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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hirata et al., U.S. Patent No. 9,506,464, patented on November 29, 2016 (Hirata).
As to Claim 1, Hirata discloses an ultrasonic pump [1] comprising: a mechanical layer having a central portion [3], a plurality of anchors [25, 27, 28], and a plurality of spokes [26] connected between the central portion [3] and the anchors with at least one membrane [3 or 3A]; and an acoustic channel (formed by [5B] and [3A]; see Fig. 2), wherein a portion of the at least one membrane comprises [3A] at least a part of the acoustic channel so that a movement of the membrane [3A] changes the dimension of the acoustic channel (the membrane [3] bends upwardly and downwardly to change a dimension of the gap between [5B] and [3A]; col. 5, lines 19-39; see Figs. 3A and 3B); wherein the membrane [3] is configured to oscillate at ultrasonic frequencies and generate at least one audio signal (the membrane is driven in a non-audible range 20 kHz or higher; col. 7, lines 38-42).
As to Claim 2, Hirata remains as applied above to Claim 1. Hirata further discloses that the membrane [3] is configured to be actuated by any of: electrostatic force, piezoelectric force, electromagnetic force, thermal induced strain, thermo electric force or combinations of these forces (the membrane [3] is actuated by piezoelectric force; col. 4, lines 40-55).
As to Claim 3, Hirata remains as applied above to Claim 1. Hirata further discloses that a maximum excursion of the membrane [3] is at least any of: 0.5 micron, 1 micron, 2 micron, 4 micron, 10 micron, 100 micron (the membrane has a vibration amplitude that can range from several micrometers to several tens of micrometers; col. 5, lines 12-18).
As to Claim 7, Hirata discloses an ultrasonic pump [1] represented as a lumped element model comprising: at least one membrane [3] and a current source corresponding to a speed and area of the at least one membrane [3]; an acoustic channel formed by [5B] and [3A]; see Fig. 2), wherein a portion of the at least one membrane [3] comprises at least a part of the acoustic channel so that a movement of the membrane [3] changes the dimension of the acoustic channel (the membrane [3] bends upwardly and downwardly to change a dimension of the gap between [5B] and [3A]; col. 5, lines 19-39; see Figs. 3A and 3B); an inductor with an inductance corresponding to the acoustic channel defined by at least a portion of the membrane [3]; a resistor with a resistance corresponding to the acoustic channel defined by at least a portion of the membrane [3], wherein resistance and/or inductance are proportional to a cross-section and length of the acoustic channel (the gap defined by [5B] and [3A] would inherently have its own acoustic inductance and resistance, and at least the resistance of a channel is inherently always proportional to its cross-section); a first impedance corresponding to the impedance on one side of the membrane [3] (the first impedance corresponds to the chamber [5] on the upper side of [3]; see Fig. 2); a second impedance corresponding to the impedance connected to the acoustic channel (the second impedance corresponds to the chamber [5] on the lower side of [3] above hole [6A]; see Fig. 2); wherein the resistor and the inductor are connected in series and current source (a series connection of acoustic resistance and inductance would be inherent in an acoustic path; see Fig. 2), and inductor resistor pairs have a common connection wherein a movement of the at least one membrane [3] generates a modulated current flow where the modulated current flow corresponds ratio of impedances on both sides of the membrane [3] (the movement of membrane [3] changes the conduit cross section, and therefore changes at least the second acoustic impedance; col. 5, lines 19-39).
As to Claim 8, Hirata remains as applied above to Claim 7. Hirata further discloses that the at least one membrane [3] is configured to be actuated by any of: electrostatic force, piezoelectric force, electromagnetic force, thermal induced strain, thermo electric force or combinations of these forces (the membrane [3] is actuated by piezoelectric force; col. 4, lines 40-55).
As to Claim 9, Hirata remains as applied above to Claim 7. Hirata further discloses that a maximum excursion of the membrane [3] is at least any of: 0.5 micron, 1 micron, 2 micron, 4 micron, 10 micron, 100 micron (the membrane has a vibration amplitude that can range from several micrometers to several tens of micrometers; col. 5, lines 12-18).
Claims 1, 5, 21, 25, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Margalit, U.S. Publication No. 2021/0067865, published on March 4, 2021 (Margalit).
As to Claim 1, Margalit discloses an ultrasonic pump comprising: a mechanical layer with at least one membrane [305] a central portion, a plurality of anchors, and a plurality of spokes connected between the central portion and the anchors (the photoresist mask for membrane [305] is shown in Fig. 3C at [335], which comprises anchor portions attached to spokes and a disc-shaped central portion; para. 0047; see Fig. 3C); and an acoustic channel (space between overlapping portions of [305] and [303]; para. 0048, lines 8-21; see Fig. 3D), wherein a portion of the at least one membrane [305] comprises at least a part of the acoustic channel so that a movement of the membrane [305] changes the dimension of the acoustic channel (the impedance behind membrane [305] is varied; para. 0074, lines 41-56); wherein the membrane [305] is configured to oscillate at ultrasonic frequencies (the membrane [305] is a shutter that moves at a frequency [Ω]; para. 0039; para. 0043, lines 6-8; which is an ultrasonic frequency; para. 0036, lines 1-5; para. 0037) and generate at least one audio signal (acoustic modulation by varying the dimensions of the channel results in a lower frequency audio signal; para. 0077).
