DETAILED ACTION
Specification
The amendment filed 23 June 2026 has been entered. The changes to ¶[0079] incorporate subject matter from claims 2, 10-11 & 14.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 1-8 & 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei (US 9,894,278) in view of Xu et al. (US 9,889,931) & Lippert et al. (US 9,861,210).
Regarding claim 1, Wei teaches a handheld image stabilization device (i.e., portable stabilizer for moving shooting) comprising:
a housing (control box) 5;
a gimbal comprising three arms (not numbered; Fig.1);
a motor assembly comprising motors (X-, Y- and Z-axis motors) 1, 4 & 6 such that respective ones of the motors are located on respective ones of the three arms (Fig.1);
a printed circuit board (i.e., Bluetooth module 7 with control circuits; c.3:5-30; Fig.2).
PNG
media_image1.png
604
469
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
528
463
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Wei does not teach: 1) “a membrane material coupled to a stiffener” [sic] or 2) “a microphone attached to a surface of the PCB [7] opposite the stiffener and configured to detect audio waves, wherein the audio waves include acoustic noise from the motor assembly [6]” or 3) “a dampener coupled to the PCB via the stiffener and disposed between the motor assembly [6] and the PCB [7], wherein the dampener is configured to reduce the acoustic noise from the motor assembly by mechanically isolating the PCB from vibration by the motor assembly”.
But, regarding (2), Xu teaches an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) including a carrier for cameras comprising a gimbal-stabilized platform with yaw, roll and pitch motors that in actuation generate noise (c.15:49-60). Xu further teaches microphones including background microphones 260 that collect background noise generated by the background noise-producing components (c.15:-66-c.16:1; Fig.2). The background microphone may be positioned in various positions, in close proximity to the background-noise producing component, e.g., on the motors (e.g., pitch motor, roll motor and yaw motor) of the gimbal of the UAV (c.17:17-36; c.17:40-c.18:31). The audio data collected by the background microphones may be used to reduce or cancel interfering background noise from the audio signal detected by an audio source collecting microphone (abstract; c.1:29-50).
PNG
media_image3.png
545
553
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to attach a microphone on the surface of the PCB of Wei since Xu teaches background microphones would have been desirable to collect background noise generated by motors of a gimbal and use the data to reduce or cancel the interfering background noise.
Regarding (1)-(3), Lippert teaches acoustic devices such as microphones and speakers for an electronic device comprising a membrane material 207 coupled to a stiffener 205, a microphone 201 attached to a surface of the PCB 204 opposite the stiffener 205 and configured to detect audio waves and a dampener (gasket) 209 coupled to the PCB 204 via the stiffener 205 and disposed between the housing 103 and the PCB 204, wherein the dampener 209 is configured to reduce the acoustic noise by mechanically isolating the PCB from vibration (inherent to gasket, which comprises a resilient silicone and/or rubber ring; c.4:12-14; Fig.2A). This construction, including the membrane, provides a liquid-tolerant acoustic device configuration that allows liquid present in the through hole to exit and/or not impair functioning of the microphone (c.1:15-17 & c.1:61-65) and the stiffener prevents the microphone and PCB from flexing and bending in response to pressure (c.4:56-65).
PNG
media_image4.png
365
593
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date to provide Wei & Xu with a membrane material coupled to a stiffener, a dampener coupled to the PCB via the stiffener, wherein the dampener is configured to reduce the acoustic noise by mechanically isolating the PCB from vibration since Lippert teaches these elements would have provided a liquid-tolerant acoustic device configuration and prevented the microphone and PCB from flexing and bending in response to pressure. Further, regarding the function, in the combination Lippert’s silicone/rubber dampener would reduce the acoustic noise from the motor assembly of Wei & Xu by mechanically isolating the PCB from vibration by the motor assembly.
Regarding claim 2, the combination, in particular Lippert, teaches a housing 103 including a first port 102 and the PCB 204 includes a second port (not numbered) with the first port and the second port being co-axial (Fig.2A).
Regarding claim 3, the combination, in particular Lippert, teaches a housing dampener (gasket) 209 is located between the PCB 204 and the housing 103 (Fig.2A).
Regarding claim 4, the combination, in particular Lippert, teaches the PCB 204 is in communication with a gasket 209.
Regarding claim 5, Lippert’s dampener 209 is coupled to the PCB and thus would not be located in bolt holes of a cage associated with one of the multiple motors of Wei & Xu.
