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 .
Election/Restrictions
1. Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 6-10 in the reply filed on 12/18/25 is acknowledged. Claims 1-5 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected method, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
3. Claims 6-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
4. With regard to claim 6, it is not clear what is meant by “wire damper for loudspeaker”. It appears that Applicants intend to provide a damper for a loudspeaker that comprises yarns and wires. However, the term “wire damper” is not clear. It is also not entirely clear what is meant by term “arc” and “arc form”. It appears that Applicants intend to form a speaker damper main body material that has a circular or disc shape profile. It is also not clear what constitutes or distinguishes a “wire disposing area”. It appears that wire assemblies are inserted/sewn/adhered into/onto a woven substrate in alternating intervals or spaced apart intervals; however, it is not clear if the wire assemblies are warp or weft sewn in, adhered and/or inserted. It is also not clear how said wire assemblies form the claimed “elastic adjustment areas”. For purposes of Examination the Examiner will construe claim 1 to mean a speaker damper main body material made from a woven substrate wherein said woven substrate further comprises spaced apart wires (assemblies) in warp or weft directions and further wherein said speaker damper main body material has a circular/curvilinear/ disc shape profile. Claims 7-10 are rejected for their dependency on claim 6.
5. Claims 7 and 8 are further indefinite because it is the opinion of the Examiner that the term “straightly” is considered relative. It appears that Applicants intends for the term “straightly” to mean in a “straight” direction, however, the claim fails to distinguish the specific direction with respect to warp or weft yarns (e.g., vertically/horizontally/lengthwise/crosswise/etc).
6. Claim 9 is further indefinite because it is not clear what is meant by “asymmetrical arc form”. Do Applicants intend to form the claimed speaker damper main body material such that it has an irregular or uneven circular/curvilinear/disc shape profile?
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
7. 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.
8. Claim(s) 6-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen, US 11317229 B1.
With regard to claim 6, the patent issued to Chen teach a method for manufacturing a loudspeaker includes arranging, weaving, impregnating, drying, forming, cutting and assembling steps. In the arranging step, Chen teaches that warp yarns and wires are arranged at intervals, and the wires are grouped as a wire group. In the weaving step, Chen teaches weft yarns are arranged at intervals and interwoven with the warp yarns and the wires to form a base material by weaving, and an area where the weft yarns are interwoven with the wires is defined as a wire disposing area. In the forming step, Chen teaches a wire damper is formed on the base material by thermoforming; two elastic adjustment areas are formed at the weft yarns between both sides of the wire group and the warp yarns closest to both sides of the wire group; and widths of the elastic adjustment areas are equal to each other and larger than distances between the remaining warp yarns (see abstract and figure 1). With regard to the limitations pertaining to “arc” and/or “arc form”, Chen illustrates a circular/disc shaped profile of the damper speaker main body material (63) (see figures 4 and 7). With regard to the claimed resin layer, Chen teaches that the base material is impregnated in a liquid synthetic resin the base material absorbing the synthetic resin is dried and hardened; afterward, the wire is sewed and fixed on the surface of the base material by a sewing thread (column 3, 15-20).
With regard to claims 7 and 8, the claimed warp and weft yarn arrangements are met with the woven base material of Chen. Specifically, figures 1-5 illustrates the claimed orientation of the warp and weft yarns and the claimed wire assemblies (see figures 1-5 and column 5, 15-column 6, 35).
With regard to claim 9, a woven fabric comprising the claimed warp and weft yarns together with the attached wire assemblies would result in an uneven or irregular surface shape. The Examiner is of the position that such an uneven or irregular surface shape meets the limitation of the claimed “asymmetrical arc form”.
With regard to claim 10, Chen teaches that a plurality of warp yarns and a plurality of wires are arranged at intervals, the warp yarns and the wires extend straight and are parallel to each other, each of the wires is a monofilament wire, the wires are grouped as at least one wire group, and both sides of the at least one wire group are respectively defined as a first side and a second side (column 3, 5-15). In the impregnating step S3, as shown in FIGS. 1 and 4, the base material 10 is impregnated in a resin solution 21 in a resin tank 20, such that the warp yarns 11, the first wires 123, the second wires 133 and the weft yarns 14 adsorb the resin and are adhered with the resin. Chen further teach that the arranging step S1, the first wires 123 are interwoven with each other, such that the first wire group 12 is formed as a multifilament wire with a flat cross-section; and the second wires 133 are interwoven with each other, such that the second wire group 13 is formed as a multifilament wire with a flat cross-section (see figure 13 and column 8, 15-20).
Double Patenting
9. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 6-10 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 6-10 of copending Application No. 18/645492 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the subject matter sought is encompassed/claimed by the subject matter of claims 6-10 in copending Application No. 18/645492.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claims 6-10 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 6-10 of copending Application No. 18/640081(reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the subject matter sought is encompassed/claimed by the subject matter of claims 6-10 in copending Application No. 18/640081.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
10. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LYNDA SALVATORE whose telephone number is (571)272-1482. The examiner can normally be reached 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, Marla McConnell can be reached at 571-270-7692. 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.
/LYNDA SALVATORE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1789