DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendment filed February 10th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 21 and 26 have been amended. Claims 25 and 27 have been cancelled. Claims 41-42 have been added.
The Section 102/103 rejections over Aoyama as the primary reference have been withdrawn due to Applicant’s amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed February 10th, 2026 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the Applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 21-24, 26, 28, & 41-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the Applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 21, the claim is directed to a plurality of openings in lines 5-7 but then then claim is directed to “the opening extends” creating an antecedent basis issue.
Claims 22-24, 26, 28, and 41-42 have been rejected for being dependent on indefinite claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 21-24, 26, 28, & 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as anticipated by Do et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0134966 A1) (hereinafter “Do”) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Do in view of Bladt et al. (U.S. Pub. 2022/0369010 A1) (hereinafter “Bladt”).
Regarding claims 21-24, Do teaches a headliner (shaped part) comprising a decorative layer comprising a skin comprising, in sequence front a front side to a rear side, a decoration material such as leather (stabilization layer) and/or a graphic or logo aesthetic layer (Fig. 10B [1012]), optionally bonded to a middle foam layer (stabilization layer), and then bonded to a metal top plate (Fig. 10B [212]), wherein each of the layers is perforated [0054, 0055-0056, 0060, 0074] and arranged on a carrier (Fig. 10B [204]) with a plurality of aligned through-holes defining a grill for the passing of air/sound [0025-0026, 0056] defining a cross-section of many shapes such as polygonal or circular, wherein the carrier further comprises a void (Fig. 10B [210]) therein a microphone and/or speaker module/housing (Fig. 10B [214]).
Alternatively, in the event that the leather or the middle foam layer do not form the stabilization layer as claimed.
Bladt teaches a loudspeaker grill cover element with a carrier element for an automotive trim panel, wherein the cover element is made of a sustainable organic material such as cork leather [0003, 0042], wherein cork leather is typically a laminate consisting of a cork decorative layer and a fabric carrier [0061].
It would have been obvious to and motivated for one of ordinary skill in the art to at the time of invention to look to the art for optimal and sustainable (decorative) leathers in automotive interior trims, specifically usable as loudspeaker grilles.
Regarding claims 26, 28, and 42, the skin layer and the middle foam layer may be bonded or flame laminated, wherein the bonding is inherently or obviously provided via an adhesive layer [0033, 0055], wherein the skin layer is in contact and may be further attached to the top plate via known methods such as direct adherence, like that of the housing being directly adhered to the top plate (defining a sound-transmissive adhesive layer) [0043, 0045, 0051, 0059].
Claims 21-24, 26, 28, & 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Price (U.S. Pub. No. 2007/0187173 A1) (hereinafter “Price”) in view of Teubert et al. (DE 102015004626 A1) (hereinafter “Teubert”), Lin (CN 10386262 A) (hereinafter “Lin”), and Kang et al. (KR 2016-0121869 A) (hereinafter “Kang”).
Regarding claims 21-24, 26, and 42, Price teaches a composite unit (All Figs. [17]) comprising a decorative sheet material (All Figs. [16]) such as leather or wood, such as a veneer [0014] that may further comprise further comprise an aesthetic outer surface pattern [0021], which is then rear injection molded by a plastic to form a substrate/carrier (All Figs. [12]) that may comprise mounting components and a shape that may be bent/curved [0023-0024, Fig. 5] having at least one acoustical region comprising a through-opening (All Figs. [14]) in the carrier, wherein aligned with the opening in a plan view, the decorative sheet material comprises a plurality of through holes forming a grille pattern that may be polygonal and/or circular [0015-0017, Fig. 1D], wherein the opening further contains a loudspeaker therein adjacent the plurality of holes (All Figs. [18]).
Teubert teaches a speaker grille cover for motor vehicles comprising a layer of wood veneer (All Figs. [16]) that may be dyed or painted, wherein the wood veneer preferably comprises a backing layer of aluminum/metal (All Figs. [14]) to undergo the perforation process of forming the grille pattern (All Figs. [12]) and also subsequent shaping processes such as bending [0006-0009, 0013, 0021-0024].
Lin teaches a rear injection molded component comprises a decorative layer of natural wood veneer that is bent/curved before or during injection molding [0052], wherein the wood veneer layer (All Figs. [1]) is bonded via an adhesive layer (All Figs. [2]) to a support layer (All Figs. [3]) to form a composite wood veneer (unit) before injection molding [0013], wherein the support layer is a nonwoven fabric, plastic film, or a thin aluminum sheet [0018, 0051], wherein the portion formed by injection molding may comprise mounting components [0022].