Regarding claim 6, Lippert’s dampener 209 is silicone and/or rubber (c.4:13).
Regarding claim 7, the gimbal of both Wei (abstract) and Xu (c.15:49-60) are configured to allow for three axes of rotation of an imaging device.
Regarding claim 8, Wei teaches a handheld image stabilization device (i.e., portable stabilizer for moving shooting) comprising:
a housing (control box) 5;
a printed circuit board (i.e., Bluetooth module 7 with control circuits; c.3:5-30);
[and] a motor assembly comprising: a first arm (not numbered) with a first (X-axis) motor 1, a second arm with a second (Y-axis) motor 4, and a third arm with a third (Z-axis) motor 6, wherein the motor assembly moves about three axes of rotation (c.1:40-51; Figs.1-2).
Wei does not teach: 1) the housing 5 comprises “a first port” and the printed circuit board (PCB) 7 comprises “a second port”; 2) “a membrane material coupled to a stiffener”; 3) “a dampener coupled to the PCB via the stiffener and disposed between the motor assembly and the PCB [7], wherein the dampener is configured to reduce acoustic noise from the first motor [1], the second motor [4], the third motor [6], or a combination thereof, by mechanically isolating the PCB from vibration by the first motor, the second motor, the third motor, or a combination thereof”, or 4) “a microphone attached to a surface of the PCB opposite the stiffener.”
But, regarding feature (4), Xu teaches an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) including a carrier for cameras comprising a gimbal-stabilized platform with yaw, roll and pitch motors that in actuation generate noise (c.15:49-60). Xu further teaches microphones including background microphones 260 that collect background noise generated by the background noise-producing components (c.15:-66-c.16:1; Fig.2). The background microphone may be positioned in various positions, in close proximity to the background-noise producing component, e.g., on the motors (e.g., pitch motor, roll motor and yaw motor) of the gimbal of the UAV (c.17:17-36; c.17:40-c.18:31). The audio data collected by the background microphones may be used to reduce or cancel interfering background noise from the audio signal detected by an audio source collecting microphone (abstract; c.1:29-50).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to attach a microphone on the surface of Wei’s PCB since Xu teaches background microphones would have been desirable to collect background noise generated by motors of a gimbal and use the data to reduce or cancel the interfering background noise.
Regarding (1)-(3), Lippert teaches acoustic devices such as microphones and speakers for an electronic device comprising housing 103 with a first port 102, a PCB 204 comprising a second port (not numbered), a membrane material 207 coupled to a stiffener 205, a microphone 201 attached to a surface of the PCB 204 opposite the stiffener 205 and configured to detect audio waves and a dampener (gasket) 209 coupled to the PCB 204 via the stiffener 205 and disposed between the housing 103 and the PCB 204, wherein the dampener 209 is configured to reduce the acoustic noise by mechanically isolating the PCB from vibration (inherent to gasket, which comprises a resilient silicone and/or rubber ring; c.4:12-14; Fig.2A). This construction provides acoustic ports for the microphone (c.3:50-51) while providing a liquid-tolerant acoustic device configuration that allows liquid present in the through hole to exit and/or not impair functioning of the microphone (c.1:15-17 & c.1:61-65) and the stiffener prevents the microphone and PCB from flexing and bending in response to pressure (c.4:56-65).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to provide Wei & Xu with ports in the housing and PCB, a membrane material coupled to a stiffener, a dampener coupled to the PCB via the stiffener, wherein the dampener is configured to reduce the acoustic noise by mechanically isolating the PCB from vibration, and a microphone attached to the surface of the PCB opposite the stiffener since Lippert teaches this construction would have provided a liquid-tolerant acoustic device with ports to the microphone that allowed liquid present in the port to exit and prevented the microphone and PCB from flexing and bending in response to pressure. Further, regarding the function, in the combination Lippert’s silicone/rubber dampener would reduce the acoustic noise from the motor assembly of Wei & Xu by mechanically isolating the PCB from vibration by the motor/s.
