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 .
Remarks
Office Action is in response to the Preliminary Amendment filed 3/11/2024.
Claims 1, 5, 7, 10, and 12 have been amended.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/11/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claim(s) 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Backes et al. (US 2013/0249323 ).
In claim 1, Backes discloses (Fig. 1-3) a power generation device (10) comprising: a coil (24); a magnet (14) that is provided at a position distant from the coil (24), having magnet pole faces (Fig. 1) facing a direction of the coil (24); and a diaphragm (16) that vibrates ([0028]) upon receiving a sound wave, having the coil (24) being placed.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6 and 8-11 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 an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The cited prior art taken singularly or in combination fails to anticipate or fairly suggest the limitation of the independent claim(s), in such a manner that a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103 would be proper. The prior art fails to teach a combination of all the features as presented in the independent claim(s) with the allowable feature being:
Claim 2: “wherein the diaphragm comprises a first diaphragm and a second diaphragm, disposed facing each other, either one of the coil and the magnet is disposed on the first diaphragm and the second diaphragm, and the other one of the coil and the magnet is disposed between the first diaphragm and the second diaphragm.”
Claim 5: “wherein the coil and the magnet are placed to be in a positional relationship where respective central axes are not aligned.”
Claim 7: “wherein the magnet is fixed to the diaphragm to be vibrable, and vibrates in association with vibration of the diaphragm.”
Claim 12: “wherein the magnet includes: an annular-shaped magnet; and a cylindrical-shaped magnet that is inserted into a circular hole of the annular magnet, and polarities are opposite in the magnetic pole face of the annular-shaped magnet and the magnetic pole face of the cylindrical-shaped magnet facing in an identical direction.”
An et al. (US 2004/0145258) has been cited as prior art most closely related to the claimed invention.
The examiner found no prior art satisfies all above conditions by itself or as combined during the prosecution period.
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.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
McMullen et al. (US 111646631) teaches a tool including a device including a housing and a rotor, the rotor to rotate about a longitudinal axis, and an axial gap generator including a stator assembly positioned adjacent to the rotor.
Ruff et al. (US 2015/0288269) teaches an induction generator is proposed, having at least one permanent magnet for generating a permanent magnetic field, at least one reflux plate for guiding the permanent magnetic field.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RASHAD H JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1231. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am-5pm.
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, Christopher Koehler can be reached at 571-272-3560. 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.
RASHAD H. JOHNSON
Examiner
Art Unit 2834
/RASHAD H JOHNSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2834