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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 7, 8 and 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarawal et al. (US 20230235552).
As to claim 1, Agarawal et al.’s figure 3 or 5A shows an apparatus comprising: a plurality of resonators (enclosures surrounding 120, 318a and 418a) each configured to attenuate sound at a specific frequency (selecting W1 to be equal to W2 in figure 5A is seen as an obvious design preference to ensure optimum performance, see figure 3), wherein each of the plurality of resonators includes a cavity (120, 318a or 418a) and a neck (W1 and/or W2) coupled to the cavity; a gas enclosure (air) configured to enclose air and a portion of each of the plurality of resonators (an empty space must be on at least one of the vertical sides of enclosure 114b and 314b/314c in order to the enclosure to be moved left and right. Furthermore, 0121 also teaches that the physical mechanism includes a pneumatic mechanism. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use air or gas in the empty space(s) for the purpose of saving cost); and a physical mechanism (114b, 314b or 314c) configured to change the specific frequency of sound attenuated by each of the plurality of resonators, wherein the physical mechanism changes the specific frequency by altering a volume included in each of the plurality of resonators.
As to claim 2, Agarawal et al.’s figure 3 or 5A shows that the portion of each of the plurality of resonators includes a portion of the cavity of each of the plurality of resonators, and the physical mechanism includes a pneumatic mechanism (¶0121) configured to alter the volume of the cavity included in each of the plurality of resonators by pressurizing a space surrounding all of the cavities of the resonators.
As to claim 5, piezoelectric mechanism is well known in the art. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to select a piezoelectric mechanism for the physical mechanism that is configured to compress or expand one or more walls of each of the cavities for the purpose of saving space.
As to claim 7, Agarawal et al.’s figure 3 or 5A shows that one or more of a volume of the cavity and a volume of the neck are alter (figure 4).
As to claim 8, Agarawal et al.’s figure 4 shows that the step of altering the volume of the neck includes altering one or more of: a length of the neck and a diameter of the neck.
Claims 11-13 recite similar limitations in claims above. Therefore, they are rejected for the same reasons.
Claim(s) 3, 4, 6, 9, 10 and 14-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarawal et al. (US 20230235552) in view of Lee (KR 20160066883 A).
As to claim 3, Agarawal et al.’s figures fail to show that a portion of each of the cavities is surrounded by a flexible membrane. However, Lee’s claim 5 discloses that “[t]he Helmholtz resonator 130 is: have a cross-sectional area (S) of a predetermined size, the extendableIt consists of a flexible material, a cavity 132, an inlet sound absorber (inlet, 131) extending a predetermined length (L) from a; [a]nd it has a volume (V) of a predetermined size, a cavity (cavity, 132) of the inlet sound absorber (131) in communication with the structure…” Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to select flexible membrane surrounding a portion of each of Agarawal et al.’s cavities for the purpose of achieving desired shapes and space occupations. The modified device further shows that the physical mechanism includes a mechanical connection coupled to each of the flexible membranes (such as 140 shown in Lee’s figure 5).
As to claim 4, the modified Agarawal et al.’s figures show that the step of altering the volume of the cavities includes moving the mechanical connection to shift a portion of the flexible membrane of each of the cavities (see Lee’s figure 5).
As to claim 6, the modified Agarawal et al.’s figures show that the portion of each of the plurality of resonators includes one or more of a diaphragm comprising a flexible membrane and the diaphragm is configured to alter the volume of the cavity (see Lee’s figure 5).
As to claim 9, Agarawal et al.’s figures 3 and 4 show two separate mechanisms (114b, 214b). One skilled in the art would have motivated to includes two mechanisms shown in figures 3 and 4 in the same device for the purpose of achieving more precise selected volume. Therefore, the figures show that one or more additional physical mechanisms configured to alter one or more additional volumes included in each of the plurality of resonators.
As to claim 10, Agarawal et al.’s figures disclose a controller (130, 230) configured to receive signals (by 232) and cause the physical mechanism to adjust the specific frequency of sound attenuated by each of the plurality of resonators in response to the received signals.
Claims 14-18 recite similar limitations in claims above. Therefore, they are rejected for the same reasons.
Claim(s) 9, 10 and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Agarawal et al. (US 20230235552) in view of Lee (KR 20160066883 A) and Kostun et al. (US 20040173175).
As to claim 9, Agarawal et al.’s figures fail to show one or more additional physical mechanisms configured to alter one or more additional volumes included in each of the plurality of resonators. However, Kostun et al.’s figure 3 shows a similar device that comprise a physical mechanism 14” and an additional mechanism 34”. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to include additional physical mechanisms in Lee’s device for the purpose of achieving more precise selected volumes.
As to claim 10, the figures disclose a controller (Agarawal et al.’s 130 or Kostum’s 28”) configured to receive signals (its input signals) and cause the physical mechanism to adjust the specific frequency of sound attenuated by each of the plurality of resonators in response to the received signals.
Claim 18 recite similar limitations in claims above. Therefore, it is rejected for the same reasons.
As to claim 19, the modified Agarawal et al.’s figures show one or more measuring devices (132 or 232 or Kostum’s 25”, 26”) coupled to the resonator array, wherein the one or more measuring devices are configured to obtain system operational characteristics related to sound emitted by the sound source, wherein the controller is coupled to the one or more measuring devices and is configured to determine one or more frequencies based on data obtained by the one or more measuring devices.
As to claim 20, data machine learning is well known in the art. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to set the controller to be configured to perform machine learning on the data obtained by the one or more measuring devices to adjust the physical mechanism based on a performance of the resonator array for the purpose of providing more precise controlling.
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 ANH-QUAN TRA whose telephone number is (571)272-1755. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri from 8:00 A.M.-5:00 P.M.
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, Andrea Lindgren Baltzell can be reached at 571-272-5918. 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.
/QUAN TRA/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2843