Regarding claim 15, Wei teaches a handheld image stabilization device (i.e., portable stabilizer for moving shooting) comprising:
an image sensor (inherent to camera; c.3:2);
a housing (control box) 5;
a motor assembly (including X-, Y- and Z-axis motors 1, 4 & 6) comprising:
a first end connected to the image sensor (i.e., on fixing support 3),
a second end connected to and extending from the housing 5, and motors that are configured to move the image sensor (c.1:40-56; Figs.1-2); [and]
a printed circuit board (i.e., Bluetooth module 7 with control circuits; c.3:5-30).
Wei does not teach: 1) the housing 5 comprises “a first port” and the printed circuit board (PCB) 7 comprises “a second port”; 2) “a membrane material coupled to the PCB via a stiffener”; 3) “a dampener coupled to the PCB via the stiffener and disposed between the motor assembly and the PCB [7], wherein the dampener is configured to reduce acoustic noise from the motors by mechanically isolating the PCB from vibration by the motors” or 4) “a microphone attached to a surface of the PCB opposite the stiffener”.
But, regarding feature (4), Xu teaches an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) including a carrier for cameras comprising a gimbal-stabilized platform with yaw, roll and pitch motors that in actuation generate noise (c.15:49-60). Xu further teaches microphones including background microphones 260 that collect background noise generated by the background noise-producing components (c.15:-66-c.16:1; Fig.2). The background microphone may be positioned in various positions, in close proximity to the background-noise producing component, e.g., on the motors (e.g., pitch motor, roll motor and yaw motor) of the gimbal of the UAV (c.17:17-36; c.17:40-c.18:31). The audio data collected by the background microphones may be used to reduce or cancel interfering background noise from the audio signal detected by an audio source collecting microphone (abstract; c.1:29-50).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to attach a microphone on the surface of Wei’s PCB since Xu teaches background microphones would have been desirable to collect background noise generated by motors of a gimbal and use the data to reduce or cancel the interfering background noise.
Regarding (1)-(3), Lippert teaches acoustic devices such as microphones and speakers for an electronic device comprising housing 103 with a first port 102, a PCB 204 comprising a second port (not numbered), a membrane material 207 coupled to a stiffener 205, a microphone 201 attached to a surface of the PCB 204 opposite the stiffener 205 and configured to detect audio waves and a dampener (gasket) 209 coupled to the PCB 204 via the stiffener 205 and disposed between the housing 103 and the PCB 204, wherein the dampener 209 is configured to reduce the acoustic noise by mechanically isolating the PCB from vibration (inherent to gasket, which comprises a resilient silicone and/or rubber ring; c.4:12-14; Fig.2A). This construction provides acoustic ports for the microphone (c.3:50-51) while providing a liquid-tolerant acoustic device configuration that allows liquid present in the through hole to exit and/or not impair functioning of the microphone (c.1:15-17 & c.1:61-65) and the stiffener prevents the microphone and PCB from flexing and bending in response to pressure (c.4:56-65).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to provide Wei & Xu with ports in the housing and PCB, a membrane material coupled to a stiffener, a dampener coupled to the PCB via the stiffener, wherein the dampener is configured to reduce the acoustic noise by mechanically isolating the PCB from vibration, and a microphone attached to the surface of the PCB opposite the stiffener since Lippert teaches this construction would have provided a liquid-tolerant acoustic device with ports to the microphone that allowed liquid present in the port to exit and prevented the microphone and PCB from flexing and bending in response to pressure. Further, regarding the function, in the combination Lippert’s silicone/rubber dampener would reduce the acoustic noise from the motor assembly of Wei & Xu by mechanically isolating the PCB from vibration by the motor/s.
Regarding claim 16, Lippert’s dampener is located “within the motor assembly” in the combination, i.e., in Wei’s motor control box, between the PCB and the housing.
Regarding claim 17, Lippert’s dampener is located “within at least one of the motors” in the combination, i.e., within Wei’s motor control box, which comprises the Z-axis motor 6.
Regarding claim 18, Lippert’s dampener 209 is formed from a flexible material, e.g., silicone and/or rubber (c.4:13).
Regarding claim 19, Lippert’s dampener 209 is coupled to the PCB, i.e., it is not located in bolt holes 9, 9-1 of a cage (i.e., housing) 5 associated with at least one of Wei’s motors (Fig.2).
Regarding claim 20, in Lippert the PCB 204 is in communication with a gasket 209.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei, Xu & Lippert as applied to claim 8 above, further in view of engineering design.
