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 Acknowledged
Applicant’s election, without traverse, Species 3 shown in Figs. 11-12 and Claims 12-16 in the response to Restriction Requirements filed 03/09/26 has been acknowledged.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-11 and 17-20 are withdrawn from further consideration as being drawn to nonelected inventions.
Claims 12-16 are examined on merits herein.
Abstract
Abstract is objected to since a chosen for examination (without traverse) Species 3 has a limitation (in independent Claim 12): “the free end of the plug has a larger area than the aperture”, which contradicts to a statement of the Abstract: “the free end of the plug has a smaller area than the aperture”. Please, be advised that when claims directed to Species 3 are allowed, only Species 4 (independent Claim 17) would be considered for rejoinder, since Claim 1 – Species 1 - having a same limitation as the Abstract - will not be rejoined with claims of Species 3 as having a limitation opposite to the above-cited limitation of Claim 12.
Specification
Specification is objected to for insufficient written description: See MPEP Guidelines for the Examination of Patent Applications Under the 35 U.S.C. 112(a), “Written Description” Requirement [R-01.2024]. I. General Principles Governing Compliance with the “Written Description” Requirement for Applications: To satisfy the written description requirement, a patent specification must describe the claimed invention in sufficient detail that one skilled in the art can reasonably conclude that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention. See, e.g., Moba, B.V. v. Diamond Automation, Inc., 325 F.3d 1306, 1319, 66 USPQ2d 1429, 1438 (Fed. Cir. 2003); Vas-Cath, Inc. v. Mahurkar, 935 F.2d at 1563, 19 USPQ2d at 1116. Note that a showing of possession alone does not cure the lack of a written description. Enzo Biochem, Inc. v. Gen-Probe, Inc., 323 F.3d 956, 969-70, 63 USPQ2d 1609, 1617 (Fed. Cir. 2002).
The specification of the current application does not sufficiently disclose a procedure for “tuning residual stress” claimed by multiple claims of the application.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention: Claim 16 has a limitation: “the rest position of the diaphragm relative to the backplane is achieved by tuning residual stress of the diaphragm, or the backplate, or both during manufacturing”. But the specification is silent about any detail of the “tuning residual stress”, and just repeats in a few paragraphs that the procedure is made during manufacturing.
Appropriate correction is required.
Allowable Subject Matter
Clams 12-15 are allowed.
Reason for Identification of allowable Subject Matter
Re Claim 12: The prior arts of record, alone or in combination, fail(s) to anticipate or render obvious such limitation as: “the free end of the plug has a larger area than the aperture”, in combination with other limitations of the claim: Lee et al. (KR 101887537) teaches most limitations of Claim 12,except for the the cited limitation; although a system of Fig. 10 (of Lee) shows that a cross-section of the plug is wider than a cross-section of the aperture, Lee teaches that the plug has an annual cross-sectional area, while an aperture is formed as a slit, and, accordingly, the ratio between two areas is unclear. Other relevant prior arts of record, including Chen et al. (US 2023/0319450), Pedersen et al. (US 2021/0204071), Liu et al. (US 2024/0340596), Loeppert (US 2021/0337317), Tsai et al. (US 2021/0276857), or Wei et al. (US 2008/0075308) – do not cure the above deficiency.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to GALINA G YUSHINA whose telephone number is 571-270-7440. The Examiner can normally be reached between 8 AM - 7 PM Pacific Time (Flexible).
Examiner interviews are available. 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, Lynne Gurley can be reached on 571-272-1670.
The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300; a fax phone number of Galina Yushina is 571-270-8440.
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 visit 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.
/GALINA G YUSHINA/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2811, TC 2800,
United States Patent and Trademark Office
E-mail: galina.yushina@USPTO.gov
Phone: 571-270-7440
Date: 03/13/26
Prosecution Insights