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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election with traverse of Species A and claims 1-14 in the reply filed on 04/28/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 19,23,27,31,38,39 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected specie as indicated by applicants reply, applicant indicated that there is no-undue burden on examiner for species B and C. Examiner indicates that species B and C are mutually exclusive species and would require more search for different structures and shapes searching different configurations THEREFORE the election still stands.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 11/26/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-14 under USC 103 have been fully considered and are NOT persuasive.
Applicant argues “Lucon does not disclose “voice coil attached to a non-moving mass configures as a housing, that does not move during operation, and magnet attached to moving mass that does move during operation…Lucon teaches bobbin and magnet move.. Lucon fails to teach Rigidly and Directly coupled to the housing”
Examiner respectfully disagrees and points out that the fact that the “bobbin and magnet moving or not moving is not claimed, and that the housing as taught in Lucon is not moving, and the bobbin being connected to the housing which according to Lucon is via other components (130) moves or does not move is not explicitly claimed in claim, and Lucon does teach non-moving mass (housing, 131,132, rigid housing) rigidly coupled to the one or more coil assemblies (160,170), Examiner also indicates that secondary references Lee was used to teach the specific limitation where Lee teaches the housing (10) RIGIDLY and DIRECTLY (see annotated fig.3) coupled to the coil assembly (40), coil assembly includes coils and bobbin or other components that are connected to a coil “assembly”, therefore Lee still teaches the claim as indicated, Lee provides a direct connection to the coil and housing. The claims do not explicitly recite that the coil assembly is NON-Moving, nor does it require it to be moving, it is just a coil assembly which is an assembly that can be interpreted as any number of parts that are connected to the coil making an assembly, a: the fitting together of manufactured parts into a complete machine, structure, or unit of a machine, that is connected to a ”Non-Moving mass” which in this case is a housing, as in Lucon and Lee combined together, the “COIL Assembly” isn’t required to be “NON-Moving” or limited to certain assembly. The movement in claim 1 is of “magnet assemblies” move relative to the housing that is NON Moving, which is already taught in Lucon Structure.
Therefore, Lucon in view of Lee teach the combination of claims as indicated below.
Inventorship
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lucon (US PG Pub 20160236162 hereinafter “Lucon”) in view of Lucon implementation of Lucon Fig.11 (US PG Pub 20160236162 hereinafter “LuconFig.11”) in further view of Lee (US PG PUB 20110133577 hereinafter “Lee”).
Re-claim 1, Lucon discloses a resonance-enabled machine (100), comprising: multiple voice coil actuators (P[0049]) each comprising a coil assembly (160,170) and one or more magnet assemblies (190), one or more moving masses (110,120,180) rigidly coupled to the one or more magnet assemblies (190), and one or more pluralities of springs (135-141,141) coupling the non-moving mass (131,132) to the one or more moving masses (110a) and between moving masses in machines comprising two or more moving masses (110a,110b,120a,120b).
Lucon Fig.11 shows multiple voice coil actuators, therefore the actuator 100 would have more than one device of the actuator therefore they will be connected to each other, and parts will be one or more than one actuator as suggested by Lucon, to include actuator of Fig.5 in Location A and B, therefore making additional voice coil actuators at different sections, for size up or down the resonant system, see P[0049] from Lucon and provide extra energy/power to the system, P[0050], Lucon.
Lucon fails to explicitly teach that non-moving mass configured as housing RIGIDLY and DIRECTLY coupled to the coil assembly.
However, Lee teaches that non-moving mass configured as housing (10) RIGIDLY and DIRECTLY (see annotated fig.3) coupled to the coil assembly (40, assmelby of components connected to the coil 40 along with other parts are part of an assembly: a: the fitting together of manufactured parts into a complete machine, structure, or unit of a machine).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the device of Lucon wherein that non-moving mass configured as housing RIGIDLY and DIRECTLY coupled to the coil assembly as shown by Lee which directly connects housing to the moving part therefore easier to fabricate and simplify manufacturing structure having direct connection and facilitate so no mass collide with casing (Lee, P[0077], P[0079).
PNG
media_image1.png
584
571
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
621
691
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
495
870
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
385
373
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Re-claim 2, Lucon discloses the machine of claim 1, comprising: the non-moving mass (131,132) as a housing (frame mass 131 connected to the ground 132 as housing); the multiple voice coil actuators (P[0049]), each comprising a coil assembly (160,170) rigidly disposed on the non-moving mass (131,132; and the one or more moving masses (180,120) rigidly coupled to the one or more magnet assemblies (190), each of which moves relative to the housing (housing is actually stable and rigid, and movement of the devices in both ways makes it moving) further coupled to the housing (floor) by a plurality of housing-to-moving mass springs ( 140 ), and, when the machine comprises more than one moving mass (masses of 120, or 130a-c are moving), further coupled to another of the one or more moving masses (any of 120a,120b,120c) by a plurality of moving-mass-to-moving-mass springs (140, see annotated Fig.4, P[0052], one or more additional voice actuators could be use, P[0029], one or more frame to rigid structure spring can be connected to frame 132,131,via 130, etc., see LuconFig.11).
Lucon fails to explicitly teach that non-moving mass configured as housing RIGIDLY and DIRECTLY coupled to the coil assembly.
