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 .
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 – 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang (US 9,616,813) in view of Insoo et al. (KR 20210052919).
With respect to claims 1 and 6, Kang teaches a sound output device (Fig,1, Item S) for a vehicle (Fig.1, Item 1), comprising an exterior component (Fig.2, Item 2) forming a part of an outer shell of the vehicle; a vibration generator (Fig.2, Item S) disposed inward of the exterior component in an outward-inward direction of the vehicle (Fig.2); but fail to disclose an interposed portion disposed between the exterior component and the vibration generator and having an attachment portion to which the vibration generator is attached, wherein the sound output device is configured to transmit vibration of the vibration generator to the exterior component via the interposed portion to cause sound waves to be emitted from the exterior component, and the interposed portion includes a plate-shaped joining portion between the exterior component and the attachment portion, the joining portion protruding inward in the outward-inward direction from the exterior component, and the exterior component and the interposed portion are integrally formed of a plastic.
On the other hand, Insoo et al. teach a sound output device (Fig,1, Item 100) for a vehicle (Abstract), comprising a component (Fig.1, Item 10) forming a part of the vehicle; a vibration generator (Fig.1, Item 1) disposed inward of the component; and an interposed portion (Fig.1, Item 130) disposed between the component and the vibration generator and having an attachment portion (Fig.1, about Item 120) to which the vibration generator is attached, wherein the sound output device is configured to transmit vibration of the vibration generator to the component via the interposed portion to cause sound waves to be emitted from the component (Specification text regarding Figure 1), and the interposed portion includes a plate-shaped joining portion (Fig.1, Item 130) between the component (Fig.1, Item 10) and the attachment portion (Fig.1, about Item 120), the joining portion protruding inward in the outward-inward direction from the component, and the component is formed of a plastic (Specification text regarding Figure 1 and Item 10). The Examiner considers that it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to form the interposed portion of plastic because it would provide a sturdy and lightweight interposed portion that could efficiently transfer the vibration from the vibration generator to the component; furthermore, it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the Insoo et al. vibration generator as the Kang generator because it would provide a compact profile vibration generator that could effectively produce sound with desired loudness at predetermined frequencies as necessitated by the specific requirements of the particular application.
With respect to claims 2 and 7, Insoo et al. teach wherein the attachment portion (Fig.1, about Item 120) is disposed only in a part of a gap (Fig.1, Item 132) between the component (Fig.1, Item 10) and the vibration generator (Fig.1, Item 100).
With respect to claims 3, 4, 8 and 9, Insoo et al. teach the vibration generator having a central axis extending in the outward-inward direction at a central portion of the vibration generator (Fig.1), and the Examiner takes official notice that it is well-known in the art to provide the attachment portion being one of a plurality of attachment portions, the attachment portions being arranged around the central axis because it could provide the necessary stability as necessitated by the specific requirements of the particular application; and wherein the vibration generator is attached to the attachment portion by screwing a screw inserted through the vibration generator into the attachment portion, as disclosed by Ashworth (US 3,449,531).
With respect to claims 5 and 10, Kang teaches wherein the exterior component (Fig.1, Item 2) forms at least a part of one of a front panel having no opening and a front grille having an opening, and the interposed portion is disposed rearward of the exterior component, and the vibration generator (Fig.2, Item S) is disposed rearward of the interposed portion.
Conclusion
The attached hereto PTO Form 892 lists prior art made of record that the Examiner considered it pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDGARDO SAN MARTIN whose telephone number is (571)272-2074. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00 - 5:00 M - F.
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, Shawki S. Ismail can be reached on 571-272-3985. 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.
/Edgardo San Martin/
Edgardo San Martín
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2837
September 19, 2025