DETAILED ACTION
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
1. The amendment filed October 8, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-11 are pending. Claims 1, 2, 6, and 7 have been amended. Claim 11 is new.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
3. Claims 1, 2, 5-7, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (U.S. Pat. No. 11,317,229 B1) in view of Yoshio (Japanese Pub. No. JP-2555781-Y2), and further in view of Auerbach et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2002/0034315 A1, hereinafter "Auerbach").
Regarding Claim 1, Chen teaches a method for manufacturing a damper having conductive structures with a wide, thin and flat shape (method for manufacturing a loudspeaker having a damper with woven wires, Fig. 1, Col. 5, Lns. 17-22), comprising the following steps:
arranging a plurality of warp yarns and at least two of the multifilament threads at intervals, wherein the warp yarns and the at least two multifilament threads extend straightly and are parallel to each (a plurality of warp yarns 11, a plurality of first wires 123 and a plurality of second wires 133 are arranged at intervals. The warp yarns 11, the first wires 123 and the second wires 133 extend straight and are parallel to each other. The first wires 123 are interwoven to form a multifilament first wire group 12; and the second wires 133 are interwoven to form a multifilament second wire group 13, Figs. 1, 2 and 12, Col. 5, Lns. 23-37, Col. 8, Lns. 15-30);
weaving a base material by interweaving a plurality of weft yarns with the warp yarns and the at least two multifilament threads (in the weaving step S2, a plurality of weft yarns 14 are arranged at intervals and interwoven with the warp yarns 11, the first wires 123 and the second wires 133, so as to form a base material 10 by weaving, Figs. 1, 3, 13 and 14, Col. 5, Lns. 38-48);
impregnating the base material in a resin solution (in the impregnating step S3, the base material 10 is impregnated in a resin solution 21, Figs. 1 and 4, Col. 5, Lns. 49-53);
drying the base material (base material 10 is dried in the drying step S4, Figs. 1 and 4, Col. 54-63);
thermoforming a main body of the damper on the base material, and at least two conductive structures with the wide, thin and flat shape on the at least two multifilament threads, simultaneously (in step S5, a thermoforming device 40 is used to form damper 63 with the two multifilament conductive structures on base material 10, Figs. 1 and 4, Col. 5, Ln. 64 thru Col. 6, Ln. 12); and
separating the main body from the base material, and the at least two conductive structures from the at least two one multifilament threads, simultaneously (in step S6, cutting device 50 is used to separate damper 63 form the base material 10, Figs. 1 and 4, Col. 6, Lns. 35-40).
Chen fails to explicitly teach forming a plurality of metal yarns by covering an outer surface of a core thread with a metal layer for each metal yarn;
weaving multifilament threads with a wide, thin and flat shape by interweaving a plurality of first interwoven parts of the plurality of metal yarns with a plurality of second interwoven parts of the plurality of metal yarns for each multifilament thread; wherein both ends of each of the first interwoven parts are respectively connected to one of the second interwoven parts, the first interwoven parts are parallel to each other, the second interwoven parts are parallel to each other, and an extension direction of the first interwoven parts is different from that of the second interwoven parts;
arranging a plurality of warp yarns and at least two of the multifilament threads at intervals with at least two of the warp yarns located between the at least two multifilament threads, wherein the warp yarns and the at least two multifilament threads extend straightly and are parallel to each;
wherein a distance between each multifilament thread and a nearest warp yarn thereof is greater than a distance between two adjacent warp yarns located between the at least two multifilament threads.
