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
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al., U.S. Patent No. 10,327,066, patented on June 18, 2019 (Jung), in view of Yu et al., U.S. Publication No. 2007/0263878, published on November 15, 2007 (Yu).
As to Claim 1, Jung discloses a sound reproduction apparatus [1] comprising: a speaker unit [11]; and a hollow sound conduit [12] having one end side [14] closed and another end side serving as an open end fitted with the speaker unit [11] (see Figs. 1-3), wherein the sound conduit [12] has a plurality of holes [12a] (see Figs. 1-3), the holes [12a] each inclined in a beam generation direction of sound radiated through the plurality of holes [12b] (the holes are provided on the radiation surface [12b] which is at an angle, the angle determines the beam generation direction; col. 10, lines 60-64). Jung does not explicitly disclose that the holes each have a shape inclined in the beam generation direction. However, Jung discloses that the holes can have shapes different from the disclosed embodiments (col. 9, lines 47-50), and the use of inclined hole shapes to adjust directivity of sound was well known. Yu teaches a radiation surface [10] with a plurality of holes [11] each inclined in a beam generation direction [β] of sound radiated through the plurality of holes [11] (para. 0019; see Figs. 1-2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of Applicant’s invention, to incorporate the inclined plurality of holes, as taught by Yu, into the sound reproduction apparatus of Jung, to further adjust the directivity of sound emitted from the apparatus.
As to Claim 2, Jung and Yu remain as applied above to Claim 1. Jung further discloses that the hollow sound conduit includes a wall portion (sides of [12]) and a plate-shaped portion [12b], and the plurality of holes [12a] is provided in the plate-shaped portion [12b] (see Fig. 4).
As to Claim 5, Jung and Yu remain as applied above to Claim 1. Jung further discloses that the plurality of holes [12a] is substantially aligned along an extending direction of the sound conduit [12] (the holes are linearly aligned; col. 5, lines 13-16; see Fig. 1).
As to Claim 6, Jung and Yu remain as applied above to Claim 5. Jung further discloses that a diameter of each of the plurality of holes [12a] increases from a side close to the speaker unit [11] toward the one end side [14] (col. 5, lines 19-22; see Fig. 1).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al., U.S. Patent No. 10,327,066, patented on June 18, 2019 (Jung), Yu et al., U.S. Publication No. 2007/0263878, published on November 15, 2007 (Yu), further in view of Ickler et al., U.S. Publication No. 2009/0274329, published on November 5, 2009 (Ickler).
As to Claim 8, Jung and Yu remain as applied above to Claim 5. Jung and Yu do not explicitly disclose that the speaker unit includes a tweeter unit that reproduces sound in a high frequency range of a predetermined frequency or more. However, incorporating a tweeter into a sound reproduction apparatus such as the one taught by Jung and Yu was well known. Ickler discloses a sound reproduction apparatus [10] similar to Jung and Yu, comprising a speaker unit [15] including a tweeter unit that reproduces sound in a high frequency range of a predetermined frequency or more (para. 0031). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of Applicant’s invention, to provide any suitable frequency range speaker, including a tweeter in the sound generation apparatus of Jung and Yu, as a design choice for a desired frequency range.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4, 7, and 9-10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 3 recites the unique features of in a case where a direction substantially orthogonal to the plate-shaped portion is taken as 0°, an extending direction of the plate-shaped portion toward the speaker unit is taken as −90°, and an extending direction of the plate-shaped portion toward the one end side of the sound conduit is taken as 90°, the beam generation direction ranges from 60° to 90°. Claim 7 recites the unique features of the plurality of holes including a first hole group provided substantially aligned with respect to a first row along the extending direction of the sound conduit and a second hole group provided substantially aligned with respect to a second row along the extending direction of the sound conduit, and individual holes constituting the first hole group and individual holes constituting the second hole group are arranged in a staggered manner. Claim 9 recites the unique feature of the sound in the high frequency range of the predetermined frequency or more including a sound of 5 kHz or more. Claim 10 recites the unique features of the speaker unit reproducing a signal passing through a high-pass filter whose cutoff frequency equals the predetermined frequency. The closest prior art does not disclose or suggest such features.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ryan Robinson whose telephone number is (571) 270-3956. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 9 am to 5 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Fan Tsang, can be reached on (571) 272-7547. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/RYAN ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2694