The combination, in particular Lippert, teaches a dampener (gasket) 209 formed of material such as silicon and/or rubber (c.4:13) which comprises an intrinsic “stiffness” (understood as the spring constant ‘k’) and the motors, in particular those of Wei & Xu, also comprise an intrinsic “resonance”, understood as a frequency at which the mechanical vibration from the motors increases significantly. While Lippert does not explicitly teach the stiffness of the dampener to be “based on a resonance of the first motor, the second motor, the third motor, or a combination thereof”, this would have been obvious before the effective filing date as a matter of engineering design. Expressed formally in textbooks such as “Formulas for Dynamics, Acoustics and Vibration” (R.Blevins, 2016), vibration isolation models (Chap.3, pp.374-391) for a vibrating mass supported by a spring on a base subject to vibration force (Fig.7.13(a), p.375) teach that in terms of ‘vibration transmissibility’ (where vibration isolation reduces vibration transmissibility), ‘k’ (as part of the static deformation δs) and forcing frequency ‘f’ determine vibration transmissibility Fbase/FO (see Equation 7.48, p.375). Similarly, Equation 7.47 expresses this in terms of the damping factor ζ (implicitly a function of spring constant ‘k’, i.e., “stiffness”) and the forcing frequency ‘f’. In other words, choice of ‘k’ is necessarily “based on” a resonant frequency of the base subject to vibration force since ‘k’ and ‘f’ are known design parameters determining the vibration transmissibility from the base vibrating at frequency ‘f’ to the vibrating mass connected by a spring of spring constant ‘k’ to the base, which in turn determines the degree of vibration isolation therebetween, and since one of ordinary skill would necessarily take into account the resonant frequency as ‘f’ since that would be the frequency at which the greatest vibration occurs.
Claims 10-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei, Xu & Lippert as applied to claim 8 above, further in view of Huang et al. (CN 107690745).
Regarding claim 10, Wei, Xu & Lippert substantially teach the invention including, in Wei, a handheld image stabilization device comprising first, second and third motors 1, 4 & 6 (Figs.1-2), but the combination does not teach the motors each comprise “an inner ring, an outer ring spaced apart from the inner ring; arms extending between the inner ring and the outer ring, and openings separating the arms.”
But, with reference to US Pat.Pub.2019/0249820, the English language continuation of CN ‘745, Huang teaches a gimbal 10 comprising first, second and third axis motors having the same structure (¶[0023]), each comprising:
an inner ring (not numbered, part of bottom wall 1111);
an outer ring (including side wall 1112) spaced apart from the inner ring;
arms (not numbered) extending between the inner ring and the outer ring, and openings (not numbered) separating the arms (Fig.2).
PNG
media_image5.png
370
428
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Together, Huang’s inner ring, outer ring and arms form a first housing space 111a enclosing magnetic ring 113 and coil winding 114 which together rotate first body 111 relative to second body 112; ¶[0025]; ¶[0032]; ¶[0042]; Fig.3).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to configure the first, second and third motors of Wei, Xu & Lippert with an inner ring, an outer ring spaced apart from the inner ring; arms extending between the inner ring and the outer ring, and openings separating the arms since Huang teaches that these would have been desirable in gimbal motors to form a housing space enclosing a magnetic ring and coil winding which provide rotation.
Regarding claim 11, in the combination, the dampener of Lippert is located within the first motor, the second motor, or the third motor at a location inside of the respective outer ring, i.e., between PCB 204 and housing 103 per Lippert (Fig.2A).
Regarding claim 12, Lippert teaches the dampener (gasket) 209 is a silicone and/or rubber (c.4:13).
Regarding claim 13, Huang’s first, second and third motors respectively comprise: a hollow shaft 1114 that extends through the inner ring (¶[0028]; Figs.2-5).
Regarding claim 14, Huang’s first, second and third motors respectively comprise: magnets (magnetic ring) 113 extending annularly within the outer ring (i.e., within side wall 1112) and facing the outer ring (Figs.2-5).
Claims 1-5 & 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei (US 9,894,278) in view of Xu et al. (US 9,889,931) & Evans et al. (US Pat.Pub.2018/0091881)
Regarding claim 1, as noted in the preceding grounds of rejection, Wei teaches all the features except for: 1) “a membrane material coupled to a stiffener” or 2) “a microphone attached to a surface of the PCB [7] opposite the stiffener and configured to detect audio waves, wherein the audio waves include acoustic noise from the motor assembly [6]” or 3) “a dampener coupled to the PCB via the stiffener and disposed between the motor assembly [6] and the PCB [7], wherein the dampener is configured to reduce the acoustic noise from the motor assembly by mechanically isolating the PCB from vibration by the motor assembly”.
