Exhibit A
`
`Initial Expert Report on US Patent No. 6,597,792
`
`

`

`1.
`
`Introduction and Background
`
`l,
`
`| have read and understand the specification and the claims of US Patent No.
`
`6.597.792 13] (the “°792 patent’) (see Attachment 1), having a title of “Headset
`
`Noise Reducing.” | have been asked to give my opinion on whether the
`
`inventions recited in Claims | and 2 were disclosed, publicly known or obvious
`
`(to one having ordinaryskill in the acoustics arts) in the prior art, based on how
`
`the claim terms are used in the specification and their meaning in the acoustic
`
`arts.
`
`bo
`
`| understand from Phitck’s legal counsel that a legal finding of obviousness may
`
`be fonnd by showing that the prior art teaches, suggests. or motivates one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art. at the time of the invention, to combine clements found in
`
`two or more priorart references,
`
`‘abd
`
`Attached as Attachment 2 is a current CV. including myqualifications andlist of
`
`publications. My compensation agreement is $1 50/hr ($225/hrfor testifying).
`
`|
`
`have not teslilied as an expert in the last 4 years.
`
`Summary of Conclusions
`
`4.
`
`The prior art (materials existing before July 15. 1998) is replete with examples of
`
`headsets with the citshion recited in Claim 1. Therefore. itis my opinion that the
`
`invention recited in Claint | was publicly known more than one yearbefore the
`
`‘792 patent was filed,
`
`The headset recited in Claim 2 combines an active noise reduction system
`
`(“ANR”) with a cushion that provides “additional damping” funcuions. Because
`
`the prior art tanght headsets having ANR and a cushionthat inherently included
`
`this “additional damping” andthe other limitations of Claim 2, the invention of
`
`Claim 2 was publicly knownat least as early as 1984,
`
`6,
`
`lurthermore. it is my opinion that it was obvious to combine ANR with anv
`
`headphone. Therefore, because prior art headphones included both covered and
`
`partially covered cushions that providedall the “additional damping” functions
`
`

`

`recited in Claim 2. it is my opinionthat the invention described in Claim 2 was
`
`obvious more than a vear before the *792 patent was filed.
`
`If. Summaryofthe ‘792 Patent and Its Claims | and 2
`
`7. The °792 patent (Attachment |} is directed to reducing noise in a headset
`
`It accomplishesthis “actively and/or passively.” Col, 1:1-5. A
`(headphone).
`cushion is used forthe passive noise reduction (ref. 15. Figures 1B and 2), and a
`
`microphone. driver. and electronic circuitry, combined with an acoustic load, are
`&
`used for the active noise reduction (see, e.g.. Col. 1232-35 and Figures 2 and 5).
`
`8. Claim | recites a headset having an carcup, a driver, and a cushion. My
`
`understanding is that only the “cushion” clementis in dispute.
`
`In its entirety, that
`
`clementts
`
`“a cushion around the peripheryofsaid front opening formed with
`an ear opening constructed and arranged to accommodate the car
`of a user and formed with a plurality of openings around said
`opening constructed and arranged to acoustically add the volume
`ofsaid cushion to the volume ofsaid earcup and enhance passive
`attenuation.”
`
`9. Followingare all the passages in the patent specification that relate to the cushion:
`
`a.
`
`‘he carcup has a cushionthat is seated in the front opening and formed
`with an ear opening for accommodating the ear of the user and an annular
`ridge surrounding the ear opening formed with a plurality of openings
`with adjacent openings typically spaced from each other by of the order of
`the width of an opening measured along the circumference ofthe car
`opening with cach opening having a radial width generally perpendicular
`to the circumference ofthe car opening slightly less than the radial width
`of the annular ridge. (Col [:23-32.)
`
`b. With reference now to the drawings and, more particularly, FIGS. 1A and
`1B thereof, there is shown a perspective view of an carcup assembly
`according to the invention with the perforated cushion of FIG, 1B
`removed. (Col. 1:60-62,)
`
`