However, Lee teaches that non-moving mass configured as housing (10) RIGIDLY and DIRECTLY (see annotated fig.3) coupled to the coil assembly (40).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the device of Lucon wherein that non-moving mass configured as housing RIGIDLY and DIRECTLY coupled to the coil assembly as shown by Lee which directly connects the housing to the moving part therefore easier to fabricate and simplify manufacturing structure having direct connection and facilitate so no mass collide with casing (Lee, P[0077], P[0079).
Re-claim 3, Lucon as modified discloses the machine of claim 1, wherein kinetic energy stored in the machine by the one or more moving masses configured as housing (120a-120c,110,180 are all surrounding the coil, part of the housing is non-moving mass, standoffs 152, housing, flooring and wall)) is directly balanced by potential energy (see Fig.4, springs hold the structure together at rest) stored within the one or more pluralities of springs (139,138, payload springs).
Re-claim 4, Lucon as modified discloses the machine of claim 2, wherein forces from the moving masses (110,120) are transmitted to the non-moving mass (131,132, , see Fig.4) through the plurality of housing-to-moving mass springs (140,141), and the transmitted forces within the non-moving mass internally sum to zero or near zero (non-moving masses are stable, floor, are not moving, so forces are near zero) , resulting in a net resulting force amplitude onto the non-moving mass at zero or near zero (floor is rigid, therefore force is going to be near zero, at least or is close to it, since floor 131, 132 is not moving and is rigid wall or structure, see Fig.4).
Re-claim 5, Lucon as modified discloses the machine of claim 1 operating on a system mode shape using lumped masses (P[0028], 100 mix various materials through oscillation of multiple masses).
Re-claim 6, Lucon as modified discloses the machine of claim 2, wherein the housing (housing, flooring and wall) comprises a plurality of plates (130a-c,131) and a plurality of standoffs (152).
Re-claim 7, Lucon as modified discloses the machine of claim 1, wherein the one or more moving masses (120,110,180) comprise a mass assembly (see Fig.3) comprising a mass plate (120b), a plurality of spacers (see Fig.8, spacer, or 123), and at least one ring (ring of 180).
Re-claim 8, Lucon as modified discloses the machine of claim 1, wherein the multiple voice coil actuators (P[0049], L.1-4) each comprises a coil assembly (170), a magnet (190), and a magnet housing (180).
Re-claim 9, Lucon as modified discloses the machine of claim 1, further comprising one or more selected from the group consisting of a signal generator, oscilloscope, signal conditioner, amplifier (P[0050], amplifier), current probe, voltage probe, and accelerometer.
Re-claim 10, Lucon as modified discloses the machine of claim 1, having a resonance frequency (resonance system, operates at resonance frequency), and when the machine is in resonance, an input oscillatory force (force from input device) is in phase with an oscillatory velocity of each of the one or two masses (120, or 110, or other moving masses have velocity when moving, therefore, oscillation of multiple system of masses form resonant system, which also resonance frequency, see P[0028], the structure of the resonant system typically has masses which would have at least one forces by vibration to move, resonate, etc.).
Re-claim 11, Lucon as modified discloses the machine of claim 1 configured to impart forces onto a structure (structure of a wall or floor, connected to springs, forces to structure, P[0005], frame mass is coupled to rigid structure by spring, forces from mass connected to springs connected to walls etc..).
Re-claim 12, Lucon as modified discloses the machine of claim 1 configured to operate as a vibrator (vibratory mixer, or vibratory pumper, P[0012]), vacuum pump, compressor, jackhammer, demolition hammer, pile driver, post pounder, hammer, soil compactor, or transformer.
Re-claim 13, Lucon as modified discloses the machine of claim 1, wherein the coil assembly (160) of each of the multiple voice coil actuators (P[049) has little (some motion) to no motion (especially at rest) compared to the one or more moving masses (120, compared to 120, the coil assembly has little motion, 120 which are supports to magnet structure 190).
Re-claim 14, Lucon as modified discloses the machine of claim 12 configured to operate as a vibrator (vibratory mixer, or vibratory pumper, P[0012]), comprising: the non-moving mass configured as housing (floor or wall of 131, or 132, is part of housing); a first moving mass (any one of 120) coupled to the housing by one or more pluralities of springs (any of 138); a coil assembly (170,160) disposed on and coupled to the housing (coupled to 132,131, via 130); and a voice coil magnet assembly (180) coupled to the first moving mass (120, see Fig.4).
Lucon fails to explicitly teach that non-moving mass configured as housing RIGIDLY and DIRECTLY coupled to the coil assembly.
However, Lee teaches that non-moving mass configured as housing (10) RIGIDLY and DIRECTLY (see annotated fig.3) coupled to the coil assembly (40).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the device of Lucon wherein that non-moving mass configured as housing RIGIDLY and DIRECTLY coupled to the coil assembly as shown by Lee which directly connects the housing to the moving part therefore easier to fabricate and simplify manufacturing structure having direct connection and facilitate so no mass collide with casing (Lee, P[0077], P[0079).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure in PTO892.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAGED M ALMAWRI whose telephone number is (313)446-6565. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christopher M. Koehler can be reached on 5712723560. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.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.
/MAGED M ALMAWRI/ Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834