But, regarding feature (2), Xu teaches an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) including a carrier for cameras comprising a gimbal-stabilized platform with yaw, roll and pitch motors that in actuation generate noise (c.15:49-60). Xu further teaches microphones including background microphones 260 that collect background noise generated by the background noise-producing components (c.15:-66-c.16:1; Fig.2). The background microphone may be positioned in various positions, in close proximity to the background-noise producing component, e.g., on the motors (e.g., pitch motor, roll motor and yaw motor) of the gimbal of the UAV (c.17:17-36; c.17:40-c.18:31). The audio data collected by the background microphones may be used to reduce or cancel interfering background noise from the audio signal detected by an audio source collecting microphone (abstract; c.1:29-50).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to attach a microphone on the surface of the PCB of Wei since Xu teaches background microphones would have been desirable to collect background noise generated by motors of a gimbal and use the data to reduce or cancel the interfering background noise.
Regarding features (1) and (3), Evans teaches a shock mounted transducer assembly comprising a microphone 102/136, a printed circuit board (PCB) 144, a membrane material 156 coupled to a stiffener 150; a microphone 102/136 attached to a surface of the PCB 144 opposite the stiffener 150 and configured to detect audio waves, wherein the audio waves include acoustic noise (i.e., microphone acoustically coupled to sound inlet port; ¶[0005]; ¶[0025]) ...; and a dampener (movable support) 126 coupled to the PCB 144 via the stiffener 150 and disposed between a housing assembly 104 and the PCB, wherein the dampener 126 is configured to reduce the acoustic noise… by mechanically isolating the PCB from vibration (i.e., when there is a sudden pressure input 116, the microphone assembly 102 translatably mounted within encased space 108 by dampener/support member 126 reduces and redistributes the force of the pressure change; ¶[0002]; ¶[0004]; ¶[0029]-¶[0031]; Figs.1-3).
PNG
media_image6.png
561
716
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Evans' membrane provides prevents water ingress into the microphone and the stiffener and dampener structure provide a soft/shock mounting assembly for the microphone that can move in response to a sudden pressure change or acoustic shock, to protect the microphone and reduce an impact of the pressure change on the membrane (¶[0004]).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to provide Wei & Xu with a microphone assembly including a membrane material coupled to a stiffener and a dampener coupled to the PCB via the stiffener since Evans teaches these elements would have prevented water ingress into the microphone and protected the microphone from sudden pressure changes. Further, regarding function, in the combination, Evans’ dampener for reducing and redistributing the force of pressure changes would reduce corresponding acoustic noise when applied to the motor assembly of Wei & Xu.
Regarding claim 2, the combination, in particular Evans, teaches a housing 104 including a first port 114 and the PCB 144 includes a second port 142 with the first port and the second port being co-axial (Fig.1).
Regarding claim 3, the combination, in particular Evans, teaches a housing dampener (movable support) 126 located between the PCB 144 and the housing 104.
Regarding claim 4, the combination, in particular Evans, teaches the PCB 144 is in communication with a gasket (i.e., annular elastic support such as a foam ring) 160 (Fig.1).
Regarding claim 5, Evans teaches the dampener 126 is coupled to the PCB and thus would not be located in bolt holes of a cage associated with one of the multiple motors of Wei & Xu.
Regarding claim 7, the gimbal of both Wei (abstract) and Xu (c.15:49-60) are configured to allow for three axes of rotation of an imaging device.
Regarding claim 8, as noted in the preceding grounds of rejection, Wei teaches all the features except for: 1) the housing 5 comprises “a first port” and the printed circuit board (PCB) 7 comprises “a second port”; 2) “a membrane material coupled to a stiffener”; 3) “a dampener coupled to the PCB via the stiffener and disposed between the motor assembly and the PCB [7], wherein the dampener is configured to reduce acoustic noise from the first motor [1], the second motor [4], the third motor [6], or a combination thereof, by mechanically isolating the PCB from vibration by the first motor, the second motor, the third motor, or a combination thereof” or 4) “a microphone attached to a surface of the PCB opposite the stiffener.”