`

`c. Referring also to F1G. 1B. cushion 15 covers the exposed front opening
`adjacent to the ear of the wearing user andis fermed with an ear opening
`[5A for accommodating the ear of the wearing user and an annular ridge
`16 surrounding ear opening ISA that is formed with a plurality of
`openings. such as 16A, through which an annular nng of foamis visible
`that rests against driver 12 when assembled,
`(Col, 2:6-12.)
`
`d. Cushion 15 covers the front opening of eareup 11 and includes foam [53.
`(Col. 2:18-19.)
`
`e. Byforming openings in annular ridge 16 of cushion 15 to expose foam
`material 15B, the effeetive volume ofthe earcup is sigmficantly increased
`to embrace the volume occupied by cushion 15 and thereby increase
`passive attenuation and provides additional dampingto help srnooth the
`audio response at the ear and control stability with the headset offthe
`head. (Col. 3:21-27.3
`
`f. Cupsize is relatively small, yet there is considerable effective volume
`with the additional effective volume afforded by cushion 15 accessed
`through openings such as 6A.
`(Col. 3:28-31.)
`
`10. Claim 2 adds te Claim | the following elements: a microphone, active noise
`
`reducing circuitry. and a “whereby” clause related to the cushion.
`
`| refer to the
`
`microphone andnoise reducing circuitry asANR or the ANR elements.
`
`‘The
`
`“whereby” clause states,
`
`“wherebysaid cushion with said plurality of openings is further
`constructed and arranged to furnish additional damping to help
`smooth the audio responseat the ear of a user and control stability
`with the headset off the head.”
`
`IV. Discussion of the Cushion and its Openings
`
`11, The word “cushion”. as used in the acoustic arts. and in particular as used in
`
`connection with headsets and headphones, is a general term that is used to
`
`deseribe a variety of resilient members, having various shapes and sizes, that
`
`serve a variety of purposes.
`
`12. In general. cushions are used in headphones to provide a comfortable fit and seal
`
`between the user’s head er ears and the headset.
`
`(See. e.a.. US Patent no.
`
`4.455.075 (Attachment 3) at Col 3:4-32; US Patent no. 4.572.324 (Attachment 4).
`
`Col [:14-26.) Cushions provide passive noise reduction in headphones. (See,
`
`

`

`e.g., Borwick, Loudspeaker and Headphone lMandhook, Third dition, Focal
`
`Press. Sections 14.2.7 and 14.2.8 (Attachment 5)}. Some cushions are covered
`
`and some are uncovered.
`
`(See, c.g., US Patent no. 4.005.267 (Attachment 6).at
`
`Col 7:33-39 and Col 9:25-35). Seme cushions are made of open cell feam. and
`
`some ofclosed cell foam, and some are fluid filled. (See. e.g.. Bose prior art
`
`patent, US Patent no. 4,455,675 (Attachment 3) at Col.3:4-32; see also, Borwick.
`
`Loudspeaker and Headphone Landhook, Third Edition, Focal Press. Section
`
`14.2.3 and Figure 14.8} (Attachment 7 (pages 595-598)}). One ofordinary skill in
`
`the art. at the time the Invention was made, would understand the word “cushion”
`
`lo include anyofthe cushions described above.
`
`13. The ‘792 patent specification’s use ofthe term “cushion” is consistent with the
`
`ordinary use of the term in the acoustic arts. That is, the patent uses the term as il
`
`is ordinarily used.
`
`I find no teaching in the patent specification that Bose
`
`intended some other meaning for the term “cushion.”
`
`L4. Claim | also recites that the cushion is “formed with a plurality of openings
`
`around said opening constructed and arranged to acoustically add the volume of
`
`suid cushion to the velume ofsaid earcup and enhance passive attenuation.” The
`
`ferm “opening” has no peculiar meaning in the acoustic arts,
`
`It simply means a
`
`hole. void. or zap. The specification ofthe *792 patent uses the term “opening”
`
`consistent with its ordinarv meaning.
`
`V. Discussion of Prior Art
`
`Properties of Open Cell Foam andits Relationship to Claim 1
`
`15. Open cell foam is commonly used in the field of acoustics.
`
`[Lis very much hike a
`
`commonsponge. and is made of synthetic materials, such as polyurcthane.
`
`It can
`
`be made with a variety of densities, for different acoustic needs.
`
`Jt is commonly
`
`used as headphonecushions, as seen in Bose’s prior art patent nos, 4.644.581]
`
`(Attachment 11) and 4.455,675 (Attachment 3). As seen in the following Figure 3
`
`of the “581 patent, open cell foam has a plurality of openings.
`
`

