of a microphone that is part of the behind-the-ear structure of a PCD. See MPEP § 2143(B).
Regarding claim 2, Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber-Daley discloses the Personal Communication Device (PCD) of claim 1, and Clow discloses wherein the sound processing electronics include at least one of a processing device (¶ 0059), an amplification device, a speaker tube associated with the speaker, at least one switch configured for programming at least one of a tone and volume of the PCD and an antenna.
Regarding claim 3, Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber-Daley discloses the Personal Communication Device (PCD) of claim 2, and Daley discloses wherein the speaker tube is connected to the cuff middle portion via the cuff first end (218 of Clow is between speaker tube and cuff middle portion),
wherein the speaker tube is hollow (tube) (¶ 0058)
wherein the speaker is electrically connected to the sound processing electronics via wires which are at least partially located within the speaker tube (¶ 0058).
The teachings of Daley relied upon above are combinable with Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber-Daley for the same reasons set forth above in the claim 1 rejection.
Additionally, Daley discloses a speaker tube (1402) being configurably flexible (at least 1404 is configurably flexible) (¶ 0086 and see Fig. 14A/B) (¶ 0085).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the speaker tube with 1404 of Daley, which would result in: wherein the speaker tube is hollow, and configurably flexible, the motivation being to accommodate different ear geometries (Daley - ¶ 0054).
Regarding claim 8, Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber-Daley discloses the Personal Communication Device (PCD) of claim 1, and wherein the PCD is configured such that when worn by the user,
the speaker is located proximate an entrance to the ear canal of the user (from the combination with Daley, the speaker inside 218 of Clow was relocated to the location of 320 of Clow which is at the ear canal), and
the microphone is located proximate the rear portion of one or more of the ear helix and the ear antihelix (from the combination with Daley, the microphone was relocated to inside 205 of Clow which is proximate the helix).
The teachings of Daley relied upon above are combinable with Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber-Daley for the same reasons set forth above in the claim 1 rejection.
Regarding claim 9, Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber-Daley discloses the Personal Communication Device (PCD) of claim 1, and Clow discloses wherein the PCD is configured to wirelessly communicate with a remote device (10) to allow the remote device to control functions (commands) of the PCD (¶ 0051 and Fig. 1A).
Claims 10, 11, 18 recite similar limitations as claims 1, 1, 8, respectively, and are rejected for the same reasons set forth above in the rejections of claims 1, 1, 8, respectively.
Regarding claim 12, Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber-Daley discloses the Personal Communication Device (PCD) of claim 11, and Clow discloses wherein the sound processing electronics include,
at least one of a processing device (¶ 0059), an antenna and an amplification device, wherein at least one of the microphone and the speaker is associated with the at least one of the processing device and the amplification device (¶ 0059 and as seen by the connections in Fig. 1B), and
at least one switch configured for programming at least one of the tone and volume of the PCD and the antenna (¶ 0060).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clow in view of Jentz in view of West in view of Gerber in view of Daley in view of Knudsen (US 2013/0216076).
Regarding claim 19, Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber-Daley discloses the Personal Sound Amplification System of claim 12, and Clow discloses wherein the PCD is configured to wirelessly communicate with at least at least one of,
a remote device (10) to allow the remote device to control functions (commands) of the PCD (¶ 0051 and Fig. 1A),
a magnetic wand, and
a wireless device (10) (¶ 0051 and Fig. 1A).
Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber-Daley is not relied upon to disclose wherein at least one of,
the switch is configured to program at least one of the tone and volume of the PCD when the magnetic wand is located proximate to the magnetic switch, and
the wireless device is configured to program at least one of the tone and volume of the PCD when the wireless device is wirelessly communicated with the PCD.
In a similar field of endeavor, Knudsen discloses a wireless device (wireless remote control or hearing aid fitter) is configured to program at least one of the tone and volume of a PCD (hearing aid) when the wireless device is wirelessly communicated with the PCD (¶ 0006).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to: the wireless device is configured to program at least one of the tone and volume of the PCD when the wireless device is wirelessly communicated with the PCD, the motivation being to allow a user to remote control volume and program settings; and/or to eliminate the need for cumbersome wires and/or fault-prone electrical contacts between the fitting equipment and the hearing aid (Knudsen - ¶ 0006).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clow in view of Jentz in view of West in view of Gerber in view of Daley in view of Usher et al. (US 2010/0074451).