But, regarding feature (4), Xu teaches an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) including a carrier for cameras comprising a gimbal-stabilized platform with yaw, roll and pitch motors that in actuation generate noise (c.15:49-60). Xu further teaches microphones including background microphones 260 that collect background noise generated by the background noise-producing components (c.15:-66-c.16:1; Fig.2). The background microphone may be positioned in various positions, in close proximity to the background-noise producing component, e.g., on the motors (e.g., pitch motor, roll motor and yaw motor) of the gimbal of the UAV (c.17:17-36; c.17:40-c.18:31). The audio data collected by the background microphones may be used to reduce or cancel interfering background noise from the audio signal detected by an audio source collecting microphone (abstract; c.1:29-50).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to attach a microphone on the surface of Wei’s PCB since Xu teaches background microphones would have been desirable to collect background noise generated by motors of a gimbal and use the data to reduce or cancel the interfering background noise.
Regarding features (1)-(3), Evans teaches a shock mounted transducer assembly housing 104 comprising a first port 114 and a printed circuit board 144 comprises a second port 142, a membrane material 156 coupled to a stiffener 150, a dampener 126 coupled to the PCB 144 via the stiffener 150 and disposed between the housing and the PCB, wherein the dampener 126 is configured to reduce acoustic noise…, by mechanically isolating the PCB from vibration (i.e., when there is a sudden pressure input 116, the microphone assembly 102 translatably mounted within encased space 108 by dampener/support member 126 reduces and redistributes the force of the pressure change; ¶[0002]; ¶[0004]; ¶[0029]-¶[0031]; Figs.1-3). Evans' membrane provides prevents water ingress into the microphone and the stiffener and dampener structure provide a soft/shock mounting assembly for the microphone that can move in response to a sudden pressure change or acoustic shock, to protect the microphone and reduce an impact of the pressure change on the membrane (¶[0004]).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to provide Wei & Xu with a microphone assembly including a membrane material coupled to a stiffener and a dampener coupled to the PCB via the stiffener since Evans teaches these elements would have prevented water ingress into the microphone and protected the microphone from sudden pressure changes. Further, regarding function, in the combination, Evans’ dampener for reducing and redistributing the force of pressure changes would reduce corresponding acoustic noise when applied to the motor assemblies of Wei & Xu.
Regarding claim 15, as noted in the preceding grounds of rejection, Wei teaches all the features except for: 1) the housing 5 comprises “a first port” and the printed circuit board (PCB) 7 comprises “a second port”; 2) “a membrane material coupled to the PCB via a stiffener”; 3) “a dampener coupled to the PCB via the stiffener and disposed between the motor assembly and the PCB [7], wherein the dampener is configured to reduce acoustic noise from the motors by mechanically isolating the PCB from vibration by the motors” or 4) “a microphone attached to a surface of the PCB opposite the stiffener”.
But, regarding feature (4), Xu teaches an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) including a carrier for cameras comprising a gimbal-stabilized platform with yaw, roll and pitch motors that in actuation generate noise (c.15:49-60). Xu further teaches microphones including background microphones 260 that collect background noise generated by the background noise-producing components (c.15:-66-c.16:1; Fig.2). The background microphone may be positioned in various positions, in close proximity to the background-noise producing component, e.g., on the motors (e.g., pitch motor, roll motor and yaw motor) of the gimbal of the UAV (c.17:17-36; c.17:40-c.18:31). The audio data collected by the background microphones may be used to reduce or cancel interfering background noise from the audio signal detected by an audio source collecting microphone (abstract; c.1:29-50).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the invention to attach a microphone on the surface of Wei’s PCB since Xu teaches background microphones would have been desirable to collect background noise generated by motors of a gimbal and use the data to reduce or cancel the interfering background noise.