`

` FIG.3
`
`16,
`
`The acoustical properties of open cel! foam are well known, and those properties
`have been exploited in the field of acoustics and headphonesfor decades. These
`acoustic properties include those recited in Claim 1. The first such propertyts
`passive attenuation.
`In particular, because ofits open cell structure, open cell
`foain absorbs sound in an earcup and therebypassivelyattenuates sound. See, for
`
`example. Handbookfor Sound Engineers, Second dition (Macmillan Computer
`Publishing. Copyright 1987 and 1991). page 119 (Attachment 12): See also. US
`Patent no. 6,831,984 (Attachment 13), Col 2:16-19 (Bose admits that open cell
`
`foamassists “in passive attenuation”).
`Furthermore, it has been well known for decades that open cel! foam cushions.
`
`17,
`
`because oftheir openings, that is, open cell structure, effectively increase the
`
`volume of whatever cavity or space they are employed bythe volume ofthe
`
`cushion. The openings allowsound to enter the absorber (as opposedto being
`
`reflected), thereby adding the volume ofthe absorberto the cavity. See. ¢.g..
`
`Noise and Vibration Control Kugincering, Second kdition (dohn Wiley & Sons.
`
`Inc. 2006) pages 216. 231-2. and 235-239. (Attachment 8) Passive attenuation is
`ad consequenceofthis effective volumeincrease. This fact is acknowledged by
`
`the patent specification:
`
`By forming openings in annular ridge 16 of cushion 15 to expose
`foam material 15B, the effective volume of the earcupis
`
`

`

`significantly increased to embrace the volume occupied by
`cushion 15 and thereby increase passive attenuation and provides
`additional damping to help smooth the audio responseat the ear
`and control stability with the headset off the head. (Col. 3:21-27,
`emphasis added.)
`
`18. Therefore. because ofthese inherent qualities ol open cell foam, priorart
`
`headphonesthat include open cell foam cushions. or publications that describe
`such headphones, include each and every element of Claim 1,
`[Examples of such
`headphones are shown im US Patent Nos. 4.572.324 (Midi 1986) (Attachment4),
`
`4.005.267 (Gorike 1977) (Attachment 6), and 4.809.811 (Gorike 1989)
`
`(Attachment 14). Another of such headphones is described in US Patent No.
`4.455.675 (the "675 patent’) (Attachment3), issued on June 19, 1984. The
`
`following claim chart showsthe linuitations of Claim |
`
`in the prior art “675 patent.
`
`CLAPMED LIMITATION
`(CLAIM1)
`
`PRIOR ART(US Patent 4,455,675)
`
`
`|
`
`|'
`
`33
`
`The ‘675 Patent is directed to, among other things.
`headsets and headphones.
`(See. ¢.g., “675 Patent
`Figure 1; Col 1:15-35 using the term “headset” to
`describe the general technologyarea to whichits
`teachings are directed: and Col 3:1-3 deseribing
`that the headphone is connectedto a headband23.)|
`The ‘675 Patent includes an earcup (Ig. 1,
`element 13, Col 2:52 — Col 3:33) having a front
`opening (Fig. 1. element 12 (cavity), Col 2:55-59).
`|
`Also, the ‘675 Patent states. “}t]he invention
`achieves these results with relatively conipact
`headphones that may be worn comfortably without
`excessive pressure on the head from forees urging
`the cups against the head.” (Col 1:8-12.)
`cae one eran
`The “675 Patent includes a driver inside itsearcup
`(rig. 1, element 17, Col 2:55-59),
`
`|. A headset coniprising,
`
`an earcup having a lront opening
`adapted to be adjacent to the ear of
`the user.
`
`adriver inside said earcup,
`
`a cushion around the periphery of
`said front opening formed with
`an car openingconstructed and
`
`The ‘673 Patent includes a cushion 15 around its
`front opening formed with an ear opening
`
`