Regarding claim 13, Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber-Daley discloses the Personal Communication Device (PCD) of claim 10, and Daley discloses further comprising the speaker tube connected to the cuff middle portion via the cuff first end (218 of Clow is between speaker tube and cuff middle portion),
wherein the speaker tube is hollow (tube) (¶ 0058),
wherein the speaker is electrically connected to the sound processing electronics via wires which are at least partially located within the speaker tube (¶ 0058).
The teachings of Daley relied upon above are combinable with Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber-Daley for the same reasons set forth above in the claim 10 rejection.
Additionally, Daley discloses a speaker tube (1402) being configurably flexible (at least 1404 is configurably flexible) and extendable lengthwise (¶ 0086 and see Fig. 14A/B) (¶ 0085).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the speaker tube with 1404 of Daley, which would result in: wherein the speaker tube is hollow, configurably flexible and extendable lengthwise, the motivation being to accommodate different ear geometries (Daley - ¶ 0054).
Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber-Daley is not relied upon to disclose wherein the microphone is electrically connected to the sound processing electronics via wires.
In a similar field of endeavor, Usher discloses wherein a microphone (106 or 120) (¶ 0036) is electrically connected to the sound processing electronics (116) (¶ 0041) via wires (see Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to: wherein the microphone is electrically connected to the sound processing electronics via wires, the motivation being to perform the simple substitution of one means for electrically connecting a microphone to sound processing electronics for another, to obtain predictable results of a microphone being electrically connected to sound processing electronics. See MPEP § 2143(B).
Claim(s) 4, 5, 14, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clow in view of Jentz in view of West in view of Gerber in view of Daley in view of Harder (US 2008/0134720).
Regarding claim 4, Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber-Daley discloses the Personal Communication Device (PCD) of claim 1.
Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber-Daley is not relied upon to disclose further comprising a decorative jewelry cover, wherein at least one of
the cuff middle portion is configured to securely associate with a decorative jewelry cover, and
the decorative jewelry cover is configured to securely associate with the cuff middle portion.
In a similar field of endeavor, Harder discloses a decorative jewelry cover (Figs. 33-36: 3304 or 3504), wherein at least one of
the cuff middle portion (2800) is configured to securely associate with a decorative jewelry cover (3304 or 3504) (¶ 0054-0055, and see Figs. 33-36), and
the decorative jewelry cover (3304 or 3504) is configured to securely associate with the cuff middle portion (2800) (¶ 0054-0055, and see Figs. 33-36).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further: comprising a decorative jewelry cover (3304 or 3504 of Harder), wherein at least one of
the cuff middle portion (240 Jentz modified in view of West) is configured to securely associate with a decorative jewelry cover (3304 or 3504 of Harder), and
the decorative jewelry cover (3304 or 3504 of Harder) is configured to securely associate with the cuff middle portion (240 Jentz modified in view of West),
the motivation being to give the PCD an ornamental look (Harder - ¶ 0054-0055).
Regarding claim 5, Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber-Daley-Harder discloses the Personal Communication Device (PCD) of claim 4, and Harder discloses wherein the decorative jewelry cover is configured to engage with (¶ 0054-0055: engaged via adhesive, solder, or the like) and cover the cuff middle portion (Figs. 33-36: see 3304/3504 covering 2800).
The teachings of Harder relied upon above are combinable with Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber-Daley-Harder for the same reasons set forth above in the claim 4 rejection.
Claims 14, 15 recite similar limitations as claims 4, 5, respectively, and are rejected for the same reasons set forth above in the rejections of claims 4, 5, respectively.
Claim(s) 6, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clow in view of Jentz in view of West in view of Gerber in view of Daley in view of Kaufman (US 2020/0007997 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber-Daley discloses the Personal Communication Device (PCD) of claim 1.
Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber-Daley is not relied upon to disclose wherein the PCD body includes a PCD cavity cover configurable between an open configuration and a closed configuration, and wherein the power source located within the PCD body cavity and is at least one of a battery and a rechargeable cell.
In a similar field of endeavor, Kaufman discloses wherein the PCD body includes a PCD cavity cover (110) configurable between an open configuration (Fig. 2f) and a closed configuration (Fig. 2a), and wherein the power source (120) located within the PCD body cavity (¶ 0078) and is at least one of a battery and a rechargeable cell (¶ 0080: battery).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to: wherein the PCD body includes a PCD cavity cover configurable between an open configuration and a closed configuration, and wherein the power source located within the PCD body cavity and is at least one of a battery and a rechargeable cell,
the motivation being to: allow for easy access to replace the battery once it has discharged (Kaufman - ¶ 0078).
Claims 16 recite similar limitations as claims 6, respectively, and are rejected for the same reasons set forth above in the rejections of claims 6, respectively.
Claim(s) 7, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clow in view of Jentz in view of West in view of Gerber in view of Daley in view of Naumann et al. (US 2012/0328139).
Regarding claim 7, Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber-Daley discloses the Personal Communication Device (PCD) of claim 1.
Clow-Jentz-West-Gerber-Daley is not relied upon to disclose
wherein the cuff second end defines a microphone opening, and
wherein the microphone is contained within the component cavity to be located proximate the microphone opening to receive sound.
In a similar field of endeavor, Naumann discloses wherein a hearing aid housing defines a microphone opening (Figs. 1-2: FM, RM, 27, or 28), and
wherein the microphone (2, 2, 22, or 22) is contained within the component cavity (see Figs. 1-2) to be located proximate the microphone opening to receive sound (¶ 0034).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to: wherein the cuff second end (which is the hearing aid housing) defines a microphone opening, and
wherein the microphone is contained within the component cavity to be located proximate the microphone opening to receive sound,
the motivation being to: allow sound to reach the microphone (Naumann - ¶ 0034).
Claims 17 recite similar limitations as claims 7, respectively, and are rejected for the same reasons set forth above in the rejections of claims 7, respectively.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Clow in view of Jentz.
Regarding claim 20, Clow discloses a Personal Communication Device (PCD) comprising:
a microphone (Fig. 1B: 173, aka Fig. 2: 258),
a sound transmitting device (Fig. 1B: 181, aka ¶ 0062: speaker inside of 218 of Fig. 2), and
a PCD body, wherein the PCD body is configured as an ear clip and includes a clip first end (218), a clip second end (205) and a clip middle portion (210) (Figs. 2-3), wherein the clip first end (218) is oriented to be perpendicular to the clip middle portion (Fig. 2-3: axis of 218 extends perpendicularly to 210),
wherein the PCD body includes sound processing electronics (Fig. 1B: 160) (¶ 0057), such that when sound is received by the microphone, the sound processing electronics processes the sound to generate processed sound data and communicates the processed sound data to the sound transmitting device which transmits the sound responsive to the processed sound data (¶ 0059, 0055),
wherein the PCD is configured for wireless connectivity (Fig. 1B: 150 and ¶ 0058) and configured to be securely associated with an ear of a user (¶ 0068) such that when the PCD is associated with the ear of the user, the sound transmitting device is disposed proximate to the ear of a user (¶ 0070).
While Clow discloses that the PCD body is configured as an ear clip, and that other types of securing arrangements may be employed (¶ 0041), Clow does not explicitly disclose that the PCD body is configured as an ear cuff; and thus further does not disclose that the clip first end, clip second end, and clip middle portion are a cuff first end, cuff second end, and cuff middle portion, respectively.
In a similar field of endeavor, Jentz discloses a PCD body (220, 230, and 240), wherein the PCD body is configured as an ear cuff (¶ 0033: grips antihelix) and includes a cuff first end (230), a cuff second end (220) and a cuff middle portion (240),
wherein the PCD is configured to be securely associated with the ear of the user such that when the PCD is associated with the ear of the user, the sound transmitting device (250) is disposed proximate to the ear of the user (¶ 0033 and Fig. 2C).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute 210 of Clow with 240 of Jentz, which would result in: the body middle portion being 240 of Jentz, which would result in:
wherein the PCD body is configured as an ear cuff and includes a cuff first end, a cuff second end and a cuff middle portion, wherein the cuff first end is oriented to be perpendicular to the cuff middle portion (axis of 218 of Clow extends perpendicularly to 240 of Jentz),
wherein the PCD is configured to be securely associated with an ear of a user such that when the PCD is associated with the ear of the user, the sound transmitting device is disposed proximate to the ear of a user (already covered by Clow),
the motivation being to employ another type of securing arrangement as suggested by ¶ 0041 of Clow.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK FISCHER whose telephone number is (571)270-3549. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 1-6, 7:30-11:59pm 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, CAROLYN R EDWARDS can be reached on 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.
/MARK FISCHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2692
/CAROLYN R EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2692