Regarding features (1)-(3), Evans teaches a shock mounted transducer assembly housing 104 comprising a first port 114 and a printed circuit board 144 comprises a second port 142, a membrane material 156 coupled to a stiffener 150, a dampener 126 coupled to the PCB 144 via the stiffener 150 and disposed between the housing and the PCB, wherein the dampener 126 is configured to reduce acoustic noise…, by mechanically isolating the PCB from vibration (i.e., when there is a sudden pressure input 116, the microphone assembly 102 translatably mounted within encased space 108 by dampener/support member 126 reduces and redistributes the force of the pressure change; ¶[0002]; ¶[0004]; ¶[0029]-¶[0031]; Figs.1-3). Evans' membrane provides prevents water ingress into the microphone and the stiffener and dampener structure provide a soft/shock mounting assembly for the microphone that can move in response to a sudden pressure change or acoustic shock, to protect the microphone and reduce an impact of the pressure change on the membrane (¶[0004]).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to provide Wei & Xu with a microphone assembly including a membrane material coupled to a stiffener and a dampener coupled to the PCB via the stiffener since Evans teaches these elements would have prevented water ingress into the microphone and protected the microphone from sudden pressure changes. Further, regarding function, in the combination, Evans’ dampener for reducing and redistributing the force of pressure changes would reduce corresponding acoustic noise when applied to the motor assemblies of Wei & Xu.
Regarding claim 16, Evans’ dampener is located “within the motor assembly” in the that in the combination it is disposed within Wei’s motor control box, between the PCB and the housing.
Regarding claim 17, Evans’ dampener is located “within at least one of the motors” in that in the combination it is disposed within Wei’s motor control box, which comprises the Z-axis motor 6.
Regarding claim 19, Evans’ dampener is coupled to the PCB and thus is not located in bolt holes 9, 9-1 of a cage (i.e., housing) 5 associated with at least one of Wei’s motors (Fig.2).
Regarding claim 20, Evans’ PCB 144 is in communication with a gasket (i.e., annular elastic support such as a foam ring) 160 (Fig.1).
Claims 6 & 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei, Xu & Evans as applied to claims 5 & 15 above, further in view of Isaacson et al. (US Pat.Pub.2021/024 3539).
Wei, Xu & Evans do not teach the dampener is silicone rubber.
But, Isaacson teaches an image capture device comprising a housing 440, a printed circuit board (PCB) 452, a microphone 408 attached to a surface of the PCB and a dampener (gasket) 446 coupled to the PCB 452 and disposed between the housing 440 and the PCB (Fig.4), wherein the dampener mechanically isolates the microphone from vibrations delivered to the housing (¶[0077]). Isaacson’s gasket is formed from a flexible material, e.g., silicone, rubber, etc. (¶[0084]).
Therefore it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to provide a silicon rubber dampener in Wei, Xu & Evans since Isaacson teaches this material was known to mechanically isolate a microphone on a PCB from vibrations delivered to the housing.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei, Xu & Evans as applied to claim 8 above, further in view of engineering design.
The combination, in particular Evans, teaches a dampener 126 with an intrinsic “stiffness” (understood as the spring constant ‘k’) in response to pressure input 116 and the motors of Wei & Xu, also comprise an intrinsic “resonance”, understood as a frequency at which the mechanical vibration from the motors increases significantly. While the combination, in particular Evans, does not explicitly teach the stiffness of the dampener to be “based on a resonance of the first motor, the second motor, the third motor, or a combination thereof”, this would have been obvious before the effective filing date as a matter of engineering design. The purpose of Evan’s dampener is to provide a soft- or shock mounting for the transducer that absorbs acoustic vibrations and protects the assembly components (¶[0004]; ¶[0035]) and thus in context of the combination, vibrations generated by the motors of Wei and Xu (Xu, c.15:28-30). Therefore, one of ordinary skill would necessarily “base” (i.e., choose or design) a stiffness of the dampener such that it provided damping at a frequency where the greatest vibration occurred. Expressed more formally in textbooks such as “Formulas for Dynamics, Acoustics and Vibration” (R.Blevins, 2016), vibration isolation models (Chap.3, pp.374-391) for a vibrating mass supported by a spring on a base subject to vibration force (Fig.7.13(a), p.375) teach that in terms of ‘vibration transmissibility’ (where vibration isolation reduces vibration transmissibility), ‘k’ (as part of the static deformation δs) and forcing frequency ‘f’ determine vibration transmissibility Fbase/FO (see Equation 7.48, p.375). Similarly, Equation 7.47 expresses this in terms of the damping factor ζ (implicitly a function of spring constant ‘k’, i.e., “stiffness”) and the forcing frequency ‘f’. In other words, choice of ‘k’ is necessarily “based on” a resonant frequency of the base subject to vibration force since ‘k’ and ‘f’ are known design parameters determining the vibration transmissibility from the base vibrating at frequency ‘f’ to the vibrating mass connected by a spring of spring constant ‘k’ to the base, which in turn determines the degree of vibration isolation therebetween, and since one of ordinary skill would necessarily take into account the resonant frequency as ‘f’ since that would be the frequency at which the greatest vibration occurs.
