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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang et al. (CN113794349, “Wang”, using machine translation).
Re claim 1, Wang discloses a vibration motor, comprising:
a frame 100 having a receiving cavity (figs 1, 4-5 & 8, [0057]), comprising an upper frame (fig 1, upper frame is 120 at top in fig 1) and a lower frame engaged with the upper frame for forming the receiving cavity (fig 1, lower frame includes 120 at the bottom of fig 1 & 110);
a vibration unit 200 received in the receiving cavity (figs 1 & 6-7, [0038]);
a driving unit 300 received in the receiving cavity (figs 1 & 3-4, [0039]) for driving the vibration unit 200 for vibrating along a first vibration direction (figs 1-2 & 5, [0041] & [0044], up-down direction), comprising a solenoid assembly (figs 1 & 3-4, [0039], includes 320 & 330); and
a pair of first elastic members 500 respectively disposed on both sides of the vibration unit 200 along the first vibration direction for elastically supporting the vibration unit 200 in the receiving cavity (figs 1-2 & 5, [0054]);
wherein, the lower frame is provided with two second elastic members 400 (figs 1-4, [0048]), each second elastic member 400 is spaced apart from the lower frame (figs 1-4 & below, 400 spaced from 120 of lower frame or a portion of 400 not attached to 110 is spaced from 110), one end of each second elastic member 400 is fixed to the lower frame (figs 1 & 4, [0047]), and another end of each second elastic member 400 is fixed to the solenoid assembly (figs 1 & 3-4, [0047], fixed through 310), the solenoid assembly is elastically supported by the two second elastic members 400 for being capable to vibrate along a second vibration direction ( figs 1 & 4, [0039] & [0041], front-back direction) perpendicular to the first vibration direction ([0041]).
PNG
media_image1.png
284
517
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re claim 5, Wang discloses claim 1 as discussed above and further discloses the solenoid assembly comprises an iron core 320 and a coil 330 (fig 1, [0039]), the iron core 320 comprises two first portions opposite to each other and a second portion connecting the two first portions (figs 1, 4 & below, 1st portions are portions outside 330 indicated below), the coil 330 is wound on the second portion (figs 4 & below), the another end of each second elastic member 400 is fixed to a corresponding first portion (figs 1, 4 & below, 400 fixed to 1st portion through 310 & 330).
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 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 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Zheng et al. (WO2022206012, “Zheng”, using machine translation).
Re claim 2, Wang discloses claim 1 as discussed above but is silent with respect to the one end of each second elastic member is fixed to the lower frame through a spacer.
Zheng discloses the one end of each elastic member 91 is fixed to the frame 10 through a spacer 93 (figs 1-3, [0100]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute one known element (directly fix each second elastic member to the lower frame as disclosed by Wang) for another known equivalent element (fixing each second elastic member to the lower frame through a spacer as disclosed by Zheng) resulting in the predictable result of fixing the second elastic member to the lower housing.
Re claim 3, Wang discloses claim 1 as discussed above but is silent with respect to the one end of each second elastic member is fixed to a protrusion of the lower frame..
Zheng discloses the one end of each elastic member 91 is fixed to a protrusion 93 of the frame 10 (figs 1-3, [0100], when assembled 93 is a protrusion of 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute one known element (directly fix each second elastic member to the lower frame as disclosed by Wang) for another known equivalent element (fixing each second elastic member to the lower frame through a protrusion as disclosed by Zheng) resulting in the predictable result of fixing the second elastic member to the lower housing.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Ogihara et al. (WO2019021969, “Ogihara”, using machine translation).
Re claim 4, Wang discloses claim 1 as discussed above but is silent with respect to each second elastic member has a long strip shape extending along the first vibration direction.
Ogihara discloses each elastic member 40 has a long strip shape 42, 43 extending substantially along the direction Z perpendicular to the vibration direction X of the elastic member (figs 1, 4a-b & 8a, [0010] & [0012])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute one known element (elastic member shape as disclosed by Wang) for another known equivalent element (elastic member shape as disclosed by Zheng) resulting in the predictable result of movably supporting the solenoid assembly with respect to the housing.
Claims 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Liu et al. (WO2022062017, “Liu”, using machine translation).
Re claim 6, Wang discloses claim 1 as discussed above but is silent with respect to a damping element is sandwiched between each second elastic member and the lower frame.
Liu discloses a damping element 240 is sandwiched between each elastic member 200 and the lower frame 130 (figs 2-4, [0031]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure each elastic spring member of Wang with a damping element is sandwiched between each second elastic member and the lower frame, as disclosed by Liu, in order to cushion impact when the second elastic member deforms, as taught by Liu ([0031]).
Re claims 7 and 8, Wang in view of Liu discloses claim 6 as discussed above and further discloses:
a gap between each second elastic member and the lower frame is full of the damping element (Liu, figs 2-3 & below, gap between portion of elastic member indicated below & housing); and
the damping element is made of foam (Liu, [0031]).
PNG
media_image2.png
318
391
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Shi et al. (CN111082630, “Shi”, using US20230015265 as translation).
Re claim 9, Wang discloses claim 1 as discussed above and further discloses the vibration unit comprises a shell 210 a containing space 210a and two magnetic units 220 mounted in the containing space 210a (figs 1 & 6-7, [0038] & [0050]), the two magnetic units 220 are arranged opposite to each other (fig 1), each of which comprises a magnetically conductive plate 230 attached to the shell 210 and a magnet 220 attached to the magnetically conductive plate 230 (fig 1, [0042] & [0065]), the solenoid assembly locates in the containing space 210a and is spaced apart from the two magnetic units 220 (figs 1-3 & 5).
Wang discloses claim 9 but is silent with respect to the shell being a weight.
Shi discloses a weight 10 to hold the magnetic unit 20 of the vibration unit (figs 1-2, [0039]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the shell of Wang to be a weight, as disclosed by Shi, in order to increase vibration inertial force, as taught by Shi ([0039]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5715. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 8:30-5pm EST.
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, Seye Iwarere can be reached on (571)270-5112. 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.
/ERIC JOHNSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834