`

`
`
`CLAIMED LIMITATION
`(CLAIM 1)
`
`arranged to acconmnodate the car
`of a user
`
`of a user(lig. 1, element 15, Col 2:55-59).
`
`_and formed with a plurality of
`openings around said opening
`constructed and arranged to
`i acoustically add the volume ofsaid |
`cushionto the volume ofsaid
`earcup and enhance passive
`attenuation.
`
`The cushion 15 ofthe *675 patent is formed with a
`plurality of openings around the front opening
`(See, e.g. openings of cushion 15 oflig. 1. and
`the description at Col. 3, lines 4-6 (cushion 1s
`~.,.open cell polyurethane foam”}). Opencell
`foam has many openings, onits surface and
`throughout.
`
`|
`
`|
`
`_ The cushion 15 and the openings of the cushion 15
`_ of the 675 patentare constructed and arranged to
`_ acoustically add the volume ofsaid cushion to the
`- volumeofsaid earcup and enhance passive
`| attenuation (See. e.g.. Col 3:4-32. and in particular
`lines 13-16 (the open cell foam cushion 15 has the
`acoustical advantages in “significantly attenuating
`spectral components”). Also, 675 patent teaches
`both high and lowflowresistance cushions, and
`thus teaches the use of a wide range of opencell
`foamdensities.
`
`The Prior Art Also Shows Covered Foam Cushions With Opcnings
`
`
`“Partially Covered Cushions”) and the Properties of Claim 1
`
`
`
`
`19, Furthermore, the prior art also discloses cushions having underlying openccll
`
`foam, covered with a cover having one or more openings ("partially covered
`
`cushions”).
`
`‘The openings ofthe prior art add the volume ofthe underlying foam
`
`to the volume ofthe carcup and enhance passive attenuation, therebydisclosing
`
`each and every element of Claim I.
`
`20. One such headphone was marketed by Audio Technica as the Audio Technica
`
`inodelATOTL. examined the AT91], and it is a headset having an earcup, a
`
`driver inside the carcup, and a cushion that is covered, and which has openings
`
`

`

`(holes) in its cover lo expose underlying open cell foam. Photographs ofthe
`
`cushions are provided below,
`
`
`
`
`
`2l.
`
`As can be seen from the photograph, the openings expose the underlying opencell
`foam at the ear cavity. ‘he holes bring into playthe effects of the underlying
`foam, and thus acoustically add the volume of the foam to the volume of the
`earcup and enhance passive attenuation.
`| performeda test. described belowin
`paragraphs 36-38. which demonstrates that theAT911] cushioncontrols stability
`with the headset off the head. Because the AT911 openings are large enough to
`
`control stability with the headset off the head by absorbing sound, they are
`therefore large enough to add the volume ofthe underlying foam to the eareup
`and to enhance passive attenuation. That is, controlling stability also
`
`demonstrates passive attenuation.
`
`. Another such headphone was described in US Patent No. 4,027,117
`(Attachment 9), issued on May 31. 1977. The following claim chart relates Claim
`
`1 to the 117 patent.
`
`

`

`
`
`PRIOR ART (US PATENT4,027,117)
`
`
`
`~CLAIMED LIMITATION|
`(CLAIM 1)
`
`-A
`
`
`headset comprising,
`
`See lig 1
`
`an carcup havinga front opening
`adapted to be adjacent to the ear of
`
`ptheusen eee
`
`"adrivadriver inside saidearcup._ SeeFi“igPo
`“An ear pad 7 is made ofa porousresifient member
`8 ofa doughnut shape, such as polyurethane foam .
`
`22.” Cot 1:67 - Cob 2:1.
`
`|
`
`a cushion around the peripheryof
`said front opening formed with an
`Phe Ti? patent specifically discloses a covered
`ear opel constructed and
`cushion (ref.8. fig £), with the cover 9 having an
`arranged to accommodate the ear
`opening so thar the foam 8 “is exposed”.
`(col. 2.
`of a user,
`“fines 1-5).
`‘Phe opening im the coverIs oriented so
`|
`thatit exposes the underlying foamat the inner
`and formed with a plurality of
`cavity, and is large enough to acoustically add the
`openings around said opening
`volume of the cushionto that of the earcup and
`constructed and arranged to
`acoustically add the volume of said|enhance passive attenuation. Bose has admitted
`enshion to the votume of said
`that the ‘117 Nakamura patent “discloses a passive
`headset with earcup cushions having one or more
`earcup and enhance passive
`attenuation.
`openings along it inner circumference to expose the
`underlying foam” in its May 9, 2008 response to
`. the US Patent Office in the reissue proceedings
`:
`
`wy “FO?
`
`23,
`
`The opening ofthe cushion cover of the Nakamura ‘117 patent is larger than those
`
`of the AT91! headphones on which | performed the test of paragraphs 36-38, and
`
`therefore is sufficiently large to acoustically add the volume of the cushion to that
`
`of the earenp and enhance passive attenuation,
`
`The Prior Art and its Relationship to Claim 2
`
`
`
`
`. the headphones recited in Claim ? combine ANR with a cushion that provides
`
`“additional damping” functions,
`
`In particular, Claim 2 recites that the “cushion
`
`

