Appeal No. 96-2515
Application 08/037,567
the fact that these claims are not specifically argued in the brief, the statement is taken to mean that the
examiner’s final rejection of these claims is not challenged on appeal. Accordingly, the rejection of claims 1
and 16 is sustained. Otherwise, appellant contends that the final rejection of his remaining claims should not
be sustained.
With respect to claim 2, which depends from claim 1, appellant argues that Konomi ‘867
does not disclose an acoustical dampening material between the speaker element and the microphone
element. We are not persuaded by this argument. In Fig. 5, Konomi shows an ear microphone with at least
the left vertical portion of dampening material 15, and dampening material 4, between speaker element 9 and
microphone element 2, 3. In a further embodiment, Fig. 6, Konomi shows dampening material 15 between
speaker element 9 and microphone element 2, 3.
With respect to claims 9 and 17, which depend from claims 1 and 16, respectively, appellant
asserts that Konomi ‘867 does not have an acoustic guide associated with the microphone element. We
disagree. We agree with the examiner that portion 2c of the ear microphone acts as an acoustic guide, and it
is evident that, as part of the ear microphone, it is associated with microphone element 3. This guide
inherently directs sound from the inner ear. Because the examiner relies on portion 2c, appellant’s sole
argument to the effect that portion 2b is not an acoustic guide is not relevant.
We are also of the opinion that Konomi’s pickup piece 2 is an acoustic guide. Speech of the
wearer is conducted to piece 2 as vibration which reaches microphone element 3 (column 3, lines 9-16).
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007