Claims 10-11 & 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei, Xu & Evans as applied to claim 8 above, further in view of Huang et al. (CN 107690745).
Regarding claim 10, Wei, Xu & Evans substantially teach the invention including, in Wei, a handheld image stabilization device comprising first, second and third motors 1, 4 & 6 (Figs.1-2), but the combination does not teach the motors each comprise “an inner ring, an outer ring spaced apart from the inner ring; arms extending between the inner ring and the outer ring, and openings separating the arms.”
But, with reference to US Pat.Pub.2019/0249820, the English language continuation of CN ‘745, Huang teaches a gimbal 10 comprising first, second and third axis motors having the same structure (¶[0023]), each comprising:
an inner ring (not numbered, part of bottom wall 1111);
an outer ring (including side wall 1112) spaced apart from the inner ring;
arms (not numbered) extending between the inner ring and the outer ring, and openings (not numbered) separating the arms (Fig.2).
PNG
media_image5.png
370
428
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Together, Huang’s inner ring, outer ring and arms form a first housing space 111a enclosing magnetic ring 113 and coil winding 114 which together rotate first body 111 relative to second body 112; ¶[0025]; ¶[0032]; ¶[0042]; Fig.3).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to configure the first, second and third motors of Wei, Xu & Evans with an inner ring, an outer ring spaced apart from the inner ring; arms extending between the inner ring and the outer ring, and openings separating the arms since Huang teaches that these would have been desirable in gimbal motors to form a housing space enclosing a magnetic ring and coil winding which provide rotation.
Regarding claim 11, in the combination, the dampener is located within the first motor, the second motor, or the third motor at a location inside of the respective outer ring, i.e., between PCB and housing per Evans (Fig.1).
Regarding claim 13, Huang’s first, second and third motors respectively comprise: a hollow shaft 1114 that extends through the inner ring (¶[0028]; Figs.2-5).
Regarding claim 14, Huang’s first, second and third motors respectively comprise: magnets (magnetic ring) 113 extending annularly within the outer ring (i.e., within side wall 1112) and facing the outer ring (Figs.2-5).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei, Xu, Evans & Huang as applied to claim 11 above, further in view of Isaacson et al. (US Pat.Pub.2021/024 3539).
Wei, Xu, Evans & Huang do not teach the dampener is silicone rubber.
But, Isaacson teaches an image capture device comprising a housing 440, a printed circuit board (PCB) 452, a microphone 408 attached to a surface of the PCB and a dampener (gasket) 446 coupled to the PCB 452 and disposed between the housing 440 and the PCB (Fig.4), wherein the dampener mechanically isolates the microphone from vibrations delivered to the housing (¶[0077]). Isaacson’s gasket is formed from a flexible material, e.g., silicone, rubber, etc. (¶[0084]).
Therefore it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to provide a silicon rubber dampener in Wei, Xu, Evans & Huang since Isaacson teaches this material was known to mechanically isolate a microphone on a PCB from vibrations delivered to the housing.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 23 June 2026 have been reviewed but are not entirely persuasive.
It is noted that Lippert’s gasket 209 is made from silicone and/or rubber material (c.4:13), the same material that Applicant’s damper is made from (specification ¶[0052] & ¶[0061]). Though Lippert does not use the term “dampener”, his silicone and/or rubber gasket 209 nevertheless intrinsically comprises one.
Further, Lippert’s stiffener 205 provides resistance of the acoustic device against flexing under pressure (c.3:35-38). Lippert’s stiffener serves as the structural intermediary through which the dampener (gasket) 209 is mechanically coupled to the PCB 204, with the microphone 201 occupying the PCB face opposite that stiffener/dampener assembly 205/209 (Fig.2A).
Similarly, Evan’s stiffener 150 serves as the structural intermediary through which the dampener 126 is mechanically coupled to the PCB 144, with the microphone 102/136 occupying the PCB face opposite that stiffener/dampener assembly (Fig.1).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BURTON S MULLINS whose telephone number is (571)272-2029. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5. 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, Tulsidas C Patel can be reached at 571-272-2098. 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.
/BURTON S MULLINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights