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
Claims 10-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 23 April 2026.
Applicant's election with traverse of the invention of Group I, Sub-Species A1 and B2 in the reply filed on 23 April 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Claims 10 and 17 have been amended to recite a controller and a blower. This is not found persuasive because the invention of Group I still does not require the step of controlling the motor at a second speed. Therefore, the apparatus of Group I is still distinct from the method of Group II and the non-transitory computer readable medium of Group III.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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 1-9 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the speed of rotation" in 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-9 are rejected for depending from indefinite claim 1.
Regarding claim 8, the limitation of “a first speed” in line 3 renders the claim indefinite because a “first speed” was positively recited in line 11 of claim 1, on which claim 8 depends. As a result, it is unclear if claim 8 requires a second “first speed”, or if it is referring to the “first speed” that was already recited. For the purposes of examination, the latter interpretation will be assumed; this appears to be consistent with the as-filed disclosure.
Claim 9 is rejected for depending from indefinite claim 8.
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 (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.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eaves (US 2,153,500) in view of Fleszewski et al. (US 2023/0219492).
Regarding claim 1, Eaves teaches a sound-generating system (col. 1, ln. 1-2; fig. 1), comprising:
a housing (5);
a first plate (19) containing a first pattern of openings (figs. 6, 7), the first plate provided within the housing (fig. 1) and rotatable about an axis (col. 2, ln. 42-43);
a motor (6) configured to rotate the first plate (col. 2, ln. 20-22 and 42-43);
a blower (8/9) capable of providing an airflow and connected to the housing (fig. 1) such that the airflow, when provided, is directed to the first plate through the housing (col. 2, ln. 22-28),
wherein when the blower is providing the airflow and the controller is causing the motor to rotate the first plate at a first speed, a first sound of a first frequency is produced; and when the blower is providing the airflow and the controller is causing the motor to rotate the first plate at a second speed, a second sound of a second frequency is produced (col. 3, ln. 10-15).
Eaves further discloses controlling the speed of rotation of the motor (col. 5, ln. 30-43), but does not explicitly disclose a controller connected to the motor.
Fleszewski teaches a sound-generating system (100) comprising a motor (17) and a controller (102) connected to the motor (par. 41) and configured to control the speed of rotation of the motor (par. 47, 48).
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the sound-generating system of Eaves to further comprise a controller connected to the motor, as taught by Fleszewski, since this was a known means for providing speed control of the motor of a sound-generating system.
Regarding claim 2, Eaves in view of Fleszewski discloses the sound-generating system described regarding claim 1, and further wherein the first plate (see fig. 6) is replaceable with a second plate provided with a second pattern of openings (see fig. 7); and when the first plate is replaced with the second plate, the blower is providing the airflow, and the controller is causing the motor to rotate the second plate at the first speed, a third sound of a third frequency is produced (col. 4, ln. 39-44); and when the first plate is replaced with the second plate, the blower is providing the airflow, and the controller is causing the motor to rotate the second plate at the second speed, a fourth sound of a fourth frequency is produced (col. 3, ln. 14).
Regarding claim 3, Eaves in view of Fleszewski discloses the sound-generating system described regarding claim 1, and further including a second plate (16) containing a second pattern of openings (figs. 3-5) and provided within the housing (fig. 1) such that the airflow passes through both the first pattern of openings and the second pattern of openings when rotation of the first plate causes at least part of the first pattern of openings to overlap at least part of the second pattern of openings (col. 3, ln. 3-8).
Regarding claim 4, Eaves in view of Fleszewski discloses the sound-generating system described regarding claim 3, and Fleszewski further teaches wherein the controller is configured to modulate rotation speed of the first plate according to a pre-defined sequence such that, when the blower is providing the airflow and the controller is modulating rotation speed of the first plate according to the pre-defined sequence, a predetermined pattern of sound frequencies is produced by the system (par. 55).
Regarding claim 5, Eaves in view of Fleszewski discloses the sound-generating system described regarding claim 4, and further wherein the pre-defined pattern of sounds is configured to extinguish fire (along with the sound, air is emitted from 18, which will extinguish fire).
Regarding claim 6, Eaves in view of Fleszewski discloses the sound-generating system described regarding claim 5, and further wherein the pre-defined pattern of sounds includes a descending chirp. It is noted that this limitation further limits the “predetermined pattern” recited by claim 4, which occurs within the context of a functional limitation to the controller; therefore, since the controller disclosed by the prior art is configured to modulate the speed in any desired manner, it is interpreted to teach “wherein the pre-defined pattern of sounds includes a descending chirp”.
Regarding claim 7, Eaves in view of Fleszewski discloses the sound-generating system described regarding claim 6, and further comprising: a sleeve having a nozzle (18, see fig. 1) and extending from the housing (fig. 1), the airflow flowing from the housing through the sleeve and exiting the sleeve through the nozzle (fig. 1); a tube (11) connecting the blower to the housing (fig. 1); a handle (fig. 1 – the rear outside surface of housing 5); and a power supply (col. 2, ln. 21 – an “electric motor” inherently requires a power supply).
Regarding claim 8, Eaves in view of Fleszewski discloses the sound-generating system described regarding claim 3, and Fleszewski further teaches wherein the controller is configured to modulate rotation speed of the first plate according to input received from a user interface (106, 108, see par. 47), wherein the controller causing the motor to rotate the first plate at a first speed includes the controller causing the motor to rotate the first plate at the first speed after receiving a first input from the user interface (par. 48); and the controller is causing the motor to rotate the first plate at the second speed includes the controller causing the motor to rotate the first plate at the second speed after receiving a second input from the user interface (par. 48).
Regarding claim 9, Eaves in view of Fleszewski discloses the sound-generating system described regarding claim 8, but not explicitly further wherein the user interface includes a keyboard, a first key of the keyboard providing the first input when activated, and a second key of the keyboard providing the second input when activated.
Nevertheless, Fleszewski does teach that the user interface may be “a touch user interface display screen, an audio input device, or another type of input device” of a computing device (par. 66). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the user input of the sound-generating system of Eaves in view of Fleszewski to further include a keyboard, a first key of the keyboard providing the first input when activated, and a second key of the keyboard providing the second input when activated since a keyboard is a known “another type of input device” for a computing device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yu (US 10,501,180), Jones et al. (US 2,354,684), Varlamov (US 4,118,796), and Faust (US 4,138,673) all disclose sound-generating systems having elements of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CODY J LIEUWEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4477. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8-5, Friday varies.
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, Arthur Hall can be reached at (571) 270-1814. 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.
/CODY J LIEUWEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752
Prosecution Insights