Ex Parte Bonanno

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jan 3, 2018

13101774 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 3, 2018)

United States Patent and Trademark Office
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O.Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
13/101,774 05/05/2011 Carmine J. BONANNO 26771US01 5682
23446 7590 01/05/2018
MCANDREWS HELD & MALLOY, LTD
500 WEST MADISON STREET
SUITE 3400
CHICAGO, IL 60661
EXAMINER
MOSSER, ROBERT E
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3714
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
01/05/2018 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address(es):
mhmpto @ mcandrews-ip.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte CARMINE J. BONANNO1
Appeal 2017-001681
Application 13/101,774
Technology Center 3700
Before JAMES P. CALVE, WILLIAM A. CAPP, and
ARTHUR M. PESLAK, Administrative Patent Judges.
CALVE, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Final Office
Action rejecting claims 1 and 5—23. Appeal Br. 2. We have jurisdiction
under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We REVERSE.
1 Voyetra Turtle Beach, Inc. is identified as the real party in interest. Appeal
Br. 1.
Appeal 2017-001681
Application 13/101,774
CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER
Claims 1, 8, and 17 are independent. Illustrative claim 1 is
reproduced below.
1. A headset arrangement for use with a gaming machine
having an audio channel outputting game sound and an audio
channel in-taking microphone sound and outputting chat sound
via a port on the machine, the headset arrangement comprising:
a headset comprising two earpieces and a microphone;
a first Bluetooth transceiver in the headset operable to send the
microphone sound and receive the chat sound, the first
Bluetooth transceiver comprising a first radio receiver;
a second radio receiver in the headset for receiving the game
sound;
a signal processor in the headset operably connected to the first
Bluetooth transceiver and the second radio receiver, the signal
processor being operable to mix the microphone, chat, and
game sounds and feed the result to the earpieces; and
an adapter coupled to a game controller and comprising a second
Bluetooth transceiver operable to transmit the chat sound and
receive the microphone sound.
Appeal Br. 19 (Claims Appendix).
REJECTION
Claims 1 and 5—23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Sampat (US 2010/0150383 Al, pub. June 17, 2010),
Alam (US 2012/0237053 Al, pub. Sept. 20, 2012), and Filer (US 2007/
0021205 Al, pub. Jan. 25, 2007).2
2 Although the caption of this rejection lists claims 1—23 as being rejected
under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Sampat, Alam, and Filer, the
rejection itself includes findings only for claims 1 and 5—23, which are the
only claims pending in the application. Final Act. 3—13, see also id. at 1
(Office Action Summary) (indicating that claims 1 and 5—23 are pending and
rejected).
2
Appeal 2017-001681
Application 13/101,774
ANALYSIS
The issue in dispute is whether the prior art renders obvious a headset
including a first receiver operable to receive signals over a wireless channel
from a video game controller, a second receiver operable to receive signals
over a wireless channel from a video game console, and a microphone that
produces a third signal that is sent to the video game controller? Appellant
discloses the claimed wireless headset with two radio modules. Bluetooth
radio transceiver 1 sends microphone chat signals from headset 5 to gaming
controller 10 and receives chat signals from Bluetooth radio adapter 11 that
is connected to video game controller 10. Wireless headset 5 also includes
radio frequency receiver 7, which receives game sounds from game radio
frequency transmitter 6 of gaming console 3’. Spec. 9:9-23, see id. at 8:2—
9:8, Fig. 2. This arrangement replaces the plug-in connection (for a wired
headset) on the prior art video game controller with Bluetooth radio adapter
11, which transmits game chat signals 4 to, and receives microphone chat or
command signals 2 from, wireless headset 5. Id. at 2:13—25, 9:13—20. The
prior art wired headset encumbered game play style. See id. at 2:23—25.
3 Claim 1 recites a headset with a first Bluetooth transceiver that sends
microphone sound and receives chat sound from a second Bluetooth
transceiver coupled to the game controller via an adapter and a second radio
receiver the receives game sound. Appeal Br. 19 (Claims Appendix).
Independent claim 8 recites a headset with a first receiver operable to
receive a first signal over a first wireless channel from a video game
controller, a second receiver operable to receive a second signal over a
second wireless channel from a video game console, and a microphone to
produce a third signal sent to the video game controller. Id. at 19-20.
