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 .
Response to Amendment
This is in response to applicant's amendment which was filed on 12/24/2025 has been entered. Claims 1 and 9 have been amended. Claims 5-8 have been cancelled. No claims has been added. Claims 1-4, 10-14 are still pending in this application, with claim 1 being independent and claims 10-14 withdrawn from consideration.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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) 1-2, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loeppert (US 2015/0304753) in view of Fu (US 2022/0340409) in further view of Chen (US 2022/0408208, Citations will be from provisional application 63/202596).
Regarding claim 1, Loeppert teaches A speaker device comprising: a first acoustic medium (Loeppert figure 2, path 103, port 106); a second acoustic medium (Loeppert figure 2, volume between lid 104 and MEMS 108, or outside the frame); a substrate in contact with the acoustic medium (Loeppert figure 2, base 102); a liner disposed on the substrate (Loeppert figure 2, solder mask 152 or barrier 112. With BRI most components of base 102 can be considered a liner); and a MEMS speaker unit (Loeppert ¶0003, “assemblies include microphones and speakers”) attached directly to the liner (Loeppert figure 2, MEMS apparatus 108 is attached to mask 152 directly), wherein a volume defined between the MEMS speaker unit, the liner and the substrate, includes a first port providing acoustic coupling between the MEMS speaker unit and the first acoustic medium (Loeppert figure 2, path 103, port 106), a lid connected to the substrate (Loeppert figure 2, lid 104) and covering the MEMS speaker unit and in contact with at least a second acoustic volume (Loeppert figure 2, lid 104), however does not explicitly teach the MEMS apparatus is a MEMS speaker, wherein the lid includes a second port providing acoustic coupling between the MEMS speaker unit and the second acoustic medium.
Fu teaches the MEMS apparatus is a MEMS speaker (Fu ¶0002); wherein the lid (Fu figure 1, lid 60. With BRI, the lid of the MEMS device that covers the components of the microspeaker can be considered the lid as well) includes a second port providing acoustic coupling between the MEMS speaker unit and the second acoustic medium (Fu figure 1, lid 60 with venting hole 61).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the known MEMS speaker of Fu to modify the known MEMS microphone of Loeppert to achieve the predictable result of improved sound performance in high and low frequency ranges (Fu ¶0015).
Chen teaches wherein the lid includes a second port providing acoustic coupling between the MEMS speaker unit and the second acoustic medium (Chen figure 14, ¶0086, “ports O3 on package cap 185 and second sound inlet O2 of microphone enclosure 152).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the known technique of Chen to improve the known speaker device of Loeppert in view of Fu to achieve the predictable result of a smaller MEMS device (Chen ¶0005).
Regarding claim 2, Loeppert in view of Fu in further view of Chen teaches wherein the liner has a minimum thickness of 20 micron (Loeppert ¶0113, “The barrier 2112 can have a wide variety of dimensions. In one illustrative example, the barrier 2112 is approximately 0.5 mm long by approximately 0.5 mm wide by approximately 0.25 mm thick placed under the MEMS apparatus 2108 in the cavity over the port 2106”).
Regarding claim 9, Loeppert in view of Fu in further view of Chen teaches where the volume defined by the lid is segregated into at least two distinct acoustic volumes and the liner includes an acoustic port coupled into at least one of the two distinct volumes (Loeppert figure 2, volume between lid and MEMS 108, and port 106).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loeppert (US 2015/0304753) in view of Fu (US 2022/0340409) in further view of Chen (US 2022/0408208, Citations will be from provisional application 63/202596) in further view of Poulsen (US 2014/0340366).
Regarding claims 3, Loeppert in view of Fu in further view of Chen does not explicitly teach wherein the MEMS speaker unit is configured to generate sound from modulated ultrasound using active demodulation.
Poulsen teaches wherein the MEMS speaker unit is configured to generate sound from modulated ultrasound using active demodulation (Poulsen ¶0051 “MEMS speaker” and ¶0062).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the known technique of Poulsen to improve the known speaker device of Loeppert in view of Fu in further view of Chen to achieve the predictable result of minimizing sampling bandwidth and reducing power consumption(Poulsen ¶0047).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loeppert (US 2015/0304753) in view of Fu (US 2022/0340409) in further view of Chen (US 2022/0408208, Citations will be from provisional application 63/202596) in further view of Angel (US 2021/0274291).
Regarding claim 4, Loeppert in view of Fu in further view of Chen does not explicitly teach wherein the volume defined between the MEMS speaker unit the liner and the substrate is at least 0.05 mm.sup.3.
Angel teaches wherein the volume defined between the MEMS speaker unit the liner and the substrate is at least 0.05 mm.sup.3 (Angel ¶0192, Length of 700μm with diameter 450μm yields a volume more than double 0.05 mm.sup.3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the volume between the MEMS speaker unit, the liner and the substrate of Loeppert in view of Fu in further view of Chen to achieve the desired frequency characteristics since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new ground of rejection in the current office action.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NORMAN YU whose telephone number is (571)270-7436. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Fri 11am-7pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ahmad Matar can be reached on 571-272-7488. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Va. 22313-1450
Or faxed to:
(571) 273-8300, for formal communications intended for entry and for
informal or draft communications, please label “PROPOSED” or “DRAFT”.
Hand-delivered responses should be brought to:
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Arlington, VA 22314
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/NORMAN YU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693