`

`with said plurality of openings is further constructed and arranged to furnish
`
`additional damping to help smooth the audio responseat the ear ofa user and
`
`control stability with the headset off the head.”
`
`bho Tay
`
`. Broken down, this clause requires that (a) the cushion be “further construeted and
`
`arranged” to furnish “additional damping,” which helps (6b) “smooth the audio
`
`response at the ear of a user” and (c) “control stability with the headset off the
`
`head.” Leach of these limitations will be discussed in turn.
`
`(a) “further coustructed and arranged”—‘Vhis limitation requires that there be
`
`some “further” — 7e., additional — construetion or arrangement of the cushionthat
`
`furnishes the “additional damping”.
`
`Ilowever, the patent specification expressly
`
`attributes this “additional damping”to the cushion of Claim 1, and therefore this
`
`limitation, and everything following it, adds nothing new.
`
`Inparticular, the
`
`“additional damping” benefit comes along with the cushion of Claim 1. This fact
`
`is acknowledged bythe patent specification:
`
`By forming openings in annular ridge 16 of cushion 15 to expose
`foam material |5B,. the effective volume ofthe earcup is
`significantly increased to embrace the volume occupied by
`cushiou 13 aud thereby increase passive attenuation and
`provides additional damping to fielp smooth the audiv response
`at the ear and control stability with the headset offthe head.
`(Col, 3:21-27. emphasis added.)
`
`. Put another way, there is nothing in the specification that discloses any additional
`
`structure or arrangement that provides “additional damping.” One might expect.
`
`from the “further constructed and arranged” claim language,that the specification
`
`would disclose one cushion construction or arrangement for increasing passive
`
`attenuation, and then another for smoothing the audio response and controlling
`
`stability. However, no such disclosure is provided.
`
`Instead, the specification
`
`expressly equates the limitations of Claim | with those of Claim 2.
`
`. The only disclosure in the specification that is directed to any cushion
`
`construction that relates to passive attenuation or additional dampingis related to
`
`

`

`[lowever. there is nothing in that disclosure that gives anyindication
`openings.
`as to what size, number, arrangement. orstructure of openings achieves the
`
`Indeed, except for one passage. all of the
`recited functions of the claims.
`references to opening structure or arrangement simplyindicate that the openings
`are represented by clement I6A of Figure 1B or they are formed on annular ridge
`16 of Figure 1B. See, Col, 2:6-12, Col. 3:21-27, and Col. 3:28-31. The one
`
`reference that provides some detail abaut the openingsstates.
`The carcup has a cushion thatis seated in the front opening and
`formed with an ear opening for accommodating the ear ofthe user
`and an annular ridge surrounding the ear opening formed with a
`plurality of openings with adjacent openings typically spaced from
`each other by of the order of the width of an opening measured
`along the circumference ofthe ear opening with cach opening
`having a radial width generally perpendicular to ihe circumference
`ofthe ear opening slightly less than the radial width ofthe annular
`ridge.
`(Col 123-32.)
`
`29, Ilowever, this passage provides no guidance as to howthis arrangementrelates to
`passive attenuationor to “additional damping.” Therefore, the specification
`provides no disclosure that indicates what cushion structure or arrangement
`provides “additional damping.” Giventhis lack of disclosure of any additional
`
`structure, there is no “further” construction or arrangement.
`
`30. Moreover. | performed dampingtests (Attachment 10) to demonstrate that the
`prior art cushions discussed in connection with Claim | inherently provideall the
`“additional damping”functions of Claim 2. The tests were performed with a
`standard, open ectt foam cushion, and with a cushion from the priorart AT9II
`headphone. Thesetests verified that the twe benefits derived from “additional
`damping” ~ smoothing and stability control -- are inherent in prior art cushions.
`That is, the tests confirm what is well known, that open cell foam, because ofits
`
`openings and opencellularstructure, whether exposed directly or through a
`partially open cover, provides the additional damping, along with its smoothing
`and stability control. The tests results are described in more detail belowin
`
`
`' The specificalion criticizes certain prior art uses of foam “around the walls of the carcup” to provide
`damping. Col 3:4-11.
`
`