However, Yoshio teaches forming a plurality of metal yarns by covering an outer surface of a core thread with a metal layer for each metal yarn (metal yarns 10 are formed by covering core thread 11 with copper foil 12, Fig. 4, Col. 4, Lns. 21-48);
weaving multifilament threads with a wide, thin and flat shape by interweaving a plurality of first interwoven parts of the plurality of metal yarns with a plurality of second interwoven parts of the plurality of metal yarns for each multifilament thread (metal yarns 10 are braided to form first and second tinsel wire 8 which is than braided into a flat net shape using multiple pieces, Figs. 1 and 4, Col. 4, Lns. 21-48); wherein both ends of each of the first interwoven parts are respectively connected to one of the second interwoven parts, the first interwoven parts are parallel to each other, the second interwoven parts are parallel to each other, and an extension direction of the first interwoven parts is different from that of the second interwoven parts (the braided net shape of interwoven tinsel wire 8 with ends connected has a portion extending in the first direction and a portion extending in a second direction with the portions of each tinsel wire 8 in the first direction parallel to each other and the portions of each tinsel wire 8 in the second direction parallel to each other, Figs. 1 and 4, Col. 4, Lns. 21-48).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method (as taught by Chen) to include covering the core thread with metal layer and interweaving the multifilament threads to form parallel portions extending in the first and second directions (as taught by Yoshio). Doing so will enable the conductive structure keep its suppleness and improve conductivity.
However, Auerbach teaches arranging a plurality of warp yarns and at least two of the multifilament threads at intervals with at least two of the warp yarns located between the at least two multifilament threads, wherein the warp yarns and the at least two multifilament threads extend straightly and are parallel to each (warp yarns and two multifilament threads 62 with multiple warp yarns between the two multifilament threads 62 are arranged at intervals with the warp yarns and the two multifilament threads extending straightly parallel, Figs. 4a and 4b, Paras. [0052]-[0056]);
wherein a distance between each multifilament thread and a nearest warp yarn thereof is greater than a distance between two adjacent warp yarns located between the at least two multifilament threads (a distance between each multifilament thread 62 and a nearest warp yarn is greater than a distance between two adjacent warp yarns located between the multifilament threads 62, Figs. 4a and 4b).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method (as taught by Chen in view of Yoshio) to include the warp yarns between two multifilament threads arranged in parallel with the distance between multifilament thread and warp yarn greater than the distance between adjacent warp yarns (as taught by Auerbach). Doing so will create a textile structure providing mechanical stability, controlled flexibility and effective acoustic damping.
PNG
media_image1.png
501
773
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Modified Fig. 4a (U.S. Pub. No. 2002/0034315 A1)
Regarding Claim 2, Chen in view of Yoshio, and further in view of Auerbach teach wherein a first elastic adjustment area is defined between portions of the weft yarns at a first side of each multifilament thread and portions of the weft yarns at the warp yarn closest to the first side (Auerbach, a first elastic adjustment area can be seen between the weft yarns at a first side of the multifilament threads and the weft yarns at the warp yarn closest to the first side, Fig. 4a, see also modified Fig. 4a), a second elastic adjustment area is defined between portions of the weft yarns at a second side of each multifilament thread and portions of the weft yarns at the warp yarn closest to the second side (Auerbach, a second elastic adjustment area can be seen between the weft yarns at a second side of the multifilament threads and the weft yarns at the warp yarn closest to the second side, Fig. 4a, see also modified Fig. 4a), widths of the first elastic adjustment area and the second elastic adjustment area are equal to each other (Auerbach, widths of the first and second elastic adjustment areas are equal, Fig. 4a, see also modified Fig. 4a), and the first elastic adjustment area and the second elastic adjustment area between the at least two multifilament threads are separated by at least the distance between two adjacent warp yarns between the at least two multifilament threads (Auerbach, first and second elastic adjustment area between the two multifilament threads are separated by at least the distance between two adjacent warp yarns between the two multifilament threads, Fig. 4a, see also modified Fig. 4a).
Regarding Claim 5, Chen in view of Yoshio, and further in view of Auerbach teach wherein the metal yarns (Yoshio, metal yarns 10, Fig. 4, Col. 4, Lns. 21-48) are in a count of seven (Chen, Figs. 15 and 17 show a count of more than seven).