Independent claim 17 recites a headset with a first receiver to receive a first
signal from a video game controller, a port operable to receive a second
signal from a video game console, and a microphone operable to produce a
third signal that is sent to the video game controller. Id. at 21.
3
Appeal 2017-001681
Application 13/101,774
The Examiner correctly finds that Sampat teaches a wireless headset
that communicates with two separate source devices, which can include an
MP3 player, video game, stereo system, and cellular phone via two wireless
transceivers 203, 205 that are Bluetooth transceivers. Final Act. 3—4, 6—7,
10-11; see Sampat || 7, 22—25, 36, Figs. 1, 2A.
The Examiner also finds correctly that Alam teaches a video gaming
system that includes wireless headsets 130 that communicate wirelessly with
game console 614, 620 and another device (master) such as cell phone 618
and incorporate the use of “chat” with the headset using Bluetooth protocols.
Final Act. 4, 7, 11; see Alam || 2, 4, 79, 80, Fig. 6. Alam teaches wireless
adapters 748, 749; however, the adapters are part of the game console 614 to
establish wireless communication channels between game console 614 and
headset 130 and video game controllers 616, 626. Id. 1 83, Figs. 6, 7. They
do not provide a wireless channel between the controller and the headset as
claimed. Although Alam teaches wireless communication links from game
console 614 to both game controller 616 and wireless headset 130 (Fig. 6),
Alam does not teach a wireless link between the wireless headset and the
video game controller, as claimed.
The Examiner looks to Filer to teach an adapter connected to a game
controller to provide wireless communications with a player. Final Act. 5,8,
12; Ans. 4—5. However, Filer does not teach a wireless channel for chat or
microphone signals between a game controller and a headset as claimed. To
the contrary, Filer teaches the conventional Xbox™ controller configuration
in which a wired headset (CH) connects its cable to a headset jack on the
game controller (GC). Filer || 4—6, 42, Figs. 1 A, IB, 4E. Filer teaches the
prior art configuration that Appellant has modified. See Spec. 2:13—25.
4
Appeal 2017-001681
Application 13/101,774
Filer’s innovation is to provide a microphone module (MM) adapter
that can be integrated with, or plug into, the game controller to allow players
to give voice commands or chat with other players during a game without
using any headset. Filer H 31, 36. Microphone module (MM) eliminates
the need to use a prior art wired headset and microphone. Id. Tflf 29, 36, 41.
Thus, microphone module (MM) does not transmit signals over a wireless
channel from video game controller (GP) to a wireless headset as claimed.
Instead, microphone module (MM) captures voice input directly from users
within a reasonable range of the module. Id. f 33. In order for a user to
communicate with video game controller (GP) via a headset, the user must
plug a traditional headset (communicator headset (CH)) into a pass-through
jack PTJ on microphone module (MM) to provide a wired communication
channel from video game controller (GP) to communicator headset (CH) to
retain person to person functionality. Id. H 31, 42, 54, Figs. 4E, 6B. When
such a headset is connected to microphone module (MM) using a standard
2.5 mm audio jack, this wired connection disables or mutes the microphone
element(s) in the microphone module MM automatically, and causes voice
input to be handled by the communicator headset CH as the voice input data
“passes through” microphone module MM to multimedia console MC via
the peripheral game controller GP. Id. 142. The Examiner also finds that
Filer provides for traditional chat by plugging a headset into a headset jack
located on a game controller. Ans. 4—6 (quoting Filer || 4, 5, 42). Contrary
to the Examiner’s findings {id. at 6), Filer does not claim the microphone
module and the headset are used in combination. Claim 10 of Filer recites
that the “one microphone element of the microphone module is disabled or
muted when the headset is connected to the second interface.”
5
Appeal 2017-001681
Application 13/101,774
Even if connecting a traditional headset to a jack in the microphone
module (MM) did not disable the microphone elements, the connection
between the wired headset and game controller is a wired connection. The
microphone module (MM) can be considered an adapter, as claimed, but it
does not provide a wireless channel between video game controller (GP) and
a wireless headset, as claimed. Thus, the Examiner has not established that
the prior art teaches or suggests a wireless channel between a receiver or a
Bluetooth transceiver of a wireless headset and a video game controller as
claimed. Accordingly, we do not sustain the rejection of claims 1 and 5-23.
DECISION
We reverse the rejection of claims 1 and 5—23.
REVERSED
6