`

`connection with each ofthe two benelits. These tests confirm the well established
`
`understanding as to the inherent damping quality of open cell foam. For example,
`Bose’s US Patent no. 4.644.581 (Attachment ||) discloses an ANR headphone
`having a cushion 15 and other elements made of “damping material”, and states
`that the damping material is “open cell Toam” that damps “high Irequeney
`resonances” -- that is. it smoothes the audio response at the ear ofa user and
`
`controls stability.
`(See, “581 Patent at Col 2:63-66 and Col 3:26-33),
`_ (6) “smooth the audio response at the ear of a user”
`This smoothing
`bencelit is the fruit of the “additional damping”, which in turn results Iromthe
`
`cushion with openings of Claim 1, whether the cushion is uncovered opencell
`foamora partially covered cushion. Therefore, it is not a separate benefit or
`
`lunetion that is the result of some additional structure.
`
`i
`
`. Furthermore. to verily this. | performed a test to characterize the audio response at
`the ear of a user.
`| perlormeda Trequeneyresponse test using a Kemar system In
`
`which standard headsets (Panasonic RP-11CS500 and Audio-Teehnica ATI 1-
`
`ANC7) ) were tested with the following: a fully covered (closed) priorart
`cushion (sce igs. ]A and 1133 and Graph |; an opencell foam cushion (lig. 2 and
`Graph 2): a partially covered prior art AT-91] cushion(lig. 3 and Graph 3): and
`the same AT-91] cushion with the holes covered (lig. 4 and Graph 4). These
`
`cushions werefitted to the headset. with the ANRturned off.
`
`] characterized the
`
`audio response on a Kemarsvstem in a hemi-anechoie chamber, which allowsthe
`measurement ofaudio response on an artificial head that models a human head,
`
`‘ed
`
`fad
`
`_ As shownin the graphs of Attachment ]0, which graph the audio response against
`frequency. both the AT-91] and open cell foam cushions smooththe audio
`response at the ear of the user as compared with prior art covered cushions and as
`compared with the AT-911 cushion with the holes in its cushion covered bytape.
`In particular. Graphs |] and 2 in attachment 10 showthat an open cell foam
`cushion smoothes the audio response compared to a closed cushion, for example
`
`by damping the resonances bevond 2 kllz, Graphs 3 and 4 showthat prior art
`
`

`

`cushion AT-91] smoothes the audio response as compared to a completely closed
`
`cushion configuration,
`_ Furthermore. as mentioned above, the inherent damping quality of open cel] foam
`
`is also admitted by Bose inits prior art, U.S. Patent No. 4.644,581
`Attachment 11). fhe ’581] patent includes a cushion 15 and other elements made
`of “damping material”, and states that the damping material is “open cell foam”
`that damps “high frequency resonances.” (See, “581 Patent at Col 2:63-66 and Col
`3:26-33). To damphigh frequency resonances is to smooththe audio response at
`the ear of a user. Furthermore,it is well known that porous cushions smooth
`audio response. See, Borwick (Attachment7), Section 14.2.4(b), at page 605
`(“Making the cushion porous smoothsthe response around 1kfz, without rnuch
`loss of low-frequency SPL.")
`_ Therefore. prior art cushions—whether uncovered or covered with a cover having
`wd TAY
`openings ~ inherently provided the smoothed audio response claimed in Claim 2.
`36. (c) “control stability with the headset offthe head”
`This stability control
`Ne oa
`benefit is another fruit ofthe “additional damping”. andrelates to control of
`
`feedback with the headset off the head. Therefore, it is not a separate benefit or
`
`function that is the result of some additional structure. Furthermore. ] performed
`a test to verifythat the stability control was inherentin prior art cushions.
`|
`performed thetest bytesting an ANR headphone with fully covered cushions (no
`foam exposed). and then with cach of twoprior art cushions (uncovered open cell
`foam and the AT-911 partially covered cushion),
`With the covered cushion, whenthe two ear cups were brought together, the
`system becamie unstable, as characterized by an audible squeal. This instability1s
`brought about by the ANR microphonesand the lack ofsufficient signal damping
`due to the covered cushion. However, with the prior art cushions (both for the
`open cell foam and the AT911) in place on the ear cups, and the ear cups brought
`together, the system remainedstable.
`Therefore, prior art cushions provided the stability control claimed in Claim 2.
`
`38.
`
`