Regarding Claim 6, it is similarly rejected as Claim 1. The damper is found in Chen (Figs. 4, 7 and 8).
Regarding Claim 7, it is similarly rejected as Claim 2. The damper is found in Chen (Figs. 4, 7 and 8).
Regarding Claim 10, it is similarly rejected as Claim 5, The damper is found in Chen (Figs. 4, 7 and 8).
4. Claims 3 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (U.S. Pat. No. 11,317,229 B1) in view of Yoshio (Japanese Pub. No. JP-2555781-Y2) in view of Auerbach et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2002/0034315 A1, hereinafter "Auerbach"), and further in view of Harris et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2010/0046788 A1, hereinafter "Harris").
Regarding Claim 3, Chen in view of Yoshio, and further in view of Auerbach fail to explicitly teach wherein after the step of separating the main body from the base material, the method further comprises: soldering with tin at both ends of the conductive structures to form at least four tin soldering parts.
However, Harris teaches soldering with tin at both ends of the conductive structures to form at least four tin soldering parts (lead wire 13 extends outwardly from the outer radial edge of spider 1 is connected to terminal 12 by tinned metal soldering forming solder ball 22, Fig. 6, Para. [0022]; the inner portion of lead 13 is connected to the voice coil wire 19 by tin metal soldering, Fig. 7, Para. [0023]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the damper having conductive structures (as taught by Chen in view of Yoshio, and further in view of Auerbach) to include soldering both ends of the conductive structures to form four tin soldering parts (as taught by Harris). Doing so creates a strong, low-resistance electrical connection ensuring optimal signal flow.
Regarding Claim 8, it is similarly rejected as Claim 3, The damper is found in Chen (Figs. 4, 7 and 8).
5. Claims 4 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (U.S. Pat. No. 11,317,229 B1) in view of Yoshio (Japanese Pub. No. JP-2555781-Y2) in view of Auerbach et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2002/0034315 A1, hereinafter "Auerbach"), and further in view of Iimura (Japanese Pub. No. JP 01269397 A).
Regarding Claim 4, Chen in view of Yoshio, and further in view of Auerbach fail to explicitly teach wherein a material of the core thread is cotton.
However, Iimura teaches wherein a material of the core thread is cotton (gold thread wire 2 made by twisting together several copper foil wires made by wrapping copper foil around a core of cotton thread, Fig. 1, Para. [0001]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the damper having conductive structures (as taught by Chen in view of Yoshio, and further in view of Auerbach) to include the cotton core thread (as taught by Iimura). Doing so creates a strong and flexible damper conductive structure.
Regarding Claim 9, it is similarly rejected as Claim 4, The damper is found in Chen (Figs. 4, 7 and 8).
6. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (U.S. Pat. No. 11,317,229 B1) in view of Yoshio (Japanese Pub. No. JP-2555781-Y2) in view of Auerbach et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2002/0034315 A1, hereinafter "Auerbach"), and further in view of Ohara (U.S. Pub. No. 2006/0159300 A1).
Regarding Claim 11, Chen in view of Yoshio, and further in view of Auerbach teach wherein in the step of thermoforming the main body of the damper on the base material, the base material is placed between a first mold and a second mold (Chen, base material 10 is placed between first mold 411 and second mold 412, Fig. 4, Col. 5, Ln. 64 thru Col. 6, Ln. 18), and when the first mold and the second mold fit together, a pressing surface of the first mold and a forming surface of the second mold jointly pressurize the base material to form a plurality of wave portions and a center hole pre-cut area of the main body (Chen, first mold 411 with pressing surface and second mold 412 with forming surface are fit together and pressurize the base material 10 to form a plurality of wave portions [seen on damper 63 after the thermoforming process] and a center hole pre-cut area, Fig. 4, Col. 5, Ln. 64 thru Col. 6, Ln. 18); and wherein each wave portion comprises a crest and a trough (Chen, each wave portion comprises a crest and trough as seen on damper 63 after the thermoforming process, Fig. 4, Col. 5, Ln. 64 thru Col. 6, Ln. 18), and the pressing surface and the forming surface jointly pressurize the at least two multifilament threads to form the at least two conductive structures (Chen, the pressing and forming surfaces of mold 411 and 412 pressurizes the wires 123 and 133 to form the conductive structures, Fig. 4, Col. 5, Ln. 64 thru Col. 6, Ln. 18).
Chen in view of Yoshio, and further in view of Auerbach fail to explicitly teach wherein in the step of thermoforming the main body of the damper on the base material, the base material is placed between a first mold and a second mold in a manner that the at least two multifilament threads are aligned with two grooves of the first mold and two grooves of the second mold, the at least two multifilament threads are located in the grooves of the first mold and the grooves of the second mold.
However, Ohara teaches wherein in the step of thermoforming the main body of the damper on the base material, the base material is placed between a first mold and a second mold in a manner that the at least two multifilament threads are aligned with two grooves of the first mold and two grooves of the second mold, the at least two multifilament threads are located in the grooves of the first mold and the grooves of the second mold (mould halves 3, 4 have half-circle slots 31, 41 arranged on the mould surface to allow lead wires 2 to be aligned with the slots 31, 41 when the upper and lower mould halves 3, 4 are combined, Figs. 4 and 8, Paras. [0022]-[0025]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the damper having conductive structures (as taught by Chen in view of Yoshio, and further in view of Auerbach) to include the first and second mold having two grooves that align with the multifilament threads (as taught by Ohara). Doing so prevents the press mold from damaging the multifilament threads in the forming process (Ohara Para. [0025]).
Response to Arguments
7. Applicant's arguments filed October 8, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding independent Claims 1 and 6, Applicant argues (see applicant’s remark, pages 9-12), applicant respectfully points out that the damper structure and the method disclosed in Chen are significantly different from the present invention. It is evident that the present invention differs from Chen in that Chen neither teaches at least two warp yarns located between the two multifilament wire groups 12 and 13 nor suggests the two elastic adjustment areas 17 and 18 be separated. To the contrary, the present invention requires that at least two warp yarns be arranged between the two multifilament threads so that the first and second elastic adjustment areas are separated by at least the distance between two adjacent warp yarns.
The present invention further requires that the distance D2 between two warp yarns located between the two multifilament threads 20 is less than the distance Dl between each multifilament thread 20 and the warp yarns 30 on both sides. Because Chen never suggests at least two warp yarns located between the two multifilament wire groups, such a distance requirement is certainly beyond the disclosure of Chen.
Although the examiner cites Figs. 15 and 17 and col. 6, lines 13-34 as teaching "the distance between multifilament thread 12, 13 and the warp yarns 11 is greater than a distance between warp yarns 11" in the office action, the two multifilament wire groups 12 and 13 of Figs. 15 and 17 are interwoven together irregularly as can be seen in the cited disclosure. There is no warp yam located between the two multifilament wire groups 12 and 13, let alone the distance discussed above.
With regards to the disclosure of Yoshio, it is cited by the examiner as teaching "forming a plurality of metal yams by covering an outer surface of a core thread with a metal layer for each metal yam" and "weaving multifilament threads by interweaving a plurality of metal yams". However, none of the unique features of the present invention discussed above is either taught or suggested by Yoshio.
Applicant amends claim 1 to clearly recite the unique structure pointed above to distinguish over Chen and Yoshio in a patentable way to overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103. More specifically, the amended claim 1 recites the limitations of "at least two of the warp yarns located between the at least two multifilament threads" and "a distance between each multifilament thread and a nearest warp yarn thereof is greater than a distance between two adjacent warp yarns located between the at least two multifilament threads" that are neither disclosed nor suggested by Chen and Yoshio, each taken alone or in combination. Applicant respectfully submits that the amended claim 1 should be allowable and claims 2-5 should also be allowable by virtue of dependency.