As to Claim 5, Margalit remains as applied above to Claim 1. Margalit further discloses that the membrane [305] oscillation includes at least two ultrasonic frequencies (an additional ultrasonic frequency that is twice the modulation frequency is created; para. 0040-0041).
As to Claim 21, Margalit discloses an ultrasonic pump comprising: at least one membrane [305]; and a fluid conduit (space between overlapping portions of [305] and [303]; para. 0048, lines 8-21; see Fig. 3D) at least partially defined by a portion of a first membrane [305] of the at least one membrane [305], wherein the fluid conduit, length and or cross section changes as a result of the first membrane [305] movement (the impedance behind membrane [305] is varied by a change in dimensions; para. 0074, lines 41-56), wherein the first membrane is configured to be actuated to move at ultrasonic rates (the membrane [305] is a shutter that moves at a frequency [Ω]; para. 0039; para. 0043, lines 6-8; which is an ultrasonic frequency; para. 0036, lines 1-5; para. 0037), and induce fluid flow from one side of the membrane [305] through the fluid conduit to a second side of the membrane [305] at a lower rate than the ultrasonic rate of movement of the membrane [305] (the impedance behind membrane [305] is varied to modulate the flow from an ultrasound source; para. 0074, lines 41-56; the acoustic modulation results in a lower frequency audio signal; para. 0077).
As to Claim 25, Margalit remains as applied above to Claim 21. Margalit further discloses that the fluid conduit length (space between overlapping portions of [305] and [303]; para. 0048, lines 8-21; see Fig. 3D) is larger than any of: 100 nanometer, 1 micron, 5 micron, 10 micron, 50 micron (the overlap defines the path length, which is 10-20 micron; para. 0048).
As to Claim 28, Margalit discloses an ultrasonic pump represented as a lumped element model comprising: at least one membrane [305]; a current source corresponding to the speed and area of a membrane [305] (a moving membrane will inherently have a speed and area); an inductor with an inductance determined by the acoustic channel (space between overlapping portions of [305] and [303]; para. 0048, lines 8-21; see Fig. 3D) defined by a membrane [305] and a base structure [303]; a resistor with a resistance determined by the acoustic channel (space between overlapping portions of [305] and [303]; para. 0048, lines 8-21; see Fig. 3D) defined by a membrane [305], wherein resistance and/or inductance are proportional to a cross-section and length of the acoustic channel (the space between overlapping portions of [305] and [303], would inherently have its own acoustic inductance and resistance, and at least the resistance of a channel is inherently always proportional to its cross-section; see Fig. 3D) and a base structure [303] or membrane (the space defined by [305] and [302] would inherently have its own acoustic inductance and resistance); a capacitor with a capacitance defined by the volume at least partially enclosed by the membrane [305] (the free volume enclosed by membrane [305]; base structure [303] and second membrane [301] form a capacitance; see Fig. 3D); acoustic impedances representing acoustic elements on either side of the membrane [301] (above membrane [305], the impedance is the acoustic medium [1135]; see Fig. 11C, and below membrane [305] the impedance includes the acoustic channel; see Fig. 3D) wherein movement of the membrane [301] generates current oscillating at ultrasonic rates (the membrane [305] is a shutter that moves at a frequency [Ω]; para. 0039; para. 0043, lines 6-8; which is an ultrasonic frequency; para. 0036, lines 1-5; para. 0037) and modulates the current by the time varying ratio of impedances to generate a portion of the current oscillating at rates lower than the membrane movement (the impedance behind membrane [305] is varied to modulate the flow from an ultrasound source; para. 0074, lines 41-56; the acoustic modulation results in a lower frequency audio signal; para. 0077).
Claims 21-24 and 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Elyada, U.S. Patent No. 9,736,595, patented on August 15, 2017 (Elyada).
As to Claim 21, Elyada discloses an ultrasonic pump [300] comprising: at least one membrane [301]; and a fluid conduit (space between [301] and [302]; see Figs. 4a-4c) at least partially defined by a portion of a first membrane [301] of the at least one membrane [301], wherein the fluid conduit, length and or cross section changes as a result of the first membrane [301] movement (the space between membrane [301] and [302] changes as a result of membrane [301] movement; see Figs. 4a-4c), wherein the first membrane [301] is configured to be actuated to move at ultrasonic rates (col. 3, lines 50-55), and induce fluid flow from one side of the membrane [301] through the fluid conduit to a second side of the membrane [301] at a lower rate than the ultrasonic rate of movement of the membrane [301] (the ultrasonic movement of membrane [301] results in an air flow at an audio signal frequency; col. 5, lines 34-40).
As to Claim 22, Elyada remains as applied above to Claim 21. Elyada further discloses the ultrasonic pump configured as a centrifugal pump [500] (air [506] is pumped in one direction; col. 6, lines 49-58; see Fig. 6a).