Kang teaches real/natural wood veneer decorative parts that are rear injection molded [0001-0005, 0009-0010], wherein composite wood veneer in sequence from the front surface to the rear surface comprises a deco(rative) wood veneer layer (All Figs. [40]), a nonwoven fabric (All Figs. [30]), and a reinforcing layer (All Figs. [20]), each layer being optionally adhesively laminated [0022], preferably comprising aluminum to ensure durability and being lightweight [0032-0033], wherein the nonwoven fabric is preferably added between the outer deco veneer layer and the reinforcing layer to improve over the prior art [0006-0007] due to the lower unit cost due to a reduction in weight and cracking and an increase in ease of shaping/molding [0014-0015, 0025, 0035-0036, 0046]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a speaker grille being a composite decorative sheet comprising a decorative (wood veneer) layer which is disposed on a (nonwoven) stabilizing layer which is disposed on a metal/aluminum reinforcing layer. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide a known decorative layer for automobile interior parts [Teubert/Lin/Kang], specifically speaker grilles [Teubert], comprising a punchable/stampable reinforcing layer [Teubert] that also helps with molding/shaping [Lin/Kang], wherein the presence of the stabilizing layer and reinforcing layer in the order claimed provides additional benefits in weight, processability, and durability [Kang].
Regarding claim 28, it would have been obvious to provide additional layers such as adhesives [Lin], nonwovens or additional veneer layers [Kang] below the reinforcing layer, all of which would have been perforated along with the remainder of the composite decoration layer.
Claims 28 & 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Price in view of Teubert, Lin, and Kang, as applied to claim 21 above, further in view of Murakoshi et al. (JP 2005-005756 A) (hereinafter “Murakoshi”) and Fan et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0088385 A1) (hereinafter “Fan”).
Regarding claims 28 and 41, a sound-transmissive layer being an intermediate layer between the rear side of the decorative composite and the carrier, wherein the sound-transmissive layer comprises a mesh is not taught.
Murakoshi teaches a speaker grille comprising on its back surface or adjacent thereto a non-perforated sound-permeable membrane that prevents foreign matter such as dust from entering the space defined by the injection molded body [0012, 0030-0037]. However, the speaker grill itself is injection molded like the conventional prior art of Teubert, which is improved upon by the laminated speaker grille cover [0003-0006].
AND
Fan teaches a substrate having a plurality of hollow holes therein, backed by a mesh cloth layer, which is commonly added to improve waterproof and dustproof performance [0003, 0006, 0039], wherein the mesh is attached to the substrate covering the holes and is then injection molded along a periphery thereof [0013].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to provide a mesh sound-transmissive layer. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to prevent foreign matter such as dust from entering the speaker [Murakoshi], wherein it would have been obvious to attach the mesh cloth to a hole-containing substrate followed by injection molding [Fan].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure:
Mitsumata (JP 10-175274 A) teaches a decorative veneer sheet for interior parts in automobiles/furniture, electronic devices, and/or musical instruments comprising adhesively laminated layers in order from the front to rear comprising a fine wood veneer layer (All Figs. [7]), nonwoven fabric/paper (All Figs. [5]), and aluminum foil (All Figs. [3]), wherein aluminum foil is a non-combustible layer providing the decorative sheet with appropriate rigidity thus suppressing dimensional changes, warping, and bending of the veneer [0013] and the nonwoven layer buffers the unevenness of the substrate, prevents the decorative sheet from lifting, concealing the shine of the inner aluminum foil [0015].
Lee et al. (KR 2020-0067269 A) teach an interior decoration that can be rear injection molded, wherein a decorative fabric woven (All Figs. [50]), a nonwoven fabric (All Figs. [40]), and metal plate (All Figs. [10]).
Heiko (JP 2007-313841 A) teaches a decorative member for the interior of a vehicle intended to be rear-injection molded a decorative surface layer (All Figs. [2b]), adhered to a metal thin plate (All Figs. [2d]) via an adhesive layer that includes an impregnated nonwoven base material (All Figs. [2e]).
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to JEFFREY A VONCH whose telephone number is (571)270-1134. The Examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6:00.
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, Frank J Vineis can be reached at (571)270-1547. 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.
/JEFFREY A VONCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1781 March 20th, 2026