For the same reasons discussed above, claim 6 is also amended to include the allowable limitations highlighted above. Therefore, claim 6 and the dependent claims 7-10 should all be allowable.
In response to applicants argument above, independent Claims 1 and 6 have been rejected on a new ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Yoshio, and further in view of Auerbach.
Auerbach teaches at least two warp yarns located between the two multifilament wire (Figs. 4a and 4b, Paras. [0052]-[0056]; see also modified Fig. 4a); two elastic adjustment areas separated by at least the distance between two adjacent warp yarns (Fig. 4a; see also modified Fig. 4a); the distance between two warp yarns located between the two multifilament threads is less than the distance between each multifilament thread and the warp yarns on both sides (Figs. 4a and 4b; see also modified Fig. 4a).
The combination of the teachings of Chen in view of Yoshio, and further in view of Auerbach renders independent Claims 1 and 6 obvious.
The rejections of Claims 1 and 6 based on a new ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Yoshio, and further in view of Auerbach are maintained.
Regarding dependent Claims 2 and 7, Applicant argues (see applicant’s remark, page 12), the amended claim 2 recites the limitation that "the first elastic adjustment area and the second elastic adjustment area between the at least two multifilament threads are separated by at least the distance between two adjacent warp yarns between the at least two multifilament threads". Because none of the cited references teaches or suggests the limitation, the amended claim 2 should be allowable by itself in addition to being dependent on an allowable base claim. For the same reason, the amended claim 7 should also be allowable by itself in addition to being dependent on an allowable base claim.
In response to applicants argument above, dependent Claims 2 and 7 have been rejected on a new ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Yoshio, and further in view of Auerbach.
Auerbach teaches the first elastic adjustment area and the second elastic adjustment area between the at least two multifilament threads are separated by at least the distance between two adjacent warp yarns between the at least two multifilament threads (Fig. 4a; see also modified Fig. 4a).
The rejections of Claims 2 and 7 based on a new ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Yoshio, and further in view of Auerbach are maintained.
Dependent Claims 3 and 8 have been rejected on a new ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Yoshio in view of Auerbach, and further in view of Harris.
The rejections of Claims 3 and 8 based on a new ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Yoshio in view of Auerbach, and further in view of Harris are maintained.
Dependent Claims 4 and 9 have been rejected on a new ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Yoshio in view of Auerbach, and further in view of Iimura.
The rejections of Claims 4 and 9 based on a new ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Yoshio in view of Auerbach, and further in view of Iimura are maintained.
Dependent Claims 5 and 10 have been rejected on a new ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Yoshio, and further in view of Auerbach.
The rejections of Claims 4 and 9 based on a new ground of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Yoshio, and further in view of Auerbach are maintained.
Regarding dependent new Claim 11, Applicant argues (see applicant’s remark, page 13), new claim 11 is presented to claim a novel step of thermoforming the main body of the damper of the present invention in which "the at least two multifilament threads are aligned with two grooves of the first mold and two grooves of the second mold" that is not disclosed by any of the cited references. Claim 11 should also be allowable.
In response to applicant’s argument above, new dependent Claim 11 has been rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Yoshio in view of Auerbach, and further in view of Ohara.
Ohara teaches the at least two multifilament threads are aligned with two grooves of the first mold and two grooves of the second mold (Figs. 4 and 8, Paras. [0022]-[0025]).
The combination of the teachings of Chen in view of Yoshio in view of Auerbach, and further in view of Ohara renders Claim 11 obvious.
Conclusion
8. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHIMEZIE E BEKEE whose telephone number is (571)272-0202. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7.30-5.
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, Duc Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-7503. 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.
/CHIMEZIE EZERIWE BEKEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2691
/DUC NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2691