As to Claim 23, Elyada remains as applied above to Claim 21. Elyada further discloses that the ultrasonic pump comprises a plurality of membranes [301, 303] (see Fig. 4a).
As to Claim 24, Elyada remains as applied above to Claim 21. Elyada further discloses that the at least one membrane [301] comprises of any of: conductive material; piezo electric material; electrically resistive material (the membrane [301] can be actuated piezoelectrically; col. 10, lines 65-67).
As to Claim 26, Elyada remains as applied above to Claim 21. Elyada further discloses that the fluid flow is time varying at any rate from constant flow to at least 50,000 Hz (the fluid flow is moving at audio signal frequencies, which are inherently between a 0 Hz constant flow and 50 kHz; col. 5, lines 34-40).
As to Claim 27, Elyada remains as applied above to Claim 21. Elyada further discloses that the ultrasonic pump [30] is configured as a volume velocity acoustic source (the ultrasonic pump [30] creates air flow vibrations; col. 5, lines 34-36).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 6 and 10-11 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: Claims 4 and 10 both recite the unique features of a mechanical resonance frequency of the membrane being any of: 100-200 KHz; 200-400 KHz; 400-600 KHz; above 600KHz. Claim 6 recites the unique features of the membrane oscillation includin at least a first periodic signal with a base frequency configured to correspond to a membrane resonance frequency and second signal corresponding to an audio signal modulated with an ultrasound carrier. Claim 11 recites the unique feature of the membrane oscillation including at least a first periodic signal with a base frequency configured to correspond to a membrane resonance frequency and second signal corresponding to an audio signal modulated with an ultrasound carrier.
Claims 12-20 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Claim 12 recites the unique feature of a first, a second and a third membrane, with the second membrane having an aperture and being disposed between the first and third membranes. The closest prior art does not disclose or suggest such features.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on April 8, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claims 1-3 and 7-9 rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Hirata, and Claims 1-2 and 4 as being anticipated by Pinkerton
Regarding Claim 1, Applicant argues that Pinkerton and Hirata do not disclose the central portion, plurality of anchors and plurality of spokes claimed in the recent amendment. Examiner respectfully disagrees and directs Applicant to the new rejection pointing out the added limitations in the above rejections.
Regarding Claim 7, Applicant argues against Examiners assertion of inherency. Specifically, Applicant argues that an acoustic channel would not inherently have a resistance and inductance. Examiner respectfully disagrees. An acoustic volume, unless infinitely sized, has an acoustic resistance and inductance, which furthermore, are inherently proportional to the cross section and/or length of the acoustic channel. Applicant has not claimed any specific values or ratios regarding the acoustic channels, but only properties inherent to acoustic channels (see https://www.animations.physics.unsw.edu.au/jw/compliance-inertance-impedance.htm).
Claims 21-24 and 26-27 rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Elyada
Regarding Claim 21, Applicant argues that Elyada does not disclose that the first membrane is configured to be actuated to move at ultrasonic rates, and induce fluid flow from one side of the membrane through the fluid conduit to a second side of the membrane at a lower rate than the ultrasonic rate of movement of the membrane. Examiner respectfully disagrees. As cited above, the resulting air flow vibration is an acoustic frequency, which is a result of a difference in ultrasonic frequencies of two membranes (Elyada: col. 5, lines 34-40). An acoustic frequency is a lower frequency than an ultrasonic frequency. Therefore, the rate of fluid flow, which in this case, is air, is lower than the ultrasonic rate.
Claims 1, 5, 21, 25, 28 rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Margalit
Regarding Claim 1, Applicant argues that Margalit not disclose the central portion, plurality of anchors and plurality of spokes claimed in the recent amendment. Examiner respectfully disagrees and directs Applicant to the new rejection pointing out the added limitations in the above rejections.
Regarding Claim 21, Applicant argues that Margalit does not disclose that the first membrane is configured to be actuated to move at ultrasonic rates, and induce fluid flow from one side of the membrane through the fluid conduit to a second side of the membrane at a lower rate than the ultrasonic rate of movement of the membrane. Examiner respectfully disagrees. As cited above, the resulting air flow vibration is an acoustic frequency, which is a result of a difference in ultrasonic frequencies of two membranes (Margalit: para. 0077). An acoustic frequency is a lower frequency than an ultrasonic frequency. Therefore, the rate of fluid flow, which in this case, is air, is lower than the ultrasonic rate.
Regarding Claim 28, Applicant argues against Examiners assertion of inherency. Specifically, Applicant argues that an acoustic channel would not inherently have a resistance and inductance. Examiner respectfully disagrees. An acoustic volume, unless infinitely sized, has an acoustic resistance and inductance, which furthermore, are inherently proportional to the cross section and/or length of the acoustic channel. Applicant has not claimed any specific values or ratios regarding the acoustic channels, but only properties inherent to acoustic channels (see https://www.animations.physics.unsw.edu.au/jw/compliance-inertance-impedance.htm).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
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
Prosecution Insights