`

`. The "675 patent discussed above includes ANR with an opencell foam cushion.
`
`The °675 patent also states that its cushion ts open cell “high flowresistance
`
`material.” Ht goes on to note that its cushion 1s contrasted wrth “low flow
`
`resistance cushions that negltyibly attenuate low frequency signals.” Col 3:26. Ht
`
`thus teaches that a wide range ol open cell foam densities may be used with ANR
`
`headphones. Because open cel] foam cushions, over a wide range ofcell sizes,
`
`mherently include both benefits of the “additional damping” -- namely smooth
`
`audio response and stability control - the °675 patent alone showsthat the
`
`invention of Claim 2 was publicly known at least as carly as 1984.
`
`40,
`
`Furthermore. it ts my option that tt was obvious to combine ANR with virtually
`
`any headphone. First. a headphone is the initial place ene of ordinary skill i the
`
`art (a “PIIOSTPA”), at the ttme of the tnvention (indeed, well before 1987), who
`
`has at least a graduate degree in acoustics and several years of experience. would
`
`try to implement ANR. This is because ofthe difficulty of rmplementing ANR in
`
`large spaces, such as the passenger compartment of an airplane.
`
`In fact, a myriad
`
`of prior art discusses ANR andits benefits, and a PHOSITA knewthat ANR was
`
`suitable for any headphone application where noise reduction was desirable.
`
`4].
`
`Second. tt is my opinion that a PILOSF£A would, in implementing ANR, lirst try
`
`Ht on existing headphones.
`
`In general, a PHOSITA would be motivated ta add ANR to headphones due to the
`
`well knewn benefit of ANR of reducing noise. Reducing notse ts a goal of mast
`
`headphone designers. ANR adds noise reduction above and beyond the passive
`
`notse reduction elements of a headphone.
`
`It would be obvious to combine prior
`
`art passive noise reducing elements with prior art ANR, as they address the
`
`problem of producing a headphone having Icss notse.
`
`43.
`
`Therefore. because mytests demonstrate that existing, prior art headphones such
`
`as that of the AT9L} or the Nakamura patent mherently possessed the “additional
`
`damping” functions of Claim 2, and because it was obvious to add ANRto any
`
`extsting headphone. it was obvious to make the combination claimed in Claim2.
`
`

`

`44. I reserve the right to address any theories, opinions, arguments or evidence
`that Bose may advancein support of any contention that the claimsofthe asserted
`patents are not invalid or unenforceable.
`In addition, i have reviewed other prior
`art found in the Joint Notice of Prior Art and reserve the right to use the other
`prior art in addressing any newtheories, opinions, arguments or evidence.
`
` 6uglas Winker. Ph.D.
`
`12007 Rotherhan
`
`Austin, Texas 78753
`
`

`

`APPENDEX OF ATTACHMENTS TO EXHIBIT A
`
`Attachment |
`
`Attachment 2
`
`Attachment 3
`
`Attachment 4
`
`Attachment 5
`
`Attachment 6
`
`Attachment 7
`
`Asserted Patent, US 6,597,792
`
`Douglas Winker. Ph.D., CV
`
`Prior Art Patent, US 4.455.675
`
`Prior Art Patent, US 4,572,324
`
`Borwick, Loudspeaker und Headphone Handbook Third
`idition, Focal Press, Sections 14.2.7 and 14.2.8
`
`Prior Art Patent, US 4.003.267
`
`Borwick, Loudspeaker and Headphone Handbook Third
`Edition, Focal Press. Secuion 14.2.3 and Fig. 14.8 and page
`605
`
`Attachment &
`
`Noise and Vibration Control Engineering, Second Idition
`(lohn Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2006) pave 216, 231-32, 255-39
`
`Attachment 9
`
`Prior Art Patent, US 4.027,1 £7
`
`Attachment 10
`
`Attachment I!
`
`Attachment 12
`
`Graphs
`
`Prior Art Patent, US 4.644,58 |
`
`Handbook for Sound Engineers, Second Edition
`(Macmillan Computer Publishing, Copyright 1987 and
`1991), page 119
`
`Attachment 13
`
`Patent, US 6,831,984
`
`Atlachment [4
`
`Prior Art Patent, US 4.809.811
`
`

`

`ATTACHMENT 14
`
`

`

`OUEAESCMSUFFI 18
`
`
`United States Patent
`Sapiejewski et al.
`
`cu Patent Nou:
`(45) Date of Patent:
`
`US 6,597,792 BI
`Jul, 22, 2003
`
`(54) HEADSET NOISE REDUCING
`
`hiventors: Ruan Sapiejewski, Bastun, MA CUS);
`Michael J, Monahan, Franklin, MA
`CUS}
`
`(73) Assignee: Base Curparating, Framingham, MA
`(US}
`
`SASF At
`5,208,848 A
`
`pi
`Park oe eee eeneees S87 EA
`vow 381/783
`5/1903 Sapicfewski
`...
`
`FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`Lp
`
`PASA
`CORBIA
`VRTSGGG A
`
`2904
`p27)8as
`PY P99s
`
`* coed by exanunes
`
` Natice:
`
`Sulijeet fu airy diselainer, the sern of this
`pafem is exicnded ar adsied nuder 35
`US.) 154(h) by1 clays.
`
`Pranary Exauainer-~ boresler W. Eset
`Assivtant Rrayiacy Ulizabell) MeChesue ¥
`(74) Atfamey, Agent ar Firne-tish & Richardsua PC.
`
`(21) Appl Na.: 09/353,425
`
`Filed:
`
`dul. 15, 1999
`
`(SD int Ch? C1OK 11/16; HOdR 2521
`YASS Ch ., A8H71.6; 38 L74; 3813715
`AS13072: 3817441
`Fiekt af Search oc. 81.74, 71.0, 362,
`BSE SPL, 3¥2; ISL12¢
`
`iteforences Cited
`CAS. PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`(37)
`
`ABSTRACT
`
`fa an
`A headsel fas au curenp avi fam apeeiag adjacent
`qunuiar cushivg furnied wit a plurality af upemugs Facing
`fhe tusice af the caremp that acoustically cauples fhe carcup
`vadume ia the cushias volume, A driver is Seated iusicde the
`careup Avil a microphime adjacent
`fo fle driver. Acnive
`uaise reducing ecireniiry iuercugples the driver aucl uiera-
`phone. Au acuushe fuad hap may comprise a wire mesh
`resislive caver anor air mass aciacenp ihe mucraplone is
`cunsirucied ancl arranged fa reduce the effect af resoiauces
`In the carenp value.
`
`GRESS! A *
`
`2 PAs? Sanieiewski
`
`NBL 7
`
`6 Claims, 4 Drawing Sheets
`
`15A
`
`
`
`Qo
`
`
`
`AN\
`
`
`
`EAR
`CUSHION
`
`WIRE MESH
`RESISTIVE
`COVER
`
`
`DRIVER
`PLATE
`
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Jul. 22, 2003
`
`Sheet 1 of 4
`
`US 6,597,792 B1
`
`
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Jal. 22, 2003
`
`Sheet 2 of 4
`
`US 6,597,792 BI
`
` WSL
`
`NOIHSND
`
`Yuva
`
`HSAWSAYIN
`
`AAILSISAY
`
`YAAOD
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Jul. 22, 2003
`
`Sheet 3 of4
`
`US 6,597,792 BI
`
`DRIVER PLATE
`MNT. BOSSES
`
` RESISTIVE COVER
`
`ERS
`
`DRIVER
`PLATE
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Jul. 22, 2003
`
`Sheet 4 of4
`
`US 6,597,792 BI
`
`MASS PORT
`
`#1.8x 8.0 mm CAR CUP
`
`RESISTIVE PORT
`80 x 700 WIRE MESH
`
`
`
`

`

`I
`HEADSIOP NOISE REDECING
`
`US 6.397.792 11
`
`3tnt
`
`‘Phe fueSed) event relilgs fi senegal tt beadse? mpise
`Toney aed dire parhecnindy esaicers peeve] apiparals
`lechanples fia aciively ancen passively dicing the
`1
`-
`Heuse perceived bey die uses ol a Heasise!.
`
`BACKGROUND OF OPH INVENPION
`
`hor hockasvonad teforence is made a EES, pst
`
`
`S,305,. 387, S,20R,808, 538),252, 4080, 271, 4,9
`
`
`4,094,581 aml 4455,075, Reference is aisemade tthe Buse
`
`dehive mise-reicing fi¢adsets that aie mn. Were commer
`cially avatialge Fran Buse Corpcuativa: that are incrpici ated
`fig veferedee herein.
`his aa inpananm olgees af the insemiionr G1 pucrvicke:
`Hnpruved indse-reiducig far headsets.
`
`BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
`
`Acciding tr (he invention, there is an earemp clised at
`the back away fiom ihe ea: al a user amd wpen at ihe Tan
`athacen Meike cae of the aser, There is a diver inside ile
`carcup. Phe carcnp has a cvshamt that is seated) in the Pratt
`uipening and Races) will on car operas Par acesatansndaring
`
`the dae oF the user gui au annnbay ride sharia:
`:
`cipenys farmed Walls
`plncsiny OF ytpenieyls Wa acter:
`
`
`apedings tepically suaced fie cach whic iy af ibe vider al
`the width af an apening wedstied alin the circumference
`ofthe earupening with each apenines baving a ialal with
`generally peopendiedian ke the eiccumivrence uf the eas
`
`hus less than the rachab widhl af ihe arma
`
`wuive neise aoinetion, There is
`a dcuapiaane
`
`the shiver crdepder ta the diver fie eleena